The Role of Sacubitril-Valsartan in Post-Acute Myocardial Infarction (RSV-PAMI) Trial: Preliminary Results

Abdelnabi, Mahmoud; Saleh, Yehia; Badran, Haitham

doi:10.1016/j.carrev.2021.06.032

Cited by 3 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of the 9 studies, 6 were RCTs and 3 were non-RCTs. Based on our defined outcomes, 8 studies reported on CRR outcomes ( 24 , 25 , 27 – 32 ); 4 studies reported on biomarkers outcomes ( 25 , 29 – 31 ); 7 studies reported on MACE and HF outcomes ( 25 – 31 ); 6 studies reported on readmission outcomes ( 25 , 26 , 28 , 30 – 32 ); 4 studies reported on cardiac death outcomes ( 26 – 28 , 31 ); 4 studies reported on MI outcomes ( 26 – 29 ); while 3 studies reported on adverse side effects ( 25 , 28 , 30 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This study has several limitations: some studies reported some results in advance, which may affect the overall quality of the study ( 27 ). Therefore, these results should be interpreted with caution; only 9 studies were included in the comparison of ARNI and ARB, a limited number of which may be due to the fact that ARNI was rarely used in patients with AMI at present.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Pooled data involving 937 patients from 8 studies (24, 25, [27][28][29][30][31][32] showed that LVEF scores increased significantly compared with baseline after treatment with ARNI (MD: 9.02%, [95%CI: 6.68, 11.36]; Figure 3A). Nonetheless, the I 2 -value for studies assessing changes was 87%, implying significant heterogeneity across the studies.…”

Section: Effects Of Angiotensin-receptor Neprilysin Inhibitor On Card...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan vs. valsartan in patients with acute myocardial infarction: A meta-analysis

Yang

Han²,

Lü³

et al. 2022

Front. Cardiovasc. Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe angiotensin-receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) sacubitril/valsartan was shown to be superior to the angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) valsartan in terms of reversing heart failure classification (NYHA classification), reducing N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) level and cardiovascular mortality in many studies. Yet, the efficacy of ARNI did not come from patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI).MethodsWe searched databases for research published from inception to July 29, 2022, that reported cardiac reverse remodeling (CRR) or security indices. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. Nine studies enrolling 1,369 patients were included to perform a meta-analysis. There were 716 patients in the ARNI group and 653 in the ARB group.ResultsARNI outperformed ARBs in terms of CRR indices, with striking changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) (MD: 4.12%, 95%CI: 2.36, 5.88, P < 0.0001), diameter (MD: –3.40 mm, 95%CI: –4.30, –2.94, P < 0.00001, I2 = 0%) and left atrial diameter (MD: –2.41 mm, 95%CI: –3.85, –0.97, P = 0.001, I2 = 0%), other indices there showed no significant improvements. The incidences of major adverse cardiac events (RR: 0.47, 95%CI: 0.34–0.65, P < 0.00001, I2 = 0%), the heart failure (RR: 0.37, 95%CI: 0.23–0.61, P < 0.0001, I2 = 0%), readmission (RR: 0.54, 95%CI: 0.36–0.80, P = 0.003, I2 = 29%) in the sacubitril/valsartan group were lower than the ARB group, while the incidences of cardiac death (RR: 0.56, 95%CI: 0.28, 1.09, P = 0.09), the myocardial infarction (RR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.39, 1.77, P = 0.63), adverse side effects (RR: 1.67, 95% CI: 0.89, 3.13, P = 0.11) showed no difference.ConclusionThis research indicated that early initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in patients after AMI was superior to ARBs in reducing the risks of major adverse cardiac events, heart failure, readmission, and enhancing left ventricular EF, decreasing diameter, left atrial diameter. As for the other outcomes (the incidences of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and adverse side effects), sacubitril/valsartan demonstrated no obvious advantage over ARBs.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier [CRD42022307237].

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Effects Of Angiotensin-receptor Neprilysin Inhibitor On Card...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan vs. valsartan in patients with acute myocardial infarction: A meta-analysis

Yang

Han²,

Lü³

et al. 2022

Front. Cardiovasc. Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A total of 129 articles were initially retrieved. The information on the articles was imported into the EndNote X9.1 software, and after duplicate checking and screening, 10 articles were finally included [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17]. The screening process and results of the articles are shown in Fig.…”

Section: Literature Search and Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The methodological quality of the studies included in this analysis was assessed using RevMan 5.3. Among the 10 studies analyzed, 8 studies [9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] were described as randomized, 1 study [8] was randomized double-blind, and 1 study [17] was randomized using envelope method. The risk assessment of bias included in the study is shown in Figs.…”

Section: Risk Of Biasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sacubitril/valsartan improves the prognosis of acute myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis

Wang,

Li,

Zhang

2024

Coronary Artery Disease

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To systematically evaluate the effect of sacubitril/valsartan (SV) on the prognosis of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), and to provide evidence for expanding the clinical application of SV. Methods PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to October 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of SV in patients with AMI. The article was screened and evaluated by the Cochrane 5.1.0 bias risk assessment tool. RevMan5.3 was used for meta-analysis of the outcome indicators. Results Ten RCTs involving 7230 patients were included. The results showed that SV increased left ventricular eject fraction (MD = 2.86, 95% CI [1.81–3.90], P < 0.00001) and reduced readmission rate (RR = 0.46, 95% CI [0.32–0.68], P < 0.0001), decreased N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (MD = −477.46, 95% CI [−914.96 to −39.96], P = 0.03), and reduced major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) (RR = 0.48, 95% CI [0.27–0.85], P = 0.01). There was no significant difference in the rate of adverse reaction (AR) between the trial group and the control group (RR = 0.88, 95% CI [0.60–1.30], P = 0.52). Conclusion SV can effectively improve the prognosis of AMI, prevent complications, and there is no significant difference in safety compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker.

show abstract

An Investigation into the Effectiveness of Sacubitril and Valsartan Sodium with Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Acute Myocardial Infarction

Li,

Chen

2023

IJPS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To evaluate the effectiveness of emergency percutaneous coronary intervention when used in combination with sacubitril and valsartan sodium for managing patients with acute myocardial infarction. Our randomized controlled trial enrolled 78 patients with acute myocardial infarction treated at our hospital between October 2018 and October 2020. Participants were allocated randomly into two groups; observation group (n=39) received sacubitril and valsartan sodium combined with percutaneous coronary intervention, and the control group (n=39) received enalapril and percutaneous coronary intervention. In our study, in addition to comparing changes in cardiac biomarkers (troponin I and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide) before and after treatment, we also analyzed adverse reactions and changes in cardiac structure and function. After 6 mo, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter and left ventricular end-systolic diameter of observation group was obviously decreased, while the control group has no significant change. In the aspect of left ventricular ejection fraction, the observation group increased significantly, while the control group had no significant change. In the N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide serum levels and the incidence of heart failure, the observation group showed advantages, compared with the control group. Sacubitril and valsartan sodium combined with emergency percutaneous coronary intervention can improve cardiac structural and functional indices, reduce the risk of heart failure, and increase long-term survival time in acute myocardial infarction patients. This approach is safe and effective and therefore warrants further consideration in clinical settings.

show abstract

The Role of Sacubitril-Valsartan in Post-Acute Myocardial Infarction (RSV-PAMI) Trial: Preliminary Results

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan vs. valsartan in patients with acute myocardial infarction: A meta-analysis

Efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan vs. valsartan in patients with acute myocardial infarction: A meta-analysis

Sacubitril/valsartan improves the prognosis of acute myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis

An Investigation into the Effectiveness of Sacubitril and Valsartan Sodium with Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Acute Myocardial Infarction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About