ArticleBMC gastroenterology2025
Angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors and risk of acute pancreatitis: a matched cohort study.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStudies have reported inconsistent findings regarding the association between the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) and the risk of acute pancreatitis (AP). In this study we aimed to determine whether ACEis and ARBs are associated with an increased risk of AP.
methodsThis population-based, retrospective cohort study utilized TriNetX to compare AP incidence among new users of ACEIs and ARBs, with dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (dCCBs) as an active comparator. Propensity matching in a 1:1 ratio matched patients based on demography, comorbidities, and medications. Cox proportional hazard models were utilized to estimate hazard ratios (HRs).
resultsThe study cohort consisted of 3,749,482 ACEI users, 2,444,549 ARBs, and 3,735,923 dCCBs. ACEIs were associated with a significantly increased risk of AP compared to ARBs, with a HR of 1.32 (95% CI: 1.30–1.34). The increased risk of AP remained stable for up to five years, with hazard ratios (HRs) ranging from 1.32 to 1.57. These findings were consistent across secondary and sensitivity analyses. In contrast, ARB users had a significantly lower risk of AP at all follow-up time points.
conclusionACEI use is associated with an increased risk of AP compared to dCCBs, while ARB use is associated with a lower risk of AP.
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.