首页> 外文OA文献 >Effects of sacubitril/valsartan in the PARADIGM-HF Trial (Prospective Comparison of ARNI with ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure) according to background therapy
【2h】

Effects of sacubitril/valsartan in the PARADIGM-HF Trial (Prospective Comparison of ARNI with ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure) according to background therapy

机译:根据背景治疗,sacubitril / valsartan在paRaDIGm-HF试验中的作用(aRNI与aCEI的前瞻性比较,以确定对全球死亡率和心力衰竭发病率的影响)

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Background—In the PARADIGM-HF trial (Prospective Comparison of ARNI with ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure), the angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor sacubitril/valsartan was more effective than the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor enalapril in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. We examined whether this benefit was consistent irrespective of background therapy.ududMethods and Results—We examined the effect of study treatment in the following subgroups: diuretics (yes/no), digitalis glycoside (yes/no), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (yes/no), and defibrillating device (implanted defibrillating device, yes/no). We also examined the effect of study drug according to β-blocker dose (≥50% and 50% of target dose) and according to whether patients had undergone previous coronary revascularization. We analyzed the primary composite end point of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization, as well as cardiovascular death. Most randomized patients (n=8399) were treated with a diuretic (80%) and β-blocker (93%); 47% of those taking a β-blocker were treated with ≥50% of the recommended dose. In addition, 4671 (56%) were treated with a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, 2539 (30%) with digoxin, and 1243 (15%) had a defibrillating device; 2640 (31%) had undergone coronary revascularization. Overall, the sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril hazard ratio for the primary composite end point was 0.80 (95% confidence interval, 0.73–0.87; P0.001) and for cardiovascular death was 0.80 (0.71–0.89; P0.001). The effect of sacubitril/valsartan was consistent across all subgroups examined. The hazard ratio for primary end point ranged from 0.74 to 0.85 and for cardiovascular death ranged from 0.75 to 0.89, with no treatment-by-subgroup interaction.ududConclusions—The benefit of sacubitril/valsartan, over an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, was consistent regardless of background therapy and irrespective of previous coronary revascularization or β-blocker dose.
机译:背景-在PARADIGM-HF试验(ARNI与ACEI进行前瞻性比较以确定对心力衰竭的总体死亡率和发病率的影响)中,在患有以下疾病的患者中,血管紧张素受体中性溶酶抑制剂沙必比尔/缬沙坦比血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂依那普利更有效心力衰竭和射血分数降低。我们检查了这种益处是否与背景疗法无关。 ud ud方法和结果-我们检查了以下亚组研究治疗的效果:利尿剂(是/否),洋地黄苷(是/否),盐皮质激素受体拮抗剂(是/否)和除颤设备(植入式除颤设备,是/否)。我们还根据β受体阻滞剂剂量(≥目标剂量的50%和<50%)以及患者是否曾接受过冠状动脉血运重建检查了研究药物的效果。我们分析了心血管死亡或心力衰竭住院以及心血管死亡的主要复合终点。大多数随机分组的患者(n = 8399)接受利尿剂(80%)和β-受体阻滞剂(93%)治疗;服用β受体阻滞剂的患者中有47%的推荐剂量≥50%。此外,用盐皮质激素受体拮抗剂治疗了4671名(56%),使用地高辛治疗了2539名(30%),并且使用了除颤器治疗了1243名(15%); 2640名(31%)接受了冠脉血运重建。总体而言,主要复合终点的沙比特利/缬沙坦/依那普利风险比为0.80(95%置信区间,0.73-0.87; P <0.001),心血管死亡为0.80(0.71-0.89; P <0.001)。沙必特/缬沙坦的作用在所有检查的亚组中均一致。主要终点的危险比在0.74至0.85之间,心血管死亡的危险比在0.75至0.89之间,没有亚组间治疗相互作用。 ud ud。结论—屈比特尔/缬沙坦相对于血管紧张素转化酶抑制剂的益处不论背景治疗如何,且与先前的冠状动脉血运重建或β-受体阻滞剂剂量无关,均一致。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号