Differential Effects of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers on COVID-19

L. Su, Jiahao Zhang, Nanhui Jiang, Jie Yang, Li He, Qin-jing Xie, Rong Huang, Fang Liu, Ying Feng, K. Kashani, Q. Lu, Zhongyi Sun, Z. Peng
{"title":"Differential Effects of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers on COVID-19","authors":"L. Su, Jiahao Zhang, Nanhui Jiang, Jie Yang, Li He, Qin-jing Xie, Rong Huang, Fang Liu, Ying Feng, K. Kashani, Q. Lu, Zhongyi Sun, Z. Peng","doi":"10.4103/2665-9190.329042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Background: The effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (ACEIs/ARBs) on the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains controversial from clinic evidence. Objectives: The objectives of this study were to report the major characteristics and clinical outcomes of COVID-19 patients treated with ACEIs and ARBs and compare the different effects of the two drugs for outcomes of COVID-19 patients. Methods: This is a retrospective, two-center case series of 198 consecutive COVID-19 patients with a history of hypertension. Results: Among 198 patients, 58 (29.3%) and 16 (8.1%) were on ARB and ACEI, respectively. Patients who were on ARB or ACEI/ARB had a significantly lower rate of severe illness and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) when compared with patients treated with ACEI alone or not receiving RAAS blocker (P < 0.05). The Kaplan–Meier survival curve showed that patients with ARB in their antihypertensive regimen had a trend toward a higher survival rate when compared with individuals without ARB (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.07–1.02; P = 0.054). The occurrence rates of severe illness, ARDS, and death were similar in the two groups regardless of receiving ACEI. The Cox regression analyses showed a better survival in the ARB group than the ACEI group (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.03; 95% CI, 0.00–0.58; P = 0.02). Conclusions: Our data may provide that some evidence of using ARB, but not ACEI, was associated with a reduced rate of severe illness and ARDS, indicating their potential protective impact in COVID-19. Further large sample sizes and multiethnic populations are warranted to confirm our findings.","PeriodicalId":93326,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Translational Critical Care Medicine","volume":"60 1","pages":"1 - 7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Translational Critical Care Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/2665-9190.329042","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT Background: The effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (ACEIs/ARBs) on the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains controversial from clinic evidence. Objectives: The objectives of this study were to report the major characteristics and clinical outcomes of COVID-19 patients treated with ACEIs and ARBs and compare the different effects of the two drugs for outcomes of COVID-19 patients. Methods: This is a retrospective, two-center case series of 198 consecutive COVID-19 patients with a history of hypertension. Results: Among 198 patients, 58 (29.3%) and 16 (8.1%) were on ARB and ACEI, respectively. Patients who were on ARB or ACEI/ARB had a significantly lower rate of severe illness and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) when compared with patients treated with ACEI alone or not receiving RAAS blocker (P < 0.05). The Kaplan–Meier survival curve showed that patients with ARB in their antihypertensive regimen had a trend toward a higher survival rate when compared with individuals without ARB (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.07–1.02; P = 0.054). The occurrence rates of severe illness, ARDS, and death were similar in the two groups regardless of receiving ACEI. The Cox regression analyses showed a better survival in the ARB group than the ACEI group (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.03; 95% CI, 0.00–0.58; P = 0.02). Conclusions: Our data may provide that some evidence of using ARB, but not ACEI, was associated with a reduced rate of severe illness and ARDS, indicating their potential protective impact in COVID-19. Further large sample sizes and multiethnic populations are warranted to confirm our findings.
血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂和血管紧张素受体阻滞剂对COVID-19的差异作用
背景:血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂/血管紧张素受体阻滞剂(ACEIs/ARBs)治疗2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)的临床疗效仍存在争议。目的:本研究的目的是报告ACEIs和ARBs治疗COVID-19患者的主要特征和临床结局,并比较两种药物对COVID-19患者结局的不同影响。方法:对198例连续有高血压病史的COVID-19患者进行回顾性、双中心病例分析。结果:198例患者中,ARB和ACEI分别为58例(29.3%)和16例(8.1%)。与单独使用ACEI或未使用RAAS阻滞剂的患者相比,ARB或ACEI/ARB组患者严重疾病和急性呼吸窘迫综合征(ARDS)发生率显著降低(P < 0.05)。Kaplan-Meier生存曲线显示,在降压方案中合并ARB的患者与未合并ARB的患者相比,生存率有更高的趋势(校正风险比,0.27;95%置信区间[CI], 0.07-1.02;P = 0.054)。无论是否接受ACEI治疗,两组的严重疾病发生率、ARDS发生率和死亡率相似。Cox回归分析显示,ARB组的生存率高于ACEI组(校正风险比,0.03;95% ci, 0.00-0.58;P = 0.02)。结论:我们的数据可能提供了一些使用ARB(而不是ACEI)与严重疾病和ARDS发生率降低相关的证据,表明它们在COVID-19中具有潜在的保护作用。进一步的大样本量和多民族人群验证了我们的发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信