ArticleEuropean heart journal open2026
Impact of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers on cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular outcomes in patients at high/very-high cardiovascular risk without heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials
Article in European heart journal open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors show an edge over angiotensin II receptor blockers in cardiovascular outcomes.European heart journal open · 2026Article
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
Aims: To assess the impact of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-Is) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) on all-cause and cardiovascular (CV) mortality, as well as CV, cerebrovascular, and renal outcomes in patients at high/very-high CV risk without heart failure by a systematic review and meta-analysis of placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized trials. Methods and results: The CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, Ovid-MEDLINE, Ovid-Embase, Science Citation Index-Expanded, and WHO-ICTRP databases were searched between August and September 2023. Heart failure trials were excluded. The hypothesis of a homogeneous treatment effect between ACE-Is and ARBs was tested with a Cochran's Q statistic. The protocol for the systematic review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023452406) and the study reported as per PRISMA guidelines.17 trials (9 ACE-Is and 8 ARBs, total of 87 908 participants) were included. The event rates for all-cause mortality, CV mortality, and major CV events (MACEs) did not differ in the parallel placebo arms of ACE-I and ARB trials; however, compared to placebo, ACE-Is reduced the rate of CV mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 0.88; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78-0.99], all-cause mortality (HR 0.92; 95% CI 0.85-0.99) and myocardial infarction (HR 0.83; 95% CI 0.73-0.94), while ARBs did not. The rates of HF, stroke, and MACEs were significantly reduced by both drug classes. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors induced a greater reduction of CV mortality than ARBs ( Conclusion: In patients at high/very-high CV risk, ACE-Is were more protective against CV mortality than ARBs, supporting their preferential use for CV protection.
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.