BACKGROUND: Controversy persists regarding the efficacy of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in the prevention of recurrent atrial fibrillation (AF). We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), not designed a priori to test this hypothesis, to explore whether ACEs and ARBs reduce recurrent AF. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search for RCTs using ACEIs or ARBs and providing data on the outcome of recurrent AF. Statistical heterogeneity across the trials was tested using the Cochran Q statistic and I(2) was computed to quantify heterogeneity. A 2-sided α error of less than .05 was considered statistically significant (P < .05). RESULTS: The analysis was based on 8 RCTs including 2323 patients. The Mantel-Haenszel random-effect model was used to calculate relative risk (RR) for studies using ACEIs or ARBs, and for studies using ARBs. The fixed-effect model was used to calculate RR for studies using ACEIs. Meta-analysis of the studies revealed that ACEIs or ARBs significantly reduced the incidence of recurrent AF (RR, 0.611; 95% CI, 0.441-0.847; P = .003). The RR for recurrent AF was 0.643 (95% CI, 0.439-0.941; P = .023) for studies using ARBs and 0.54 (95% CI, 0.377-0.80; P = .002) for studies using ACEIs. CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis of RCTs not designed a priori to test the hypothesis, ACEs and ARBs were associated with a significant reduction in recurrent AF. Large-scale randomized trials designed a priori to test the hypothesis are necessary to complete the totality of evidence.
BACKGROUND: Controversy persists regarding the efficacy of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in the prevention of recurrent atrial fibrillation (AF). We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), not designed a priori to test this hypothesis, to explore whether ACEs and ARBs reduce recurrent AF. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search for RCTs using ACEIs or ARBs and providing data on the outcome of recurrent AF. Statistical heterogeneity across the trials was tested using the Cochran Q statistic and I(2) was computed to quantify heterogeneity. A 2-sided α error of less than .05 was considered statistically significant (P < .05). RESULTS: The analysis was based on 8 RCTs including 2323 patients. The Mantel-Haenszel random-effect model was used to calculate relative risk (RR) for studies using ACEIs or ARBs, and for studies using ARBs. The fixed-effect model was used to calculate RR for studies using ACEIs. Meta-analysis of the studies revealed that ACEIs or ARBs significantly reduced the incidence of recurrent AF (RR, 0.611; 95% CI, 0.441-0.847; P = .003). The RR for recurrent AF was 0.643 (95% CI, 0.439-0.941; P = .023) for studies using ARBs and 0.54 (95% CI, 0.377-0.80; P = .002) for studies using ACEIs. CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis of RCTs not designed a priori to test the hypothesis, ACEs and ARBs were associated with a significant reduction in recurrent AF. Large-scale randomized trials designed a priori to test the hypothesis are necessary to complete the totality of evidence.
Authors: Evan L Thacker; Paul N Jensen; Bruce M Psaty; Barbara McKnight; W T Longstreth; Sascha Dublin; Katherine M Newton; Nicholas L Smith; David S Siscovick; Susan R Heckbert Journal: Ann Pharmacother Date: 2015-01-27 Impact factor: 3.154