Mayo Clin Proc. 2023 May 25:S0025-6196(23)00064-2. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2023.02.007. Online ahead of print.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction with renal impairment (AMI-RI) treated with either angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in real-world clinical settings.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 4790 consecutive patients with AMI-RI between November 1, 2011, and December 31, 2015, were subdivided into ACEI (n=2845) and ARB (n=1945) treatment groups. The primary end points were major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, including all-cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, any revascularization, cerebrovascular accident, rehospitalization, and stent thrombosis. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to adjust for group differences.
RESULTS: The ARB group had a significantly higher incidence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (at 3-year follow-up) than the ACEI group according to the unadjusted analysis (3-year hazard ratio [HR], 1.60; 95% CI, 1.43 to 1.78) and the PSM-adjusted analysis (3-year HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.56). However, any revascularization (3-year HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.54) and rehospitalization (3-year HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.67) were not significantly different between groups in the PSM-adjusted analysis. Compared with the ARB group, the ACEI group had lower rates of all-cause mortality at estimated glomerular filtration rates of at least 15 or less than 90 mL/min/1.73 m2 in the unadjusted data and at least 60 or less than 90 mL/min/1.73 m2 in the PSM-adjusted analysis.
CONCLUSION: Treatment with ACEIs seemed to be more beneficial than treatment with ARBs for patients with AMI-RI; further prospective studies are required to confirm these results.