Hypertension, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone-system-blocking agents, and COVID-19

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical outcomes of ACEI/ARB in East-Asian patients with COVID-19

BACKGROUND

SARS-CoV-2 invades human cells and leads to COVID-19 by direct associating with angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptors, the level of which may be increased by treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and/or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs). This meta-analysis aimed to explore the impact of ACEI/ARB treatment on the clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19 infections among population in the East-Asia region.

METHODS

We collected clinical data published from January 2000 to May 2022 in the English databases including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Two reviewers independently screened and identified studies that met the prespecified criteria. Review Manager 5.3 software was used to perform the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 28 articles were included in this analysis. The results showed that patients who were prescribed with ACEI/ARB had a shorter duration of hospital stay [MD = -2.37, 95%CI (-3.59, -1.14), P = 0.000 2] and a lower mortality rate [OR = 0.61, 95% CI (0.52, 0.70), P<0.000 01] than patients who were not on ACEI/ARB. Furthermore, there was no statistically significant difference in disease severity [OR = 0.99, 95% CI (0.83, 1.17), P = 0.90] between individuals receiving ACEI/ARB or not.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis suggested that the use of ACEI/ARB was not associated with adverse clinical outcomes in East-Asian Covid-19 patients and a reduced mortality and shorter duration of hospital stay among East-Asian population (especially for female subjects) was found. Thus, ACEI/ARB should be continued in patients infected by Covid-19.

Renin-Angiotensin Aldosterone System Inhibitors and COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Revealing Critical Bias Across a Body of Observational Research

Background

Renin‐angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitor—COVID‐19 studies, observational in design, appear to use biased methods that can distort the interaction between RAAS inhibitor use and COVID‐19 risk. This study assessed the extent of bias in that research and reevaluated RAAS inhibitor—COVID‐19 associations in studies without critical risk of bias.

Methods and Results

Searches were performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases (December 1, 2019 to October 21, 2021) identifying studies that compared the risk of infection and/or severe COVID‐19 outcomes between those using or not using RAAS inhibitors (ie, angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II type‐I receptor blockers). Weighted hazard ratios (HR) and 95% CIs were extracted and pooled in fixed‐effects meta‐analyses, only from studies without critical risk of bias that assessed severe COVID‐19 outcomes. Of 169 relevant studies, 164 had critical risks of bias and were excluded. Ultimately, only two studies presented data relevant to the meta‐analysis. In 1 351 633 people with uncomplicated hypertension using a RAAS inhibitor, calcium channel blocker, or thiazide diuretic in monotherapy, the risk of hospitalization (angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitor: HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.66–0.87; P<0.001; angiotensin II type‐I receptor blockers: HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77–0.97; P=0.015) and intubation or death (angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitor: HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.48–0.85; P=0.002; angiotensin II type‐I receptor blockers: HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.58–0.95; P=0.019) with COVID‐19 was lower in those using a RAAS inhibitor. However, these protective effects are probably not clinically relevant.

Conclusions

This study reveals the critical risk of bias that exists across almost an entire body of COVID‐19 research, raising an important question: Were research methods and/or peer‐review processes temporarily weakened during the surge of COVID‐19 research or is this lack of rigor a systemic problem that also exists outside pandemic‐based research?

Registration

URL: www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/; Unique identifier: CRD42021237859.

The impact of pre-existing hypertension and its treatment on outcomes in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19

The impact of pre-existing hypertension on outcomes in patients with the novel corona virus (SARS-CoV-2) remains controversial. To address this, we examined the impact of pre-existing hypertension and its treatment on in-hospital mortality in patients admitted to hospital with Covid-19. Using the CAPACITY-COVID patient registry we examined the impact of pre-existing hypertension and guideline-recommended treatments for hypertension on in-hospital mortality in unadjusted and multi-variate-adjusted analyses using logistic regression. Data from 9197 hospitalised patients with Covid-19 (median age 69 [IQR 57–78] years, 60.6% male, n = 5573) was analysed. Of these, 48.3% (n = 4443) had documented pre-existing hypertension. Patients with pre-existing hypertension were older (73 vs. 62 years, p < 0.001) and had twice the occurrence of any cardiac disease (49.3 vs. 21.8%; p < 0.001) when compared to patients without hypertension. The most documented class of anti-hypertensive drugs were angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) or angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) (n = 2499, 27.2%). In-hospital mortality occurred in (n = 2020, 22.0%), with more deaths occurring in those with pre-existing hypertension (26.0 vs. 18.2%, p < 0.001). Pre-existing hypertension was associated with in-hospital mortality in unadjusted analyses (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.42,1.74), no significant association was found following multivariable adjustment for age and other hypertension-related covariates (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.87,1.10). Use of ACEi or ARB tended to have a protective effect for in-hospital mortality in fully adjusted models (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78,0.99). After appropriate adjustment for confounding, pre-existing hypertension, or treatment for hypertension, does not independently confer an increased risk of in-hospital mortality patients hospitalized with Covid-19.