Search

This study aimed to evaluate the association between sacubitril/valsartan and dementia-related adverse events (AEs) in geographical subpopulations using subgroup disproportionality analysis. Cases from the FDA adverse event reporting system involving patients aged 60 or older with sacubitril/valsartan or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) were analyzed. The adjusted reporting odds ratios (RORs) for dementia-related AEs were calculated for each continent. A total of 61,518 AEs associated with sacubitril/valsartan or ARBs were identified. Among these, 1441 were dementia-related AEs. In Asia, Europe, and Africa, the reporting risk of dementia-related AEs associated with sacubitril/valsartan was lower compared to ARBs (adjusted ROR, 0.57 [95% CI 0.31-1.01]; adjusted ROR, 0.89 [95% CI 0.69-1.14]; adjusted ROR, 0.40 [95% CI 0.27-0.61], respectively). In Latin America and Oceania, the reporting risk of dementia-related AEs associated with sacubitril/valsartan was similar to that associated with ARBs (adjusted ROR, 1.04 [95% CI 0.75-1.44]; adjusted ROR, 1.02 [95% CI 0.31-3.37], respectively). On the contrary, in North America, the reporting risk associated with sacubitril/valsartan was higher compared to ARBs (adjusted ROR, 1.29 [95% CI 1.10-1.53]). Although the ROR value did not meet the criteria for signal detection, the significantly greater than 1 ROR observed in North America suggests that caution may be warranted regarding potential dementia-related adverse events associated with sacubitril/valsartan., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Poststroke epilepsy (PSE) is a common complication after ischemic stroke. This study investigates the association between the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and the risk of PSE in patients with ischemic stroke., Methods and Results: A population-based retrospective cohort study was conducted using Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database between 2000 and 2015. Patients with hypertension with a history of ischemic stroke were classified into prevalent, new, and nonusers according to their use of ACEIs/ARBs. Prevalent ACEI/ARB users were further classified into continuing or discontinued users, based on their poststroke medication adherence. We used multivariate Cox regression models, adjusted for demographics and comorbidities, to assess the risk of PSE among different ACEI/ARB user groups. There were 182 983 ACEI/ARB users and 38 365 nonusers included. There were 7387 patients diagnosed with PSE, whereas 213 961 were not. Nonusers exhibited a higher risk of PSE (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.72 [95% CI, 1.63-1.82]). Both prevalent and nonusers had higher risks compared with new ACEI/ARB users, with respective aHRs of 1.33 (95% CI, 1.25-1.41) and 2.00 (95% CI, 1.87-2.14). Discontinued ACEI/ARB users showed the highest risk of PSE (aHR, 2.34 [95% CI, 2.15-2.54]), suggesting the importance of continuing ACEI/ARB use after stroke. Treatment-by-age interaction was significant among patients with or without ACEI/ARB use before stroke ( P value for interaction 0.004 and <0.001, respectively), suggesting a stronger beneficial association in younger patients., Conclusions: The use of ACEIs/ARBs after ischemic stroke in patients with hypertension is associated with a reduced risk of PSE, especially among younger patients.

Purpose: Long-term use of hydrochlorothiazide increases the risk of non-melanoma skin cancer. We aimed to evaluate potential changes in the use of hydrochlorothiazide in Switzerland after a direct healthcare professional communication (DHPC) in November 2018 by Swissmedic., Methods: We performed interrupted time-series analyses using a large Swiss healthcare claims database (2015-2021). Within monthly intervals, we quantified the total number of claims and the total dispensed 'defined daily doses' (DDD) for preparations containing (1) hydrochlorothiazide, (2) angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin-II-receptor blockers (ARB), (3) calcium-channel blockers (CCB) and (4) thiazide-like diuretics per 10 000 persons. Using segmented linear regression, we quantified the pre-DHPC trend, the immediate change and the post-DHPC change in trend for total claims and DDD for the four drug classes weighted for the demographic distribution of the Swiss population., Results: ACE inhibitors and ARB were the most frequently claimed antihypertensive drugs with 300-400 claims per 10 000 persons, which increased by 5.4% during the study period. The average number of hydrochlorothiazide claims (157/10 000 persons in 2015) declined by 35% between 2015 and 2021. The decrease started prior to the DHPC, but the DHPC was associated with an immediate 6.1% decline and an accelerated decline in claims over time after the DHPC (similar results for DDD). This coincided with a 23% increase in claims of CCB (dihydropyridine type) over 7 years, whereas use of other antihypertensives increased less., Conclusion: Our results suggest that the DHPC by Swissmedic in 2018 accelerated a pre-existing decline in the use of hydrochlorothiazide in Switzerland., (© 2024 The Author(s). Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Withholding or continuing angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin 2 receptor blockers peri-operatively in non-cardiac surgery remains controversial as they may result in intra-operative hypotension and postoperative organ damage., Methods: We included patients prescribed angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin 2 receptor blockers who underwent surgical procedures > 1 h duration under general or spinal anaesthesia from January 2012 to June 2022 in a single centre. We categorised patients by whether these drugs were withheld for 24 h before surgery. We evaluated the association of withholding these drugs before non-cardiac surgery with creatinine concentrations that increased ≥ 26.4 μmol.l -1 in the first 48 postoperative hours (acute kidney injury). We also analysed changes in creatinine concentrations and estimated glomerular filtration rates., Results: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin 2 receptor blockers were withheld in 24,285 of 32,933 (74%) patients and continued in 8648 (26%) patients. We used propensity scores for drug discontinuation to match 8631 patient pairs who did or did not continue these drugs: acute kidney injury was recorded for 1791 (21%) patients who continued these drugs vs. 1587 (18%) who did not (OR (95%CI) 1.16 (1.08-1.25), p < 0.001). Intra-operative hypotension was recorded for 3892 (45%) patients who continued drugs vs. 3373 (39%) patients who did not (OR (95%CI) 1.28 (1.21-1.36), p < 0.001). Continuing drugs was independently associated with a mean increase in creatinine of 2.2 μmol.l -1 (p < 0.001) and a mean decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate of 1.4 ml.min.1.73 m -2 (p < 0.001)., Conclusions: Continuing angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin 2 receptor blockers 24 h before non-cardiac surgery was associated with intra-operative hypotension and postoperative acute kidney injury., (© 2024 Association of Anaesthetists.)

Background: Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is a common cause of liver-related morbidity and mortality. Evidence suggests that angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) decrease liver fibrosis, an intermediate step between liver injury and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Our aim was to investigate the association between the use of ACEIs and ARBs on incident HCC and liver-related mortality among patients with HBV infection., Methods: We conducted a population-based study on a new-user cohort of patients seen at 24 hospitals across China. We included adult patients with HBV infection who started ACEIs or ARBs (ACEIs/ARBs), or calcium channel blockers or thiazide diuretics (CCBs/THZs) from January 2012 to December 2022. The primary outcome was incident HCC; secondary outcomes were liver-related mortality and new-onset cirrhosis. We used propensity score matching and Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of study outcomes., Results: Among 32 692 eligible patients (median age 58 [interquartile range (IQR) 48-68] yr, and 18 804 male [57.5%]), we matched 9946 pairs of patients starting ACEIs/ARBs or CCBs/THZs. During a mean follow-up of 2.3 years, the incidence rate of HCC per 1000 person-years was 4.11 and 5.94 among patients who started ACEIs/ARBs and CCBs/THZs, respectively, in the matched cohort. Use of ACEIs/ARBs was associated with lower risks of incident HCC (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.50-0.86), liver-related mortality (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.64-0.93), and new-onset cirrhosis (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.70-0.94)., Interpretation: In this cohort of patients with HBV infection, new users of ACEIs/ARBs had a lower risk of incident HCC, liver-related mortality, and new-onset cirrhosis than new users of CCBs/THZs., Competing Interests: Competing interests:: Xin Xu reports receiving support for the present manuscript from the Ministry of Science and Technology of China and the Natural Science Foundation of China. Lu Li reports receiving funding from the National Natural Science Foundation of China. No other competing interests were declared., (© 2024 CMA Impact Inc. or its licensors.)

Background: Depression ranks as a leading contributor to the global disease burden. The potential causal relationship between the use of antihypertensive medications and depression has garnered significant interest. Despite extensive investigation, the nature of this relationship remains a subject of ongoing debate. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the influence of antihypertensive medications on depression by conducting a Mendelian randomization study focused on drug targets., Method: We focused on the targets of five antihypertensive drug categories: ACE Inhibitors (ACEIs), Angiotensin II Receptor Antagonists (ARBs), Calcium Channel Blockers (CCBs), Beta-Blockers (BBs), and Thiazide Diuretics (TDs). We collected single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with these drug targets from genome-wide association study (GWAS) statistics, using them as proxies for the drugs. Subsequently, we conducted a Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis targeting these drugs to explore their potential impact on depression., Results: Our findings revealed that genetic proxies for Beta-Blockers (BBs) were associated with an elevated risk of depression (OR [95%CI] = 1.027 [1.013, 1.040], p < 0.001). Similarly, genetic proxies for Calcium Channel Blockers (CCBs) were linked to an increased risk of depression (OR [95%CI] = 1.030 [1.009, 1.051], p = 0.006). No significant associations were identified between the genetic markers of other antihypertensive medications and depression risk., Conclusion: The study suggests that genetic proxies associated with Beta-Blockers (BBs) and Calcium Channel Blockers (CCBs) could potentially elevate the risk of depression among patients. These findings underscore the importance of considering genetic predispositions when prescribing these medications, offering a strategic approach to preventing depression in susceptible individuals., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Yang, Li, Huang, Li, He, Cai and Lai.)

Since 2014, sacubitril/valsartan (Entresto ® ) is widely prescribed for heart failure. Despite neprilysin inhibition's benefits in heart failure, concerns about potential amyloid-beta (Aβ) accumulation and Alzheimer's disease (AD) risk have persisted. This narrative review, a decade post-approval, evaluates the risk of amyloid pathology and neurocognitive disorders in long-term sacubitril/valsartan use. Clinical trials, real-world studies, and pharmacovigilance data do not indicate an increased risk of cognitive decline. In patients treated with sacubitril/valsartan blood-based amyloid biomarkers show perturbations, while neuroimaging biomarkers reveal no significant increase in amyloid load. Despite a theoretical risk of amyloid accumulation and AD under treatment with sacubitril/valsartan, current clinical data appears reassuring, and there is no signal indicating an increased risk of cognitive decline, but a perturbation of amyloid blood-based biomarkers, which implies great caution when interpreting biomarkers in this context., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) are contraindicated during pregnancy because of fetal toxicity. All previous reports on adverse fetal outcomes involved women who continued to take low-dose ARBs for hypertension and were unaware of the adverse effects. Herein, we report the case of a 23-year-old pregnant woman in her third trimester who experienced an ARB overdose after an argument with her partner. Pregnancy was complicated by transient oligohydramnios, and fetal magnetic resonance imaging suggested renal failure. Despite these concerns, the newborn had no morphological abnormalities or abnormal neurological findings. Renal impairment improved over time, and the infant grew well. A single overdose of ARBs in the third trimester can lead to fetal renal failure, similar to long-term low-dose ARB administration; however, favorable outcomes are possible. An overdose of ARBs may transiently cause renal failure, which may improve. The study findings may inform counseling for women who are unexpectedly exposed to an overdose of ARBs., (© 2024 Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology.)

Objective: Whether angiotensin II blockade is an effective medical treatment for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) has not been established. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the association between angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) prescription and AAA growth and events., Data Sources: MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched from their inception to 4 January 2024, with no language restrictions., Review Methods: The five databases were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies reporting the association between ACEi or ARB prescription and AAA growth, repair, or rupture. The primary outcome was AAA growth, with secondary outcomes of AAA rupture, AAA repair, and AAA related events (rupture and repair combined). Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 tool for RCTs and with a modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Random effects models were used for meta-analyses., Results: Eleven studies (two RCTs, eight observational studies, and one meta-analysis of individual patient data from seven populations) involving 58 022 patients were included. ACEi prescription was not associated with a statistically significant reduction in AAA growth (standard mean difference 0.01 mm/year, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.26 - 0.28; p = .93; I 2  = 98%) or AAA repair (odds ratio [OR] 0.73, 95% CI 0.50 - 1.09; p = .65; I 2  = 61%), but was associated with a statistically significantly lower risk of AAA rupture (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.81 - 0.93; p < .001; I 2  = 26%) and AAA related events (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.72 - 0.95; p = .006; I 2  = 80%). ARB prescription was not associated with significantly reduced AAA growth or a lower risk of AAA related events. The two RCTs had a low risk of bias, with one observational study having low, seven moderate, and one high risk of bias. All of the findings had a very low certainty of evidence based on the GRADE analysis., Conclusion: There was no association between ACEi or ARB prescription and AAA growth, but ACEi prescription was associated with a reduced risk of AAA rupture and AAA related events with very low certainty of evidence., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Animal and human studies have suggested that the use of angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) may be associated with a lower risk of incident epilepsy compared with other antihypertensive medications. However, observational data from the US are lacking., Objective: To evaluate the association between ARB use and epilepsy incidence in subgroups of US patients with hypertension., Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used data from a national health administrative database from January 2010 to December 2017 with propensity score (PS) matching. The eligible cohort included privately insured individuals aged 18 years or older with diagnosis of primary hypertension and dispensed at least 1 ARB, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI), β-blocker, or calcium channel blocker (CCB) from 2010 to 2017. Patients with a diagnosis of epilepsy at or before the index date or dispensed an antiseizure medication 12 months before or 90 days after initiating the study medications were excluded. The data analysis for this project was conducted from April 2022 to April 2024., Exposures: Propensity scores were generated based on baseline covariates and used to match patients who received ARBs with those who received either ACEIs, β-blockers, CCBs, or a combination of these antihypertensive medications., Main Outcomes and Measures: Cox regression analyses were used to evaluate epilepsy incidence during follow-up comparing the ARB cohort with other antihypertensive classes. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were conducted to examine the association between ARB use and epilepsy incidence in various subgroups., Results: Of 2 261 964 patients (mean [SD] age, 61.7 [13.9] years; 1 120 630 [49.5%] female) included, 309 978 received ARBs, 807 510 received ACEIs, 695 887 received β-blockers, and 448 589 received CCBs. Demographic and clinical characteristics differed across the 4 comparison groups prior to PS matching. Compared with ARB users, patients receiving ACEIs were predominantly male and had diabetes, CCB users were generally older (eg, >65 years), and β-blocker users had more comorbidities and concurrent medications. The 1:1 PS-matched subgroups included 619 858 patients for ARB vs ACEI, 619 828 patients for ARB vs β-blocker, and 601 002 patients for ARB vs CCB. Baseline characteristics were equally distributed between comparison groups after matching with propensity scores. Use of ARBs was associated with a decreased incidence of epilepsy compared with ACEIs (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.75; 95% CI, 0.58-0.96), β-blockers (aHR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.54-0.90), and a combination of other antihypertensive classes (aHR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.56-0.95). Subgroup analyses revealed a significant association between ARB use (primarily losartan) and epilepsy incidence in patients with no preexisting history of stroke or cardiovascular disease., Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found that ARBs, mainly losartan, were associated with a lower incidence of epilepsy compared with other antihypertensive agents in hypertensive patients with no preexisting stroke or cardiovascular disease. Further studies, such as randomized clinical trials, are warranted to confirm the comparative antiepileptogenic properties of antihypertensive medications.

Background: The characteristics, tolerability, and outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF) who are treated with sacubitril/valsartan remain unclear in Japan., Methods: We conducted a nationwide multicenter study to evaluate the features and outcomes of patients newly prescribed sacubitril/valsartan for the management of HF. We analyzed adverse events (AEs) related to sacubitril/valsartan at 3 months, which were defined as hypotension, worsening renal function, hyperkalemia, and angioedema. Additionally, the association between AEs and outcomes was examined., Results: Among 993 patients, the mean age was 70 years and 291 (29.3 %) were female, and 22.8 % had left ventricular ejection fraction ≥50 %. Of them, 20.8 % had systolic blood pressure (sBP) <100 mmHg, and 19.5 % had estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <30 ml/min/1.73 m 2 at baseline, which were the populations excluded from the eligibility in landmark trials. AEs related to sacubitril/valsartan were observed in 22.5 % of the patients at 3 months. Overall, 22.6 % of patients discontinued sacubitril/valsartan, and hypotension was the most common event leading to drug discontinuation. After adjustment, patients who had worse HF symptoms (New York Heart Association III or IV), sBP <100 mmHg, and eGFR <30 ml/min/1.73 m 2 were associated with a higher risk of AEs related to sacubitril/valsartan. Additionally, patients experiencing AEs had a higher risk of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization than those who did not., Conclusion: In Japan, sacubitril/valsartan was also prescribed to patients not eligible for landmark trials, and AEs were observed at a relatively high rate from soon after treatment initiation. Physicians should closely monitor patients for these events, especially in patients anticipated to have a higher risk of AEs., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest S.M. has received research grants and personal fees from Abott, Bayer Pharma, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Medtronic, Novartis, Ono Pharma, Orbus Neich, Otsuka Pharma, and the Uehara Memorial Foundation. J.J.V.M. received payments through Glasgow University from work on clinical trials, consulting, and other activities from: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Cardurion, Cytokinetics, GSK, KBP Biosciences, and Novartis. Personal consultancy fees from: Alnylam Pharma, Bayer, BMS, George Clinical PTY Ltd., Ionis Pharma., Novartis, Regeneron Pharma., River 2 Renal Corporation. Personal lecture fees: Abbott, Alkem Metabolics, Astra Zeneca, Blue Ocean Scientific Solutions Ltd., Boehringer Ingelheim, Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge, Emcure Pharma. Ltd., Eris Lifesciences, European Academy of CME, Hikma Pharmaceuticals, Imagica health, Intas Pharma, J.B. Chemicals & Pharma. Ltd., Lupin Pharma, Medscape/Heart.Org, ProAdWise Communications, Radcliffe Cardiology, Sun Pharma., The Corpus, Translation Research Group, and Translational Medicine Academy. J.J.V.M is a director of Global Clinical Trial Partners Ltd. J.J.V.M. is supported by a British Heart Foundation Centre of Research Excellence Grant RE/18/6/34217 and the Vera Melrose Heart Failure Research Fund. N.K. receives honorarium from Novartis Pharma, Boehringer-Ingelheim Japan, Eli Lilly Japan K.K, and Otsuka Pharma, and is affiliated with a department endowed by AMI Inc., Fukuda Denshi, KYOCERA, InterReha, and Philips Japan. T.S. has received honoraria from Novartis Pharmaceuticals KK, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Otsuka Pharmaceuticals Co. Ltd. A.K. has received honoraria from Novartis Pharma., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: A hypothetical concern has been raised that sacubitril/valsartan might cause cognitive impairment because neprilysin is one of several enzymes degrading amyloid-β peptides in the brain, some of which are neurotoxic and linked to Alzheimer-type dementia. To address this, we examined the effect of sacubitril/valsartan compared with valsartan on cognitive function in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in a prespecified substudy of PARAGON-HF (Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibitor With Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Global Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction)., Methods: In PARAGON-HF, serial assessment of cognitive function was conducted in a subset of patients with the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE; score range, 0-30, with lower scores reflecting worse cognitive function). The prespecified primary analysis of this substudy was the change from baseline in MMSE score at 96 weeks. Other post hoc analyses included cognitive decline (fall in MMSE score of ≥3 points), cognitive impairment (MMSE score <24), or the occurrence of dementia-related adverse events., Results: Among 2895 patients included in the MMSE substudy with baseline MMSE score measured, 1453 patients were assigned to sacubitril/valsartan and 1442 to valsartan. Their mean age was 73 years, and the median follow-up was 32 months. The mean±SD MMSE score at randomization was 27.4±3.0 in the sacubitril/valsartan group, with 10% having an MMSE score <24; the corresponding numbers were nearly identical in the valsartan group. The mean change from baseline to 96 weeks in the sacubitril/valsartan group was -0.05 (SE, 0.07); the corresponding change in the valsartan group was -0.04 (0.07). The mean between-treatment difference at week 96 was -0.01 (95% CI, -0.20 to 0.19; P =0.95). Analyses of a ≥3-point decline in MMSE, decrease to a score <24, dementia-related adverse events, and combinations of these showed no difference between sacubitril/valsartan and valsartan. No difference was found in the subgroup of patients tested for apolipoprotein E ε4 allele genotype., Conclusions: Patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in PARAGON-HF had relatively low baseline MMSE scores. Cognitive change, measured by MMSE, did not differ between treatment with sacubitril/valsartan and treatment with valsartan in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction., Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01920711., Competing Interests: Dr Jhund reports receiving grant support from Boehringer Ingelheim and fees for serving on an advisory board from Cytokinetics. Dr Anand reports receiving fees for serving on a steering committee from AstraZeneca, ARCA biopharma, Amgen, and LivaNova; fees for serving as chair of a data and safety monitoring board from Boston Scientific; fees for serving on an end-point committee from Boehringer Ingelheim; and fees for serving on an advisory board from Zensun. Dr Claggett received consulting fees from AOBiome, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Corvia Medical, Gilead Sciences, and MyoKardia. Dr Desai received consulting fees from Abbott, Boehringer Ingelheim, DalCor Pharmaceuticals, and Regeneron; grant support, paid to Brigham and Women’s Hospital, consulting fees, and fees for serving on an advisory board from Alnylam Pharmaceuticals and AstraZeneca; consulting fees and fees for serving on a steering committee from Biofourmis; consulting fees and fees for serving on a data and safety monitoring committee from Boston Scientific; fees for serving on an advisory board from Corvidia; and fees for serving on an advisory board and consulting fees from Relypsa. Drs Chiang, Gong, and Lefkowitz are employed by Novartis Pharmaceuticals. Dr Lam received grant support and fees for serving on an advisory board from Boston Scientific and Roche Diagnostics; grant support, fees for serving on an advisory board, and fees for serving on steering committees from Bayer; grant support from Medtronics; grant support and fees for serving on a steering committee from Vifor Pharma; fees for serving on an advisory board and fees for serving on steering committees from AstraZeneca and Novartis; fees for serving on an advisory board from Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Abbott Diagnostics; consulting fees from Merck and Stealth BioTherapeutics; fees for serving on a steering committee from Janssen Research and Development; lecture fees and consulting fees from Menarini; and fees for serving on a scientific committee from Corvia Medical and holding a pending patent (PCT/SG2016/050217) on a method regarding diagnosis and prognosis of chronic heart failure. Dr Maggioni received fees for serving on a study committee from Bayer and Fresenius. Dr Packer received consulting fees from AbbVie, Akcea Therapeutics, Actavis, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardiorentis, Daiichi Sankyo, Gilead Sciences, Johnson & Johnson, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Relypsa, Sanofi, Synthetic Biologics, and Theravance Biopharma. Dr Rouleau received consulting fees from AstraZeneca. Dr van Veldhuisen received fees for serving on a steering committee and travel support from ARCA Biopharma and Corvia Medical. Dr Zannad received fees for serving on a steering committee from Janssen, Bayer, Boston Scientific, CVRx, and Boehringer Ingelheim; consulting fees from Amgen, Vifor Pharma–Fresenius, Cardior, Cereno Pharmaceutical, Applied Therapeutics, and Merck; and consulting fees and fees for serving on a steering committee from AstraZeneca and serving as founder of cardiorenal and CVCT. Dr Zile received fees for serving on a steering committee from Abbott and Ironwood Pharma; consulting fees from Boston Scientific and MyoKardia; grant support and fees for serving on a steering committee from CVRx and Medtronic; fees for serving on an eligibility committee from EBR Systems and V-Wave; fees for serving on a clinical-events committee from Endotronics; and fees for serving on a data and safety monitoring board from Merck. Dr Solomon received grant support, paid to Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and consulting fees from Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, MyoKardia, Novartis, Theracos, Bayer, and Cytokinetics; grant support, paid to Brigham and Women’s Hospital, from Bellerophon Therapeutics, Celladon, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Lonestar Heart, Mesoblast, Sanofi Pasteur, and Eidos Therapeutics; consulting fees from Akros Pharma, Corvia Medical, Ironwood Pharma, Merck, Roche, Takeda Pharmaceutical, Quantum Genomics, AOBiome, Cardiac Dimensions, Tenaya Therapeutics, and Daiichi Sankyo; and fees for serving on a data and safety monitoring board from Janssen. Dr McMurray reports that his employer, Glasgow University, has been paid by Novartis for serving as an executive committee member and coprincipal investigator of ATMOSPHERE, PARADIGM-HF, and PARAGON-HF trials and executive/steering committee member of the PARADISE-MI and PERSPECTIVE trials (with sacubitril/valsartan) and for meetings/presentations related to these trials, aliskiren, and sacubitril-valsartan. Novartis has also paid for his travel and accommodation for some of these meetings. Glasgow University has also been paid by Novartis for advisory board; by Bayer for serving as a steering committee member of the PANACHE trial using neladenoson bialanate (BAY 1067197); by Cardiorentis for serving as a steering committee member and end-point committee chair for the TRUE-AHF trial and attending meetings related to this trial; by Cardiorentis for travel and accommodation to attend some of these meetings; by Amgen for serving as steering committee member for the ATOMIC-HF and COSMIC-HF trials and attending meetings related to this trial; by Amgen for travel and accommodation for some of these meetings; by Oxford University (which received a grant from Bayer, which manufactures acarbose) for serving as a steering committee member for the ACE trial (using acarbose) and attending meetings related to this trial; by Theracos for serving as principal investigator for the BEST trial and attending meetings related to this trial; by Theracos for travel and accommodation to attend some of these meetings; by Abbvie (which manufactures atrasentan) for serving as steering committee member for the SONAR trial (using atrasentan) and to attend meetings related to this trial; by Abbvie for his travel and accommodation to attend some of these meetings; by DalCor Pharmaceuticals for serving as steering committee member for the Dal-GenE trial and to attend meetings related to this trial; by Pfizer for serving on the data safety monitoring committee for the SPIRE trial and to attend meetings related to this trial; by Merck for serving on the data safety monitoring committee for the MK-3102 program, for the VICTORIA trial, and to attend meetings related to these trials; by AstraZeneca (which markets dapagliflozin) for serving as principal investigator of DAPA-HF and coprincipal investigator of DELIVER (trials using dapagliflozin on heart failure) and to attend meetings related trial; by AstraZeneca for his travel and accommodation to attend meetings; by GSK for serving as coprincipal investigator and steering committee member for the Harmony-Outcomes trial (albiglutide) and the trials ASCEND-D and ASCEND-ND, using daprodustat, respectively, and to attend meetings related to these trials; by GSK for his travel and accommodation to attend some of the meetings; by BMS for serving as a steering committee member for the STAND-UP clinical trial (using an HNO donor) on heart failure and to attend meetings related to this trial; and by Kings College Hospital (which has received a grant from KRUK and Vifor-Fresenius, which manufactures intravenous iron) for serving as steering committee member for the PIVOTAL trial (using intravenous iron) and for running the end-point adjudication committee for this trial, to attend meetings related to PIVOTAL, and for his travel and accommodation for to attend some of the meetings. All payments were made through consultancies with Glasgow University, and Dr McMurray has not received any personal payments in relation to the trials or drugs. The other authors report no conflicts. The study supporters had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; or decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Background: Optimal antihypertensive medication for chronic type B aortic dissection (AD) remains undecided. This study compared the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan with valsartan to determine suitable antihypertensive drug combinations., Methods: In this single-center, open-label, randomized, controlled trial, patients with chronic Stanford type B AD and mild hypertension were randomized to receive sacubitril/valsartan 100/200 mg or valsartan 80/160 mg. The primary endpoint was the reduction in mean sitting systolic blood pressure (msSBP) at week 8 in patients with sacubitril/valsartan vs. valsartan. Key secondary endpoints included changes in (i) mean sitting diastolic blood pressure (msDBP); (ii) pulse pressure (PP); and (iii) mean ambulatory blood pressure (BP) for 24-hour, daytime, and nighttime. Safety assessments included adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs. This trial was registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, identifier: ChiCTR2300073399., Results: A total of 315 patients completed the study. Sacubitril/valsartan provided a significantly greater reduction in msSBP than valsartan at week 8 (between-treatment difference: -5.1 mm Hg [95% confidence interval -5.8 to -4.5], P < 0.001). Reductions in msSBP, msDBP, and PP as well as the mean ambulatory BP for 24-hour, daytime, and nighttime, were significantly greater in sacubitril/valsartan compared with valsartan (all P < 0.001). No excessive episodes of AEs occurred in the sacubitril/valsartan group., Conclusions: Sacubitril/valsartan and valsartan reduced BP compared with baseline values. However, sacubitril/valsartan improved BP control to a greater extent than valsartan. It may offer a new treatment option for patients with mild hypertension and chronic type B AD., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of American Journal of Hypertension, Ltd. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

BACKGROUND Heart failure and end-stage renal disease often coexist, and management of heart failure can be challenging in patients during hemodialysis. Sacubitril-valsartan (SV) is the first drug to receive regulatory approval for use in patients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification II, III, or IV. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SV for use in chronic heart failure patients on maintenance hemodialysis (MHD). MATERIAL AND METHODS From September 2021 to October 2022, 28 patients on MHD with chronic heart failure at the hemodialysis center of Shaanxi Second Provincial People's Hospital were regularly followed. During the 12-week follow-up period, all patients were administered SV at doses of 100-400 mg per day. Biochemical indicators, echocardiographic parameters, life quality scores, and adverse events were evaluated. RESULTS We enrolled 28 patients. Compared with the baseline levels, NYHA class III in these patients treated with SV was significantly decreased from 60.71% to 32.14% (P<0.05), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was significantly improved from 44.29±8.92% to 53.32±7.88% (P<0.001), the Physical Component Summary (PCS) score was significantly improved from 40.0±6.41 to 56.20±9.86 (P<0.001), and the Mental Component Summary (MCS) score was significantly improved from 39.99±6.14 to 52.59±11.0 (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS We demonstrated that SV improved NYHA classification and LVEF values of patients on MHD with chronic heart failure and also improved their quality of life.

In recent years, regulatory agencies have raised concerns about the presence of potentially carcinogenic substances in certain formulations of Angiotensin Receptor Blockers (ARBs). Specifically, nitrosamines and azido compounds have been identified in some ARB products. Nitrosamines are known to have carcinogenic properties and are associated with an increased risk of neoplasms. Spontaneous safety reports from the EudraVigilance Data Analysis System (EVDAS) database were analyzed to investigate cases of neoplasms associated with ARBs. A disproportionality analysis was conducted, calculating the reporting odds ratio (ROR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a case/non-case approach for each ARB drug. The EVDAS database contained 68,522 safety reports related to ARBs (including Azilsartan, Candesartan, Irbesartan, Olmesartan, Losartan, Valsartan, and Telmisartan), among which 3,396 (5%) cases were associated with neoplasms. The majority of these cases were reported in Germany (11.9%), followed by France (9.7%). Approximately 70% of the reports were submitted by healthcare professionals such as physicians and nurses. Among the ARBs, valsartan had the highest ROR for neoplasm (ROR 1.949, 95% CI 1.857-2.046). This association remained significant when comparing ARBs with other classes of antihypertensive drugs, including ACE inhibitors, beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, and diuretics. Our study identifies a possible signal of an association between ARBs, particularly valsartan, and the risk of neoplasms. However, further observational and analytical studies are necessary to confirm these findings and elucidate the underlying mechanisms., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: In patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD), the effects of initiating treatment with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) or angiotensin-receptor blocker (ARB) on the risk for kidney failure with replacement therapy (KFRT) and death remain unclear., Purpose: To examine the association of ACEi or ARB treatment initiation, relative to a non-ACEi or ARB comparator, with rates of KFRT and death., Data Sources: Ovid Medline and the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration Clinical Trials Consortium from 1946 through 31 December 2023., Study Selection: Completed randomized controlled trials testing either an ACEi or an ARB versus a comparator (placebo or antihypertensive drugs other than ACEi or ARB) that included patients with a baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) below 30 mL/min/1.73 m 2 ., Data Extraction: The primary outcome was KFRT, and the secondary outcome was death before KFRT. Analyses were done using Cox proportional hazards models according to the intention-to-treat principle. Prespecified subgroup analyses were done according to baseline age (<65 vs. ≥65 years), eGFR (<20 vs. ≥20 mL/min/1.73 m 2 ), albuminuria (urine albumin-creatinine ratio <300 vs. ≥300 mg/g), and history of diabetes., Data Synthesis: A total of 1739 participants from 18 trials were included, with a mean age of 54.9 years and mean eGFR of 22.2 mL/min/1.73 m 2 , of whom 624 (35.9%) developed KFRT and 133 (7.6%) died during a median follow-up of 34 months (IQR, 19 to 40 months). Overall, ACEi or ARB treatment initiation led to lower risk for KFRT (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.55 to 0.79]) but not death (hazard ratio, 0.86 [CI, 0.58 to 1.28]). There was no statistically significant interaction between ACEi or ARB treatment and age, eGFR, albuminuria, or diabetes ( P for interaction > 0.05 for all)., Limitation: Individual participant-level data for hyperkalemia or acute kidney injury were not available., Conclusion: Initiation of ACEi or ARB therapy protects against KFRT, but not death, in people with advanced CKD., Primary Funding Source: National Institutes of Health. (PROSPERO: CRD42022307589)., Competing Interests: Disclosures: Disclosures can be viewed at www.acponline.org/authors/icmje/ConflictOfInterestForms.do?msNum=M23-3236.

Background: Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASIs) play a crucial role in the treatment of several chronic cardiovascular conditions. Nonetheless, hyperkalemia, a frequent side effect, often leads to the discontinuation of RAASIs. The implications of hyperkalemia-driven changes in RAASI medications are poorly understood., Methods: Population-based, observational, retrospective cohort study. Two large healthcare databases were utilized to identify 77,089 individuals aged 55 years and older with chronic conditions who were prescribed RAASIs between 2015 and 2017 in Southern Barcelona, Spain. We assessed the interplay between serum potassium abnormalities, RAASI management, and their associations with clinical outcomes, adjusting for potential confounders including socioeconomic factors, medical conditions, and potassium levels., Results: The one-year prevalence of hyperkalemia (defined as serum potassium, K+ >5.0 mmol/L) was 17.8 %. RAASI were down-titrated in 16.1 % of these 13,673 patients with K+ levels. Factors linked to a higher likelihood of reducing/discontinuing RAASI after developing hyperkalemia included older age, impaired kidney function, higher potassium levels, and previous hospitalizations. Dose reduction/discontinuation of RAASI after developing hyperkalemia was associated with an increased risk of hospitalization (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.16, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.10-1.21) and with increased mortality (HR 1.60, 95 % CI 1.56-1.84)., Conclusion: In this large, observational study, hyperkalemia was linked to a greater likelihood of discontinuing RAASIs. Down-titration of RAASI was independently associated with unfavorable clinical outcomes such as hospitalization and specially mortality. Although the observational nature of the study, these findings underscore the importance of preventing circumstances that may lead to RAASI down-titration, such as hyperkalemia, as well as preventing hospitalizations and mortality, to ensure RAASI benefits., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Josep Comin-Colet has received speaker fees from Vifor Pharma. Josep Comin-Colet and Miguel Cainzos-Achirica have participated in other research projects funded by unrestricted grants from CLS Vifor., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

It has not yet been established whether angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB), statins, and multiple drugs affect the severity of COVID-19. Therefore, we herein performed an observational study on the effects of 1st- and 2nd-generation ARB, statins, and multiple drugs, on COVID-19 in patients admitted to 15 Japanese medical facilities. The results obtained showed that ARB, statins, and multiple drugs were not associated with the primary outcome (odds ratio: 1.040, 95% confidence interval: 0.688-0.571; 0.696, 0.439-1.103; 1.056, 0.941-1.185, respectively), each component of the primary outcome (in-hospital death, ventilator support, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support, and admission to the intensive care unit), or the secondary outcomes (oxygen administration, disturbed consciousness, and hypotension, defined as systolic blood pressure ≤90 mmHg). ARB were divided into 1st- and 2nd-generations based on their approval for use (before 2000 and after 2001), with the former consisting of losartan, candesartan, and valsartan, and the latter of telmisartan, olmesartan, irbesartan, and azilsartan. The difference of ARB generation was not associated with the primary outcome (odds ratio with 2nd-generation ARB relative to 1st-generation ARB: 1.257, 95% confidence interval: 0.613-2.574). The odd ratio for a hypotension as one of the secondary outcomes with 2nd-generation ARB was 1.754 (95% confidence interval: 1.745-1.763) relative to 1st-generation ARB. These results suggest that patients taking 2nd-generation ARB may be at a higher risk of hypotension than those taking 1st-generation ARB and also that careful observations are needed. Further studies are continuously needed to support decisions to adjust medications for co-morbidities., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to The Japanese Society of Hypertension.)

Introduction: Angiotensin receptor blockers are widely used antihypertensive drugs in South Korea. In 2021, the Korea Ministry of Food and Drug Safety acknowledged the need for national compensation for a drug-induced liver injury (DILI) after azilsartan use. However, little is known regarding the association between angiotensin receptor blockers and DILI., Objective: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in incident users of angiotensin receptor blockers from a common data model database (1 January, 2017-31 December, 2021) to compare the risk of DILI among specific angiotensin receptor blockers against valsartan., Methods: Patients were assigned to treatment groups at cohort entry based on prescribed angiotensin receptor blockers. Drug-induced liver injury was operationally defined using the International DILI Expert Working Group criteria. Cox regression analyses were conducted to derive hazard ratios and the inverse probability of treatment weighting method was applied. All analyses were performed using R., Results: In total, 229,881 angiotensin receptor blocker users from 20 university hospitals were included. Crude DILI incidence ranged from 15.6 to 82.8 per 1000 person-years in treatment groups, most were cholestatic and of mild severity. Overall, the risk of DILI was significantly lower in olmesartan users than in valsartan users (hazard ratio: 0.73 [95% confidence interval 0.55-0.96]). In monotherapy patients, the risk was significantly higher in azilsartan users than in valsartan users (hazard ratio: 6.55 [95% confidence interval 5.28-8.12])., Conclusions: We found a significantly higher risk of suspected DILI in patients receiving azilsartan monotherapy compared with valsartan monotherapy. Our findings emphasize the utility of real-world evidence in advancing our understanding of adverse drug reactions in clinical practice., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Aims: This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan in abnormal renal function (eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73m 2 ) patients combined with heart failure based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies., Methods: The Embase, PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant studies from inception to December 2023. Dichotomous variables were described as event counts with the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) values. Continuous variables were expressed as mean standard deviation (SD) with 95% CIs., Results: A total of 6 RCTs and 8 observational studies were included, involving 17335 eGFR below 60 ml/min/1.73m 2 patients combined with heart failure. In terms of efficacy, we analyzed the incidence of cardiovascular events and found that sacubitril/valsartan significantly reduced the risk of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization in chronic kidney disease (CKD) stages 3-5 patients with heart failure (OR: 0.65, 95%CI: 0.54-0.78). Moreover, sacubitril/valsartan prevented the serum creatinine elevation (OR: 0.81, 95%CI: 0.68-0.95), the eGFR decline (OR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.73-0.95) and the development of end-stage renal disease in this population (OR:0.73, 95%CI:0.60-0.89). As for safety outcomes, we did not find that the rate of hyperkalemia (OR:1.31, 95%CI:0.79-2.17) and hypotension (OR:1.57, 95%CI:0.94-2.62) were increased in sacubitril/valsartan group among CKD stages 3-5 patients with heart failure., Conclusions: Our meta-analysis proves that sacubitril/valsartan has a favorable effect on cardiac function without obvious risk of adverse events in abnormal renal function patients combined with heart failure, indicating that sacubitril/valsartan has the potential to become perspective treatment for these patients.

Background: The effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (ACEI/ARBs) on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients who undergo coronary artery bypass graft surgery is equivocal. This retrospective, population-based cohort study evaluated effect of exposure to an ACEI/ARB on MACE using linked administrative databases that included all cardiac revascularization procedures, hospitalizations, and prescriptions for the population of British Columbia, Canada., Methods and Results: All adults who underwent coronary artery bypass graft surgery between 2002 and 2020 were eligible. The primary outcome was time to MACE, defined as a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and ischemic stroke using Cox proportional hazards models with inverse probability treatment weighting. Included were 15 439 patients and 6191 (40%) were prescribed an ACEI/ARB. Mean age was 66 years, 83% were men, and 16% had heart failure (HF). Median exposure time was 40 months. Over the 5-year follow-up, 1623 MACE occurred. Impact of exposure was different for patients with and without HF ( P <0.0001 for interaction). After probability-weighting and adjustment for relevant covariates, exposure to ACEI/ARBs was associated with a lower hazard of MACE in patients with HF at 1 year (hazard ratio, 0.13 [95% CI, 0.09-0.19]) and 5 years (hazard ratio, 0.36 [95% CI, 0.30-0.44]). In patients without HF, ACEI/ARBs had a lower hazard of MACE at 1 year (hazard ratio, 0.35 [95% CI, 0.27-0.46]) and 5 years (hazard ratio, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.58-0.76])., Conclusions: In this population-based study, ACEI/ARBs were associated with a lower hazard of MACE in a cohort of patients post-coronary artery bypass graft surgery irrespective of HF status.

Acne vulgaris is a common chronic dermatological condition characterized by obstruction and inflammation of pilosebaceous units. Recent research on a different dermatologic condition has demonstrated that the use of vasodilatory medications is associated with a decreased relative risk of rosacea. This finding is significant due to the overlapping inflammatory pathways involved in rosacea and acne. Herein, a retrospective cohort study was designed to determine the correlation between vasodilator usage and the risk of developing acne within 5 years, contrasting it with thiazide diuretics, chosen as a control due to its non-vasodilatory antihypertensive mechanism and availability of data. Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors (RR, 0.775; 95% CI, 0.727-0.826; P&lt;0.05), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) (RR, 0.739; 95% CI, 0.685-0.797; P&lt;0.05), beta-blockers (BB) (RR, 0.829; 95% CI, 0.777-0.885; P&lt;0.05), and calcium channel blockers (CCB) usage (RR, 0.821, 95% CI, 0.773-0.873; P&lt;0.05) were associated with a significantly lower risk of developing acne within 5 years of initiating therapy compared to thiazide diuretics. It is unclear if thiazide diuretics are more likely to cause acne within the adult population or if vasodilators are protective against the development of acne. Finding mechanisms and therapeutics that lower the risk of developing acne is of significant public health interest, and this study provides a step toward this endeavor. Further research is required to uncover the underlying mechanisms for this reduction in the development of acne.&nbsp; J Drugs Dermatol. 2024;23(6):446-449.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; doi:10.36849/JDD.8362.

Objective: To provide an overview of the guidelines on the management of immunoglobulin A nephropathy (IgAN) and focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS), review the evidence for sparsentan, and discuss its place in therapy., Data Sources: A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and clinicaltrials.gov using the search terms "sparsentan" and "RE-021" up to the end of Jun 2023., Study Selection and Data Extraction: English studies were included if they evaluated the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety of sparsentan in human subjects. Information from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and manufacturer's monograph were also extracted., Data Synthesis: In comparison with irbesartan, sparsentan reduced urine protein-to-creatinine ratio (UPCR) in both IgAN (-49.8% vs -15.1% at interim 36 weeks) and FSGS (-44.8% vs -18.5% at 8 weeks). Hypotension and edema were the most common adverse events in the sparsentan groups. Hepatotoxicity appears to be comparable between sparsentan and irbesartan in short-term results., Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice in Comparison With Existing Drugs: Sparsentan provides a new option for patients with IgAN who are otherwise at high risk of progressive kidney disease. Continued FDA approval is dependent on long-term study results on renal function decline and safety., Conclusion: Sparsentan reduces proteinuria in IgAN and FSGS, and has expedited approval by the FDA for IgAN in patients at risk of rapid disease progression, generally at urine protein-to-creatinine ratio (UPCR) ≥1.5 g/g. Interim results from PROTECT and results from DUET showed promise for improving proteinuria in IgAN and FSGS. Long-term renal function benefit and safety data are pending., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background: Sacubitril acts to inhibit neprilysin and as neprilysin is involved in amyloid-beta degradation in the central nervous system, and there is concern that sacubitril/valsartan may increase the risk of dementia. We aimed to compare the risk of incident dementia associated with sacubitril/valsartan and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs)., Methods: Patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction treated with either sacubitril/valsartan or ARB, identified from the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, were matched in a 1:2 ratio using propensity scores (6789 on sacubitril/valsartan and 13,578 on ARBs) and followed up for incident dementia., Results: During a mean follow-up of 2.5 years, 526 (2.6%) patients were newly diagnosed with dementia: Alzheimer dementia in 282, vascular dementia in 8, and other dementia in 236. There was no significant difference in the risk of overall dementia (hazard ratio [HR] 0.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70-1.01), Alzheimer dementia (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.67-1.10), vascular dementia (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.23-4.11), and all other dementias (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.62-1.07) between sacubitril/valsartan users and ARB users. These results were consistent regardless of initial sacubitril/valsartan dose and subgroups including old age, previous mild cognitive impairment, previous stroke, and concomitant antiplatelet or anticoagulation. Sensitivity analysis with a 1-year lag period for dementia assessment confirmed the main analysis. Meanwhile, risk of incident stroke was lower in sacubitril/valsartan users compared to ARBs users., Conclusions: In a nationwide propensity-matched cohort of patients with heart failure, sacubitril/valsartan was not associated with an increased risk of incident dementia compared to ARBs., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany.)

Study Objective: To evaluate the effect of continuing of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) or angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) prescriptions 24 h before surgery on postoperative myocardial injury and blood pressure in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery., Design: A single-center, retrospective study., Setting: Operating room and perioperative care area., Patients: 42,432 patients who had been taking chronic ACEI/ARB underwent non-cardiac surgery from January 2012 to June 2022., Interventions: Patients who discontinued ACEI/ARB 24 h before surgery (withheld group, n=31,055) and those who continued ACEI/ARB 24 h before surgery (continued group, n=11,377)., Measurements: Primary outcome was myocardial injury after non-cardiac surgery (MINS) within 7 days postoperatively. MINS was defined as an elevated postoperative cardiac troponin measurement above the 99th percentile of the upper reference limit with a rise/fall pattern. Perioperative blood pressure and clinical outcomes were secondary outcomes., Main Results: Among 42,432 patients, MINS occurred in 2848 patients (6.7%) and was the all-cause of death within 30 days in 122 patients (0.3%). Incidence of MINS was significantly higher in the continued group than the withheld group (847/11,377 [7.4%] vs. 2001/31,055 [6.4%]; OR [95% CI] 1.17 [1.07-1.27]; P<0.001). After 1:1 propensity score matching, 11,373 patients were included in each group. There was still a significant difference for the occurrence of MINS between two groups in matched cohort (7.4% vs. 6.6%, OR [95% CI] 1.14 [1.03-1.26]; P=0.015). Time-average weight of mean arterial pressure <65 mmHg during surgery was significantly higher in the continued group (mean 0.11 vs. 0.09 [95% CI of mean difference] [0.01-0.03]; P<0.001). However, there was no significant difference in other clinical outcomes and mortality., Conclusions: Withholding ACEI/ARB before surgery was associated with a reduced risk of intraoperative hypotension and postoperative myocardial injury, but it did not affect overall clinical outcomes in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is a clinical syndrome characterized by volume overload, impaired exercise capacity, and recurrent hospital admissions. A major contributor to the pathophysiology and clinical presentation of heart failure is the activation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS). Normally, RAAS is responsible for the homeostatic regulation of blood pressure, extracellular fluid volume, and serum sodium concentration. In HFrEF, RAAS gets chronically activated in response to decreased cardiac output, further aggravating the congestion and cardiotoxic effects. Hence, inhibition of RAAS is a major approach in the pharmacologic treatment of those patients. The most recently introduced RAAS antagonizing medication class is angiotensin receptor blocker/ neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI). In this paper, we discuss ARNIs' superiority over traditional RAAS antagonizing agents in reducing heart failure hospitalization and mortality. We also tease out the evidence that shows ARNIs' renoprotective functions in heart failure patients including those with chronic or end stage kidney disease. We also discuss the evidence showing the added benefit resulting from combining ARNIs with a sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitor. Moreover, how ARNIs decrease the risk of arrhythmias and reverse cardiac remodeling, ultimately lowering the risk of cardiovascular death, is also discussed. We then present the positive outcome of ARNIs' use in patients with diabetes mellitus and those recovering from acute decompensated heart failure. ARNIs' side effects are also appreciated and discussed. Taken together, the provided insight and critical appraisal of the evidence justifies and supports the implementation of ARNIs in the guidelines for the treatment of HFrEF., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Readmission rates following ileostomy formation are high. Dehydration and consecutive renal failure are common causes of readmission, potentially pronounced by drugs affecting the homeostasis. The aim of the study was to assess the risk of dehydration after ileostomy formation in patients treated with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI), angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) or diuretics., Method: This nationwide population-based cohort study used data derived from the Colorectal Cancer Data Base of several Swedish healthcare registers. The study included all patients operated on with elective anterior resection and temporary ileostomy for rectal cancer clinically staged I-III in Sweden in 2007-2016. Exposure was at least two dispensations of ACEI, ARB or diuretics within 1 year prior to surgery. Outcome was 90-day readmission due to dehydration including acute renal failure., Results: In total, 3252 patients were included with 1173 (36.1%) exposed to ACEI, ARB or diuretics. The cumulative incidence for 90-day readmission due to dehydration was 29.0% (151 of 520) for exposed versus 13.8% (98 of 712) for unexposed. The proportion of readmissions due to any reason was 44.3% (520 of 1173) for exposed compared to 34.2% (712 of 2079) for unexposed. The incidence rate ratio for readmission due to dehydration was 2.83 (95% c.i. 2.21 to 3.63, P < 0.001). The hazard rate ratio was 2.45 (95% c.i. 1.83 to 3.27, P < 0.001) after adjusting for age, gender and comorbidity., Conclusion: Medication with ACEI, ARB or diuretics defines a vulnerable patient group with increased risk of readmission due to dehydration after ileostomy formation., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Foundation Ltd.)

Background: Hypotension is a potential adverse effect of sacubitril/valsartan, but there are limited data regarding the predictors and implications of treatment-related hypotension in heart failure (HF) with mildly reduced and preserved ejection fraction., Objectives: We investigated predictors of treatment-associated hypotension, clinical outcomes after hypotension, and the relationship between left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and incidence of hypotension in the PARAGON-HF (Prospective Comparison of ARNI with ARB Global Outcomes in HF with Preserved Ejection Fraction) trial., Methods: PARAGON-HF randomized patients with chronic HF (≥45%) to sacubitril/valsartan or valsartan. Following randomization, hypotension was defined as investigator-reported hypotension with a systolic blood pressure <100 mm Hg. Predictors of hypotension were assessed using multivariable Cox models. Associations between hypotension and clinical outcomes were evaluated in time-updated Cox models. The relationship among treatment, LVEF, and incident rates of hypotension and clinical outcomes was estimated using Poisson regression models., Results: Of 4,796 patients in PARAGON-HF, 637 (13%) experienced hypotension, more frequently in the sacubitril/valsartan arm (P < 0.001). Following documented hypotension, patients had higher risk of cardiovascular death and total HF hospitalizations (adjusted RR: 1.63; 95% CI: 1.27-2.09; P < 0.001) and all-cause death (adjusted HR: 1.62; 95% CI: 1.28-2.05; P < 0.001). LVEF modified the association between sacubitril/valsartan and risk of hypotension (P interaction  = 0.019) such that patients with LVEF ≥60% experienced substantially higher treatment-related risks of hypotension., Conclusions: In PARAGON-HF, a higher LVEF was associated with an increased risk of hypotension in patients treated with sacubitril/valsartan compared with valsartan. Because these subjects are also less likely to derive clinical benefit from sacubitril/valsartan, our data reinforce that the benefit/risk ratio favors the use of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with LVEF below normal, but not at higher LVEF. (Efficacy and Safety of LCZ696 Compared to Valsartan, on Morbidity and Mortality in Heart Failure Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction [PARAGON-HF]; NCT01920711)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The PARAGON-HF trial was sponsored by Novartis. Dr Vaduganathan has received research grant support, served on advisory boards, or had speaker engagements with American Regent, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer AG, Baxter Healthcare, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Cytokinetics, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pharmacosmos, Relypsa, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi, and Tricog Health; and participates on clinical trial committees for studies sponsored by AstraZeneca, Galmed, Novartis, Bayer AG, Occlutech, and Impulse Dynamics. Dr Claggett has received consulting fees from Alnylam, Cardurion, Corvia, Cytokinetics, Intellia, and Rocket. Dr Lu has received research funding from the Gottfried und Julia Bangerter-Rhyner Foundation, the SICPA Foundation, and the Société Académique Vaudoise. Dr Pfeffer has received research grant support (via institution) from Lexicon and Novartis; has served as a consultant for Alnylam, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly Alliance, DalCor, Lexicon, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute CONNECTs (Master Protocol Committee), Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi; and has equity in DalCor. Dr Packer has received consulting fees from AbbVie, Akcea, Actavis, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardiorentis, Daiichi-Sankyo, Gilead, Johnson and Johnson, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Relypsa, Sanofi, Synthetic Biologics, and Theravance. Dr Vardeny has served as a consultant for AstraZeneca, Bayer, Cardior, and Moderna; and has received research institutional support from Bayer and Cardurion. Dr Rouleau has received grants and consulting fees from Novartis; and has received consulting fees from Abbott, AstraZeneca, MyoKardia, and Sanofi. Dr Lefkowitz is an employee of Novartis. Dr Mentz has received research support and honoraria from Abbott, American Regent, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim/Eli Lilly, Boston Scientific, Cytokinetics, Fast BioMedical, Gilead, Innolife, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Relypsa, Respicardia, Roche, Sanofi, Vifor, Windtree Therapeutics, and Zoll. Dr Jhund's employer, the University of Glasgow, has been remunerated by AstraZeneca for working on the DAPA-HF and DELIVER trials; has received personal fees from Novartis and Cytokinetics; and has received grants from Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Desai has received personal fees from Abbott, Biofourmis, Boston Scientific, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, Regeneron, and Relypsa; and has received grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Alnylam, and Novartis outside of the submitted work. Dr McMurray has received payments through Glasgow University from work on clinical trials, consulting, and other activities from Alnylam, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardurion, Cytokinetics, Dal-Cor, GlaxoSmithKline, Ionis, KBP Biosciences, Novartis, Pfizer, and Theracos; and has received personal lecture fees from the Corpus, Abbott, Hikma, Sun Pharmaceuticals, Medscape/Heart.org, Radcliffe Cardiology, Servier Director, and Global Clinical Trial Partners (GCTP). Dr Solomon has received research grants from Actelion, Alnylam, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bellerophon, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celladon, Cytokinetics, Eidos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Ionis, Lilly, Mesoblast, MyoKardia, National Institutes of Health/NHLBI, NeuroTronik, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Respicardia, Sanofi Pasteur, Theracos, and US2.AI; and has served as a consultant for Abbott, Action, Akros, Alnylam, Amgen, Arena, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardior, Cardurion, Corvia, Cytokinetics, Daiichi-Sankyo, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Merck, Myokardia, Novartis, Roche, Theracos, Quantum Genomics, Cardurion, Janssen, Cardiac Dimensions, Tenaya, Sanofi-Pasteur, Dinaqor, Tremeau, CellPro-Thera, Moderna, American Regent, and Sarepta. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Sprue-like enteropathy (SE) related to olmesartan use was first reported in 2012. In 2017, the manufacturer of Benicar paid $300 million for 2300 claims for olmesartan-related SE., Objective: A study in 2019 suggested that SE was related to olmesartan and with the possibility of angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) class effect. To further characterize this condition, our group examined reports of ARB-related SE to Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS)., Methods: All reports of ARB-related SE from January 2017 to December 2021 were downloaded from the FAERS database. Gastrointestinal adverse events including SE were reviewed. Reporter categories included physicians, pharmacists, other health care professionals, consumers, and attorneys., Results: A total of 106 590 reports of ARB-related adverse effects were analyzed. Sprue-like enteropathy was identified in 4337 cases (4.1% of total reports). Of these, 4240 cases (98.0%) of ARB-related SE were reported in patients using products with olmesartan, and 97 cases of SE were reported for all other ARBs (eprosartan, losartan, telmisartan, irbesartan, valsartan, and candesartan). Reports of olmesartan-related SE increased rapidly in 2017, continued at a high rate in 2018 and 2019, and essentially stopped in 2020 and 2021., Conclusions and Relevance: Reports to FAERS for ARB-related SE are mostly related to olmesartan. There was a steep decline in reports of olmesartan-related SE following the lawsuit with potential of lawyer interference. There are reports of SE related to ARBs other than olmesartan, with increased physician awareness and the potential to discover a class effect with future studies., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe authors declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Dr Eli D. Ehrenpreis serves as the Chief Executive Officer of E2Bio Life Sciences, a company that is developing Bocaliner, a medical device to improve the treatment of oral mucositis. Dr Ehrenpreis serves as a consultant for Level Ex, a company that develops medical related simulation games. He is the Chief Executive Officer and major stockholder of E2Bio Life Sciences, a company that develops new devices for oral diseases. Dr Ehrenpreis is also the Chief Executive Officer of GI pharmaceuticals, a company devoted to the development of new treatments of gastrointestinal diseases. Dr Ehrenpreis has no additional competing interests to disclose. Dr Ryan Meader and Dr Hardeep Ahdi have no competing interests to disclose. Sam Papasotirious has no competing interests to disclose. Hoang Dang has no competing interests to disclose.

Aim: Previous research has indicated that preoperative beta blocker therapy is associated with a decreased risk of complications after surgery for rectal cancer. This is thought to arise because of the anti-inflammatory activity of the drug. These results need to be reproduced and analyses extended to other drugs with such properties, as this information might be useful in clinical decision-making. The main aim of this work was to replicate previous findings of beta blocker use as a prognostic marker for postoperative leakage. We also investigated whether drug exposure might induce anastomotic leaks., Method: This is a retrospective multicentre cohort study, comprising 1126 patients who underwent anterior resection for rectal cancer between 2014 and 2018. The use of any preoperative beta blocker was treated as the primary exposure, while anastomotic leakage within 12 months of surgery was the outcome. Secondary exposures comprised angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, statins and metformin. Using multivariable regression, we performed a replication analysis with a predictive aim for beta blockers only, while adjustment for confounding was done in more causally oriented analyses for all drugs. We estimated incidence rate ratio (IRR) and relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs)., Results: Anastomotic leakage occurred in 20.6% of patients. Preoperative beta blockers were used by 22.7% of the cohort, while the leak distribution was almost identical between exposure groups. In the main replication analysis, no association could be detected (IRR 0.95, 95% CI 0.68-1.33). In the causally oriented analyses, only metformin affected the risk of leakage (RR 1.59, 95% Cl 1.31-1.92)., Conclusion: While previous research has suggested that preoperative beta blocker use could be prognostic of anastomotic leakage, this study could not detect any such association. On the contrary, our results indicate that preoperative beta blocker use neither predicts nor causes anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer., (© 2024 The Authors. Colorectal Disease published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Background: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) medications are widely prescribed. We sought to assess how pre-admission use of these medications might impact the response to angiotensin-II treatment during vasodilatory shock., Methods: In a post-hoc subgroup analysis of the randomized, placebo-controlled, Angiotensin Therapy for High Output Shock (ATHOS-3) trial, we compared patients with chronic angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) use, and patients with angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) use, to patients without exposure to either ACEi or ARB. The primary outcome was mean arterial pressure after 1-h of treatment. Additional clinical outcomes included mean arterial pressure and norepinephrine equivalent dose requirements over time, and study-drug dose over time. Biological outcomes included baseline RAS biomarkers (renin, angiotensin-I, angiotensin-II, and angiotensin-I/angiotensin-II ratio), and the change in renin from 0 to 3 h., Results: We included n = 321 patients, of whom, 270 were ACEi and ARB-unexposed, 29 were ACEi-exposed and 22 ARB-exposed. In ACEi/ARB-unexposed patients, angiotensin-treated patients, compared to placebo, had higher hour-1 mean arterial pressure (9.1 mmHg [95% CI 7.6-10.1], p < 0.0001), lower norepinephrine equivalent dose over 48-h (p = 0.0037), and lower study-drug dose over 48-h (p < 0.0001). ACEi-exposed patients treated with angiotensin-II showed similarly higher hour-1 mean arterial pressure compared to ACEi/ARB-unexposed (difference in treatment-effect: - 2.2 mmHg [95% CI - 7.0-2.6], p interaction  = 0.38), but a greater reduction in norepinephrine equivalent dose (p interaction  = 0.0031) and study-drug dose (p interaction  < 0.0001) over 48-h. In contrast, ARB-exposed patients showed an attenuated effect of angiotensin-II on hour-1 mean arterial pressure versus ACEi/ARB-unexposed (difference in treatment-effect: - 6.0 mmHg [95% CI - 11.5 to - 0.6], p interaction  = 0.0299), norepinephrine equivalent dose (p interaction  < 0.0001), and study-drug dose (p interaction  = 0.0008). Baseline renin levels and angiotensin-I/angiotensin-II ratios were highest in ACEi-exposed patients. Finally, angiotensin-II treatment reduced hour-3 renin in ACEi/ARB-unexposed and ACEi-exposed patients but not in ARB-exposed patients., Conclusions: In vasodilatory shock patients, the cardiovascular and biological RAS response to angiotensin-II differed based upon prior exposure to ACEi and ARB medications. ACEi-exposure was associated with increased angiotensin II responsiveness, whereas ARB-exposure was associated with decreased responsiveness. These findings have clinical implications for patient selection and dosage of angiotensin II in vasodilatory shock. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.Gov Identifier: NCT02338843 (Registered January 14th 2015)., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Valsartan is commonly used for cardiac conditions. In 2018, the Food and Drug Administration recalled generic valsartan due to the detection of impurities. Our objective was to determine if heart failure patients receiving valsartan at the recall date had a greater likelihood of unfavorable outcomes than patients using comparable antihypertensives., Methods: We conducted a cohort study of Optum's de-identified Clinformatics® Datamart (July 2017-January 2019). Heart failure patients with commercial or Medicare Advantage insurance who received valsartan were compared to persons who received non-recalled angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and angiotensin converting enzyme-inhibitors (ACE-Is) for 1 year prior and including the recall date. Outcomes included a composite for all-cause hospitalization, emergency department (ED), and urgent care (UC) use and a measure of cardiac events which included hospitalizations for acute myocardial infarction and hospitalizations/ED/UC visits for stroke/transient ischemic attack, heart failure or hypertension at 6-months post-recall. Cox proportional hazard models with propensity score weighting compared the risk of outcomes between groups., Results: Of the 87 130 adherent patients, 15% were valsartan users and 85% were users of non-recalled ARBs/ACE-Is. Valsartan use was not associated with an increased risk of all-cause hospitalization/ED/UC use six-months post-recall (HR 1.00; 95% CI 0.96-1.03), compared with individuals taking non-recalled ARBs/ACE-Is. Similarly, cardiac events 6-months post-recall did not differ between individuals on valsartan and non-recalled ARBs/ACE-Is (HR 1.04; 95% CI 0.97-1.12)., Conclusions: The valsartan recall did not affect short-term outcomes of heart failure patients. However, the recall potentially disrupted the medication regimens of patients, possibly straining the healthcare system., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objectives: To investigate differences in the incidence of enteropathy or intestinal malabsorption in patients taking angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI), calcium channel blocker (CCB), and beta blockers (BBs) at a single center in Korea., Methods: In this retrospective study, we utilized data from the Yangsan electronic medical records to identify 129,169 patients. These individuals were prescribed olmesartan, other ARBs, ACEI, CCB, and BBs between November 2008 and February 2021., Results: Of the 44,775 patients, 51 (0.11%) were observed to have enteropathy or intestinal malabsorption. Compared with the ACEI group, the adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for enteropathy and intestinal malabsorption were OR=1.313 (95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.188-6.798], p =0.893) for olmesartan, OR=0.915 (95% CI: [0.525-1.595], p =0.754) for the other ARBs, OR=0.928 (95% CI: [0.200-4.307]; p =0.924) for the CCB, and OR=0.663 (95% CI: [0.151-2.906]; p =0.586) for the BBs group. These findings were adjusted for factors such as age, gender, duration of antihypertensive medication, and comorbidities., Conclusion: In a retrospective cohort study of patients on antihypertensive medications, no significant difference was found in the incidence of enteropathy or intestinal malabsorption when ACEI was compared to olmesartan, other ARBs, CCB, and BBs., (Copyright: © Saudi Medical Journal.)

Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Background and Aims: Haemodynamic instability is associated with peri-operative myocardial injury, particularly in patients receiving renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors (angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers). Whether stopping RAS inhibitors to minimise hypotension, or continuing RAS inhibitors to avoid hypertension, reduces peri-operative myocardial injury remains unclear., Methods: From 31 July 2017 to 1 October 2021, patients aged ≥60 years undergoing elective non-cardiac surgery were randomly assigned to either discontinue or continue RAS inhibitors prescribed for existing medical conditions in six UK centres. Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors were withheld for different durations (2-3 days) before surgery, according to their pharmacokinetic profile. The primary outcome, masked to investigators, clinicians, and patients, was myocardial injury [plasma high-sensitivity troponin-T (hs-TnT) ≥ 15 ng/L within 48 h after surgery, or ≥5 ng/L increase when pre-operative hs-TnT ≥15 ng/L]. Pre-specified adverse haemodynamic events occurring within 48 h of surgery included acute hypertension (>180 mmHg) and hypotension requiring vasoactive therapy., Results: Two hundred and sixty-two participants were randomized to continue (n = 132) or stop (n = 130) RAS inhibitors. Myocardial injury occurred in 58 (48.3%) patients randomized to discontinue, compared with 50 (41.3%) patients who continued, RAS inhibitors [odds ratio (for continuing): 0.77; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45-1.31]. Hypertensive adverse events were more frequent when RAS inhibitors were stopped [16 (12.4%)], compared with 7 (5.3%) who continued RAS inhibitors [odds ratio (for continuing): 0.4; 95% CI 0.16-1.00]. Hypotension rates were similar when RAS inhibitors were stopped [12 (9.3%)] or continued [11 (8.4%)]., Conclusions: Discontinuing RAS inhibitors before non-cardiac surgery did not reduce myocardial injury, and could increase the risk of clinically significant acute hypertension. These findings require confirmation in future studies., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: There is limited evidence to inform the association between the intake of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) and intraoperative blood pressure (BP) changes in an ambulatory surgery population., Methods: Adult patients who underwent ambulatory surgery and were discharged on the same day or within 24 hours of their procedure were enrolled in this prospective cohort study. The primary outcome of the study was early intraoperative hypotension (first 15 minutes of induction). Secondary outcomes included any hypotension, BP variability, and recovery. Hypotension was defined as a decrease in systolic BP of >30% from baseline for ≥5 minutes or a mean BP of <55 mm Hg. Four exposure groups were compared (no antihypertensives, ACEI/ARB intake <10 hours before surgery, ACEI/ARB intake ≥10 hours before surgery, and other antihypertensives)., Results: Of the 537 participants, early hypotension was observed in 25% (n = 134), and any hypotension in 41.5% (n = 223). Early hypotension occurred in 30% (29 of 98) and 41% (17 of 41) with the intake of ACEI/ARBs <10 and ≥10 hours before surgery, respectively, compared to 30% (9 of 30) with other antihypertensives and 21% (79 of 368) with no antihypertensives ( P = .02). Those on antihypertensives also experienced any hypotension more frequently than those who were not on antihypertensives ( P < .001). After adjusting for age and baseline BP in a regression analysis, antihypertensive exposure groups were observed to be associated only with any intraoperative hypotension ( P = .012). In the ACEI/ARB subset, there was no evidence of an association between time since the last ACEI/ARB dose, and hypotension or minimum mean or systolic BP. Compared to normal baseline BP, BP ≥ 140/90 mm Hg increased the odds of early and any hypotension (odds ratio [OR], 3.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1-7.1 and OR, 7.7; 95% CI, 3.7-14.9, respectively; P < .001). Intraoperative variability in systolic and diastolic BP demonstrated significant differences with age, baseline BP, and antihypertensive exposure group ( P < .001)., Conclusions: Early and any hypotension occurred more frequently in those on antihypertensives than those not on antihypertensives. Unadjusted associations between antihypertensive exposure and intraoperative hypotension were largely explained by baseline hypertension rather than the timing of ACEI/ARBs or type of antihypertensive exposure. Patients with hypertension and on treatment experience more intraoperative BP variability and should be monitored appropriately., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 International Anesthesia Research Society.)

The aims of this study is to evaluate the association between angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE-I), angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARBs) and/or statin use with the risk of pneumonia, as well as and with in-hospital and short-term outpatient mortality in hospitalized older patients with pneumonia. Patients aged 65 years or older hospitalized in internal medicine and/or geriatric wards throughout Italy and enrolled in the REPOSI (REgistro Politerapuie SIMI-Società Italiana di Medicina Interna) register from 2010 to 2019 were screened to assess the diagnosis of pneumonia and classified on whether or not they were prescribed with at least one drug among ACE-I, ARBs, and/or statins. Further study outcomes were mortality during hospital stay and at 3 months after hospital discharge. Among 5717 cases included (of whom 18.0% with pneumonia), 2915 (51.0%) were prescribed at least one drug among ACE-I, ARBs, and statins. An inverse association was found between treatment with ACE-I or ARBs and pneumonia (OR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.65-0.95). A higher effect was found among patients treated with ACE-I or ARBs in combination with statins (OR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.52-0.85). This study confirmed in the real-world setting that these largely used medications may reduce the risk of pneumonia in older people, who chronically take them for cardiovascular conditions., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Società Italiana di Medicina Interna (SIMI).)

Background: Large cardiovascular outcomes trials in individuals with heart failure, with and without diabetes, have demonstrated a significant risk reduction in the composite outcome of cardiovascular death or hospitalizations for heart failure with SGLT2 inhibitor therapy. These positive outcomes have led to the recommendation that SGLT2 inhibitors serve as backbone therapy in patients with heart failure reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). To date, there has not been enough participants in clinical trials on concomitant SGLT2 inhibitor and angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor therapy to evaluate the benefits and risks of combination therapy with these two agents outside of smaller subgroup analyses. Case Summary: This case describes a Black female with diabetes meeting her glycemic targets and concomitant stable NYHA FC II HFrEF on guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) with sacubitril/valsartan, spironolactone and metoprolol succinate who developed severe hypotension and dehydration requiring hospitalization after initiation of SGLT2 inhibitor therapy. Practice Implications: This case report raises the question of whether those with type 2 diabetes, and/or those on background angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor therapy, who are euvolemic or sensitive to diuretic therapy should be started on lower dose dapagliflozin and titrated to 10 mg daily based on response. It also raises awareness to the potential increased diuretic effect produced with concomitant use of sacubitril/valsartan and dapagliflozin. Caution and education to mitigate the risk for volume depletion should be provided to those patients who are euvolemic and initiated on a SGLT2 inhibitor, regardless of their background diuretic and GDMT. Conclusion: Future research should focus on the benefits and safety considerations and provide education on how to best initiate and adjust SGLT2 inhibitors in the setting of sacubitril/valsartan use in diverse heart failure patient populations., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Dr. Christine Schumacher is on the Speakers Bureau for Abbott and participated on an Advisory Board for Dexcom.

Aims: Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) therapy is a cornerstone in the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), with significant improvement in mortality as well as morbidity and quality of life. However, maximal ARNI doses often result in hypotension. Recent studies with 'real world' experience suggest that lower doses of ARNI are as effective as higher doses.In order to evaluate the symptomatic effect of low-dose ARNI in HFrEF patients, we analyzed physical activity data obtained via home monitoring of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs)., Methods: We retrospectively analyzed physical activity data obtained from HFrEF patients with CIED-active home monitoring during the years 2021-2022. Patients with ARNI therapy were further divided into subgroups according to the administered dose. Low-dose ARNI included doses of up to 24/26 mg sacubitril/valsartan daily. Intermediate dose and high dose included doses of 72/78-120/130 mg/day, and 144/156-194/206 mg/day, respectively., Results: A total of 122 patients had home monitoring-compatible CIEDs and HFrEF during the study period. Sixty-four of these patients were treated with ARNI. Administration of low-dose ARNI resulted in a 20% increase in daily activity when compared with patients without ARNI treatment ( P  = 0.038). Change in physical activity of patients in the intermediate-dose and high-dose groups was not significant. Younger patients, patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy, and patients without diabetes mellitus were more physically active., Conclusion: Low-dose ARNI had a beneficial effect on physical activity in HFrEF patients. MH via CIED provided real-life objective data for patients' follow-up., (Copyright © 2024 Italian Federation of Cardiology - I.F.C. All rights reserved.)

Background: Statin use has been studied and confirmed to have a beneficial impact on perioperative carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) outcomes. The benefits of Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-I) in hypertension, ischemic heart disease, heart failure, diabetes mellitus, and renal disease are well-known; however, the impact of continuing or withholding ACE-Is/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) on CEA and CAS outcomes is not addressed well in the literature. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of preoperative statin use combined with ACE-Is/ARBs in patients undergoing CEA or CAS on mortality and morbidity using a multi-institutional database., Methods: Using the data of all patients who underwent carotid artery revascularization, including CEA, transcarotid artery revascularization, and transfemoral carotid artery stenting from 2016 to 2021 in the Vascular Quality Initiative data, we determined as our primary outcome 30-day mortality/stroke after carotid revascularization based on periop exposure to statins alone, or the combination of statins and ACE-Is/ARBs. Secondary outcomes were postop myocardial infarction and postop congestive heart failure. Poisson regression with robust variance was used to determine postop outcomes comparing the combination of statin and ACE-Is/ARBs group with statins alone group., Results: A total of 131,285 patients were included in the study, with 59,860 (46%) patients receiving statin only, and 71,425 (54%) receiving both statin and ACE-Is/ARBs preoperatively. Both patient groups differed significantly in preop clinical and demographic characteristics. After adjusting for potential confounders, the statins plus ACE-I/ARB group had a 12% lower risk of postop mortality/stroke (Incident Rate Ratio comparing Statin/ACE group to Statins Only group [IRR] 0.88, 95% confidence interval 0.81-0.95, P = 0.001), 18% lower risk of postop congestive heart failure (IRR 0.82, 95% CI 0.68-0.98, P = 0.029), and similar risk of postop myocardial infarction (IRR 1.05 95% confidence interval 0.91-1.20, P = 0.54) compared to the statin-only group., Conclusion: Statins combined with ACE-Is/ARBs perioperatively offer better protection compared to statins alone in patients undergoing carotid revascularization surgery. We recommend the continuation of ACE-Is/ARBs use in patients undergoing carotid revascularization, especially if they have concurrent hypertension. Further prospective studies are needed to evaluate the benefit of adding ACE-Is/ARBs., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Although diuretics play an important role in triple-whammy acute kidney injury (AKI), it is unclear whether the type of diuretic influences the risk of triple-whammy AKI. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether vasopressin receptor antagonists affect triple-whammy AKI. This cross-sectional study used disproportionality analysis of VigiBase data to assess the risk of AKI with various diuretics. Although multiple logistic regression analysis showed that aldosterone antagonists (odds ratio [OR] 2.19, 95% CI 2.01-2.37), loop diuretics (OR 4.40, 95% CI 4.07-4.76) and thiazide diuretics (OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.83-2.15) increased the risk of AKI in patients who received non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi), vasopressin receptor antagonists did not increase the risk of AKI in those patients. Vasopressin receptor antagonists might not influence the development of triple-whammy AKI., (© 2023 British Pharmacological Society.)

BACKGROUND Angioedema is non-pitting edema that occurs in the deep layers of the skin and subcutaneous tissue due to vascular leakage of plasma resulting from 1 of 2 major pathophysiological processes: mast cell-mediated angioedema and bradykinin-mediated angioedema. While it is a well-recognized adverse reaction of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, the association of angioedema with angiotensin receptor blockers is relatively less studied. Direct local trauma, although rarely, has been suggested to induce angioedema under certain conditions. We present a unique case of direct, local, trauma-related angioedema in a patient on an angiotensin receptor blocker. CASE REPORT The patient, an 83-year-old woman on telmisartan for hypertension, hit her neck against the edge of a chair during a fall. Shortly thereafter, she developed progressive airway compromise due to airway angioedema, as noted on direct laryngoscopy. A contrast CT scan of the neck also noted edema of the periglottic and supraglottic regions. She required intravenous corticosteroid administration and intubation in the emergency room and was successfully extubated 3 days after admission. She had no prior history of angioedema or allergy. We hypothesize that increased levels of circulatory bradykinin in the setting of telmisartan, combined with a local release of bradykinin from trauma, was the main pathophysiologic cause of the angioedema. CONCLUSIONS This case report highlights the rare and often forgotten adverse reaction of angioedema with use of angiotensin receptor blockers and confirms the finding of local trauma as a possible trigger.