ReviewInternal and emergency medicine2017
The benefit of angiotensin AT1 receptor blockers for early treatment of hypertensive patients.
Review in Internal and emergency medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Naringenin Ameliorates Renovascular Hypertensive Renal Damage by Normalizing the Balance of Renin-Angiotensin System Components in Rats.International journal of medical sciences · 2019Article
- Interplay between the renin-angiotensin system, the canonical WNT/β-catenin pathway and PPARγ in hypertension.Current hypertension reports · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
ESC guidelines for management of arterial hypertension allow one to choose among five classes of antihypertensive drugs indiscriminately. They are based on the principle that in the management of hypertensive patients, it is fundamental to reduce blood pressure (BP), independently of the utilized drug. However, it has been demonstrated that the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) plays a relevant role in the hypertensive-derived development and progression of organ damage. Thus, antihypertensive drugs interfering with the RAS should be preferred in preventing and reducing target organ damage. The availability of two classes of drugs, ACE-inhibitors and angiotensin AT1 receptor blockers (ARBs), both interfering with the RAS, makes the choice between them difficult. Both pharmacological strategies offer an effective BP control, and a substantial improvement of prognosis in different associated pathologies. Regarding cardiovascular prevention, ACE-inhibitors have an extensive scientific literature regarding utility in high-risk patients. Nevertheless, there is evidence to support the concept that in the early phases of organ tissue damage, the RAS is activated, but the ACE pathway producing angiotensin II is not always employed. Accordingly, ACE-inhibitors appear to be less effective, whereas ARBs have a greater beneficial action in the initial stages of atherosclerotic disease. Moreover, patients undergoing ARBs therapy show a substantially lower risk of therapy discontinuation when compared to those treated with ACE-inhibitors, because of a better tolerability. In conclusion, ACE-inhibitors should be used in patients who have already developed organ damage, but tolerate this drug well, while ARBs should be the first choice in naïve hypertensive patients without organ damage or at the initial stages of disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.