Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29642146›Full record

SynthesisMedicine2018

Comparison of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers on cardiovascular outcomes in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis.

Xiaodan Lv, Yingshi Zhang, Yixuan Niu, Qi Song, Qingchun Zhao

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Coronary Large Conductance CaFrontiers in physiology · 2021
    Review
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.

Xiaodan LvDepartment of Pharmacy, General Hospital of Shenyang Military Area Command School of Life Science and Biopharmaceutis, Shenyang Pharmaceutical University, Shenyang, China.
Yingshi Zhang
Yixuan Niu
Qi Song
Qingchun Zhao

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrevious studies seem to show different effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) on cardiovascular (CV) events in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Our objective was to analyze which are preferable on the incidence of all-cause mortality, CV death, and major CV events in hypertensive patients with T2DM.

methodsPubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to June 2016 with ACEI or ARBs as the intervention for hypertensive patients with T2DM. The primary end points were all-cause mortality and CV death. The secondary end points were myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, heart failure (HF), and CV events. Two investigators extracted the information independently. Data were pooled using a fixed-effects model or a random-effects model if significant heterogeneity was present.

resultsA total of 13 trials were included for analysis, 5 ACEI trials (24,976 patients) and 8 ARB trials (22,032 patients) followed for a mean of 3.8 years. Treatment with ACEI was associated with significantly reduction in all-cause mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.87; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.80-0.94], CV death (OR 0.81; 95% CI, 0.68-0.98), and other CV outcomes such as MI (0R 0.77; 95% CI, 0.66-0.90), stroke (OR 0.88; 95% CI, 0.78-0.99), HF (OR 0.65; 95% CI, 0.47-0.90), and CV events (OR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.73-0.95), whereas ARBs therapy had no significant reduction in the results of many primary and secondary outcomes.

conclusionThis meta-analysis suggests that treatment with ACEI showed a significant CV protection for all-cause mortality, CV death, and major CV events, whereas ARBs had no benefits on these outcomes except MI. In consideration of high mortality and morbidity, ACEI was preferable than ARBs on patients with hypertension and T2DM.

Indexed as

HypertensionAngiotensin-Converting Enzyme InhibitorsAngiotensin Receptor AntagonistsCardiovascular SystemDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2HumansOutcome Assessment, Health CareAngiotensin-Converting Enzyme InhibitorsAngiotensin Receptor Antagonists

Identifiers

PMID29642146
PMCPMC5908573

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.