BackgroundIn real practice, two or more antihypertensive drugs are needed to achieve target blood pressure. We investigated the comparative beneficial actions of combination therapy of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASI), with calcium channel blockers (CCB) over CCB monotherapy on the development of new-onset diabetes mellitus (NODM) in Korean patients during four-year follow-up periods.MethodsA total of 3208 consecutive hypertensive patients without a history of diabetes mellitus who had been prescribed CCB were retrospectively enrolled from January 2004 to December 2012. These patients were divided into the two groups according to the additional use of RASI (the RASI group, n = 1221 and the no RASI group, n = 1987). Primary endpoint was NODM, defined as a fasting blood glucose ≥ 126 mg/dL or hemoglobin A1c ≥ 6.5%. Secondary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as total death, myocardial infarction (MI) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).ResultsAfter propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis, two propensity-matched groups (939 pairs, n = 1878, C-statistic = 0.743) were generated. The incidences of NODM (HR = 1.009, 95% CI: 0.700–1.452, P = 0.962), MACE (HR = 0.877, 95% CI: 0.544–1.413, P = 0.589), total death, MI, PCI were similar between the two groups after PSM during four years.ConclusionsThe use of RASI in addition to CCB showed comparable incidences of NODM and MACE compared to CCB monotherapy in non-diabetic hypertensive Korean patients during four-year follow-up period. However, large-scaled randomized controlled clinical trials will be required for a more definitive conclusion.

No abstract

Introduction Cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) is associated with a high risk of cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality. The regression equation of American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) was a preferred method for estimating maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max). It is well-known that CRF is overestimated in ACSM equation. Recently, Kokkinos reported more precise equation from the Fitness Registry and the Importance of Exercise National Database (FRIEND). Both equations were made from western healthy people. Purpose In this study, we compared VO2max estimated by ACSM and FRIEND equations to VO2max directly measured in male coronary artery disease (CAD) patients. Methods We analyzed 103 male CAD patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention and who participated in cardiac rehabilitation between June 2015 and December 2018. VO2max was directly measured by the gas exchange analysis during treadmill test with modified Bruce protocol. Exclusive criteria were pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease on hemodialysis, malignancy, peripheral artery disease, insufficient cardiopulmonary exercise test and orthopedic injuries. Directly measured VO2max were compared to ACSM and FRIEND equations. Results Age-specific VO2max values, which were directly measured from male CAD patients, were shown in Table. Smaller CRF difference was shown in FRIEND equation than ACSM equation. Compared to the measured value, CRF estimated by ACSM equation was overestimated by 22%, but the one estimated by FRIEND equation had only 2% gap. Figure presents Bland-Altman plots. ACSM equation had the higher bias (5.52ml/kg/min) compared with FRIEND equation (0.200ml/kg/min). Comparison table of VO2max estimated by ACSM and FRIEND equations with directly measured VO2max in male CAD patients Age Number VO2max (ml/kg/min) Measured ACSM % predicted FRIEND % predicted 30–39 4 29.5 ± (6.6) 35.7 ± (6.1) 122.3 ± (8.5) 29.1 ± (4.3) 100.1 ± (8.7) 40–49 20 29.1 ± (5.1) 35.7 ± (5.4) 123.6 ± (11.1) 29.1 ± (3.8) 101.2 ± (9.5) 50–59 32 25.6 ± (4.3) 31.5 ± (5.1) 123.8 ± (10.1) 26.2 ± (3.6) 103.2 ± (8.5) 60–69 27 26.0 ± (5.1) 31.1 ± (2.6) 120.5 ± (12.6) 25.9 ± (4.0) 100.8 ± (10.5) 70–79 18 21.2 ± (6.0) 26.8 ± (5.4) 123.2 ± (14.8) 22.8 ± (3.9) 105.2 ± (12.0) >80 2 25.0 ± (10.1) 22.8 ± (2.6) 97 ± (28.9) 19.9 ± (1.9) 85.1 ± (27.0) Total 103 25.7 ± (5.6) 31.4 ± (6.0) 122.2 ± (12.4) 26.1 ± (4.3) 102.1 ± (10.4) Data are presented as mean ± (standard deviation). Bland-Altman plots Conclusions FRIEND equation can estimate CRF more accurately than ACSM equation, even in Asian patients with CAD.

No abstract

No abstract