Humans ; Stroke Volume ; Valsartan/therapeutic use* ; Heart Failure/drug therapy* ; Hypotension/drug therapy* ; Aminobutyrates/therapeutic use* ; Drug Combinations ; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/therapeutic use* ; Tetrazoles/therapeutic use* ; Treatment Outcome ; Ventricular Function, Left

Humans ; Stroke Volume ; Valsartan/therapeutic use* ; Heart Failure/drug therapy* ; Hypotension/drug therapy* ; Aminobutyrates/therapeutic use* ; Drug Combinations ; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/therapeutic use* ; Tetrazoles/therapeutic use* ; Treatment Outcome ; Ventricular Function, Left

Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of the initiation of sacubitril-valsartan （ARNI） therapy, as compared with ACEI therapy, after hemodynamic stabilization among patients hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure （ADHF）. Methods: A total of 199 hospitalized patients for ADHF in our department from January 2017 to June 2019 were included in this retrospective analysis. According to the medication early after hemodynamic stabilization, patients were divided into ARNI group (n=92) and ACEI group (n=107). Among the included patients, 61 patients with newly diagnosed heart failure at the time of admission were also divided into ARNI group (n=30) and ACEI group (n=31) according to the applied medication. Clinical baseline data and follow-up results of enrolled patients were collected through the electronic medical records at admission, outpatient and telephone follow-up. The primary effectiveness observation index was left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and left ventricular end diastolic dimension (LVEDD) measured by echocardiography; the secondary observation index was death from any causes and hospitalization for heart failure. Safety outcomes were the incidences of symptomatic hypotension, worsening renal function, hyperkalemia, and angioedema. Results: The clinical baseline characteristics were similar between ARNI group and ACEI group（all P>0.05）. The duration of follow up was (15.2±6.5) months in all patients enrolled, (12.3±5.0) months in ARNI group, and (18.2±6.5) months in ACEI group. At the end of follow-up, prevalence of an absolute LVEF increase of more than 5% was 48.9% (45/92) in ANRI group and 25.2% (27/107) in ACEI group (P=0.001). Percent of LVEF increase to more than 50% was 17.4% (16/92) in ANRI group and 3.7% (4/107) in ACEI group (P=0.001). Percent of patients with more than 10 mm LVEDD reduction was 14.1% (13/92) in ANRI group and 3.7% (4/107) in ACEI group (P=0.009). All-cause mortality rate was 5.7% (5/88) in ARNI group and 15.3% (13/85) in ACEI group (P=0.038). Rate of re-hospitalization due to heart failure was 50% (46/92) in ARNI group and 71% (76/107) in ACEI group（P=0.002）.The rates of symptomatic hypotension, worsening renal function, hyperkalemia, and angioedema were similar between ARNI group and ACEI group (all P>0.05). In patients with first diagnosed heart failure，percent of LVEF increase to more than 50% was 30% (9/30) in ANRI group and 6.5% (2/31) in ACEI group (P=0.017). Percent of more than 10 mm LVEDD reduction was 26.7%(8/30) in ANRI group and 3.2%(1/31) in ACEI group (P=0.012). Percent of an absolute LVEF increase of more than 5% was 53.3% (16/30) in ANRI group and 51.6% (16/31) in ACEI group (P=0.893). Re-hospitalization due to heart failure was 23.3% (7/30） in ARNI group and 73.3% (11/31) in ACEI group（P<0.01）. Rate of all-cause death tended to be lower in patients receiving ARNI (3.4% (1/29)) as compared to patients receiving ACEI (13.0% (3/23), P=0.197）. Conclusions: Among patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction hospitalized for ADHF, the initiation of ARNI therapy after hemodynamic stabilization is associated with a more significant improvement of cardiac remodeling and pump function than ACEI therapy and satisfactory safety. In ADHF patients with first diagnosed heart failure, initiation of ARNI therapy after hemodynamic stabilization can more effectively improve cardiac remodeling and pump function than treatment with ACEI.
Aminobutyrates ; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/therapeutic use* ; Biphenyl Compounds ; Drug Combinations ; Heart Failure/drug therapy* ; Humans ; Retrospective Studies ; Stroke Volume ; Tetrazoles ; Treatment Outcome ; Valsartan ; Ventricular Function, Left

BACKGROUNDAtrial fibrillation (AF) is the most frequent tachyarrhythmia in patients with a permanent pacemaker. Angiotensin II receptor antagonists have a protective effect against the occurrence of AF in patients with heart diseases. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of olmesartan in the prevention of new-onset AF and AF burden in atrioventricular block (AVB) patients with dual-chamber (DDD) pacemaker implantation.

METHODSThis was a single-center, prospective, randomized, single-blind, controlled clinical study. A total of 116 AVB patients, who received DDD pacemakers implantation with the percentage of ventricular pacing (VP%) ≥40% from April 22, 2011 to December 24, 2012, were prospectively randomized to olmesartan group (20 mg per day; n = 57) or control group (n = 59). Patients were followed up using pacemaker programming, 12-lead electrocardiography in the intrinsic sinus rhythm, laboratory examinations, and transthoracic echocardiography at 24 months. Atrial high rate events (AHREs) were defined as 180 beats/min over a minimum of 5 min. AF burden was calculated by the number of hours with AHREs divided by the number of measurement hours.

RESULTSTen (17.5%) patients in the olmesartan group and 24 patients (40.7%) in the control group occurred new-onset AF, and the difference between two groups was statistically significant (P = 0.04). AF burden was lower in olmesartan group than that in control group (8.02 ± 3.10% vs. 13.66 ± 6.14%, P = 0.04). There were no significant differences in mean days to the first occurrence of AHREs and mean cumulative numbers of AHREs between two groups (P = 0.89 and P = 0.42, respectively). Moreover, olmesartan group had smaller values of maximal P-wave durations and P-wave dispersion (PD) after 24 months follow-up compared with the control group (109.5 ± 7.4 ms vs. 113.4 ± 7.1 ms, P = 0.00; and 40.6 ± 4.5 ms vs. 43.3 ± 4.4 ms, P = 0.02, respectively). Left ventricular end-diastolic diameter and left ventricular ejection fraction were not significantly different between two groups (both P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONThis study suggested that 24-month of olmesartan therapy could reduce new-onset AF and AF burden in patients with DDD pacemakers.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATIONChiCTR-TRC-12004443; http://www.chictrdb.org.

Aged ; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists ; therapeutic use ; Atrial Fibrillation ; drug therapy ; Atrioventricular Block ; drug therapy ; Female ; Humans ; Imidazoles ; therapeutic use ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Single-Blind Method ; Tetrazoles ; therapeutic use

Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) have organ-protective effects in heart failure and may be also effective in doxorubicin-induced cardiomyopathy (DOX-CMP); however, the efficacy of ARBs on the prevention of DOX-CMP have not been investigated. We performed a preclinical experiment to evaluate the preventive effect of a novel ARB, fimasartan, in DOX-CMP. All animals underwent echocardiography and were randomly assigned into three groups: treated daily with vehicle (DOX-only group, n=22), 5 mg/kg of fimasartan (Low-fima group, n=22), and 10 mg/kg of fimasartan (High-fima group, n=19). DOX was injected once a week for six weeks. Echocardiography and hemodynamic assessment was performed at the 8th week using a miniaturized conductance catheter. Survival rate of the High-fima group was greater (100%) than that of the Low-fima (75%) and DOX-only groups (50%). Echocardiography showed preserved left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction in the High-fima group, but not in the DOX-only group (P=0.002). LV dimensions increased in the DOX-only group; however, remodeling was attenuated in the Low-fima and High-fima groups. Hemodynamic assessment showed higher dP/dt in the High-fima group compared with the DOX-only group. A novel ARB, fimasartan, may prevent DOX-CMP and improve survival rate in a dose-dependent manner in a rat model of DOX-CMP and could be a treatment option for the prevention of DOX-CMP.
Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/*therapeutic use ; Animals ; Biphenyl Compounds/*therapeutic use ; Cardiomyopathies/chemically induced/mortality/*prevention & control ; Doxorubicin/*toxicity ; Echocardiography ; Hemodynamics ; Pyrimidines/*therapeutic use ; Rats ; Rats, Sprague-Dawley ; Receptor, Angiotensin, Type 1/chemistry/*metabolism ; Survival Rate ; Tetrazoles/*therapeutic use ; Ventricular Function, Left/physiology

BACKGROUNDAngiotensin type 1 receptor (AT 1 R) antagonists are extensively used for blood pressure control in elderly patients with hypertension. This study aimed to investigate the inhibitory effects of AT 1 R antagonist valsartan on platelet aggregation and the occurrence of cardio-cerebral thrombotic events in elderly patients with hypertension.

METHODSTwo-hundred and ten patients with hypertension and aged > 60 years were randomized to valsartan (n = 140) or amlodipine (n = 70) on admission. The primary endpoint was platelet aggregation rate (PAR) induced by arachidonic acid at discharge, and the secondary endpoint was the rate of thrombotic events including brain infarction and myocardial infarction during follow-up. Human aortic endothelial cells (HAECs) were stimulated by angiotensin II (Ang II, 100 nmol/L) with or without pretreatment of valsartan (100 nmol/L), and relative expression of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) and thromboxane B 2 (TXB 2 ) and both p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase (p38MAPK) and nuclear factor-kB (NF-kB) activities were assessed. Statistical analyses were performed by GraphPad Prism 5.0 software (GraphPad Software, Inc., California, USA).

RESULTSPAR was lower after treatment with valsartan (11.49 ± 0.69% vs. 18.71 ± 2.47%, P < 0.001), associated with more reduced plasma levels of COX-2 (76.94 ± 7.07 U/L vs. 116.4 ± 15.89 U/L, P < 0.001) and TXB 2 (1667 ± 56.50 pg/ml vs. 2207 ± 180.20 pg/ml) (all P < 0.001). Plasma COX-2 and TXB 2 levels correlated significantly with PAR in overall patients (r = 0.109, P < 0.001). During follow-up (median, 18 months), there was a significantly lower thrombotic event rate in patients treated with valsartan (14.3% vs. 32.8%, P = 0.002). Relative expression of COX-2 and secretion of TXB 2 with concordant phosphorylation of p38MAPK and NF-kB were increased in HAECs when stimulated by Ang II (100 nmol/L) but were significantly decreased by valsartan pretreatment (100 nmol/L).

CONCLUSIONSAT 1 R antagonist valsartan decreases platelet activity by attenuating COX-2/TXA 2 expression through p38MAPK and NF-kB pathways and reduces the occurrence of cardio-cerebral thrombotic events in elderly patients with hypertension.

Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists ; therapeutic use ; Blood Platelets ; drug effects ; Blotting, Western ; Cell Line ; Cyclooxygenase 2 ; blood ; Female ; Humans ; Hypertension ; drug therapy ; Male ; Platelet Aggregation ; drug effects ; Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction ; Tetrazoles ; therapeutic use ; Thrombosis ; blood ; drug therapy ; Thromboxane B2 ; blood ; Valine ; analogs & derivatives ; therapeutic use ; Valsartan

Cardioprotective effect of fimasartan, a new angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB), was evaluated in a porcine model of acute myocardial infarction (MI). Fifty swine were randomized to group 1 (sham, n=10), group 2 (no angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor [ACEI] or ARB, n=10), group 3 (perindopril 2 mg daily, n=10), group 4 (valsartan 40 mg daily, n=10), or group 5 (fimasartan 30 mg daily, n=10). Acute MI was induced by occlusion of the left anterior descending artery for 50 min. Echocardiography, single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), and F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose cardiac positron emission tomography (PET) were performed at baseline, 1 week, and 4 weeks. Iodine-123 meta-iodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) scan was done at 6 weeks for visualization of cardiac sympathetic activity. Left ventricular function and volumes at 4 weeks were similar between the 5 groups. No difference was observed in groups 2 to 5 in SPECT perfusion defect, matched and mismatched segments between SPECT and PET at 1 week and 4 weeks. MIBG scan showed similar uptake between the 5 groups. Pathologic analysis showed similar infarct size in groups 2 to 5. Infarct size reduction was not observed with use of fimasartan as well as other ACEI and ARB in a porcine model of acute MI.
3-Iodobenzylguanidine ; Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers/therapeutic use ; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/*therapeutic use ; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/therapeutic use ; Animals ; Anterior Wall Myocardial Infarction/*drug therapy/physiopathology ; Biphenyl Compounds/*therapeutic use ; Cardiotonic Agents/*therapeutic use ; Disease Models, Animal ; Echocardiography ; Fluorodeoxyglucose F18 ; Perindopril/therapeutic use ; Positron-Emission Tomography ; Pyrimidines/*therapeutic use ; Random Allocation ; Swine ; Tetrazoles/*therapeutic use ; Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon ; Valsartan/therapeutic use ; Ventricular Function, Left/*physiology

OBJECTIVETo observe the efficacy and safety of Qizhi Jiangtang Capsule (QJC) in treating stage 3b diabetic kidney disease (DKD) patients with macroalbuminuria.

METHODSPatients who conformed to the diagnostic criteria of stage 3b DKD were randomly assigned to two groups according to random digital table, the experiment group and the control group, 84 in each group. All patients received a two-week elution period, and then were treated with basic Western therapy. Patients in the experiment group took QJC, 5 pills per time, 3 times a day, while those in the control group took Valsartan Capsule 160 mg each time, once daily. The observation period of follow-ups was limited within 6 months, and the time points were set as the baseline, 1st month, 3rd month, and 6th month. Systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBS), 24 h urine protein quantitative (24 h UPQ), plasma albumin (ALB), and serum creatinine (SCr) were detected and recorded, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was calculated. The occurrence of hypoglycemic reaction, coagulation disorder, gastrointestinal tract reaction, allergy, hyperkalemia, doubling of creatinine, and overall adverse events were observed and recorded at same time.

RESULTSFinally 81 patients in the experiment group and 80 patients in the control group were effectively included. Compared with the baseline level, SBP and DBS obviously decreased in the control group at month 1 of treatment (P < 0.05), and more significantly decreased at month 6 of treatment (P < 0.01). SBP at month 1, 3, and 6 of follow-ups; DBS at month 6 of follow-ups was lower in the control group than in the experiment group (P < 0.05). At month 1, 3, and 6 of follow-ups, 24 h UPQ of the experiment group was significantly lower than the baseline level (P < 0.01). It was also significantly lower than the level of the control group at the same time point (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in 24 h UPQ at month 1, 3, and 6 of follow-ups between the control group and the baseline level (P > 0.05). ALB of the experiment group showed an increasing trend. It was significantly higher than the baseline level at month 6 (P < 0.05), which was also higher than that of the control group at same period (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the ALB level in the control group (P > 0.05). SCr of two groups showed an increasing trend. SCr of the experiment group was significantly higher at month 1, 3, and 6 follow-ups than the baseline level (P < 0.05). But the increment of SCr was higher in the control group than in the experimental group, and obviously higher than the baseline levels (P < 0.05). eGFR of both groups showed a decreasing trend. The decrement was higher in the control group than in the experimental group (P < 0.05). The proportion of progression of renal functions at month 1, 3, and 6 of follow-ups in the experimental group was 0.0% (0 case), 9.55% (8 cases), and 21.4% (18 cases), while they were 8.3% (7 cases), 21.4% (18 cases), and 40.5% (34 cases) in the control group. There was no statistical difference in the proportion of progression of renal functions between the two groups at month 3 and 6 of follow-ups (P < 0.05). There was no statistical difference in the incidence of adverse reactions between two groups (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONQJC could effectively reduce urinary protein of patients with stage 3b DKD, and delay the progression of renal functions.

Adult ; Albumins ; analysis ; Albuminuria ; drug therapy ; Blood Pressure ; drug effects ; Creatinine ; blood ; Diabetic Nephropathies ; drug therapy ; Drugs, Chinese Herbal ; therapeutic use ; Female ; Glomerular Filtration Rate ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Tetrazoles ; therapeutic use ; Treatment Outcome ; Valine ; analogs & derivatives ; therapeutic use ; Valsartan

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) inhibit activated hepatic stellate cell contraction and are thought to reduce the dynamic portion of intrahepatic resistance. This study compared the effects of combined treatment using the ARB candesartan and propranolol versus propranolol monotherapy on portal pressure in patients with cirrhosis in a prospective, randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Between January 2008 and July 2009, 53 cirrhotic patients with clinically significant portal hypertension were randomized to receive either candesartan and propranolol combination therapy (26 patients) or propranolol monotherapy (27 patients). Before and 3 months after the administration of the planned medication, the hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) was assessed in both groups. The dose of propranolol was subsequently increased from 20 mg bid until the target heart rate was reached, and the candesartan dose was fixed at 8 mg qd. The primary endpoint was the HVPG response rate; patients with an HVPG reduction of >20% of the baseline value or to <12 mmHg were defined as responders. RESULTS: The mean portal pressure declined significantly in both groups, from 16 mmHg (range, 12-28 mmHg) to 13.5 mmHg (range, 6-20 mmHg) in the combination group (P<0.05), and from 17 mmHg (range, 12-27 mmHg) to 14 mmHg (range, 7-25 mmHg) in the propranolol monotherapy group (P<0.05). However, the medication-induced pressure reduction did not differ significantly between the two groups [3.5 mmHg (range, -3-11 mmHg) vs. 3 mmHg (range, -8-10 mmHg), P=0.674]. The response rate (55.6% vs. 61.5%, P=0.435) and the reductions in mean blood pressure or heart rate also did not differ significantly between the combination and monotherapy groups. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of candesartan (an ARB) to propranolol confers no benefit relative to classical propranolol monotherapy for the treatment of portal hypertension, and is thus not recommended.
Adolescent ; Adult ; Aged ; Antihypertensive Agents/*therapeutic use ; Benzimidazoles/*therapeutic use ; Blood Pressure ; Drug Therapy, Combination ; Female ; Humans ; Hypertension, Portal/complications/*drug therapy ; Liver Cirrhosis/complications/diagnosis ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Propranolol/*therapeutic use ; Prospective Studies ; Tetrazoles/*therapeutic use ; Treatment Outcome ; Young Adult

Albuminuria ; drug therapy ; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 ; complications ; drug therapy ; Diabetic Nephropathies ; drug therapy ; Humans ; Tetrazoles ; therapeutic use