Angiotensin Receptor Blockers Research Articles

OptiHeart: determinants and prognostic importance of optimal medical treatment in patients with heart failure discharged from the heart failure clinic

Abstract Background Heart failure (HF) is an increasing health problem globally. Current guidelines are based on studies with primarily male patients. Females are less likely to receive target dose of HF medication as recommended by the clinical guidelines. The reason for this is uncertain, but it has led to the question whether females might not need as high dosages as the males to achieve the beneficial effects of the HF medication. Aim To assess baseline predictors for achieving optimal medical treatment (OMT) and the prognostic importance of OMT for male and female patients who have attended a HF clinical program (HFCP). Methods OPTIHEART included 870 patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <45% leaving HFCP in 2018, 2019 or 2020 and followed in registers for a mean of 1083(SD 11.3) days. OMT was defined as receiving an angiotensin-converting-enzyme-inhibitor (ACEi), angiotensin-receptor blocker (ARB) or angiotensin-II-receptor blocker and nephrylisin-inhibitor (ARNI) AND a betablocker both in doses > 50% of target dose. Association between baseline data at referral and OMT at end of HFCP were calculated using logistic regression. The association between OMT and a 5-point Major Adverse Cardiovascular Event (a 5-Point MACE consisting of cardiovascular mortality, non-fatal acute myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, coronary revascularization, worsening of heart failure (both hospitalisation and re-referral to HFC)), were calculated and adjusted for other cardiovascular risk factors using multiple Cox-regression analyses. Results Achieving OMT was associated with male sex (OR: 2.05 95%CI 1.44-2.97; P<0.0001) independently of younger age, higher diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and lower creatinine at referral. A lower rate of 5-point MACE was associated achieved OMT (HR: 0.67 95%CI 0.50-0.89; P=0.006) independently of female sex (HR: 0.62 95%CI 0.47-0.82; P=0.002), younger age, never smoking and NYHA≤2. The beneficial effect of OMT was more pronounced in patients with BMI<26.5kg/m2 (HR=0.41[0.23-0.72] vs. HR=0.84[0.58-1.21], Pinteraction= 0.02), and insignificantly more pronounced in patients with male sex, older age, higher creatinine, and lower DBP. Conclusion OMT was more frequently achieved in patients with male sex independently of lower age, higher DBP, and lower creatinine. Achieving OMT was associated with less 5-point MACE independently of female sex, younger age, never smoking and NYHA≤2 and especially in patients with BMI<26.5kg/m2.Hazard RatioMedical treatment

Comparative Study of Olmesartan versus Telmisartan, in Patient with Stage I Hypertension

Background: Hypertension is one of the most common diseases in the world. It is defined as sustained increase in blood pressure ≥ 140/90 mmHg. The risk of both microvascular & microvascular complications including stroke, coronary artery disease, peripheral vascular disease, retinopathy, nephropathy & possibly neuropathy increases with hypertension. Olmesartan medoxomil is a non-peptide angiotensin II receptor antagonist. The drug acts by selectively blocking angiotensin II type 1 receptor. Telmisartan is angiotensin receptor blocker shows high affinity for the angiotensin II type 1 receptors. Objective of the study is to compare the efficacy of Olmesartan and Telmisartan in Patient with stage –I hypertension. Materials and methods: This was a randomized, open‑label, parallel‑group, comparative study conducted in 120 patients of Stage I hypertension carried out from January 2021to June 2022. Patients were recruited from the cardiology outpatient department (OPD) of Shaheed Suhrawardy Medical College hospital.Results: In olmesartan group there were 39 male and 21 female patients and in telmisartan group there were 36 male and 24 female patients. Both Olmesartan and Telmisartan are effective in lowering systolic & diastolic BP at different intervals of 2nd, 4th, 8th and 12th week. There was a statistically significant decrease in mean blood glucose level after 12 weeks of treatment in telmisartan group when compared to baseline. Serum total cholesterol, triglycerides, and low‑density lipoproteins decreased significantly after 12‑week treatment with olmesartan and telmisartan. Conclusion: Olmesartan and telmisartan are equally efficacious in reducing DBP. Olmesartan, when compared to telmisartan is more efficacious in reducing SBP. Whereas Telmisartan shows the most favorable effects on FBG and lipid profile. J Shaheed Suhrawardy Med Coll 2023; 15(1): 8-12

The Selective Endothelin Receptor Antagonist SC0062 in IgA Nephropathy: A Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial.

Key Points Patients with IgA nephropathy and significant proteinuria are at high risk of progressive kidney function loss and kidney failure.We report the results of a clinical trial assessing the selective endothelin receptor antagonist SC0062 for the treatment of IgA nephropathy.SC0062 led to clinically meaningful improvements in proteinuria and did not increase risk of peripheral edema at higher doses. Background Endothelin receptor type A activation contributes to kidney injury in patients with IgA nephropathy. SC0062 is a novel selective endothelin receptor type A antagonist. We report the results of a phase 2 dose-finding trial to characterize the efficacy and safety of SC0062 in patients with IgA nephropathy. Methods We conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, clinical trial in adults with biopsy-proven IgA nephropathy and eGFR ≥30 ml/min per 1.73 m2 with urinary protein-creatinine ratio (UPCR) ≥0.75 g/g or proteinuria ≥1 g/24 hour despite using maximum tolerated doses of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers. Patients were randomized 1:1:1:1 to 24-week treatment with SC0062 5, 10, and 20 mg or matching placebo once daily. The primary efficacy outcome was percent change from baseline in UPCR in 24-hour urine samples after 12 weeks of treatment. Secondary end points included changes in eGFR. Safety outcomes including treatment emerging adverse events and serious adverse events were recorded. Results Overall, 131 patients (mean age 42 years [SD, 11]; mean eGFR 72 ml/min per 1.73 m2 [SD 24] and median 24-hour UPCR 1.2 g/g [25th–75th percentile, 0.9–1.5 g/g]) were randomized to placebo (n=34) or SC0062 5 mg (n=33), 10 mg (n=32), or 20 mg (n=32). All SC0062 doses reduced UPCR versus placebo throughout treatment. At week 12, placebo-corrected geometric mean changes (95% confidence interval) from baseline in UPCR with SC0062 5, 10, and 20 mg were−27.6% (−43.0 to −8.2), −20.5% (−37.4 to 1.0), and −38.1% (−51.4 to −21.0), respectively, and at week 24 they were−22.4% (−42.2 to 4.3), −30.9% (−48.6 to −7.0), and −51.6% (−64.2 to −34.6), respectively. No differences in eGFR were observed among treatment groups. The proportion of participants with treatment emerging adverse events or serious adverse events was balanced among treatment groups. Peripheral edema was reported by 2 (6%), 1 (3%), 1 (3%) participants in the 5, 10, and 20 mg SC0062-treated groups, respectively, compared with 5 (15%) in the placebo group. Conclusions In patients with IgA nephropathy, SC0062 reduced proteinuria and did not increase risk of peripheral edema. Clinical Trial registry name and registration number: A Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of SC0062 in the Treatment of CKD, NCT05687890.

ACE Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers for the Primary and Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Outcomes: Recommendations from the 2024 Egyptian Cardiology Expert Consensus in Collaboration with the CVREP Foundation.

The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) plays a pivotal role in regulating blood pressure (BP), with dysregulation of RAAS resulting in hypertension and potentially heart failure (HF), myocardial infarction (MI), cardio-renal syndrome, and stroke. RAAS inhibitors, such as angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), have advantages beyond BP control. However, differences between these two drug classes need to be considered when choosing a therapy for preventing cardiovascular events. A panel of 36 Egyptian cardiologists developed consensus statements on RAAS inhibitors for primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular outcomes and stroke, using a modified three-step Delphi process. The consensus statements highlight the importance of effective BP control and the role of RAAS blockade for prevention and management of various cardiovascular diseases. ACEis and ARBs differ in their mode of action and, thus, clinical effects. On the basis of available evidence, the consensus group recommended the following: ACEis should be considered as first choice (in preference to ARBs) to reduce the risk of MI, for primary prevention of HF, and for secondary prevention of stroke. ACEis and ARBs show equivalent efficacy for the primary prevention of stroke. Evidence also favors the preferential use of ACEis in patients with type 2 diabetes, for BP control, for the primary prevention of diabetic kidney disease, and to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular and renal outcomes. Treatment with an ACEi should be started within 24 h of ST segment elevation MI (and continued long term) in patients with HF, left ventricular systolic dysfunction, and/or diabetes. Angiotensin receptor/neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs) are the first choice for patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction, with ACEis being the second choice in this group. ARBs are indicated as alternatives in patients who cannot tolerate ACEis. ACEis may be associated with cough development, but the incidence tends to be overestimated, and the risk can be reduced by use of a lipophilic ACEi or combining the ACEi with a calcium channel blocker. RAAS blockade is an essential component of hypertension therapy; however, the protective effects provided by ACEis are superior to those of ARBs. Therefore, an ACEi is indicated in almost all cases, unless not tolerated.

Renin–angiotensin system inhibition and mortality in patients undergoing dialysis with coronary artery disease: insights from a multi-center observational study

ABSTRACT Background While the survival benefits of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) are firmly established in the general population, their efficacy within patient undergoing dialysis with coronary artery disease (CAD) remains controversial. Methods Between January 2015 and June 2021, 1168 patients undergoing dialysis with CAD were assessed from 30 tertiary medical centers. The primary outcome was all-cause death, and the secondary outcome was cardiovascular death. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and propensity score matching (PSM) were performed to account for between-group differences. Results Overall, ACEI or ARB were prescribed to 518 patients (44.3%) upon discharge. After a median follow-up of 22.2 months, 361 (30.9%) patients died, including 243 cardiovascular deaths. The use of ACEI or ARB was associated with a significantly lower risk of all-cause (25.3% vs 35.4%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.52–0.82, p < 0.001) and cardiovascular death (17.0% vs 23.8%; HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.48–0.83, p = 0.001). These findings remained consistent across IPTW and PSM analyses. Sensitivity analyses for ACEI and ARB use separately yielded similar results. Conclusions Our findings suggested that among patients undergoing dialysis with CAD, ACEI or ARB use was associated with a lower risk of all-cause and cardiovascular death.

Evaluation effect of alginate hydrogel containing losartan on wound healing and gene expression.

Skin tissue engineering has become an increasingly popular alternative to conventional treatments for skin injuries. Hydrogels, owing to their advantages have become the ideal option for wound dressing, and they are extensively employed in a mixture of different drugs to accelerate wound healing. Sodium alginate is a readily available natural polymer with advantages such as bio-compatibility and a non-toxicological nature that is commonly used in hydrogel form for medical applications such as wound repair and drug delivery in skin regenerative medicine. Losartan is a medicine called angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) that can prevent fibrosis by inhibiting AT1R (angiotensin II type 1 receptor). In this research, for the first time, three-dimensional scaffolds based on cross-linked alginate hydrogel with CaCl2 containing different concentrations of losartan for slow drug release and exudate absorption were prepared and characterized as wound dressing. Alginate hydrogel was mixed with 10, 1, 0.1, and 0.01mg/mL of losartan, and their properties such as morphology, chemical structure, water uptake properties, biodegradability, stability assay, rheology, blood compatibility, and cellular response were evaluated. In addition, the therapeutic efficiency of the developed hydrogels was then assessed in an in vitro wound healing model and with a gene expression. The results revealed that the hydrogel produced was very porous (porosity of 47.37 ± 3.76µm) with interconnected pores and biodegradable (weight loss percentage of 60.93 ± 4.51% over 14days). All hydrogel formulations have stability under various conditions. The use of CaCl2 as a cross-linker led to an increase in the viscosity of alginate hydrogels. An in vitro cell growth study revealed that no cytotoxicity was observed at the suggested dosage of the hydrogel. Increases in Losartan dosage, however, caused hemolysis. In vivo study in adult male rats with a full-thickness model showed greater than 80% improvement of the primary wound region after 2weeks of treatment with alginate hydrogel containing 0.1mg/mL Losartan. RT-PCR and immunohistochemistry analysis showed a decrease in expression level of TGF-β1 and VEGF in treatment groups. Histological analysis demonstrated that the alginate hydrogel containing Losartan can be effective in wound repair by decreasing the size of the scar and tissue remodeling, as evidenced by future in vivo studies.

Analysis factors influencing left ventricular thrombus in patients with non-ischemic heart failure

Objective: To explore the influencing factors of left ventricular thrombus (LVT) in patients with non-ischemic heart failure (NIHF) and to construct a nomogram prediction model for NIHF patients with LVT. Methods: This study was a case-control study. A total of 2 592 patients with NIHF hospitalized in Beijing Anzhen Hospital affiliated to Capital Medical University from January 2018 to July 2022 were selected. Fifty-one patients with LVT identified by echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance were classified into LVT group. One hundred and sixty patients were selected as the non-LVT group using a 1∶3 propensity score matching based on age and gender. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to explore the influencing factors of LVT in patients with NIHF. A nomogram prediction model was constructed, and the area under (AUC) the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was calculated to evaluate the predictive effect of the model. Results: A total of 211 patients were enrolled, with a median age of 40 years old and 160 males (76%). Compared with non-LVT group, LVT group had lower systolic blood pressure ((112±20) mmHg vs. (120±19) mmHg; 1 mmHg=0.133 kPa), lower left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF; (27±12)% vs. (39±14)% ), lower proportion of patients with history of hypertension (28% (14/51) vs. 44% (70/160)) and atrial fibrillation (8% (4/51)vs.39% (62/160)), higher proportion of patients with New York Heart Association functional class Ⅲ to Ⅳ (class Ⅲ: 59% (30/51) vs. 41% (66/160); class Ⅳ: 28% (14/51) vs. 19% (31/160)), and larger left ventricular end-systolic diameter (LVESD; (56±14) mm vs. (50±15) mm). The levels of hemoglobin ((152±23) g/L vs. (142±30) g/L), D-dimer (508 (300, 1 105) μg/L vs. 158 (68, 379) μg/L), and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (3 429 (2 462, 4 734) ng/L vs. 1 288 (422, 2 544) ng/L) were higher in LVT group than in non-LVT group (P all<0.05). LVT group had a higher proportion of patients using beta-blockers (92% (47/51) vs. 78% (124/160)), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers or angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (88% (45/51) vs. 72% (115/160)), and anticoagulant drugs (98% (50/51) vs. 32% (51/160)) than non-LVT group (all P <0.05). Multivariate logistic regression showed that reduced LVEF (OR=1.08, 95%CI 1.02-1.15, P=0.008), decreased LVESD (OR=1.07, 95%CI 1.01-1.12, P=0.013), and increased D-dimer levels (OR=5.40, 95%CI 1.98-14.74, P=0.001) were independent influencing factors for LVT in patients with NIHF. The ROC curve showed that the AUC of the nomogram for predicting LVT in patients with NIHF was 0.793 (95%CI 0.710-0.876, P<0.001). Conclusion: Reduced LVEF, decreased LVESD, and elevated D-dimer are associated with LVT in NIHF patients. The predictive model developed based on the above indicators has certain value in predicting LVT in NIHF patients.

High prevalence of comorbidities in older adult patients with type 2 diabetes: a cross-sectional survey

BackgroundDiabetes is a global health problem, and its incidence and complications increase with the duration of the disease and over time. This increase in complications in older patients can lead to disability and a lower quality of life. This study aimed to investigate the rate of diabetes control and complications in older adults.MethodThis was a cross-section of an ongoing cohort of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) aged 65 years and older. The clinical and laboratory characteristics of older adult patients with T2DM in good and intermediate health conditions were collected between 2010 and 2022.ResultsA total of 2,770 older adult patients with T2DM were enrolled, including 1,530(55.3%) female and 1,240 (44.7%) male participants. Metabolic syndrome, hypertension, and coronary artery disease were the most common comorbidities, affecting 1,889 (71.4%), 1,495 (54.4%), and 786 (29.2%) patients, respectively. Albuminuria was present in 626 (22.6%) patients, while retinopathy was detected in 408 (14.7%) patients, including 6% with proliferative retinopathy. Most patients were treated with oral antidiabetic agents (88.9%), with metformin being the most prescribed medication (85.6%). Statins were prescribed to 71.8% of the patients. The most prescribed antihypertensive medications were angiotensin receptor blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, prescribed to 54% and 15% of patients, respectively. The hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) goal (HbA1c < 7.5%) was achieved in 1,350 (56.4%) patients, and the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal (LDL < 100) was achieved in 1,165 (45.6%) patients. Blood pressure control (BP < 140/90) was achieved in 1,755 (65.4%) patients. All three goals were achieved in 278 (10.3%) patients. There were no significant differences in clinical laboratory results and the patients’ characteristics based on gender.ConclusionThe rate of progression of complications in older adult patients is higher than the effectiveness of the treatment, indicating the need for increased social support for this age group.

Use of renin-angiotensin system blockers and posttraumatic stress disorder risk in the UK Biobank: a retrospective cohort study

BackgroundPrevious research has shown that the use of renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockers is linked to a lower prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), but longitudinal studies are scarce. We aimed to estimate the association between the use of RAS blockers and the risk of PTSD among individuals taking antihypertensive medications.MethodsThis longitudinal study included participants aged 40–69 from the UK Biobank. Exposure data were obtained from the initial assessment (2006–10), while outcome data were obtained from the online mental health questionnaire administered 6–11 years later (2016–17). We included participants who were under antihypertensive treatment and did not have a prior diagnosis of PTSD before the initial assessment. Use of RAS blockers was defined as self-reported regular use, at the initial assessment, of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB). Among participants who experienced adverse life experiences, cases of probable PTSD were defined with the six-item PTSD Checklist-Civilian version score ≥ 14. Logistic regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to estimate the odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for the association between RAS blocker use and the risk of probable PTSD.ResultsOf the 15,954 participants (mean age = 59.9 years; 42.6% women) under antihypertensive treatment with no prior history of PTSD at the initial assessment, 64.5% were taking RAS blockers. After a mean follow-up of 7.5 years, 1,249 (7.8%) were newly identified with probable PTSD. RAS blocker users had a lower risk of probable PTSD than RAS blocker non-users (OR = 0.84 [95% CI: 0.75–0.94]), whereas the use of other antihypertensive medications showed no such association (users vs. non-users; calcium channel blockers, OR = 0.99 [95% CI: 0.88–1.11]; beta-blockers, 1.20 [1.08–1.34]; and thiazide-related diuretics, 1.15 [1.03–1.29]). The association between probable PTSD risk and the use of ACEi vs. ARB showed no significant difference (p = 0.96).ConclusionsAmong individuals under antihypertensive treatment, the use of RAS blockers was associated with a decreased risk of probable PTSD. This added benefit of RAS blockers should be considered in the selection of antihypertensive medications.

The role of eprosartan in the management of essential hypertension: literature review and expert opinion.

Eprosartan is an angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) used for management of essential hypertension. With unique pharmacological characteristics, dual action mechanism, and clinical effectiveness, eprosartan offers additional advantages over other ARBs in specific patient populations. A comprehensive review of the literature was performed across publicly available databases, with no time limitations, to ensure the inclusion of all relevant studies. The review focuses on presenting the efficacy and safety profile of eprosartan, alone or in combination with other agents. Additionally, it explores the etiology of hypertension concerning the structure and function of angiotensin II type 1 receptors. Further, the efficacy of eprosartan in special populations and its additional benefits are also discussed. Eprosartan effectively reduces blood pressure (BP), with a 24-hour BP-lowering effect at 600 mg/day. Eprosartan demonstrates similar or better efficacy than other ARBs, such as telmisartan and losartan, particularly in managing coagulation-related abnormalities and peripheral resistance. In combination therapy, eprosartan with hydrochlorothiazide significantly enhances BP reduction. Eprosartan is well-tolerated, with a low incidence of adverse events, making it a reliable choice for long-term hypertension management across various patient populations, such as those with comorbid diabetes and renal disease and older adults.

Use of Beta-Blockers as a First-Line Treatment for Primary Hypertension

Background: Even though beta-blockers had been used as a first-line therapy for hypertension, since the late 1960s, the Eighth Joint National Committee, JNC 8, decided to recommend them no longer. This decision was based on relatively weak evidence from previous studies, which found that first-line beta-blockers were less effective in reducing stroke and heart failure, the main outcomes of hypertension. Despite the general perception, the most common events caused by hypertension are death and MI, not stroke or heart failure. Therefore, this study aimed to clarify beta-blocker efficacy by incorporating the data from all relevant beta-blocker trials, using the composite outcome of major cardiovascular events. Method: A search was conducted on MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, restricted to published, peer-reviewed, human, meta-analysis, and controlled clinical trials. The term words used were “beta-blockers or adrenergic beta antagonists”, “hypertension”, and “death or coronary heart disease or stroke or congestive heart failure or myocardial infarction”. For this research, we selected six randomized controlled trials, and three meta-analyses were also chosen. Results: The results showed that beta-blockers were as effective as other first-line medications in younger hypertensive patients. On the other hand, in the patients aged above 60, the results were mixed. Beta-blockers were more effective than diuretics, but inferior to angiotensin receptor blockers. Also, beta-blockers were as safe and effective as angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in reducing coronary heart disease, myocardial infarction, heart failure, and sudden death. However, beta-blockers were inferior to calcium channel blockers in reducing strokes. Conclusions: Beta-blockers were found to be the most effective in many aspects except for strokes. Further studies are needed to assess beta-blockers’ effectiveness in treating primary hypertension.

Clinical Correlates and Prognostic Impact of Cognitive Dysfunction in Patients With Heart Failure and Preserved Ejection Fraction: Insights From PARAGON-HF.

Cognitive impairment is common in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction but its clinical correlates and prognostic associations are poorly understood. We analyzed cognitive function, using the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction enrolled in a prespecified substudy of the PARAGON-HF trial (Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibitor With Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Global Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction). Logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the variables associated with lower MMSE scores at baseline and postbaseline decline in MMSE scores at 48 weeks. Cox proportional hazards regression and semiparametric proportional rates models were used to examine the risk of clinical outcomes related to baseline MMSE scores, and decline in MMSE scores during follow-up, adjusted for prognostic variables including NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide). At baseline, cognitive function was normal (MMSE score 28-30) in 1809 of 2895 patients (62.5%), borderline (score 24-27) in 794 (27.4%), and impaired (score <24) in 292 (10.1%). Variables associated with both a lower MMSE score at baseline and a decline in score from baseline included older age, a history of stroke or transient ischemia attack, and lower serum albumin. Compared with those with baseline MMSE scores of 28 to 30, patients in the lower MMSE score categories had a stepwise increase in the risk of the composite of time to first HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death, with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.27 (95% CI, 1.06-1.53) for those with scores of 24 to 27 and 1.58 (95% CI, 1.21-2.06) for those with scores <24, respectively. These associations were also found for the individual components of the composite and all-cause death. Likewise, cognitive impairment was associated with a 50% higher risk of total (first and repeat) heart failure hospitalizations and cardiovascular deaths. Examining the change in MMSE score from baseline, a decrease in MMSE score during follow-up was associated with a higher risk of death. In patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction, even modest baseline impairment of cognitive function was associated with worse outcomes, including death. A decline in MMSE score during follow-up was a strong predictor of mortality, independent of other prognostic variables.

Comparative Analysis of First-Line Antihypertensive Treatment Classes

BackgroundThe best first-line monotherapy for hypertension remains uncertain, as current guidelines suggest that thiazides, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), and calcium channel blockers (CCB) are appropriate in the absence of specific comorbidities. We aimed to compare the outcomes of first-line antihypertensive classes in a real-life setting with a long follow-up period. MethodsThis nationwide retrospective new-user cohort study included patients insured by the largest health maintenance organization in Israel. We included patients with a new diagnosis of hypertension between 2008 and 2021 who initiated treatment with a single first-line drug for hypertension. Outcomes were assessed with and without propensity score matching for confounding factors. The primary composite outcome was the first occurrence of myocardial infarction (MI), acute coronary syndrome (ACS), stroke, or heart failure (HF). ResultsA total of 97,639 patients initiated antihypertensive treatment with a single drug as first-line therapy. The most commonly prescribed class was ACEi/ARB (66,717, 68.3%), followed by CCBs (15,922, 16.3%), beta-blockers (BBs, 12,869, 13.2%), and thiazides (2,131, 2.2%). For the primary outcome, the hazard ratios (HRs) for BBs, CCBs, and ACEi/ARBs were 1.44 (95% CI 1.25 - 1.66), 1.10 (95% CI 0.96 - 1.27), and 1.13 (95% CI 0.99 - 1.29), respectively, when compared to thiazides. ConclusionWhen initiating pharmacotherapy for hypertension with a single drug, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, and calcium channel blockers were associated with similar risk of MI, ACS, stroke, or HF when compared to thiazides, while beta-blockers were associated with increased risk.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on initiation of antihypertensive drugs in Sweden: an interrupted time series study

ObjectivesAntihypertensives reduce the risk of myocardial infarction and stroke. Restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic limited access to healthcare, which may have had a negative impact on drug prescribing. This study...

Home blood pressure-lowering effect of esaxerenone versus trichlormethiazide for uncontrolled hypertension: a predefined subanalysis of the EXCITE-HT randomized controlled trial by basal calcium channel blocker versus angiotensin receptor blocker.

This prespecified subanalysis of the multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group EXCITE-HT study aimed to examine the non-inferiority of esaxerenone to trichlormethiazide as a second-line antihypertensive agent according to the basal antihypertensive agent used (angiotensin receptor blocker [ARB] or calcium channel blocker [CCB]). The primary endpoint, change in morning home systolic/diastolic blood pressure (SBP/DBP) from baseline to end of treatment was similar between the two groups (intergroup difference in least squares mean change [95% confidence interval]: -1.3 [-3.8, 1.3]/-0.2 [-1.6, 1.3] mmHg for ARB; -2.7 [-4.2, -1.2]/-0.8 [-1.7, 0.1] mmHg for CCB). The respective incidences of serum potassium levels <3.5 mEq/L and ≥5.5 mEq/L in the ARB subgroup were 3.4% and 4.2% for esaxerenone and 7.9% and 0% for trichlormethiazide; in the CCB subgroup, they were 2.8% and 0.6% for esaxerenone and 13.9% and 1.2% for trichlormethiazide, respectively. The incidence of uric acid level ≥7.0 mg/dL was numerically higher in the trichlormethiazide group than the esaxerenone group in both the ARB and CCB subgroups. The non-inferiority of esaxerenone to trichlormethiazide in lowering morning home BP was demonstrated regardless of whether the basal antihypertensive agent was an ARB or CCB. Esaxerenone with a CCB showed superiority to trichlormethiazide in lowering SBP, without any new safety concerns. Serum potassium levels tended to be higher when esaxerenone was combined with an ARB than with a CCB, but this can be mitigated if administered according to the package insert. A subgroup analysis of the EXCITE-HT study according to basal antihypertensive agent demonstrated the non-inferiority of esaxerenone to trichlormethiazide in lowering morning home BP regardless irrespective of the basal antihypertensive agent. Esaxerenone with a CCB showed superiority to trichlormethiazide in lowering SBP, without any new safety concerns.

Antihypertensive therapy in patients with arterial hypertension and concomitant diseases in real clinical practice (according to the National Registry of Arterial Hypertension, 2019-2022)

Arterial hypertension (AH) remains the leading risk factor associated with cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), cerebrovascular disease and chronic kidney disease. About 70% of patients with AH who are on monotherapy cannot achieve blood pressure (BP) targets, and therefore all quidelines for the management of AH have recently recommended prescribing combination therapy (PCT). In real clinical practice (RCP), there remains significant uncertainty in the effectiveness and rationality of therapy, despite the wide availability of antihypertensive drugs (AHD) and the presence of recommendations for a stepwise approach to prescribing combinations of specific groups of AHD in different clinical situations. Analyze the real ongoing antihypertensive therapy, including the PCT; international nonproprietary names of drugs and their dosages in RCP; compliance of therapy with clinical recommendations; changing trends in the PCT. An analysis was carried out of the data from the register of AH, the compliance of treatment in different clinical groups of patients and the achievement of BP and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol targets in the sample of 2019-2022 (n=5012). The prescription of AHD and achievement of targets values were assessed in accordance with current clinical guidelines for the management of AH and hypercholesterolemia. Data from 2010 (n=7782) and 2020 (n=3061) were analyzed to assess the dynamics of prescription of monotherapy and PCT. The greatest increase in the number of AHD was observed in patients with hypertension in combination with coronary heart disease, heart failure, and atrial fibrillation. In a small group of patients with hypertension without other CVDs, the recommended combinations of AHD were not prescribed; preference was given to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, and β-adrenoblocker (β-AB). PCT mainly differed from the recommended combinations by the wider use of drugs from the β-AB group. The PCT of recommended drugs was highest in patients with hypertension and coronary artery disease - more than 90%, hypertension and heart failure in 56.2%, hypertension and atrial fibrillation - 33.3%, hypertension and chronic kidney desease - 19.6%. Achievement of BP and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol targets was insufficient in all analyzed groups. Among the international nonproprietary names of drugs, the most frequently prescribed are the following: bisoprolol, metoprolol, lisinopril, perindopril, losartan, spironolactone, amlodipine, torasemide, indapamide, hypochlorothiazide, moxonidine. The prescribed daily dosages were closer to the initial recommended ones. By 2020, the prescription of PCT with β-AB and a more uniform prescription of various combinations will come to the fore, while PCT in 2010 is characterized by the presence of one or two leaders combinations. The described features of prescribing AHD partially reproduce clinical recommendations for the management of AH. Differences in therapy provided in RCP may be associated with an attempt to intensify the treatment of hypertension in patients with other concomitant CVDs. At the same time, analysis of combinations and dosages of prescribed drugs suggests the presence of wide opportunities for further escalation of therapy. The presented data can provide insight into current patterns of antihypertensive therapy prescription in patients in RCP and lay the foundation for optimizing therapy in different categories hypertensive patients.

Association of Hypertension with Different Cognitive Disorders.

This literature review explores the association between hypertension and major neurocognitive disorders, including delirium, Alzheimer's disease, vascular dementia, Lewy body dementia, and frontotemporal dementia, which contribute significantly to global mortality and morbidity. Hypertension is a potentially modifiable risk factor for cognitive decline, as it contributes to the progression of neurodegenerative pathologies via vascular damage, inflammation, and the disruption of the blood-brain barrier. Despite this, the effectiveness of antihypertensive treatments in preventing or alleviating cognitive decline remains contentious. While some research highlights the potential benefits of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers, other studies show inconsistent results, complicated by variations in hypertension definitions, diagnostic criteria for cognitive disorders, and confounding factors like medication adherence. Furthermore, the complex bidirectional relationship between hypertension and major neurocognitive disorders warrants more investigation, as cognitive decline can exacerbate cardiovascular risks through heightened inflammatory responses and compromised autonomic regulation. This review underscores the need for prospective, long-term studies to elucidate the relationships between hypertension and cognitive disorders and to evaluate the potential therapeutic benefits of antihypertensive treatments.

Association of RAAS inhibitors on osteoporosis and fracture risk in the hypertensive population–A prospective population-based cohort study in Lanzhou, China

BackgroundRenin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors appear to benefit bone tissue in antihypertensive treatment. However, the association between RAAS inhibitors and bone metabolism was inconsistent.Methods and study designBased on the study of Risk Evaluation of Cancers in Chinese Diabetic Individuals(REACTION) conducted in 2011, We followed 6,252 Lanzhou residents aged 40–75 years from 2014 to 2016. Finally, 1,625 hypertension cases with complete data were included in the analysis. The study subjects were divided into four groups according to the type of antihypertensive drugs. We employed logistic or multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate the association between different antihypertensive drug use and osteoporosis, the risk of fracture, and the change in bone mineral density (BMD) level. The association of osteoporosis or the fracture risk by cumulative duration of use of these medications (< 3 years.) and (> 3 years.) was also estimated.ResultsThe cross-sectional study showed that there was no significant association between baseline antihypertensive drugs (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB)) use and osteoporosis and fracture. During a mean follow-up of 3.4 years in the longitudinal study, there were 478 new osteoporosis cases and 76 fractures. Compared with patients without antihypertensive drug use, the hazard ratios (HRs) [95% confidence interval (CI)] for the risk of osteoporosis were 1.005(0.651,1.552) and 1.077(0.793,1.462) in ACEI or ARB use (p > 0.05). ACEI or ARB use was also not significantly associated with fracture risk (HR 1.102(0.326,3.726), 0.735(0.251,2.148), p > 0.05). Further analysis showed that the use of ACEI (HR 1.078(0.146,7.950)) or ARB (HR 1.169(0.347,3.939)) was not significantly associated with the improvement of osteoporosis (p > 0.05). In addition, the duration of RAAS inhibitors used showed no apparent correlation with the risk of osteoporosis (≤ 3 years: HR 0.872 (0.516, 1.474), > 3 years: HR 1.151 (0.574, 2.308)), nor with the improvement of osteoporosis and the risk of fracture. Meanwhile, the association mentioned above did not change compared to different RAAS inhibitors.ConclusionsThe use of RAAS inhibitors, including ACEIs and ARBs, was not significantly associated with osteoporosis, risk of fracture, or BMD change.

PRESCRIPTION PATTERN OF ANTI-HYPERTENSIVE MEDICATIONS IN PATIENTS WITH HYPERTENSION AT A TERTIARY CARE HOSPITAL, ASSAM

Objective: The aim of our study is to analyze the pattern of prescription of medications used for managing hypertension (HTN) at a tertiary care hospital and assess the comorbidities associated with HTN. Methods: This prospective study has been conducted for duration of 6 months in the Department of Medicine of Silchar Medical College and Hospital. Prescriptions of both genders diagnosed with primary essential HTN and patients receiving or advised to start antihypertensive medications were included in the study. Results: One hundred and fifty prescriptions have been evaluated in the study duration, 42% are female and 58% male. Monotherapy (69%) followed by dual therapy (26%) and multidrug therapy (5%) have been prescribed to the patients. Calcium channel blockers (CCBs) (48%) are the most widely used drugs, along with angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) (29%), beta-blockers (BBs) (11%), diuretics (6%), and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (6%) in single drug therapy. ARB+CCB followed by ARB+diuretic and ARB+BB were used in dual therapy. In triple therapy, the most preferred therapy was ARB+CCB+diuretic, and then ARB+CCB+BB. Dyslipidemia (38%), followed by Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) (34%), and chronic kidney disease (CKD) (19%) were the most common associated comorbidities. Conclusion: Monotherapy was frequently prescribed regimen followed by dual therapy and multidrug therapy. In single-drug therapy, CCB was mostly used, and then ARB. In dual therapy CCB+ARB was the most preferred treatment. Dyslipidemia was most frequently associated with HTN, followed by DM and CKD. Prescription patterns of anti-hypertensive moderately followed the World Health Organization recommendations for HTN.

7529 A Silent Menace Of Mounjaro: Acute Renal Failure Associated With Tirzepatide

Abstract Disclosure: F. farhat: None. P. Gonzalez: None. A.B. Ravin: None. F.F. Foo: None. S. Patel: None. J. Cheng: None. S.W. Holland: None. A. Chinnici: None. A. Abu Homoud: None. Introduction: Obesity and metabolic syndrome are serious conditions resulting in high morbidity and mortality. Approximately 70% of Americans suffer from obesity. In light of increasing obesity rates, many new medications, including GLP1 receptor agonists, have been approved by the FDA. Tirzepatide injection, known as Mounjaro, is a new medication for diabetes mellitus which offers additional benefits of weight loss. Mounjaro’s side effects can range from mild symptoms including nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea, to more severe symptoms like pancreatitis, and allergic reaction. In this report we present a rare case of renal failure after initiation of Mounjaro. Case presentation:This is a 59 year old male with past medical history significant for hypertension, dysglycemia who presented to the Emergency Department (ED) after two near syncopal events. He was started on Mounjaro a month ago. One week prior to presentation, the patient received his 6th dose of Mounjaro and shortly after he began experiencing generalized weakness associated with nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and lower extremity cramps. His symptoms continued to worsen which prompted him to come to the hospital. Moreover, he had not voided in 4 days. In the ED, he was severely hyponatremic and AKI with a sodium of 115 and creatinine of 6.62.Patient was admitted to the ICU for further treatment and monitoring. He was evaluated by a nephrologist and determined that dialysis was not necessary as his AKI was resultant from volume depletion due to severe diarrhea as creatinine improved to 3.89 after resuscitation. He was discharged with no further complications.Discussion:This case report brings attention to a potential serious adverse effect from the use of a GLP1, Mounjaro, that has not been described before. Previous reports have described AKI caused by GLP1 treatment but none to our knowledge have discussed renal failure in patients without underlying renal disease. Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease and use of medications such as NSAIDs, diuretics, or angiotensin receptor blockers are more likely to develop renal complications.Mounjaro and other GLP1 medications have gained popularity among patients as they are effective in weight loss and simple to administer.. Additionally, more practitioners are now prescribing these medications for diabetics as they offer a more favorable safety profile compared to other available medications. Although GI side effects are well known, patients should be warned about the potential of severe dehydration leading to renal complications. Conclusion: Mounjaro has been associated with gastrointestinal adverse effects which include nausea, vomiting and diarrhea, and if severe, can lead to AKI and possible renal failure even without underlying renal disease. Monitoring renal functions after initiating or escalating the dose of Mounjaro should be a routine workup by all providers. Presentation: 6/2/2024