BACKGROUND/AIMS: This meta-analysis compared the effects of amlodipine besylate, a charged dihydropyridine-type calcium channel blocker (CCB), with other non-CCB antihypertensive therapies regarding the cardiovascular outcome. METHODS: Data from seven long-term outcome trials comparing the cardiovascular outcomes of an amlodipine-based regimen with other active regimens were pooled and analyzed. RESULTS: The risk of myocardial infarction was significantly decreased with an amlodipine-based regimen compared with a non-CCB-based regimen (odds ratio [OR], 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84 to 0.99; p = 0.03). The risk of stroke was also significantly decreased (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.79 to 0.90; p < 0.00001). The risk of heart failure increased slightly with marginal significance for an amlodipine-based regimen compared with a non-CCB-based regimen (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.31; p = 0.08). However, when compared overall with beta-blockers and diuretics, amlodipine showed a comparable risk. Amlodipine-based regimens demonstrated a 10% risk reduction in overall cardiovascular events (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.82 to 0.99; p = 0.02) and total mortality (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.91 to 0.99; p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Amlodipine reduced the risk of total cardiovascular events as well as all-cause mortality compared with non-CCB-based regimens, indicating its benefit for high-risk cardiac patients.
Amlodipine/*therapeutic use ; Antihypertensive Agents/*therapeutic use ; Blood Pressure/*drug effects ; Calcium Channel Blockers/*therapeutic use ; Chi-Square Distribution ; Clinical Trials as Topic ; Heart Failure/etiology/mortality/*prevention & control ; Humans ; Hypertension/complications/diagnosis/*drug therapy/mortality/physiopathology ; Myocardial Infarction/etiology/mortality/*prevention & control ; Odds Ratio ; Risk Factors ; Stroke/etiology/mortality/*prevention & control ; Treatment Outcome

BACKGROUND/AIMS: A controversy exists about which statin is preferable for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), and clinical impacts of different statins according to lipophilicity have not been established. METHODS: The 1,124 patients with AMI included in the present study were divided into hydrophilic- and lipophilic-statin groups. In-hospital complications (defined as death, cardiogenic shock, ventricular arrhythmia, infection, bleeding, and renal insufficiency, and other fatal arrhythmias), major adverse cardiac events (MACE), all-cause death, re-myocardial infarction, re-percutaneous coronary intervention (re-PCI), and surgical revascularization were analyzed during a 1-year clinical follow-up. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups, and in-hospital complication rates showed no between-group differences (11.7% vs. 12.8%, p = 0.688). Although MACE at the 1- and 6-month clinical follow-ups occurred more in hydrophilic statin group I (1 month: 10.0% vs. 4.4%, p = 0.001; 6 month: 19.9% vs. 14.2%, p = 0.022), no significant difference in MACE was observed at the 1-year follow-up (21.5% vs. 17.9%, p = 0.172). Both statin groups showed similar efficacy for reducing serum lipid concentrations. A Cox-regression analysis showed that the use of a hydrophilic statin did not predict 1-year MACE, all-cause death, AMI, or re-PCI. CONCLUSIONS: Although short-term cardiovascular outcomes were better in the lipophilic-statin group, 1-year outcomes were similar in patients with AMI who were administered hydrophilic and lipophilic statins. In other words, the type of statin did not influence 1-year outcomes in patients with AMI.
Aged ; Biological Markers/blood ; Cardiovascular Diseases/etiology/prevention & control ; Chi-Square Distribution ; Female ; Hospital Mortality ; Humans ; Hydrophobic and Hydrophilic Interactions ; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/adverse effects/chemistry/*therapeutic use ; Korea ; Lipids/blood ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Myocardial Infarction/blood/complications/diagnosis/mortality/*therapy ; Proportional Hazards Models ; Recurrence ; Retrospective Studies ; Risk Assessment ; Risk Factors ; Time Factors ; Treatment Outcome