4.5 Article

Coronary artery disease - Angiotensin inhibition in renovascular disease: A population-based cohort study

期刊

AMERICAN HEART JOURNAL
卷 156, 期 3, 页码 549-555

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2008.05.013

关键词

-

资金

  1. University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers effectively reduce blood pressure in patients with renovascular disease (RVD); yet, randomized cardiovascular prevention trials of these drugs typically exclude individuals with this condition. Patients and Methods We studied the association of renin-angiotensin system inhibition with prognosis in a population-basec cohort comprising 3,570 patients with RVD in Ontario, Canada; slightly more than half (n = 1,857, 53%) were prescribed angiotensin inhibitors. The primary outcome was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Secondary outcomes included individual cardiovascular and renal events. Results Patients receiving angiotensin inhibitors had a significantly lower risk for the primary outcome during follow-up (10.0 vs 13.0 events per 100 patient-years at risk, multivariable adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.70, 95% CI 0.59-0.82). In addition, hospitalization for congestive heart failure (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.53-0.90), chronic dialysis initiation (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.42-0.92), and mortality (HR 0.56, 95% Cl 0.47-0.68) was lower in treated patients. Conversely, patients receiving angiotensin inhibitors were significantly more likely to be hospitalized for acute renal failure during follow-up (HR 1.87, 95% CI 1.05-3.33; 1.2 vs 0.6 events per 100 patient-years at risk). Conclusions These data emphasize the high vascular risk of RVID and suggest that angiotensin inhibitors may improve prognosis in this setting at the expense of acute renal toxicity. If the latter are selected in the management of RVD, renal function parameters shou d be assiduously followed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据