Journal Home
Search for

Volume 156, Issue 3, Pages 549-555 (September 2008)


View previous. 26 of 43 View next.

Angiotensin inhibition in renovascular disease: A population-based cohort study

Daniel G. Hackam, MD, PhDaCorresponding Author Informationemail address, Minh L. Duong-Hua, MScb, Muhammad Mamdani, PharmD, MA, MPHbc, Ping Li, PhDb, Sheldon W. Tobe, MDd, J. David Spence, MDa, Amit X. Garg, MD, PhDbe

Received 28 January 2008; accepted 6 May 2008. published online 21 July 2008.

Background

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers effectively reduce blood pressure in patients with renovascular disease (RVD); yet, randomized cardiovascular prevention trials of these drugs typically exclude individuals with this condition.

Patients and Methods

We studied the association of renin-angiotensin system inhibition with prognosis in a population-based cohort comprising 3,570 patients with RVD in Ontario, Canada; slightly more than half (n = 1,857, 53%) were prescribed angiotensin inhibitors. The primary outcome was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Secondary outcomes included individual cardiovascular and renal events.

Results

Patients receiving angiotensin inhibitors had a significantly lower risk for the primary outcome during follow-up (10.0 vs 13.0 events per 100 patient-years at risk, multivariable adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.70, 95% CI 0.59-0.82). In addition, hospitalization for congestive heart failure (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.53-0.90), chronic dialysis initiation (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.42-0.92), and mortality (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.47-0.68) was lower in treated patients. Conversely, patients receiving angiotensin inhibitors were significantly more likely to be hospitalized for acute renal failure during follow-up (HR 1.87, 95% CI 1.05-3.33; 1.2 vs 0.6 events per 100 patient-years at risk).

Conclusions

These data emphasize the high vascular risk of RVD and suggest that angiotensin inhibitors may improve prognosis in this setting at the expense of acute renal toxicity. If the latter are selected in the management of RVD, renal function parameters should be assiduously followed.

a Division of Clinical Pharmacology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada

b Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

c Department of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

d Division of Nephrology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

e Division of Nephrology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada

Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: Daniel G. Hackam, Room 100K, Siebens Research Building 1400 Western Road, London, Ontario, Canada N6G 2V2.

 The study was supported by an unrestricted research grant from the University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada. None of the funding sources participated in the design or conduct of the research; collection, management, analysis, or interpretation of the data; or the preparation, review, and approval of the manuscript.

 No conflicts of interest exist for D.G.H., M.L.D., M.M., P.L., or A.X.G. J.D.S. has consulted for Novartis and received lecture fees from Solvay. SWT has participated in research studies, advisory panels, and lectures with support from AstraZeneca, Abbott, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Sanofi-Aventis, Merck, and Novartis.

PII: S0002-8703(08)00385-2

doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2008.05.013


View previous. 26 of 43 View next.