ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2024
Retrospective Analysis of Sacubitril/Valsartan vs Benazepril for Treating Heart Failure Following Acute Myocardial Infarction.
Article in International journal of general medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To retrospectively compare the efficacy of Sacubitril/Valsartan and Benazepril in the treatment of heart failure in patients following acute myocardial infarction. Methods: A retrospective analysis of clinical data was conducted for 103 patients with heart failure following acute myocardial infarction admitted to our hospital from January 2021 to January 2024. All patients met complete inclusion and exclusion criteria. Based on the treatment interventions received, they were divided into a control group (n=51) and an observation group (n=52). All patients received percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and conventional drug treatment upon admission. The control group received additional treatment with benazepril, while the observation group received Sacubitril/Valsartan on top of the baseline treatment. A comparison was made between the two groups in terms of clinical treatment outcomes, cardiac function indicators [left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV), left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDD), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF)], levels of inflammatory markers [high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6)], N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), incidence of adverse reactions, major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), and 6-minute walking distance (6MWD). Results: No patients were lost to follow-up. After six months of treatment, the observation group demonstrated significantly greater improvements in left ventricular function parameters (LVESV, LVEDD, and LVEF) and reductions in inflammatory markers (hs-CRP, IL-6) and NT-proBNP levels compared to the control group (P < 0.05). The observation group also had a significantly lower incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) (11.54% vs 31.37%, P < 0.05) and a greater improvement in 6-minute walking distance (P < 0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions was comparable between the two groups (P > 0.05). Conclusion: Sacubitril/Valsartan is a safe and effective treatment for heart failure post-AMI, offering significant improvements in cardiac function, inflammatory response, exercise capacity, and a reduction in MACE risk.
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.