Key result
ACEIs show no MACE benefit over ARBs in patients with diabetes and prior stroke.
Why the study?
Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockers are preferred antihypertensives in patients with diabetes and prior stroke, but comparative effects of ACEIs versus ARBs on major adverse cardiac events were unclear.
Do angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) compared to angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) reduce major adverse cardiac events in patients with type 2 diabetes and prior ischemic stroke?
Cohort (n=39,888)
Yes
Do angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) compared to angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) reduce major adverse cardiac events in patients with type 2 diabetes and prior ischemic stroke?
In patients with type 2 diabetes and prior ischemic stroke, ACEIs and ARBs demonstrate similar effectiveness in preventing major adverse cardiac events and similar risks of acute kidney injury or hyperkalemia.
OBJECTIVE: Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockers are the preferred antihypertensive medications in patients with diabetes and prior stroke. This study aimed to compare the effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) in terms of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) in patients with diabetes who survived ischemic stroke. METHODS: We conducted an observational, nationwide, propensity score-matched cohort study using Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database. Patients aged at least 20 years with type 2 diabetes who initiated ACEI (n = 15,959) or ARB (n = 23,929) use within 90 days after discharge for first ischemic stroke between January 2000 and December 2011 were allocated to ACEI and ARB groups, respectively. The primary outcomes were MACEs (myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, and cardiovascular mortality). The secondary outcomes were hospitalization for acute kidney injury and hyperkalemia. Intention-to-treat and as-treated models were used. RESULTS: Intention-to-treat analysis showed no significant difference between the ACEI and ARB groups in the outcomes of MACEs [hazard ratio (HR), 0.99; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.95-1.04], including ischemic stroke (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.97-1.06), myocardial infarction (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.95-1.18), and cardiovascular mortality (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.91-1.06). As-treated analysis produced similar results. Additionally, the groups showed no difference in the risk of hospitalization for acute kidney injury or hyperkalemia. CONCLUSION: Our study supports the hypothesis that the risks of MACEs and two additional secondary outcomes in patients with diabetes who survived ischemic stroke did not differ according to ACEI versus ARB use.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shih et al. (2015) conducted a cohort in Type 2 diabetes with prior ischemic stroke (n=39,888). Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) vs. Angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) was evaluated on MACEs (myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, and cardiovascular mortality) (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.95-1.04). ACEI use compared to ARB use showed no significant difference in the risk of major adverse cardiac events among patients with diabetes and prior ischemic stroke (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.95-1.04).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: