Hong Xie1, Gaoqing Luo2, Yong Zheng1, Feng Peng1, Liangdi Xie3. 1. a Department of Cardiology , The First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University , Fuzhou , China. 2. b The E.N.T. Department , Fujian Provincial Governmental Hospital , Fuzhou , China. 3. c Department of Internal Medicine (Area 4) , The First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University , Fuzhou , China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This meta-analysis of randomized parallel controlled trials was designed to compare the efficacy of atenolol with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) in changing pulse wave velocity (PWV), peripheral blood pressure and heart rate (HR) among patients with essential hypertension. METHODS: This study was conducted according to the PRISMA guideline. Data collection was independently completed by two investigators. Statistical analyses were completed by Stata software (v12.0). RESULTS: Eight clinical trials were meta-analyzed in this study. Overall changes in PWV (weighted mean difference or WMD = 0.068, 95% confidence interval or CI: -0.487 to -0.623, P = 0.811) and peripheral systolic blood pressure (PSBP) (WMD = -1.281 mmHg, 95% CI: -6.936 to 4.375, P = 0.657) did not differ significantly between atenolol and ACEIs treatment. Relative to ACEIs, atenolol had a more favorable impact on peripheral diastolic blood pressure (PDBP) (WMD = -1.912 mmHg, 95% CI: -3.732 to -0.091, P = 0.040) and HR (WMD = -9.23 bpm, 95% CI: -12.53 to -5.93, P < 0.001). In stratified analyses, particularly by follow-up period, atenolol was observed to be superior over ACEIs within early 3-month treatment in PSBP (WMD = -4.097 mmHg, 95% CI: -6.589 to -1.605, P = 0.001), PDBP (WMD = -6.802 mmHg, 95% CI: -8.517 to -5.087, P < 0.001) and HR (WMD = -14.242 bpm, 95% CI: -16.427 to -12.058, P = 0.028), without heterogeneity (I2 = 0.0%). There were low probabilities of publication bias for all comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that atenolol and ACEIs were equally effective in reducing PWV and PSBP, while atenolol was superior over ACEIs in improving PDBP and HR, especially within short-term treatment.
OBJECTIVES: This meta-analysis of randomized parallel controlled trials was designed to compare the efficacy of atenolol with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) in changing pulse wave velocity (PWV), peripheral blood pressure and heart rate (HR) among patients with essential hypertension. METHODS: This study was conducted according to the PRISMA guideline. Data collection was independently completed by two investigators. Statistical analyses were completed by Stata software (v12.0). RESULTS: Eight clinical trials were meta-analyzed in this study. Overall changes in PWV (weighted mean difference or WMD = 0.068, 95% confidence interval or CI: -0.487 to -0.623, P = 0.811) and peripheral systolic blood pressure (PSBP) (WMD = -1.281 mmHg, 95% CI: -6.936 to 4.375, P = 0.657) did not differ significantly between atenolol and ACEIs treatment. Relative to ACEIs, atenolol had a more favorable impact on peripheral diastolic blood pressure (PDBP) (WMD = -1.912 mmHg, 95% CI: -3.732 to -0.091, P = 0.040) and HR (WMD = -9.23 bpm, 95% CI: -12.53 to -5.93, P < 0.001). In stratified analyses, particularly by follow-up period, atenolol was observed to be superior over ACEIs within early 3-month treatment in PSBP (WMD = -4.097 mmHg, 95% CI: -6.589 to -1.605, P = 0.001), PDBP (WMD = -6.802 mmHg, 95% CI: -8.517 to -5.087, P < 0.001) and HR (WMD = -14.242 bpm, 95% CI: -16.427 to -12.058, P = 0.028), without heterogeneity (I2 = 0.0%). There were low probabilities of publication bias for all comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that atenolol and ACEIs were equally effective in reducing PWV and PSBP, while atenolol was superior over ACEIs in improving PDBP and HR, especially within short-term treatment.
Authors: Priit Pauklin; Jaan Eha; Kaspar Tootsi; Rein Kolk; Rain Paju; Mart Kals; Priit Kampus Journal: J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) Date: 2021-07-12 Impact factor: 3.738