Should renin-angiotensin system inhibitors be held prior to major surgery?

Many patients undergoing surgical procedures have a history of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, heart failure, or a combination. Often, these conditions involve the chronic use of a renin-angiotensin system inhibitor, including angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs). Observational studies have suggested that continuing ACEIs/ARBs before major noncardiac surgery can increase the risk of intraoperative hypotension, which might drive postoperative complications such as acute kidney injury, myocardial injury, or stroke. Strong recommendations on how to manage ACEIs/ARBs before surgery are, however, lacking owing to insufficient evidence, mostly limited to data from observational studies. Recently, the SPACE trial investigated the impact of preoperative management of ACEIs/ARBs on postoperative myocardial injury. Myocardial injury occurred in 48.3% patients randomised to discontinue and 41.3% patients randomised to continue ACEI/ARB (odds ratio for continuing: 0.77, 95% confidence interval 0.45-1.31). Patients randomised to the 'Stop' group experienced more postoperative hypertension. In a post hoc analysis, patients randomised to the 'Continue' group with low preoperative NT-proBNP concentrations (<100 pg ml-1) experienced less myocardial injury after surgery than the 'Stop' group, whereas no significant difference was observed in patients with elevated preoperative NT-proBNP concentrations. The SPACE trial provides important and new reassuring data on the safety of continuing ACEIs/ARBs before major surgery, challenging previous beliefs.

ACE inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers differentially alter the response to angiotensin II treatment in vasodilatory shock.

BACKGROUND: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) medications are widely prescribed. We sought to assess how pre-admission use of these medications might impact the response to angiotensin-II treatment during vasodilatory shock. METHODS: In a post-hoc subgroup analysis of the randomized, placebo-controlled, Angiotensin Therapy for High Output Shock (ATHOS-3) trial, we compared patients with chronic angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) use, and patients with angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) use, to patients without exposure to either ACEi or ARB. The primary outcome was mean arterial pressure after 1-h of treatment. Additional clinical outcomes included mean arterial pressure and norepinephrine equivalent dose requirements over time, and study-drug dose over time. Biological outcomes included baseline RAS biomarkers (renin, angiotensin-I, angiotensin-II, and angiotensin-I/angiotensin-II ratio), and the change in renin from 0 to 3 h. RESULTS: We included n = 321 patients, of whom, 270 were ACEi and ARB-unexposed, 29 were ACEi-exposed and 22 ARB-exposed. In ACEi/ARB-unexposed patients, angiotensin-treated patients, compared to placebo, had higher hour-1 mean arterial pressure (9.1 mmHg [95% CI 7.6-10.1], p < 0.0001), lower norepinephrine equivalent dose over 48-h (p = 0.0037), and lower study-drug dose over 48-h (p < 0.0001). ACEi-exposed patients treated with angiotensin-II showed similarly higher hour-1 mean arterial pressure compared to ACEi/ARB-unexposed (difference in treatment-effect: - 2.2 mmHg [95% CI - 7.0-2.6], pinteraction = 0.38), but a greater reduction in norepinephrine equivalent dose (pinteraction = 0.0031) and study-drug dose (pinteraction < 0.0001) over 48-h. In contrast, ARB-exposed patients showed an attenuated effect of angiotensin-II on hour-1 mean arterial pressure versus ACEi/ARB-unexposed (difference in treatment-effect: - 6.0 mmHg [95% CI - 11.5 to - 0.6], pinteraction = 0.0299), norepinephrine equivalent dose (pinteraction < 0.0001), and study-drug dose (pinteraction = 0.0008). Baseline renin levels and angiotensin-I/angiotensin-II ratios were highest in ACEi-exposed patients. Finally, angiotensin-II treatment reduced hour-3 renin in ACEi/ARB-unexposed and ACEi-exposed patients but not in ARB-exposed patients. CONCLUSIONS: In vasodilatory shock patients, the cardiovascular and biological RAS response to angiotensin-II differed based upon prior exposure to ACEi and ARB medications. ACEi-exposure was associated with increased angiotensin II responsiveness, whereas ARB-exposure was associated with decreased responsiveness. These findings have clinical implications for patient selection and dosage of angiotensin II in vasodilatory shock. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.Gov Identifier: NCT02338843 (Registered January 14th 2015).

Effects of the valsartan recall on heart failure patients: A nationwide analysis.

BACKGROUND: Valsartan is commonly used for cardiac conditions. In 2018, the Food and Drug Administration recalled generic valsartan due to the detection of impurities. Our objective was to determine if heart failure patients receiving valsartan at the recall date had a greater likelihood of unfavorable outcomes than patients using comparable antihypertensives. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study of Optum's de-identified Clinformatics® Datamart (July 2017-January 2019). Heart failure patients with commercial or Medicare Advantage insurance who received valsartan were compared to persons who received non-recalled angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and angiotensin converting enzyme-inhibitors (ACE-Is) for 1 year prior and including the recall date. Outcomes included a composite for all-cause hospitalization, emergency department (ED), and urgent care (UC) use and a measure of cardiac events which included hospitalizations for acute myocardial infarction and hospitalizations/ED/UC visits for stroke/transient ischemic attack, heart failure or hypertension at 6-months post-recall. Cox proportional hazard models with propensity score weighting compared the risk of outcomes between groups. RESULTS: Of the 87 130 adherent patients, 15% were valsartan users and 85% were users of non-recalled ARBs/ACE-Is. Valsartan use was not associated with an increased risk of all-cause hospitalization/ED/UC use six-months post-recall (HR 1.00; 95% CI 0.96-1.03), compared with individuals taking non-recalled ARBs/ACE-Is. Similarly, cardiac events 6-months post-recall did not differ between individuals on valsartan and non-recalled ARBs/ACE-Is (HR 1.04; 95% CI 0.97-1.12). CONCLUSIONS: The valsartan recall did not affect short-term outcomes of heart failure patients. However, the recall potentially disrupted the medication regimens of patients, possibly straining the healthcare system.

Effect of continuing angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers on the day of surgery on myocardial injury after non-cardiac surgery: A retrospective cohort study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of continuing of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) or angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) prescriptions 24 h before surgery on postoperative myocardial injury and blood pressure in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery. DESIGN: A single-center, retrospective study. SETTING: Operating room and perioperative care area. PATIENTS: 42,432 patients who had been taking chronic ACEI/ARB underwent non-cardiac surgery from January 2012 to June 2022. INTERVENTIONS: Patients who discontinued ACEI/ARB 24 h before surgery (withheld group, n=31,055) and those who continued ACEI/ARB 24 h before surgery (continued group, n=11,377). MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome was myocardial injury after non-cardiac surgery (MINS) within 7 days postoperatively. MINS was defined as an elevated postoperative cardiac troponin measurement above the 99th percentile of the upper reference limit with a rise/fall pattern. Perioperative blood pressure and clinical outcomes were secondary outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: Among 42,432 patients, MINS occurred in 2848 patients (6.7%) and was the all-cause of death within 30 days in 122 patients (0.3%). Incidence of MINS was significantly higher in the continued group than the withheld group (847/11,377 [7.4%] vs. 2001/31,055 [6.4%]; OR [95% CI] 1.17 [1.07-1.27]; P<0.001). After 1:1 propensity score matching, 11,373 patients were included in each group. There was still a significant difference for the occurrence of MINS between two groups in matched cohort (7.4% vs. 6.6%, OR [95% CI] 1.14 [1.03-1.26]; P=0.015). Time-average weight of mean arterial pressure <65 mmHg during surgery was significantly higher in the continued group (mean 0.11 vs. 0.09 [95% CI of mean difference] [0.01-0.03]; P<0.001). However, there was no significant difference in other clinical outcomes and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Withholding ACEI/ARB before surgery was associated with a reduced risk of intraoperative hypotension and postoperative myocardial injury, but it did not affect overall clinical outcomes in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery.

Sacubitril/valsartan improves the prognosis of acute myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate the effect of sacubitril/valsartan (SV) on the prognosis of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), and to provide evidence for expanding the clinical application of SV. METHODS: PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to October 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of SV in patients with AMI. The article was screened and evaluated by the Cochrane 5.1.0 bias risk assessment tool. RevMan5.3 was used for meta-analysis of the outcome indicators. RESULTS: Ten RCTs involving 7230 patients were included. The results showed that SV increased left ventricular eject fraction ( MD  = 2.86, 95% CI [1.81-3.90], P  < 0.00001) and reduced readmission rate ( RR  = 0.46, 95% CI [0.32-0.68], P  < 0.0001), decreased N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide ( MD = -477.46, 95% CI [-914.96 to -39.96], P  = 0.03), and reduced major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) ( RR  = 0.48, 95% CI [0.27-0.85], P  = 0.01). There was no significant difference in the rate of adverse reaction (AR) between the trial group and the control group ( RR  = 0.88, 95% CI [0.60-1.30], P  = 0.52). CONCLUSION: SV can effectively improve the prognosis of AMI, prevent complications, and there is no significant difference in safety compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker.

A Case of Trauma-Related Angioedema of the Airway in a Patient on an Angiotensin Receptor Blocker.

BACKGROUND Angioedema is non-pitting edema that occurs in the deep layers of the skin and subcutaneous tissue due to vascular leakage of plasma resulting from 1 of 2 major pathophysiological processes: mast cell-mediated angioedema and bradykinin-mediated angioedema. While it is a well-recognized adverse reaction of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, the association of angioedema with angiotensin receptor blockers is relatively less studied. Direct local trauma, although rarely, has been suggested to induce angioedema under certain conditions. We present a unique case of direct, local, trauma-related angioedema in a patient on an angiotensin receptor blocker. CASE REPORT The patient, an 83-year-old woman on telmisartan for hypertension, hit her neck against the edge of a chair during a fall. Shortly thereafter, she developed progressive airway compromise due to airway angioedema, as noted on direct laryngoscopy. A contrast CT scan of the neck also noted edema of the periglottic and supraglottic regions. She required intravenous corticosteroid administration and intubation in the emergency room and was successfully extubated 3 days after admission. She had no prior history of angioedema or allergy. We hypothesize that increased levels of circulatory bradykinin in the setting of telmisartan, combined with a local release of bradykinin from trauma, was the main pathophysiologic cause of the angioedema. CONCLUSIONS This case report highlights the rare and often forgotten adverse reaction of angioedema with use of angiotensin receptor blockers and confirms the finding of local trauma as a possible trigger.

Comparative estimation of the effects of antihypertensive medications on schizophrenia occurrence: a multinational observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The association between antihypertensive medication and schizophrenia has received increasing attention; however, evidence of the impact of antihypertensive medication on subsequent schizophrenia based on large-scale observational studies is limited. We aimed to compare the schizophrenia risk in large claims-based US and Korea cohort of patients with hypertension using angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors versus those using angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) or thiazide diuretics. METHODS: Adults aged 18 years who were newly diagnosed with hypertension and received ACE inhibitors, ARBs, or thiazide diuretics as first-line antihypertensive medications were included. The study population was sub-grouped based on age (> 45 years). The comparison groups were matched using a large-scale propensity score (PS)-matching algorithm. The primary endpoint was incidence of schizophrenia. RESULTS: 5,907,522; 2,923,423; and 1,971,549 patients used ACE inhibitors, ARBs, and thiazide diuretics, respectively. After PS matching, the risk of schizophrenia was not significantly different among the groups (ACE inhibitor vs. ARB: summary hazard ratio [HR] 1.15 [95% confidence interval, CI, 0.99-1.33]; ACE inhibitor vs. thiazide diuretics: summary HR 0.91 [95% CI, 0.78-1.07]). In the older subgroup, there was no significant difference between ACE inhibitors and thiazide diuretics (summary HR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.71-1.16]). The risk for schizophrenia was significantly higher in the ACE inhibitor group than in the ARB group (summary HR, 1.23 [95% CI, 1.05-1.43]). CONCLUSIONS: The risk of schizophrenia was not significantly different between the ACE inhibitor vs. ARB and ACE inhibitor vs. thiazide diuretic groups. Further investigations are needed to determine the risk of schizophrenia associated with antihypertensive drugs, especially in people aged > 45 years.

The impact of Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibitors on bone fracture risk: a nationwide nested case-control study.

BACKGROUND: The therapeutic efficacy of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi) in elderly patients with hypertension and at risk of fractures has been in the limelight because of accumulating evidence that localized RAS activation in bone tissue leads to osteoclastic bone resorption, resulting in osteoporosis. This study set out to investigate the association between RASi use and fracture incidence in a large cohort. METHODS: We employed a nested case-control design to investigate the association between RASi use and newly developed fractures. A case was defined as a patient newly diagnosed with a fracture between January 2004 and December 2015. We selected 1,049 cases and controls using 1:1 propensity score matching. Conditional logistic regression analysis was conducted to estimate the association between RASi exposure and fracture incidence. RESULTS: Overall, RASi usage was significantly associated with lower odds for fracture incidence (ever-users vs never-users: OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.59-0.91). We found that ARB-only users experienced fewer fractures than RASi-never users (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.49-0.86), whereas ACEi-only users or ARB/ACEi-ever users did not. In subgroup analysis, RASi-ever users without cerebrovascular disease, those with a BMI exceeding 23, and statin exposure had significantly lower ORs. CONCLUSIONS: The present study established a significant association between RASi use and reduced fracture incidence, thus highlighting the potential clinical utility of RASi use as a preventive strategy in elderly patients at risk for osteoporotic fractures.

Systematic review: Clinical phenotypes, histopathological features and prognosis of enteropathy due to angiotensin II receptor blockers.

BACKGROUND: Although enteropathy due to angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) has been known for over 10 years, clinicians' awareness of this condition is still low. AIMS: To systematically review the literature about clinical phenotypes, distribution of mucosal changes throughout the gastrointestinal tract and prognosis of enteropathy due to ARBs. METHODS: According to PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed and Embase for relevant articles up to November 6, 2023. We included full-text papers, letters, case reports and case series describing enteropathy due to ARBs. Patients were classified into subgroups based on endoscopic and histological findings of different regions of the gastrointestinal tract. The protocol was registered with Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/TK67C). RESULTS: We included 94 articles reporting 183 cases (101 female, mean age at diagnosis 69 ± 10 years). The clinical picture at diagnosis was characterised by severe diarrhoea (97%) and weight loss (84%, median -13 kg), leading to hospital admission in 167 (95%) patients. Olmesartan (90%) was most frequently implicated. Villous atrophy (VA) was reported in 164/183 (89%) patients. One hundred and nine had only VA, 12 had pan-gastrointestinal involvement, 23 had VA and gastric involvement and 19 had VA and colon involvement (predominantly microscopic colitis). Outcomes were reported for 178/183 (97%) patients, who all recovered clinically on ARBs withdrawal. Histological recovery occurred in all 96 patients with VA at baseline who underwent follow-up duodenal biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: Enteropathy due to ARBs is characterised by severe malabsorption often requiring hospital admission and can involve the entire gastrointestinal tract. Clinician awareness can lead to prompt diagnosis and excellent prognosis.

Effect of angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor on physical activity in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, monitored by implantable electronic device home monitoring.

AIMS: Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) therapy is a cornerstone in the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), with significant improvement in mortality as well as morbidity and quality of life. However, maximal ARNI doses often result in hypotension. Recent studies with 'real world' experience suggest that lower doses of ARNI are as effective as higher doses.In order to evaluate the symptomatic effect of low-dose ARNI in HFrEF patients, we analyzed physical activity data obtained via home monitoring of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed physical activity data obtained from HFrEF patients with CIED-active home monitoring during the years 2021-2022. Patients with ARNI therapy were further divided into subgroups according to the administered dose. Low-dose ARNI included doses of up to 24/26 mg sacubitril/valsartan daily. Intermediate dose and high dose included doses of 72/78-120/130 mg/day, and 144/156-194/206 mg/day, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 122 patients had home monitoring-compatible CIEDs and HFrEF during the study period. Sixty-four of these patients were treated with ARNI. Administration of low-dose ARNI resulted in a 20% increase in daily activity when compared with patients without ARNI treatment ( P  = 0.038). Change in physical activity of patients in the intermediate-dose and high-dose groups was not significant. Younger patients, patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy, and patients without diabetes mellitus were more physically active. CONCLUSION: Low-dose ARNI had a beneficial effect on physical activity in HFrEF patients. MH via CIED provided real-life objective data for patients' follow-up.

Preoperative Renin-Angiotensin System Antagonists Intake and Blood Pressure Responses During Ambulatory Surgical Procedures: A Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence to inform the association between the intake of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) and intraoperative blood pressure (BP) changes in an ambulatory surgery population. METHODS: Adult patients who underwent ambulatory surgery and were discharged on the same day or within 24 hours of their procedure were enrolled in this prospective cohort study. The primary outcome of the study was early intraoperative hypotension (first 15 minutes of induction). Secondary outcomes included any hypotension, BP variability, and recovery. Hypotension was defined as a decrease in systolic BP of >30% from baseline for ≥5 minutes or a mean BP of <55 mm Hg. Four exposure groups were compared (no antihypertensives, ACEI/ARB intake <10 hours before surgery, ACEI/ARB intake ≥10 hours before surgery, and other antihypertensives). RESULTS: Of the 537 participants, early hypotension was observed in 25% (n = 134), and any hypotension in 41.5% (n = 223). Early hypotension occurred in 30% (29 of 98) and 41% (17 of 41) with the intake of ACEI/ARBs <10 and ≥10 hours before surgery, respectively, compared to 30% (9 of 30) with other antihypertensives and 21% (79 of 368) with no antihypertensives ( P = .02). Those on antihypertensives also experienced any hypotension more frequently than those who were not on antihypertensives ( P < .001). After adjusting for age and baseline BP in a regression analysis, antihypertensive exposure groups were observed to be associated only with any intraoperative hypotension ( P = .012). In the ACEI/ARB subset, there was no evidence of an association between time since the last ACEI/ARB dose, and hypotension or minimum mean or systolic BP. Compared to normal baseline BP, BP ≥ 140/90 mm Hg increased the odds of early and any hypotension (odds ratio [OR], 3.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1-7.1 and OR, 7.7; 95% CI, 3.7-14.9, respectively; P < .001). Intraoperative variability in systolic and diastolic BP demonstrated significant differences with age, baseline BP, and antihypertensive exposure group ( P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Early and any hypotension occurred more frequently in those on antihypertensives than those not on antihypertensives. Unadjusted associations between antihypertensive exposure and intraoperative hypotension were largely explained by baseline hypertension rather than the timing of ACEI/ARBs or type of antihypertensive exposure. Patients with hypertension and on treatment experience more intraoperative BP variability and should be monitored appropriately.

Patients with Prior Exposure to a Combination of Statins & Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors (ACE-Is)/Angiotensin Receptor Blockers (ARBs) Have Better Outcomes after Carotid Revascularization than Patients with Prior Exposure to Statins Alone: A MultiCenter Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Statin use has been studied and confirmed to have a beneficial impact on perioperative carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) outcomes. The benefits of Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-I) in hypertension, ischemic heart disease, heart failure, diabetes mellitus, and renal disease are well-known; however, the impact of continuing or withholding ACE-Is/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) on CEA and CAS outcomes is not addressed well in the literature. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of preoperative statin use combined with ACE-Is/ARBs in patients undergoing CEA or CAS on mortality and morbidity using a multi-institutional database. METHODS: Using the data of all patients who underwent carotid artery revascularization, including CEA, transcarotid artery revascularization, and transfemoral carotid artery stenting from 2016 to 2021 in the Vascular Quality Initiative data, we determined as our primary outcome 30-day mortality/stroke after carotid revascularization based on periop exposure to statins alone, or the combination of statins and ACE-Is/ARBs. Secondary outcomes were postop myocardial infarction and postop congestive heart failure. Poisson regression with robust variance was used to determine postop outcomes comparing the combination of statin and ACE-Is/ARBs group with statins alone group. RESULTS: A total of 131,285 patients were included in the study, with 59,860 (46%) patients receiving statin only, and 71,425 (54%) receiving both statin and ACE-Is/ARBs preoperatively. Both patient groups differed significantly in preop clinical and demographic characteristics. After adjusting for potential confounders, the statins plus ACE-I/ARB group had a 12% lower risk of postop mortality/stroke (Incident Rate Ratio comparing Statin/ACE group to Statins Only group [IRR] 0.88, 95% confidence interval 0.81-0.95, P = 0.001), 18% lower risk of postop congestive heart failure (IRR 0.82, 95% CI 0.68-0.98, P = 0.029), and similar risk of postop myocardial infarction (IRR 1.05 95% confidence interval 0.91-1.20, P = 0.54) compared to the statin-only group. CONCLUSION: Statins combined with ACE-Is/ARBs perioperatively offer better protection compared to statins alone in patients undergoing carotid revascularization surgery. We recommend the continuation of ACE-Is/ARBs use in patients undergoing carotid revascularization, especially if they have concurrent hypertension. Further prospective studies are needed to evaluate the benefit of adding ACE-Is/ARBs.

Short-term effects of sacubitril/valsartan therapy on myocardial oxygen consumption and energetic efficiency of cardiac work in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: A randomized controlled study.

AIMS: We sought to evaluate the mechanism of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) sacubitril/valsartan therapy and compare it with a valsartan-only control group in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). METHODS AND RESULTS: The study was a phase IV, prospective, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study in patients with New York Heart Association class II-III heart failure and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35%. During a 6-week run-in period, all patients received valsartan therapy, which was up-titrated to the highest tolerated dose level (80 mg bid or 160 mg bid) and then randomized to either valsartan or sacubitril/valsartan. Myocardial oxygen consumption, energetic efficiency of cardiac work, cardiac and systemic haemodynamics were quantified using echocardiography and 11 C-acetate positron emission tomography before and after 6 weeks of therapy (on stable dose) in 55 patients (ARNI group: n = 27, mean age 63 ± 10 years, LVEF 29.2 ± 10.4%; and valsartan-only control group: n = 28, mean age 64 ± 8 years, LVEF 29.0 ± 7.3%; all p = NS). The energetic efficiency of cardiac work remained unchanged in both treatment arms. However, both diastolic (-4.5 mmHg; p = 0.026) and systolic blood pressure (-9.8 mmHg; p = 0.0007), myocardial perfusion (-0.054 ml/g/min; p = 0.045), and left ventricular mechanical work (-296; p = 0.038) decreased significantly in the ARNI group compared to the control group. Although myocardial oxygen consumption decreased in the ARNI group (-5.4%) compared with the run-in period and remained unchanged in the control group (+0.5%), the between-treatment group difference was not significant (p = 0.088). CONCLUSIONS: We found no differences in the energetic efficiency of cardiac work between ARNI and valsartan-only groups in HFrEF patients. However, ARNI appears to have haemodynamic and cardiac mechanical effects over valsartan in heart failure patients.

Prior Use of Angiotensin-converting Enzyme Inhibitors or Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers and Clinical Outcomes of Sepsis and Septic Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: Sepsis and septic shock are life-threatening conditions that are associated with high mortality and considerable health care costs. The association between prior angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) use and outcomes after sepsis is elusive. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of the prior use of ACEi or ARBs and outcomes after sepsis and septic shock. A relevant literature review was performed in 4 databases from inception until July 2022. Independent reviewers first screened the title, abstract, and full text, and then, data extraction and analysis were performed. One post hoc analysis of a trial and 6 retrospective cohort studies were included in this review. There were 22% lower odds of in-hospital/30-day mortality among patients who have used ACEi/ARBs in the past [23.83% vs. 37.20%; odds ratio (OR), 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.64-0.96], and reduced 90-day mortality (OR, 0.80, 95% CI, 0.69-0.92). ACEi/ARBs users were found to have 31% lesser odds of developing acute kidney injury as compared with nonusers (OR, 0.69, 95% CI, 0.63-0.76). There was no significant difference in the length of hospital stay (MD 1.26, 95% CI, ‒7.89 to 10.42), need for renal replacement therapy (OR, 0.71, 95% CI, 0.13-3.92), mechanical ventilation (OR, 1.10, 95% CI, 0.88-1.37) or use of vasopressors (OR, 1.21, 95% CI, 0.91-1.61). Based on this analysis, prior use of ACEi/ARBs lowers the risk of mortality and adverse renal events in patients with sepsis and septic shock.

Influence of angiotensin receptor and converting enzyme blockers therapy in the respiratory outcome of COVID-19 hospitalized patients.

OBJECTIVES: COVID-19, caused by SARS-CoV-2, has spread around the world since 2019. In severe cases, COVID-19 can lead to hospitalization and death. Systemic arterial hypertension and other comorbidities are associated with serious COVID-19 infection. Literature is unclear whether antihypertensive therapy with angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors affect COVID-19 outcomes. We aim to assess whether ACEI/ARB therapy is a risk factor for worse respiratory outcomes related to COVID-19 in hospitalized patients. METHODS: Retrospective study enrolling admitted COVID-19-diagnosed patients by RT-PCR at the Hospital Geral de Fortaleza, Brazil, during 2021. Patient medical records, sociodemographic, and clinical data were analyzed. Chest CT images were analyzed using CAD4COVID-CT/Thirona™ software. RESULTS: A total of 294 patients took part in the study. A cut-off point of 66% of pulmonary involvement was found by ROC curve, with patients having higher risk of death and intubation and lower 60-day survival. Advanced age (RR 1.025, P=0.001) and intubation (RR 16.747, P<0.001) were significantly associated with a higher risk of death. Advanced age (RR 1.023, P=0.001) and the use of noninvasive ventilation (RR 1.548, P=0.037) were associated with a higher risk of intubation. Lung involvement (>66%) increased the risk of death by almost 2.5-fold (RR 2.439, P<0.001) and by more than 2.3-fold the risk of intubation (RR 2.317, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Altogether, our findings suggest that ACEI or ARB therapy does not affect the risk of death and disease course during hospitalization.

Influence of vasopressin receptor antagonists on triple-whammy acute kidney injury: A VigiBase analysis.

Although diuretics play an important role in triple-whammy acute kidney injury (AKI), it is unclear whether the type of diuretic influences the risk of triple-whammy AKI. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether vasopressin receptor antagonists affect triple-whammy AKI. This cross-sectional study used disproportionality analysis of VigiBase data to assess the risk of AKI with various diuretics. Although multiple logistic regression analysis showed that aldosterone antagonists (odds ratio [OR] 2.19, 95% CI 2.01-2.37), loop diuretics (OR 4.40, 95% CI 4.07-4.76) and thiazide diuretics (OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.83-2.15) increased the risk of AKI in patients who received non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi), vasopressin receptor antagonists did not increase the risk of AKI in those patients. Vasopressin receptor antagonists might not influence the development of triple-whammy AKI.

Impact of Treatment With Sacubitril/Valsartan on Erectile Dysfunction in Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction.

Sacubitril/valsartan (S/V), an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, has been shown to reduce the risk of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization and relieve symptoms in patients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. The objective of this study was to assess the effects of S/V on erectile dysfunction in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). A prospective, open-label study was conducted with 59 male patients diagnosed with HFrEF and concomitant erectile dysfunction. Patients were treated with S/V for a duration of 1 month. The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) questionnaire was used to assess the severity of erectile dysfunction and sexual activities at baseline and follow-up visits. Other clinical parameters, including heart rate, were also monitored. After S/V treatment, a significant improvement was observed in sexual activities at the 1-month follow-up visit. The IIEF score showed a statistically significant increase, indicating a decrease in the severity of erectile dysfunction. However, it should be noted that the numerical increase in the IIEF score did not reach clinical significance. This study suggests that S/V treatment in patients with HFrEF may lead to improvements in sexual activities and a reduction in the severity of erectile dysfunction as measured by the IIEF score.

The real-world safety of sacubitril / valsartan among older adults (≥75): A pharmacovigilance study from the FDA data.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure is a major cause of morbidity and mortality among older adults. Sacubitril-Valsartan (Sac/Val) has been shown to improve patients' outcomes; however, its safety profile among older adults has not been adequately examined. We therefore aimed to examine its safety profile among this population. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective pharmacovigilance study utilizing the FDA's database of safety reports (FAERS). We employed disproportionality analysis comparing Sac/Val to angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs). We aim to evaluate the reporting of pre-defined adverse events associated with Sac/Val (hypotension, acute kidney injury (AKI), hyperkalemia and angioedema) in two age groups: adults (< 75 years) and older adults (≥ 75). For each subgroup, we calculated reporting odds ratio (ROR) and compared them by calculating P for interaction. RESULTS: The FAERS database encompassed 18,432 unique reports of Sac/Val. Of them, 12,630 (68.5%) subjects were adults (< 75 years), and 5802 (31.5%) were older adults (≥ 75 years), with a median age (IQR) of 68 (59-77). When compared to ARBs, Sac/Val was associated with higher reporting of hypotension, lower reporting of acute kidney injury (AKI) and hyperkalemia, and similar reporting of angioedema. Notably, we did not observe a significant interaction between the age subgroups and the risk estimates (AKI: Pinteraction = 0.72, hyperkalemia: Pinteraction = 0.94, hypotension: Pinteraction = 0.31, and angioedema: Pinteraction = 0.61). CONCLUSIONS: In this postmarking study, none of the prespecified adverse events was reported more frequently in older adults. These findings provide reassurance for safety use of Sac/Val in older adults.