Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24595033›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2014

Angiotensin II receptor blockers improve peripheral endothelial function: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Shuang Li, Yan Wu, Ge Yu, Qing Xia, Yawei Xu

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Neurocirculatory regulation and adaptations to exercise in chronic kidney disease.American journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology · 2023
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Cardiovascular risk in patients receiving antihypertensive drug treatment from the perspective of endothelial function.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2022
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Shuang LiDepartment of Cardiology, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Yan WuDepartment of Ophthalmology, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Ge YuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Qing XiaDepartment of Cardiology, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Yawei XuDepartment of Cardiology, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Tongji University · CNShanghai Tenth People's Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

OBJECTIVE(S): Several studies have assessed the effect of angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) on peripheral endothelial dysfunction as measured by flow-mediated vasodilatation (FMD), a widely-used indicator for endothelial function. We conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the effect in comparison to placebo or no treatment and other antihypertensives.

methodsMEDLINE, Cochrane library and EMBASE were searched to September 2013 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the effect of ARBs versus placebo or no treatment and other antihypertensives (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), calcium channel blockers (CCBs), β-blockers, diuretics) by forearm FMD. Furthermore, we also use meta-regression to analyze the relationship between the endothelial function and the duration of ARBs treatments.

resultsIn 11 trials including 590 patients, ARBs (n = 315) significantly improved FMD (1.36%, 95% confidence internal [CI]:1.28 to 1.44) versus placebo or no treatment (n = 275). In 16 trials that included 1028 patients, ARBs (n = 486) had a significant effect (0.59%, 95% CI: 0.25 to 0.94) on FMD when compared with other antihypertensives (n = 542). In 8 trials, ARBs (n = 174) had no significant effect (-0.14%, 95% CI: -0.32 to 0.03) compared with ACEI (n = 173). Compared with others, the benefits of ARBs, respectively, were 1.67% (95% CI: 0.65 to 0.93) in 7 trials with CCBs, 0.79% (95% CI: 0.42 to 1.01) with β-blockers in 3 trials and 0.9% (95% CI: 0.77 to 1.03) with diuretics in 3 trials. Importantly, we found ARBs were less effective in a long time span (95% CI: -1.990 to -0.622) than the first 6 months (95% CI: -0.484 to 0.360).

conclusionsThis study shows that ARBs improve peripheral endothelial function and are superior to CCBs, β-blockers and diuretics. However, the effect couldn't be maintained for a long time. In addition, there was no significant difference between ARBs and ACEI.

Indexed as

Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicAngiotensin Receptor AntagonistsEndothelium, VascularHumansPlacebosAngiotensin Receptor AntagonistsPlacebos

Identifiers

PMID24595033
PMCPMC3940822
OpenAlexW2048757170

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.