ArticleJournal of applied biomedicine2023
Comparison of cardiocerebrovascular disease incidence between angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker users in a real-world cohort.
Article in Journal of applied biomedicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- National Heart Center/Saudi Heart Association 2025 Guidelines for Cardiovascular Diseases Prevention and Risk Assessment.Saudi medical journal · 2026Guideline
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBoth angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) are known to be effective in managing cardiovascular diseases, but more evidence supports the use of an ACEI. This study investigated the difference in cardiovascular disease incidence between relatively low-compliance ACEIs and high-compliance ARBs in the clinical setting.
methodsPatients who were first prescribed ACEIs or ARBs at two tertiary university hospitals in Korea were observed in this retrospective cohort study for the incidence of heart failure, angina, acute myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular disease, ischemic heart disease, and major adverse cardiovascular events for 5 years after the first prescription. Additionally, 5-year Kaplan-Meier survival curves were used based on the presence or absence of statins.
resultsOverall, 2,945 and 9,189 patients were prescribed ACEIs and ARBs, respectively. When compared to ACEIs, the incidence of heart failure decreased by 52% in those taking ARBs (HR [95% CI] = 0.48 [0.39-0.60], P < 0.001), and the incidence of cerebrovascular disease increased by 62% (HR [95% CI] = 1.62 [1.26-2.07], P < 0.001). The incidence of ischemic heart disease (P = 0.223) and major adverse cardiovascular events (P = 0.374) did not differ significantly between the two groups.
conclusionsARBs were not inferior to ACEIs in relation to reducing the incidence of cardiocerebrovascular disease in the clinical setting; however, there were slight differences for each disease. The greatest strength of real-world evidence is that it allows the follow-up of specific drug use, including drug compliance. Large-scale studies on the effects of relatively low-compliance ACEIs and high-compliance ARBs on cardiocerebrovascular disease are warranted in the future.
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.