Abstract | PURPOSE OF REVIEW: RECENT FINDINGS: The role of ARBs in the prevention of MI has not only been disputed, but also has at times cast the class as a causative agent in increasing the risk of MI. This potentially deleterious effect was proposed after results from the Valsartan Antihypertensive Long-Term Use Evaluation (VALUE) trial, in which the use of valsartan (ARB) was compared with amlodipine in patients at high cardiovascular disease risk, found an excess of MIs among patients in the valsartan arm. Subsequent clinical trials and meta-analyses have largely laid to rest the question of whether ARBs contribute to cardiovascular risk. SUMMARY: The definitive answer of whether ARBs are effective, if at all, in preventing MI remains difficult to parse out. Current evidence from newer clinical trials and comprehensive meta-analyses suggests that ARBs, while effective antihypertensive agents that protect against risk of stroke, renal disease, diabetes, and heart failure, are likely to have a neutral effect upon reduction of MI when compared with other antihypertensive agents.
|
Authors | Amita Singh, Sripal Bangalore |
Journal | Current opinion in cardiology
(Curr Opin Cardiol)
Vol. 27
Issue 4
Pg. 381-5
(Jul 2012)
ISSN: 1531-7080 [Electronic] United States |
PMID | 22525329
(Publication Type: Journal Article, Review)
|
Chemical References |
- Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers
- Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors
- Antihypertensive Agents
|
Topics |
- Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers
(adverse effects, therapeutic use)
- Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors
(adverse effects, therapeutic use)
- Antihypertensive Agents
(adverse effects, therapeutic use)
- Humans
- Myocardial Infarction
(prevention & control)
- Renin-Angiotensin System
(drug effects)
|