We found predominantly moderate quality evidence that all-cause mortality is similar when first-line RAS inhibitors are compared to other first-line antihypertensive agents .
First-line thiazides caused less HF and stroke than first-line RAS inhibitors .
Compared with first-line CCBs , first-line RAS inhibitors reduced HF but increased stroke .
The magnitude of the reduction in HF exceeded the increase in stroke .
The small differences in effect on blood pressure between the different classes of drugs did not correlate with the differences in the primary outcomes
BACKGROUND Renin-angiotensin system ( RAS ) inhibitors are widely prescribed for treatment of hypertension , especially for diabetic patients on the basis of postulated advantages for the reduction of diabetic nephropathy and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality .
Despite widespread use of angiotensin converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers ( ARBs ) for hypertension in both diabetic and non-diabetic patients , the efficacy and safety of RAS inhibitors compared to other antihypertensive drug classes remains unclear .
OBJECTIVES To evaluate the benefits and harms of first-line RAS inhibitors compared to other first-line antihypertensive drugs in patients with hypertension .
Effect of blood pressure lowering and antihypertensive drug class on progression of hypertensive kidney disease: results from the AASK trial.
CONTEXT Hypertension is a leading cause of end-stage renal disease ( ESRD ) in the United States , with no known treatment to prevent progressive declines leading to ESRD . OBJECTIVE To compare the effects of 2 levels of blood pressure ( BP ) control and 3 antihypertensive drug classes on glomerular filtration rate ( GFR ) decline in hypertension . DESIGN R and omized 3 x 2 factorial trial with enrollment from February 1995 to September 1998 . SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS A total of 1094 African Americans aged 18 to 70 years with hypertensive renal disease ( GFR , 20 - 65 mL/min per 1.73 m(2 ) ) were recruited from 21 clinical centers throughout the United States and followed up for 3 to 6.4 years . INTERVENTIONS Participants were r and omly assigned to 1 of 2 mean arterial pressure goals , 102 to 107 mm Hg ( usual ; n = 554 ) or 92 mm Hg or less ( lower ; n = 540 ) , and to initial treatment with either a beta-blocker ( metoprolol 50 - 200 mg/d ; n = 441 ) , an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor ( ramipril 2.5 - 10 mg/d ; n = 436 ) or a dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker , ( amlodipine 5 - 10 mg/d ; n = 217 ) . Open-label agents were added to achieve the assigned BP goals . MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Rate of change in GFR ( GFR slope ) ; clinical composite outcome of reduction in GFR by 50 % or more ( or > or = 25 mL/min per 1.73 m2 ) from baseline , ESRD , or death . Three primary treatment comparisons were specified : lower vs usual BP goal ; ramipril vs metoprolol ; and amlodipine vs metoprolol . RESULTS Achieved BP averaged ( SD ) 128/78 ( 12/8 ) mm Hg in the lower BP group and 141/85 ( 12/7 ) mm Hg in the usual BP group . The mean ( SE ) GFR slope from baseline through 4 years did not differ significantly between the lower BP group ( -2.21 [ 0.17 ] mL/min per 1.73 m2 per year ) and the usual BP group ( -1.95 [ 0.17 ] mL/min per 1.73 m2 per year ; P = .24 ) , and the lower BP goal did not significantly reduce the rate of the clinical composite outcome ( risk reduction for lower BP group = 2 % ; 95 % confidence interval [ CI ] , -22 % to 21 % ; P = .85 ) . None of the drug group comparisons showed consistent significant differences in the GFR slope . However , compared with the metoprolol and amlodipine groups , the ramipril group manifested risk reductions in the clinical composite outcome of 22 % ( 95 % CI , 1%-38 % ; P = .04 ) and 38 % ( 95 % CI , 14%-56 % ; P = .004 ) , respectively . There was no significant difference in the clinical composite outcome between the amlodipine and metoprolol groups . CONCLUSIONS No additional benefit of slowing progression of hypertensive nephrosclerosis was observed with the lower BP goal . Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors appear to be more effective than beta-blockers or dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers in slowing GFR decline
We found predominantly moderate quality evidence that all-cause mortality is similar when first-line RAS inhibitors are compared to other first-line antihypertensive agents .
First-line thiazides caused less HF and stroke than first-line RAS inhibitors .
Compared with first-line CCBs , first-line RAS inhibitors reduced HF but increased stroke .
The magnitude of the reduction in HF exceeded the increase in stroke .
The small differences in effect on blood pressure between the different classes of drugs did not correlate with the differences in the primary outcomes
BACKGROUND Renin-angiotensin system ( RAS ) inhibitors are widely prescribed for treatment of hypertension , especially for diabetic patients on the basis of postulated advantages for the reduction of diabetic nephropathy and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality .
Despite widespread use of angiotensin converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers ( ARBs ) for hypertension in both diabetic and non-diabetic patients , the efficacy and safety of RAS inhibitors compared to other antihypertensive drug classes remains unclear .
OBJECTIVES To evaluate the benefits and harms of first-line RAS inhibitors compared to other first-line antihypertensive drugs in patients with hypertension .