| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Submitted on February 20, 2007
From the Centre for Epidemiological Studies and Clinical Trials (J.G.W., Y.L.), Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China; Preventive Cardiology Program (S.S.F.), University of California, Irvine; and the Diagnosis Center (M.S.), Hopital Hotel-Dieu, Paris, France. * To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: jiguangwang{at}netscape.net.
Abstract--In the present quantitative overview of outcome trials, we investigated the efficacy of amlodipine or angiotensin receptor blockers in the prevention of stroke and myocardial infarction in patients with hypertension, coronary artery disease, or diabetic nephropathy. The analysis included 12 trials of 94 338 patients. The analysis of trials involving an amlodipine group showed that amlodipine provided more protection against stroke and myocardial infarction than other antihypertensive drugs, including angiotensin receptor blockers (-19%, P<0.0001 and -7%, P=0.03) and placebo (-37%, P=0.06 and -29%, P=0.04). The analysis of trials involving an angiotensin receptor blocker group showed contrasting results between trials versus amlodipine and trials versus other antihypertensive drugs for stroke (+19% versus -25%; P<0.0001) and myocardial infarction (+21% versus +1%; P=0.03). The results of 3 trials comparing an angiotensin receptor blocker with placebo were neutral (P
Revised on March 13, 2007
Prevention of Stroke and Myocardial Infarction by Amlodipine and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers. A Quantitative Overview
Ji-Guang Wang*;
0.14). The within-trial between-group difference in achieved systolic pressure ranged from -1.1 to +4.7 mm Hg for trials involving an amlodipine group and from -2.8 to +4.0 mm Hg for trials involving an angiotensin receptor blocker group. The metaregression analysis correlating odds ratios with blood pressure differences showed a negative relationship (regression coefficients: -3% to -8%), which reached statistical significance (regression coefficient: -6%; P=0.01) for stroke in trials involving an amlodipine group. In conclusion, blood pressure differences largely accounted for cardiovascular outcome.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
S. J. Connolly, H. J.G.M. Crijns, C. Torp-Pedersen, M. van Eickels, C. Gaudin, R. L. Page, S. H. Hohnloser, and for the ATHENA Investigators Analysis of Stroke in ATHENA: A Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind, Parallel-Arm Trial to Assess the Efficacy of Dronedarone 400 mg BID for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Hospitalization or Death From Any Cause in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation/Atrial Flutter Circulation, September 29, 2009; 120(13): 1174 - 1180. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. H. Strauss and A. Hall Angiotensin Receptor Blockers Should Be Regarded as First-Line Drugs for Stroke Prevention in Both Primary and Secondary Prevention Settings: No Stroke, September 1, 2009; 40(9): 3161 - 3162. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J.-L. Balligand and T. Godfraind Amlodipine and Stroke Prevention Hypertension, October 1, 2007; 50(4): e71 - e71. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J.-G. Wang and Y. Li Response to Amlodipine and Stroke Prevention Hypertension, October 1, 2007; 50(4): e72 - e72. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Minami, T. Ishimitsu, and H. Matsuoka Can Large-Scale Trials or Meta-Analyses Demonstrate Blood Pressure Independent Effect of Angiotensin Receptor Blockers? Hypertension, October 1, 2007; 50(4): e73 - e73. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J.-G. Wang and Y. Li Response to Can Large-Scale Trials or Meta-Analyses Demonstrate Blood Pressure Independent Effect of Angiotensin Receptor Blockers? Hypertension, October 1, 2007; 50(4): e74 - e74. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
|
Hypertension Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search Copyright © 2007 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. |