on July 11, 2005
Published online before print July 11, 2005, doi: 10.1161/01.HYP.0000174591.42889.a2
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Submitted on March 7, 2005
From the Dipartimento Malattie Cardiovascolari (P.V., F.A., R.G., M.B., C.P.), Hospital R. Silvestrini, Dipartimento di Medicina Interna (G.R.), University of Perugia, Italy; and Hypertension and Cardiovascular Rehabilitation Unit (J.A.S., L.T.), Department of Molecular and Cardiovascular Research, University of Leuven, Belgium. * To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: verdec{at}tin.it.
Abstract--We investigated whether protection from coronary heart disease (CHD) and stroke conferred by angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and calcium channel blockers (CCBs) in hypertensive or high-risk patients may be explained by the specific drug regimen. We extracted summary statistics regarding CHD and stroke from 28 outcome trials that compared either ACEIs or CCBs with diuretics,
Revised on March 30, 2005
Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Calcium Channel Blockers for Coronary Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention
Paolo Verdecchia*;
-blockers, or placebo for a total of 179 122 patients, 9509 incident cases of CHD, and 5971 cases of stroke. CHD included myocardial infarction and coronary death. In placebo-controlled trials, ACEIs decreased the risk of CHD (P<0.001), and CCBs reduced stroke incidence (P<0.001). There were no significant differences in CHD risk between regimens based on diuretics/-blockers and regimens based on ACEIs (P=0.46) or CCBs (P=0.52). The risk of stroke was reduced by CCBs (P=0.041) but not by ACEIs (P=0.15) compared with diuretics/-blockers. Because heterogeneity between trials was significant, we investigated potential sources of heterogeneity by metaregression. Examined covariates were the reduction in systolic blood pressure (BP), drug treatment (ACEIs versus CCBs), their interaction term, sex, age at randomization, year of publication, and duration of treatment. Prevention of CHD was explained by systolic BP reduction (P<0.001) and use of ACEIs (P=0.028), whereas prevention of stroke was explained by systolic BP reduction (P=0.001) and use of CCBs (P=0.042). These findings confirm that BP lowering is fundamental for prevention of CHD and stroke. However, over and beyond BP reduction, ACEIs appear superior to CCBs for prevention of CHD, whereas CCBs appear superior to ACEIs for prevention of stroke.
Key words: antihypertensive therapy • myocardial infarction • stroke
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  J. A Staessen, T. Richart, and P. Verdecchia Reducing blood pressure in people of different ages BMJ, May 17, 2008; 336(7653): 1080 - 1081. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 V. Perkovic, R. Huxley, Y. Wu, D. Prabhakaran, and S. MacMahon The Burden of Blood Pressure-Related Disease: A Neglected Priority for Global Health Hypertension, December 1, 2007; 50(6): 991 - 997. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. S Hall and M. H Strauss More about the "ARB MI paradox" Heart, September 1, 2007; 93(9): 1011 - 1014. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. A Staessen and E. O'Brien Will generic hypertension guidelines reduce the proliferation of directives? Heart, July 1, 2007; 93(7): 775 - 777. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 Authors/Task Force Members:, G. Mancia, G. De Backer, A. Dominiczak, R. Cifkova, R. Fagard, G. Germano, G. Grassi, A. M. Heagerty, S. E. Kjeldsen, et al. 2007 Guidelines for the Management of Arterial Hypertension: The Task Force for the Management of Arterial Hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) and of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Eur. Heart J., June 11, 2007; (2007) ehm236v1. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. G. Robinson, G. Bakris, J. Torner, N. J. Stone, and R. Wallace Is it Time for a Cardiovascular Primary Prevention Trial in the Elderly? Stroke, February 1, 2007; 38(2): 441 - 450. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. M. Kaplan Clinical Trials for Hypertension: Expectations Fulfilled and Unfulfilled Hypertension, February 1, 2007; 49(2): 257 - 259. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Sever, B. Dahlof, N. Poulter, H. Wedel, G. Beevers, M. Caulfield, R. Collins, S. Kjeldsen, A. Kristinsson, G. McInnes, et al. Potential synergy between lipid-lowering and blood-pressure-lowering in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial Eur. Heart J., December 2, 2006; 27(24): 2982 - 2988. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. H. Messerli and J. A. Staessen Amlodipine Better Than Lisinopril?: How One Randomized Clinical Trial Ended Fallacies From Observational Studies Hypertension, September 1, 2006; 48(3): 359 - 361. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. H. Strauss and A. S. Hall Angiotensin Receptor Blockers May Increase Risk of Myocardial Infarction: Unraveling the ARB-MI Paradox Circulation, August 22, 2006; 114(8): 838 - 854. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. A. Kotchen From Clinical Trials to Clinical Practice: Why the Gap? Hypertension, August 1, 2006; 48(2): 196 - 197. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. Zhang, L. Thijs, and J. A. Staessen Blood Pressure Lowering for Primary and Secondary Prevention of Stroke Hypertension, August 1, 2006; 48(2): 187 - 195. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. S. Sever, N. R. Poulter, W. J. Elliott, M. C. Jonsson, H. R. Black, P. S. Sever, N. R. Poulter, W. J. Elliott, M. C. Jonsson, and H. R. Black Blood Pressure Reduction Is Not the Only Determinant of Outcome Circulation, June 13, 2006; 113(23): 2754 - 2774. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. H. Strauss, E. Lonn, and S. Verma Angiotensin-II receptor blockers and coronary artery disease: 'presumed innocents': reply Eur. Heart J., June 2, 2006; 27(12): 1507 - 1508. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Volpe, G. Tocci, and C. Savoia Angiotensin II receptor blockers and coronary artery disease: 'presumed innocents' Eur. Heart J., June 2, 2006; 27(12): 1506 - 1507. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. H. Strauss, S. Verma, J. Schrader, S. Luders, A. Kulschewski, F. Hammersen, K. Plate, J. Berger, W. Zidek, P. Dominiak, et al. MOSES Raises Questions * Response: Stroke, February 1, 2006; 37(2): 338 - 340. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. B. Goldstein and G. J. Hankey Advances in Primary Stroke Prevention Stroke, February 1, 2006; 37(2): 317 - 319. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. M. Kaplan Treatment of Hypertension: Remaining Issues After the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial Hypertension, January 1, 2006; 47(1): 10 - 13. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. H. Strauss, E. M. Lonn, and S. Verma Is the jury out? Class specific differences on coronary outcomes with ACE-inhibitors and ARBs: insight from meta-analysis and The Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists' Collaboration Eur. Heart J., November 2, 2005; 26(22): 2351 - 2353. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. M. Kaplan An Updated Meta-Analysis With a Few Surprises Hypertension, August 1, 2005; 46(2): 257 - 258. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|