Dataset Information

Effect of Angiotensin System Inhibitors on Physical Performance in Older People - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Preclinical and observational data suggest that angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) may be able to improve physical performance in older people via direct and indirect effects on skeletal muscle. We aimed to summarize current evidence from randomised controlled trials in this area.

Design

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Setting and participants

Randomized controlled trials enrolling older people, comparing ACEi or ARB to placebo, usual care or another antihypertensive agent, with outcome data on measures of physical performance.

Methods

We searched multiple electronic databases without language restriction between inception and the end of February 2020. Trials were excluded if the mean age of participants was <65 years or treatment was targeting specific diseases known to affect muscle function (for example heart failure). Data were sought on measures of endurance and strength. Standardized mean difference (SMD) treatment effects were calculated using random-effects models with RevMan software.

Results

Eight trials (952 participants) were included. Six trials tested ACEi, 2 trials tested ARBs. The mean age of participants ranged from 66 to 79 years, and the duration of treatment ranged from 2 months to 1 year. Trials recruited healthy older people and people with functional impairment; no trials specifically targeted older people with sarcopenia. Risk of bias for all trials was low to moderate. No significant effect was seen on endurance outcomes [6 trials, SMD 0.04 (95% CI -0.22 to 0.29); P = .77; I² = 53%], strength outcomes [6 trials, SMD -0.02 (95% CI -0.18 to 0.14), P = .83, I² = 21%] or the short physical performance battery [3 trials, SMD -0.04 (95% CI -0.19 to 0.11), P = .60, I² = 0%]. No evidence of publication bias was evident on inspection of funnel plots.

Conclusions and implications

Existing evidence does not support the use of ACE inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers as a single intervention to improve physical performance in older people.

SUBMITTER: Caulfield L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8189253 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Introduction:The objectives of this review paper were to synthesize the data from randomized controlled trials in the literature to come to a conclusion on the effects of e-health interventions on promoting physical activity in older people. Methods:The Medline, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, and SportDiscus databases were searched for articles about studies that 1) recruited subjects with a mean age of >?50?years, 2) tested e-health interventions, 3) employed control groups with no or less advanced e-health strategies, 4) measured physical activity as an outcome, 5) were published between 1st January 2008 and 31st May 2019, and 6) employed randomized controlled trials. The risk of bias in individual studies was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale. To examine the effects of the interventions, variables quantifying the amount of physical activity were extracted. The within-group effects of individual studies were summarized using Hedges g and 95% confidence intervals. Between-group effects were summarized by meta-analyses using RevMan 5.0 with a random effect model. Results:Of the 2810 identified studies, 38 were eligible, 25 were included in the meta-analyses. The within-group effect sizes (Hedges g) of physical activity in the intervention group at T1 ranged from small to large: physical activity time (0.12 to 0.84), step counts (-?0.01 to 11.19), energy expenditure (-?0.05 to 0.86), walking time (0.13 to 3.33), and sedentary time (-?0.12 to -?0.28). The delayed effects as observed in T2 and T3 also ranged from small to large: physical activity time (0.24 to 1.24) and energy expenditure (0.15 to 1.32). In the meta-analysis, the between-group effect of the e-health intervention on physical activity time measured by questionnaires, physical activity time measured by objective wearable devices, energy expenditure, and step counts were all significant with minimal heterogeneity. Conclusion:E-health interventions are effective at increasing the time spent on physical activity, energy expenditure in physical activity, and the number of walking steps. It is recommended that e-health interventions be included in guidelines to enhance physical activity in older people. Further studies should be conducted to determine the most effective e-health strategies.

Project description:Aims: We aim to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis examining randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan in patients on renal outcomes, in comparison with the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor (RAASi). Methods: Eligible studies were retrieved on MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane until September 2021. The primary outcome was the incidence of renal impairment, which was defined as the composite of increases in serum creatinine by >0.3 mg/dl and/or a reduction in eGFR ≥25%, development of ESRD, or renal death. We pooled relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) or the mean difference with 95% CIs for the variables. Results: Our search yielded 10 randomized controlled trials with a total of 18,362 patients. Compared with RAASi treatment, patients treated with sacubitril/valsartan had lower incidence of composite renal impairment (10 studies, 18,362 patients, RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.72-0.96, p = 0.01; I 2 = 22%), ESRD development (3 studies, 13,609 patients, RR 0.53; 95% CI 0.30-0.96, p = 0.03; I 2 = 0%), drug discontinuation due to renal events (4 studies, 9,995 patients, RR 0.58; 95% CI 0.40-0.83, p = 0.003; I 2 = 47%), severe hyperkalemia (6 studies, 16,653 patients, RR 0.80; 95% CI 0.68-0.93, p = 0.01; I 2 = 25%) and a slower eGFR decline (4 studies, 13,608 patients, WMD 0.56; 95% CI 0.36-0.76, p < 0.00001; I 2 = 65%). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that sacubitril/valsartan was associated with a lower incidence of renal impairment in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), but not in those with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). The superior renal function preservation of sacubitril/valsartan treatment was not associated with different baseline eGFR levels and follow-up duration. There was a smaller increase in the change in the urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) (3 studies, 9,114 patients, SMD 0.06; 95% CI 0.02-0.10, p = 0.003; I 2 = 14%) with sacubitril/valsartan treatment. However, patients with heart failure appeared to have increased microalbuminuria, not patients without HF (p = 0.80 for interaction). Conclusion: Sacubitril/valsartan was associated with a lower incidence of composite renal impairment especially in patients with HFpEF, but higher microalbuminuria in patients with heart failure (both HFrEF and HFpEF) compared with RAASi. The lower incidence of severe hyperkalemia and drug discontinuation due to renal events in patients with sacubitril/valsartan treatment demonstrated its superior safety compared with RAASi.

Project description:ObjectiveWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to clarify the effects of different exercise modes (resistance training [RT], whole body vibration training [WBVT], and mixed training [MT, resistance training combined with other exercises such as balance, endurance and aerobic training]) on muscle strength (knee extension strength [KES]) and physical performance (Timed Up and Go [TUG], gait speed [GS] and the Chair Stand [CS]) in older people with sarcopenia.MethodAll studies published from January 2010 to March 2021 on the effects of exercise training in older people with sarcopenia were retrieved from 6 electronic databases: Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang Database. Two researchers independently extracted and evaluated studies that met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Pooled analyses for pre- and post- outcome measurements were performed using Review Manager 5.4 with standardized mean differences (SMDs) and fixed-effect models.ResultTwenty-six studies (25 randomized controlled trails [RCTs] and one non-randomized controlled trail) were included in this study with 1191 older people with sarcopenia (mean age 60.6 ± 2.3 to 89.5 ± 4.4). Compared with a control group, RT and MT significantly improved KES (RT, SMD = 1.36, 95% confidence intervals [95% CI]: 0.71 to 2.02, p < 0.0001, I2 = 72%; MT, SMD = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.29 to 0.95, p = 0.0002, I2 = 56%) and GS (RT, SMD = 2.01, 95% CI: 1.04 to 2.97, p < 0.0001, I2 = 84%; MT, SMD = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.29 to 1.09, p = 0.008, I2 = 81%). WBVT showed no changes in KES (SMD = 0.65, 95% CI: - 0.02 to 1.31, p = 0.06, I2 = 80%) or GS (SMD = 0.12, 95% CI: - 0.15 to 0.39, p = 0.38, I2 = 0%). TUG times were significantly improved with all exercise training modes (SMD = -0.66, 95% CI: - 0.94 to - 0.38, p < 0.00001, I2 = 60%). There were no changes in CS times with any of the exercise training modes (SMD = 0.11, 95% CI: - 0.36 to 0.57, p = 0.65, I2 = 87%).ConclusionsIn older people with sarcopenia, KES and GS can be improved by RT and MT, but not by WBVT. All three training modes improved TUG times, but not improved CS times.

Project description:BackgroundThis trial aimed to determine the efficacy of leucine and/or perindopril in improving physical function in older people with sarcopenia.MethodsPlacebo-controlled, parallel group, double-blind, randomized two-by-two factorial trial. We recruited adults aged ≥ 70 years with sarcopenia, defined as low gait speed (<0.8 m/s on 4 m walk) and/or low handgrip strength (women < 20 kg, men < 30 kg) plus low muscle mass (using sex and body mass index category-specific thresholds derived from normative UK BioBank data) from 14 UK centres. Eligible participants were randomized to perindopril 4 mg or placebo, and to oral leucine powder 2.5 g or placebo thrice daily. The primary outcome was the between-group difference in the short physical performance battery (SPPB) score over 12-month follow-up by repeated-measures mixed models. Results were combined with existing systematic reviews using random-effects meta-analysis to derive summary estimates of treatment efficacy.ResultsWe screened 320 people and randomized 145 participants compared with an original target of 440 participants. For perindopril [n = 73, mean age 79 (SD 6), female sex 39 (53%), mean SPPB 7.1 (SD 2.3)] versus no perindopril [n = 72, mean age 79 (SD 6), female sex 39 (54%), mean SPPB 6.9 (SD 2.4)], median adherence to perindopril was lower (76% vs. 96%; P < 0.001). Perindopril did not improve the primary outcome [adjusted treatment effect -0.1 points (95%CI -1.2 to 1.0), P = 0.89]. No significant treatment benefit was seen for any secondary outcome including muscle mass [adjusted treatment effect -0.4 kg (95%CI -1.1 to 0.3), P = 0.27]. More adverse events occurred in the perindopril group (218 vs. 165), but falls rates were similar. For leucine [n = 72, mean age 78 (SD 6), female sex 38 (53%), mean SPPB 7.0 (SD 2.1)] versus no leucine [n = 72, mean age 79 (SD 6), female sex 40 (55%), mean SPPB 7.0 (SD 2.5)], median adherence was the same in both groups (76% vs. 76%; P = 0.99). Leucine did not improve the primary outcome [adjusted treatment effect 0.1 point (95%CI -1.0 to 1.1), P = 0.90]. No significant treatment benefit was seen for any secondary outcome including muscle mass [adjusted treatment effect -0.3 kg (95%CI -1.0 to 0.4), P = 0.47]. Meta-analysis of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker trials showed no clinically important treatment effect for the SPPB [between-group difference -0.1 points (95%CI -0.4 to 0.2)].ConclusionsNeither perindopril nor leucine improved physical performance or muscle mass in this trial; meta-analysis did not find evidence of efficacy of either ACE inhibitors or leucine as treatments to improve physical performance.