Angiotensin receptor blockers as anti-hypertensive treatment for patients with diabetes mellitus: meta-analysis of controlled double-blind randomized trials

被引:20
|
作者
Siebenhofer, A
Plank, J
Horvath, K
Berghold, A
Sutton, AJ
Sommer, R
Pieber, TR
机构
[1] Karl Franzens Univ Hosp, Dept Internal Med, Div Diabet & Metab, A-8036 Graz, Austria
[2] Knittelfeld Hosp, Dept Internal Med, Graz, Austria
[3] Karl Franzens Univ Graz, Inst Med Informat Stat & Documentat, Graz, Austria
[4] Univ Leicester, Dept Epidemiol & Publ Hlth, Leicester, Leics, England
关键词
diabetes; angiotensin receptor blockers; meta-analysis;
D O I
10.1111/j.1464-5491.2004.01122.x
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Aims To assess the evidence for possible reduction of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, and end-stage renal disease in diabetic patients treated with angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers (ARBs) as an anti-hypertensive treatment. Methods Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, double-blind controlled trials of at least 1 year's duration. ARBs were used in the intervention group vs. placebo or standard anti-hypertensive treatment in the control group. The main outcome measures were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, and end-stage renal disease. Results Three studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Separate analyses were conducted for comparisons of ARBs with groups given placebo and those given standard anti-hypertensive treatment. There was no significant difference in mortality between the ARBs and placebo groups, with an estimated odds ratio (OR) of 0.99 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81, 1.20]. There was a non-significant difference in patients treated with ARBs compared with standard anti-hypertensive treatment, with an OR of 0.78 (95% CI 0.45, 1.36). No statistically significant difference in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality between the intervention and placebo groups was found, with an OR of 0.91 (95% CI 0.77, 1.08). When ARBs were compared with standard treatment, the OR was estimated at 0.85 (0.54, 1.33). Data on end-stage renal disease were available for two studies comparing ARBs vs. placebo and showed a statistically significant advantage of ARBs, with an OR of 0.73 (95% CI 0.6, 0.89). As only one study compared end-stage renal disease outcome for ARBs vs. standard treatment, a meta-analysis was not possible. This study reported a considerable benefit of ARBs [OR = 0.73 (0.54, 1.01)] compared with the calcium channel blocker amlodipine. Conclusions ARBs failed to show significant reduction in total mortality and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in diabetic patients. The only statistical benefit was the reduction of end-stage renal disease compared with placebo. Therefore, at this time ARBs have not proved to be superior to standard anti-hypertensive treatment in diabetic patients.
引用
收藏
页码:18 / 25
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] LCZ696 COMPARED WITH ANGIOTENSIN II RECEPTOR BLOCKERS FOR PATIENTS WITH HYPERTENSION: A META-ANALYSIS OF RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS
    Zhao Yang
    Zhao Xu
    Li Ningyin
    Yu Jing
    JOURNAL OF HYPERTENSION, 2016, 34 : E444 - E444
  • [32] The Effects of LCZ696 in Patients With Hypertension Compared With Angiotensin Receptor Blockers: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
    Zhao, Yang
    Yu, Heng
    Zhao, Xu
    Ma, Ruixin
    Li, Ningyin
    Yu, Jing
    JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR PHARMACOLOGY AND THERAPEUTICS, 2017, 22 (05) : 447 - 457
  • [33] LCZ696 COMPARED WITH ANGIOTENSIN II RECEPTOR BLOCKERS FOR PATIENTS WITH HYPERTENSION: A META-ANALYSIS OF RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS
    Zhao, Y.
    Zhao, X.
    Li, Ny.
    Yu, J.
    JOURNAL OF HYPERTENSION, 2016, 34 : E208 - E208
  • [34] Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers Improve Peripheral Endothelial Function: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
    Li, Shuang
    Wu, Yan
    Yu, Ge
    Xia, Qing
    Xu, Yawei
    PLOS ONE, 2014, 9 (03):
  • [35] Effect of Angiotensin Receptor Blockers on Flow-Mediated Vasodilation: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
    Chen, Jian-Dong
    Liu, Ming
    Chen, Xiao-hu
    Yang, Zhi-Jian
    CARDIOLOGY, 2015, 131 (02) : 69 - 79
  • [36] ANGIOTENSIN-CONVERTING ENZYME INHIBITORS AND ANGIOTENSIN RECEPTOR BLOCKERS IN PATIENTS WITH CARDIOVASCULAR RISK FACTORS: A META-ANALYSIS OF RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS
    Vu Linh Hoang
    Addison, Daniel
    Don Pham
    Alam, Mahboob
    Birnbaum, Yochai
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 2015, 65 (10) : A1423 - A1423
  • [37] A meta-analysis of eight randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trials of mirtazapine for the treatment of patients with major depression and symptoms of anxiety
    Fawcett, J
    Barkin, RL
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PSYCHIATRY, 1998, 59 (03) : 123 - 127
  • [38] Incidence of angioedema in randomised controlled trials of angiotensin receptor blockers: a meta-analysis
    Chapman, N.
    Dixon, F.
    Gupta, A. K.
    EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL, 2013, 34 : 335 - 335
  • [39] Pharmacological treatment for bipolar mania: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of double-blind randomized controlled trials
    Taro Kishi
    Toshikazu Ikuta
    Yuki Matsuda
    Kenji Sakuma
    Makoto Okuya
    Ikuo Nomura
    Masakazu Hatano
    Nakao Iwata
    Molecular Psychiatry, 2022, 27 : 1136 - 1144
  • [40] Pharmacological treatment for bipolar mania: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of double-blind randomized controlled trials
    Kishi, Taro
    Ikuta, Toshikazu
    Matsuda, Yuki
    Sakuma, Kenji
    Okuya, Makoto
    Nomura, Ikuo
    Hatano, Masakazu
    Iwata, Nakao
    MOLECULAR PSYCHIATRY, 2022, 27 (02) : 1136 - 1144