Advertisement
Mayo Clinic Proceedings Home

Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors or Angiotensin Receptor Blockers in Patients Without Heart Failure? Insights From 254,301 Patients From Randomized Trials

      Abstract

      Objectives

      To compare the efficacy and safety of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in patients without heart failure.

      Patients and Methods

      Meta-analysis of randomized trials identified using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials searches from January 1, 1980, through April 13, 2015, of ACEis and ARBs compared with placebo or active controls and corroborated with head-to-head trials of ARBs vs ACEis. Outcomes were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), angina, stroke, heart failure, revascularization, and new-onset diabetes.

      Results

      Our search yielded 106 randomized trials that enrolled 254,301 patients. Compared with placebo, ACEis but not ARBs reduced the outcomes of all-cause mortality (ACEis vs placebo: relative risk [RR], 0.89; 95% CI, 0.80-1.00; ARBs vs placebo: RR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.96-1.06; Pinteraction=.04), cardiovascular death (RR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70-0.99 and RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.92-1.14; Pinteraction=.05), and MI (RR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.78-0.90 and RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.85-1.03; Pinteraction=.06). The meta-regression analysis revealed that the difference between ACEis and ARBs compared with placebo was due to a higher placebo event rate in the ACEis trials (most of these trials were conducted a decade earlier than the ARB trials) for the outcome of all-cause mortality (P=.001), cardiovascular death (P<.001), and MI (P=.02). Sensitivity analyses restricted to trials published after 2000 revealed similar outcomes with ACEis vs placebo and ARBs vs placebo (Pinteraction>.05). Head-to-head comparison trials of ARBs vs ACEis exhibited no difference in outcomes except for a lower risk of drug withdrawal due to adverse effects with ARBs (RR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.65-0.81).

      Conclusion

      In patients without heart failure, evidence from placebo-controlled trials (restricted to trials after 2000), active controlled trials, and head-to-head randomized trials all suggest ARBs to be as efficacious and safe as ACEis, with the added advantage of better tolerability.

      Abbreviations and Acronyms:

      ACEi (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor), ARB (angiotensin receptor blocker), CKD (chronic kidney disease), CVD (cardiovascular disease), ESRD (end-stage renal disease), MI (myocardial infarction), RAS (renin-angiotensin system), RR (relative risk)
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Mayo Clinic Proceedings
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Fox K.M.
        • EURopean trial On reduction of cardiac events with Perindopril in stable coronary Artery disease Investigators
        Efficacy of perindopril in reduction of cardiovascular events among patients with stable coronary artery disease: randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial (the EUROPA study).
        Lancet. 2003; 362: 782-788
        • Yusuf S.
        • Sleight P.
        • Pogue J.
        • Bosch J.
        • Davies R.
        • Dagenais G.
        • The Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation Study Investigators
        Effects of an angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor, ramipril, on cardiovascular events in high-risk patients [published corrections appear in N Engl J Med. 2000;342(10):748 and 2000;342(18):1376].
        N Engl J Med. 2000; 342: 145-153
        • Yusuf S.
        • Diener H.C.
        • Sacco R.L.
        • et al.
        • PRoFESS Study Group
        Telmisartan to prevent recurrent stroke and cardiovascular events.
        N Engl J Med. 2008; 359: 1225-1237
        • Haller H.
        • Ito S.
        • Izzo Jr., J.L.
        • et al.
        • ROADMAP Trial Investigators
        Olmesartan for the delay or prevention of microalbuminuria in type 2 diabetes.
        N Engl J Med. 2011; 364: 907-917
        • Al Khalaf M.M.
        • Thalib L.
        • Doi S.A.
        Cardiovascular outcomes in high-risk patients without heart failure treated with ARBs: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Am J Cardiovasc Drugs. 2009; 9: 29-43
        • Task Force Members
        • Montalescot G.
        • Sechtem U.
        • Achenbach S.
        • et al.
        2013 ESC guidelines on the management of stable coronary artery disease: The Task Force on the management of stable coronary artery disease of the European Society of Cardiology [published correction appears in Eur Heart J. 2014;35(33):2260–2261].
        Eur Heart J. 2013; 34: 2949-3003
        • Fihn S.D.
        • Blankenship J.C.
        • Alexander K.P.
        • et al.
        2014 ACC/AHA/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS focused update of the guideline for the diagnosis and management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines, and the American Association for Thoracic Surgery, Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons.
        Circulation. 2014; 130: 1749-1767
      1. Report of the National Cholesterol Education Program Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults: the Expert Panel.
        Arch Intern Med. 1988; 148: 36-69
        • Grundy S.M.
        • Cleeman J.I.
        • Merz C.N.
        • et al.
        • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; American College of Cardiology Foundation; American Heart Association
        Implications of recent clinical trials for the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines [published correction appears in Circulation. 2004;110(6):763].
        Circulation. 2004; 110: 227-239
        • Center for Disease Control and Prevention
        Crude and Age-Adjusted Percentage of People with Diabetes Aged 35 Years or Older Reporting Any Heart Disease or Stroke, United States, 1997–2011.
        Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA2012
        • ONTARGET Investigators
        • Yusuf S.
        • Teo K.K.
        • Pogue J.
        • et al.
        Telmisartan, ramipril, or both in patients at high risk for vascular events.
        N Engl J Med. 2008; 358: 1547-1559
        • The Cochrane Collaboration
        Higgins J.P. Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.0.0. 2008 (Available at:) (Accessed December 12, 2013)
        • Moher D.
        • Cook D.J.
        • Eastwood S.
        • Olkin I.
        • Rennie D.
        • Stroup D.F.
        Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses.
        Lancet. 1999; 354: 1896-1900
        • DerSimonian R.
        • Laird N.
        Meta-analysis in clinical trials.
        Control Clin Trials. 1986; 7: 177-188
        • Galbraith R.F.
        A note on graphical presentation of estimated odds ratios from several clinical trials.
        Stat Med. 1988; 7: 889-894
        • Higgins J.P.
        • Thompson S.G.
        Controlling the risk of spurious findings from meta-regression.
        Stat Med. 2004; 23: 1663-1682
        • Bradburn M.J.
        • Deeks J.J.
        • Altman D.G.
        sbe24: metan—an alternative meta-analysis command.
        Stata Tech Bull. 1998; 44: 15
        • Murphey L.
        • Vaughan D.
        • Borwn N.
        Contribution of bradykinin to the cardioprotective effects of ACE inhibitors.
        Eur Heart J Suppl. 2003; 5: A37-A41
        • Cheng J.
        • Zhang W.
        • Zhang X.
        • et al.
        Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular deaths, and cardiovascular events in patients with diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis.
        JAMA Intern Med. 2014; 174: 773-785
        • DREAM Trial Investigators
        • Bosch J.
        • Yusuf S.
        • Gerstein H.C.
        • et al.
        Effect of ramipril on the incidence of diabetes.
        N Engl J Med. 2006; 355: 1551-1562
        • Law M.R.
        • Morris J.K.
        • Wald N.J.
        Use of blood pressure lowering drugs in the prevention of cardiovascular disease: meta-analysis of 147 randomised trials in the context of expectations from prospective epidemiological studies.
        BMJ. 2009; 338: b1665
        • Li E.C.
        • Heran B.S.
        • Wright J.M.
        Angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors versus angiotensin receptor blockers for primary hypertension.
        Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014; 8: CD009096

      Linked Article

      • The Different Effects of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers on Mortality
        Mayo Clinic ProceedingsVol. 91Issue 7
        • Preview
          The article by Bangalore et al1 published in the January 2016 issue of Mayo Clinic Proceedings deals with the important topic of cardiovascular protection. In this regard, several recent studies have compared the 2 classes of cardioprotective drugs, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs). As highlighted by Bangalore et al, these studies have often reported mortality reduction with ACE inhibitors vs placebo or comparators, while ARBs were not associated with significant effect.
        • Full-Text
        • PDF