본문으로 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

사용자별 맞춤메뉴

자주찾는 메뉴

추가하기
닫기

연구성과

contents area

detail content area

Comparison of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers in patients with diabetes mellitus and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who underwent successful percutaneous coronary intervention
  • 작성일2019-05-09
  • 최종수정일2019-05-09
  • 담당부서연구기획과
  • 연락처043-719-8033
  • 524
Atherosclerosis , 2018, 277, 130─135, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2018.08.038

Comparison of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers in patients with diabetes mellitus and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who underwent successful percutaneous coronary intervention

Jae Kyeong Byun, Byoung Geol Choi; Seung-Woon Rha; Se Yeon Choi; Myung Ho Jeong

Abstract

    Background and aims: Angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) are known to be beneficial for either non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients or diabetes mellitus (DM) patients. However, the comparative efficacy of ACEI versus ARB in patients with NSTEMI and DM is unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the protective efficacy of ACEI versus ARB in patients with NSTEMI and DM, who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES). Methods: Among 53,281 patients enrolled in the nationwide Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry, 3426 patients with NSTEMI and DM, who were treated with renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors, had undergone successful PCI with DESs. They were classified into two groups: ACEI group (N=2076), and ARB group (N=1350). Individual major clinical outcomes and major adverse cardiac events (MACE), the composite of total death, myocardial infarction (MI), and revascularization were compared between the two groups for up to two years. Results: After propensity score-matching analysis, two propensity-matched groups (1103 pairs, total=2206) were generated, and the baseline characteristics were balanced. Although all causes of death and recurrent MI were not different between the two groups, the incidence of revascularization (4.0% vs. 7.1%; p=0.002), including target vessel (2.3% vs. 5.0; p=0.002), and MACE (8.7% vs. 12.5%, p=0.008), were lower in the ACEI group than the ARB group at two-year follow-up. Conclusions: Compared with ARB, no beneficial effects of ACEI on all causes of death, cardiac death, or recurrence of MI were observed, but ACEI reduced the incidence of revascularization and MACE in this population. Thus, well-designed trials with a larger population are needed to confirm these results.



  • 본 연구는 질병관리본부 연구개발과제(과제번호 2016-ER6304-02) 연구비를 지원받아 수행되었습니다.
  • This research was supported by a fund(code 2016-ER6304-02) by Research of Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.


본 공공저작물은 공공누리  출처표시+상업적이용금지+변경금지 조건에 따라 이용할 수 있습니다 본 공공저작물은 공공누리 "출처표시+상업적이용금지+변경금지" 조건에 따라 이용할 수 있습니다.
TOP