Angiotensin II receptor blockers versus angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in patients with stable coronary artery disease: Prevalence, correlates, and prognostic impact (from the CORONOR study).

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In international guidelines for patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-I) are recommended while angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) are proposed as an alternative in case of intolerance. There are no real-life data on the frequency and correlates of ARB use in this setting. METHODS: We studied 3363 outpatients included in a prospective registry on stable CAD (the CORONOR study) and receiving an ARB or an ACE-I at inclusion. RESULTS: Altogether, 944 patients received an ARB (28.1%). Factors positively and independently associated with ARB use versus ACE-I use were a history of hypertension, the absence of prior myocardial infarction, age, female gender, estimated glomerular filtration rate <60ml/min/m2, and left ventricular ejection fraction ≥40%. In the whole study population, the hazard ratio (HR) for the combined endpoint (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke) of patients with ARB use was 0.95 (0.69-1.31) (p=0.765) (patients with ACE-I use as reference). Similar results were observed when the analysis was restricted to a propensity-matched cohort HR=0.91 (0.62-1.34) (p=0.632). CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that a significant proportion of stable CAD patients are treated with ARB rather than with ACE-I in modern practice. Several correlates of ARB prescription were identified. Our results suggest that patients receiving ARB have similar outcome than patients receiving ACE-I.