ArticleJACC. Advances2024
Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors or Angiotensin Receptor Blockers After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Meta-Analysis.
Article in JACC. Advances, 2024. 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.
- Clinical management of aortic valve regurgitation after left ventricular assist device implantation: prediction, assessment, and treatment strategies.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibitors After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: The Jury Is Still Out.JACC. Advances · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Persistent left ventricular hypertrophy after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been associated with poor outcomes. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), due to their favorable effects on ventricular remodeling, have been hypothesized to improve outcomes post-TAVR, yet there are no recommendations regarding their use. Objectives: This study aimed to compare the outcomes of patients receiving ACEIs/ARBs with those not receiving ACEIs/ARBs after TAVR. Methods: We performed a literature search on PubMed and Cochrane Library until June 14, 2023, and included all studies comparing clinical outcomes between patients given ACEIs/ARBs and those not given ACEIs/ARBs after TAVR. All-cause mortality was the primary outcome. We used a random effects model with appropriate corrections to calculate relative risk (RR) and CIs, with all analyses carried out using R v4.0.3. Results: We included ten studies on the use of ACEIs/ARBs post-TAVR. Patients on ACEIs/ARBs had lower risk of all-cause mortality (RR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.65-0.86, I Conclusions: We found that patients receiving ACEIs/ARBs had a lower risk of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and new-onset atrial fibrillation. Risk of other outcomes was similar to patients not receiving ACEIs/ARBs. Randomized clinical trials are needed to explore the benefits of ACEIs/ARBs post-TAVR, so that definitive guidelines can be developed.
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.