Dataset Information

Comparative efficacy of aliskiren/valsartan vs valsartan in nocturnal dipper and nondipper hypertensive patients: a pooled analysis.

ABSTRACT: This pooled analysis of ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring data from two 8-week randomized controlled trials compared the antihypertensive efficacy and safety of combination aliskiren/valsartan vs valsartan alone in hypertensive patients (nocturnal dippers or nondippers). At study end, patients were taking aliskiren/valsartan 300/320 mg or valsartan 320 mg. In dippers (n=138) and nondippers (n=132), aliskiren/valsartan provided significantly (P<.05) greater reductions from baseline to week 8 than valsartan in 24-hour, daytime, and last-4-hour mean ambulatory systolic BP (maSBP). Treatment differences were more pronounced in nondippers. Nighttime maSBP reductions with aliskiren/valsartan were significantly greater vs valsartan in nondippers (-17.0 mm Hg vs -8.9 mm Hg; P<.05) but not dippers (-7.6 mm Hg vs -4.5 mm Hg; P=.16). In all time periods, combination therapy was generally associated with BP reductions that were greater in nondippers than dippers. Conversion from nondipper to dipper status was 32% vs 22% for aliskiren/valsartan vs valsartan (P=.48). Both treatments were similarly well tolerated. Although the addition of aliskiren to valsartan did not significantly alter dipper status, our data suggest an increased contribution of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system to the nondipper status of hypertensive patients.

SUBMITTER: Giles TD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8108859 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe angiotensin-receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) sacubitril/valsartan was shown to be superior to the angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) valsartan in terms of reversing heart failure classification (NYHA classification), reducing N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) level and cardiovascular mortality in many studies. Yet, the efficacy of ARNI did not come from patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI).MethodsWe searched databases for research published from inception to July 29, 2022, that reported cardiac reverse remodeling (CRR) or security indices. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. Nine studies enrolling 1,369 patients were included to perform a meta-analysis. There were 716 patients in the ARNI group and 653 in the ARB group.ResultsARNI outperformed ARBs in terms of CRR indices, with striking changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) (MD: 4.12%, 95%CI: 2.36, 5.88, P < 0.0001), diameter (MD: -3.40 mm, 95%CI: -4.30, -2.94, P < 0.00001, I 2 = 0%) and left atrial diameter (MD: -2.41 mm, 95%CI: -3.85, -0.97, P = 0.001, I 2 = 0%), other indices there showed no significant improvements. The incidences of major adverse cardiac events (RR: 0.47, 95%CI: 0.34-0.65, P < 0.00001, I 2 = 0%), the heart failure (RR: 0.37, 95%CI: 0.23-0.61, P < 0.0001, I 2 = 0%), readmission (RR: 0.54, 95%CI: 0.36-0.80, P = 0.003, I 2 = 29%) in the sacubitril/valsartan group were lower than the ARB group, while the incidences of cardiac death (RR: 0.56, 95%CI: 0.28, 1.09, P = 0.09), the myocardial infarction (RR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.39, 1.77, P = 0.63), adverse side effects (RR: 1.67, 95% CI: 0.89, 3.13, P = 0.11) showed no difference.ConclusionThis research indicated that early initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in patients after AMI was superior to ARBs in reducing the risks of major adverse cardiac events, heart failure, readmission, and enhancing left ventricular EF, decreasing diameter, left atrial diameter. As for the other outcomes (the incidences of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and adverse side effects), sacubitril/valsartan demonstrated no obvious advantage over ARBs.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier [CRD42022307237].

Project description:BackgroundNight-time BP, especially non-dipper, is a stronger predictor of adverse cardiovascular outcomes. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is a gold standard for the detection of non-dippers but it often is unavailable and expensive. This study aims to determine clinical risk factors that predict non-dipper.MethodsAn exploratory traditional case-control study, exclusive sampling of control was conducted from January 2013 to September 2018 to explore clinical risk factors associated with non-dippers in hypertensive patients. Subgroup analysis was performed in each treated and untreated hypertensive patient. The parsimonious predictive score for non-dippers was constructed.ResultsThe study included 208 hypertensive patients receiving 24 h ABPM. There were 104 dippers and 104 non-dippers. Significant clinical risk factors associated with non-dippers were the age of > 65 years, average office diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and fasting plasma glucose of > 5.6 mmol/L. Results of subgroup analysis showed that dyslipidemia, history of coronary artery disease, use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and direct vasodilators, average office DBP, and serum uric acid were associated with non-dippers in treated hypertensive patients, however, there were no risk factors associated with non-dippers in the untreated group. The predictive score for non-dippers in treated group included average office DBP, dyslipidemia, serum uric acid, male, calcium channel blockers and ACEIs use. The area under Receiver Operating Characteristic (AuROC) was 0.723. A cut-off point which was > 0.0701 and prevalence of non-dippers of 46%, this score had a sensitivity of 77.4%, specificity of 65.6%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 66.1%, and negative predictive value (NPV) of 79.6%. For untreated group, age, hemoglobin and body mass index were included in the predictive model. AuROC was 0.74. There was a sensitivity of 51.9%, specificity of 91.2%, PPV of 82.4%, and NPV of 70.5% at the cut-off point of > 0.357, and prevalence of 44%.ConclusionThere were several significant clinical risk factors associated with non-dippers in treated hypertensive patients. The predictive score might be useful for the detection of non-dippers; however, it cannot replace ABPM.

Dataset Information

Comparative efficacy of aliskiren/valsartan vs valsartan in nocturnal dipper and nondipper hypertensive patients: a pooled analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets