Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16598512›Full record

ArticleClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2006

ACE inhibition in secondary prevention: are the results controversial?

Erik B Friedrich, Koon K Teo, Michael Böhm

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Recent achievements in the management of Raynaud's phenomenon.Vascular health and risk management · 2010
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Prehospital cooling with hypothermia caps (PreCoCa): a feasibility study.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2008
    Article
  11. RAS blockade with ARB and ACE inhibitors: current perspective on rationale and patient selection.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2008
    Review
  12. Hotline update of clinical trials and registries presented at the ACC and SCAI-ACCi2 meeting 2008 in Chicago.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2008
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Lichenoid reactions to gold from dental restorations and exposure to gold through intracoronary implant of a gold-plated stent.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2006
    Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Erik B FriedrichKlinik für Innere Medizin III, Universitätsklinikum des Saarlandes, Kirrberger Strasse, 66421 Homburg/Saar, Germany. efriedrich@med-in.uni.sb.de
Koon K Teo
Michael Böhm
Universitätsklinikum des Saarlandes · DEPopulation Health Research Institute · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Results from the HOPE and EUROPA trials showed that ACE inhibitors lower cardiovascular mortality of patients with atherosclerosis and preserved left ventricular function. However, despite apparently adequate study design, the recently conducted PEACE trial detected no benefit of an additional ACE inhibitor treatment in patients with coronary artery disease and no heart failure with respect to cardiovascular risk reduction. One of the main reasons for this discrepancy might be the lower cardiovascular baseline risk of the PEACE study population, which was more intensively treated with lipid lowering drugs and myocardial revascularization prior to enrollment than patients in HOPE or EUROPA. Another reason for the negative results of PEACE might be substance-specific differences between individual ACE inhibitors (trandolapril in PEACE, ramipril in HOPE, and perindopril in EUROPA) in their clinical efficacy to reduce cardiovascular end-points. The PEACE trial did not achieve the originally projected sample size and the addition of a soft end-point of revascularization has not been helpful. While the results from the PEACE trial suggest that low-risk patients with coronary artery disease and with preserved left ventricular function who receive intensive standard therapy including lipid lowering and coronary revascularization may not benefit from additional ACE inhibition therapy, this conclusion should be made with caution. A number of reasons, other than drug treatment efficacy, may explain the neutral results in the PEACE trial. Further studies are needed to try to resolve this issue. In the meantime, the overwhelming data still support the use of ACE inhibitors in patients with coronary artery disease with preserved left ventricular function.

Indexed as

Angioplasty, Balloon, CoronaryAngiotensin-Converting Enzyme InhibitorsCardiovascular DiseasesCoronary Artery BypassCoronary DiseaseDose-Response Relationship, DrugHumansIndolesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicVentricular Function, LeftAngiotensin-Converting Enzyme InhibitorsIndolestrandolapril

Identifiers

PMID16598512
OpenAlexW2074393549

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.