There was no clear evidence that proportional risk reductions in major cardiovascular disease differed by baseline disease history , except for diabetes and chronic kidney disease , for which smaller , but significant , risk reductions were detected .
β blockers were inferior to other drugs for the prevention of major cardiovascular disease events , stroke , and renal failure .
Calcium channel blockers were superior to other drugs for the prevention of stroke .
For the prevention of heart failure , calcium channel blockers were inferior and diuretics were superior to other drug classes .
INTERPRETATION Blood pressure lowering significantly reduces vascular risk across various baseline blood pressure levels and comorbidities .
BACKGROUND The benefits of blood pressure lowering treatment for prevention of cardiovascular disease are well established .
However , the extent to which these effects differ by baseline blood pressure , presence of comorbidities , or drug class is less clear .
We therefore performed a systematic review and meta- analysis to clarify these differences .
The effect of nisoldipine as compared with enalapril on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes and hypertension.
BACKGROUND It has recently been reported that the use of calcium-channel blockers for hypertension may be associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular complications . Because this issue remains controversial , we studied the incidence of such complications in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus and hypertension who were r and omly assigned to treatment with either the calcium-channel blocker nisoldipine or the angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor enalapril as part of a larger study . METHODS The Appropriate Blood Pressure Control in Diabetes ( ABCD ) Trial is a prospect i ve , r and omized , blinded trial comparing the effects of moderate control of blood pressure ( target diastolic pressure , 80 to 89 mm Hg ) with those of intensive control of blood pressure ( diastolic pressure , 75 mm Hg ) on the incidence and progression of complications of diabetes . The study also compared nisoldipine with enalapril as a first-line antihypertensive agent in terms of the prevention and progression of complications of diabetes . In the current study , we analyzed data on a secondary end point ( the incidence of myocardial infa rct ion ) in the subgroup of patients in the ABCD Trial who had hypertension . RESULTS Analysis of the 470 patients in the trial who had hypertension ( base-line diastolic blood pressure , > or = 90 mm Hg ) showed similar control of blood pressure , blood glucose and lipid concentrations , and smoking behavior in the nisoldipine group ( 237 patients ) and the enalapril group ( 233 patients ) throughout five years of follow-up . Using a multiple logistic-regression model with adjustment for cardiac risk factors , we found that nisoldipine was associated with a higher incidence of fatal and nonfatal myocardial infa rct ions ( a total of 24 ) than enalapril ( total , 4 ) ( risk ratio , 9.5 ; 95 percent confidence interval , 2.7 to 33.8 ) . CONCLUSIONS In this population of patients with diabetes and hypertension , we found a significantly higher incidence of fatal and nonfatal myocardial infa rct ion among those assigned to therapy with the calcium-channel blocker nisoldipine than among those assigned to receive enalapril . Since our findings are based on a secondary end point , they will require confirmation
There was no clear evidence that proportional risk reductions in major cardiovascular disease differed by baseline disease history , except for diabetes and chronic kidney disease , for which smaller , but significant , risk reductions were detected .
β blockers were inferior to other drugs for the prevention of major cardiovascular disease events , stroke , and renal failure .
Calcium channel blockers were superior to other drugs for the prevention of stroke .
For the prevention of heart failure , calcium channel blockers were inferior and diuretics were superior to other drug classes .
INTERPRETATION Blood pressure lowering significantly reduces vascular risk across various baseline blood pressure levels and comorbidities .
BACKGROUND The benefits of blood pressure lowering treatment for prevention of cardiovascular disease are well established .
However , the extent to which these effects differ by baseline blood pressure , presence of comorbidities , or drug class is less clear .
We therefore performed a systematic review and meta- analysis to clarify these differences .