Blockage of the Renin-Angiotensin System in the Secondary Prevention of Stroke: Beneficial Effects Beyond Blood Pressure Reduction?

Abstract

HomeStrokeVol. 40, No. 3Blockage of the Renin-Angiotensin System in the Secondary Prevention of Stroke: Beneficial Effects Beyond Blood Pressure Reduction? Free AccessLetterPDF/EPUBAboutView PDFView EPUBSections ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload citationsTrack citationsPermissions ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InMendeleyReddit Jump toFree AccessLetterPDF/EPUBBlockage of the Renin-Angiotensin System in the Secondary Prevention of Stroke: Beneficial Effects Beyond Blood Pressure Reduction? Luis Castilla-Guerra María del Carmen Fernández-Moreno Maria Dolores Jiménez-Hernandez Luis Castilla-GuerraLuis Castilla-Guerra Department of Internal Medicine, Hospital de Osuna, Seville, Spain Search for more papers by this author María del Carmen Fernández-MorenoMaría del Carmen Fernández-Moreno Department of Neurology, Hospital de Valme, Seville, Spain Search for more papers by this author Maria Dolores Jiménez-HernandezMaria Dolores Jiménez-Hernandez Department of Neurology, Hospital Virgen del Rocio, Seville, Spain Search for more papers by this author Originally published29 Jan 2009https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.537639Stroke. 2009;40:e75Other version(s) of this articleYou are viewing the most recent version of this article. Previous versions: January 29, 2009: Previous Version 1 To the Editor:In the last few years, evidence from experimental and clinical studies have supported the hypothesis that angiotensin II might exert detrimental effects beyond the mechanical damage of high blood pressure (BP) and be a risk factor for ischemic stroke independent of its effect on BP. Thus, data from the HOPE and LIFE studies suggested that ACE inhibitors and angiotensin receptors blockers (ARB) may have protective effects for stroke that are independent of BP reduction.1 However, in view of recent published trials, data on the particular benefits of these specific antihypertensive agents for secondary stroke prevention are largely lacking. First, the Perindopril Protection against Recurrent Stroke Study (PROGRESS) trial provided no evidence of perindopril alone for preventing recurrent stroke. In fact, only the subgroup receiving both perindopril in combination with indapamide had reduced stroke recurrence.2 Furthermore, there is no evidence to date that using perindopril in combination with indapamide is more beneficial than using indapamide alone. Thus, the BP reduction with indapamide alone in the Poststroke Antihypertensive Treatment Study (PATS) trial was only 5/2 mm Hg, similar to the reduction seen with perindopril alone in the PROGRESS, and, on the contrary, significantly associated with stroke reduction.2,3 In addition, a systematic review on BP reduction in secondary prevention of stroke showed that calcium channel blockers were found to be better than ACE inhibitors in stroke prevention.4Recently, the Prevention Regimen for Effectively Avoiding Second Strokes (PRoFESS) trial, a multicenter trial involving more than 20 000 patients, has shown that termisaltan initiated soon after ischemic stroke and continued for 2.5 years did not significantly lower the rate of recurrent stroke or major cardiovascular events against placebo.5 This trial has important lessons for clinical practice and also illustrates that the extrapolation of the benefits of these drugs to the prevention of vascular recurrences after stroke may be inappropriate.Therefore, currently the question of whether agents that block the rennin–angiotensin system offer additional benefits independent of their effects on BP in patients with stroke seems to be a matter of faith.DisclosuresNone.1 Hankey GJ. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors for stroke prevention. Is there hope for progress after life? Stroke. 2003; 34: 354–356.LinkGoogle Scholar2 Wennberg R, Zimmermann C. The progress trial three years later: time for a balanced report of effectiveness. BMJ. 2004; 329: 968–970.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar3 PATS Collaborating Group. Post-stroke antihypertensive treatment study. A preliminary result. Chin Med J. 1995; 108: 710–717.MedlineGoogle Scholar4 Zhang H, Thijs L, Staessen JA. Blood pressure lowering for primary and secondary prevention of stroke. Hypertension. 2006; 48: 187–195.LinkGoogle Scholar5 Yusuf S, Diener HC, Sacco RL, Cotton D, Ôunpuu S, Lawton WA, Palesch Y, Martin RH, Albers GW, Bath P, Bornstein N, Chan BPL, Chen ST, Cunha L, Dahlöf B, De Keyser J, Donnan GA, Estol C, Gorelick P, Gu V, Hermansson K, Hilbrich L, Markku Kaste M, Lu C, Machnig T, Pais P, Roberts R, Skvortsova V, Teal P, Toni D, VanderMaelen C, Voigt T, Weber M, Yoon BW, for the PRoFESS Study Group. Telmisartan to prevent recurrent stroke and cardiovascular events. N Engl J Med. 2008; 359.Google Scholar Previous Back to top Next FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited By Pandit A (2015) Evidence base for secondary prevention – Antihypertensive therapy in cerebrovascular disease, Apollo Medicine, 10.1016/j.apme.2015.03.001, 12:2, (100-102), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2015. Castilla-Guerra L, Fernández-Moreno M, Romera-Tellado M and Álvarez-Suero J (2012) Prevención primaria del ictus en el anciano: evidencias actuales en el tratamiento de la hipertensión arterial, Revista Española de Geriatría y Gerontología, 10.1016/j.regg.2011.06.014, 47:3, (119-124), Online publication date: 1-May-2012. March 2009Vol 40, Issue 3 Advertisement Article InformationMetrics https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.537639PMID: 19182077 Originally publishedJanuary 29, 2009 PDF download Advertisement