ReviewCardiology research and practice2021
A Meta-Analysis on the Effect and Safety of LCZ696 in the Treatment of Hypertension.
Review in Cardiology research and practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Difference between Sacubitril Valsartan and Valsartan on Vascular Endothelial Function, APN, MMP-9, and BNP Levels in Patients with Hypertension and Chronic Heart Failure.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2022Trial
- Network meta-analysis of sacubitril/valsartan for the treatment of essential hypertension.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2023Review
- Efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan on heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo systematically evaluate the differences in effect and safety of LCZ696 and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in the treatment of hypertension.
methodsWe searched PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Ovid, collected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about the effect and safety of LCZ696 and ARBs in hypertensive patients, extracted relevant data and evaluated the quality of the included literature according to the RCT quality evaluation standard recommended by Cochrane Reviewer's Handbook, using RevMan 5.3, and performed meta-analysis.
resultsEight RCTs studies were included, with a total of 4313 patients. Compared with ARBs, LCZ696 can better reduce systolic blood pressure (msSBP) (WMD -4.29 mmHg; 95% CI: -5.37 to -3.21;
conclusionLCZ696 can significantly reduce the blood pressure level of patients with hypertension, but it is necessary to pay attention to whether the patient will experience coughing after taking the drug.
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.