Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Diabetes and CVD risk during angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin II receptor blocker treatment in hypertension: a study of 15,990 patients.
Hasvold, L P; Bodegård, J; Thuresson, M; Stålhammar, J; Hammar, N; Sundström, J; Russell, D; Kjeldsen, S E.
Affiliation
  • Hasvold LP; 1] The Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway [2] AstraZeneca, Nordic-Baltic, Norway.
  • Bodegård J; 1] AstraZeneca, Nordic-Baltic, Norway [2] Department of Cardiology, Ullevaal Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
  • Thuresson M; Statisticon AB, Uppsala, Sweden.
  • Stålhammar J; Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
  • Hammar N; 1] Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden [2] AstraZeneca R&D, Mölndal, Sweden.
  • Sundström J; Department of Medical Sciences and Uppsala Clinical Research Center, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
  • Russell D; Department of Neurology, Rikshospitalet, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
  • Kjeldsen SE; Department of Cardiology, Ullevaal Hospital, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
J Hum Hypertens ; 28(11): 663-9, 2014 Nov.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25211055
ABSTRACT
Differences in clinical effectiveness between angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in the primary treatment of hypertension are unknown. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to assess the prevention of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease (CVD) in patients treated with ARBs or ACEis. Patients initiated on enalapril or candesartan treatment in 71 Swedish primary care centers between 1999 and 2007 were included. Medical records data were extracted and linked with nationwide hospital discharge and cause of death registers. The 11,725 patients initiated on enalapril and 4265 on candesartan had similar baseline characteristics. During a mean follow-up of 1.84 years, 36,482 patient-years, the risk of new diabetes onset was lower in the candesartan group (hazard ratio (HR) 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69-0.96, P=0.01) compared with the enalapril group. No difference between the groups was observed in CVD risk (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.87-1.13, P=0.86). More patients discontinued treatment in the enalapril group (38.1%) vs the candesartan group (27.2%). In a clinical setting, patients initiated on candesartan treatment had a lower risk of new-onset type 2 diabetes and lower rates of drug discontinuation compared with patients initiated on enalapril. No differences in CVD risk were observed.
Subject(s)

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Tetrazoles / Benzimidazoles / Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors / Enalapril / Cardiovascular Diseases / Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers / Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 / Hypertension Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Incidence_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limits: Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Country/Region as subject: Europa Language: En Journal: J Hum Hypertens Journal subject: ANGIOLOGIA Year: 2014 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Norway

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Tetrazoles / Benzimidazoles / Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors / Enalapril / Cardiovascular Diseases / Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers / Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 / Hypertension Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Incidence_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limits: Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Country/Region as subject: Europa Language: En Journal: J Hum Hypertens Journal subject: ANGIOLOGIA Year: 2014 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Norway
...