Use of Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System Inhibitors and Severe COVID-19 Outcomes in Patients with Hypertension: A Nationwide Cohort Study

Effect of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors on time to nucleic acid negative conversion in hypertensive patients with SARS-CoV-2 omicron infection: a propensity score matching study

We examined the relationship between RAAS inhibitor use and Omicron infection in mildly symptomatic patients. This retrospective case-control observational study included 50,121 patients with mild Omicron infection from the largest "Fangcang" shelter hospital in Shanghai between April 9, 2022, and May 21, 2022. Using 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM), we classified 4394 COVID-19 patients into hypertension and non-hypertension groups, and 406 hypertensive patients into RAAS inhibitor and non-RAAS inhibitor groups. The risk of initial symptoms of infection, cumulative negative conversion rates, time to nucleic-acid negative conversion, and viral loads were compared. In the hypertension group, the median number of days for nucleic-acid negative conversion was 7.0 (IQR, 5.0-9.0), which was greater than non-hypertensive group (median (IQR) 6.0 (4.0-8.0), P < 0.001, Cohen's d = 0.29); the mean and minimum cycle threshold values (CT-values) were significantly lower (P < 0.001, Cohen's d = 0.23). In the RAAS inhibitors group, the median number of days for nucleic-acid negative conversion was 7.0 days (IQR, 5.0-9.0), which was shorter than the non-RAAS inhibitors group ([median (IQR)] 8.0 (6.0-10.0), P < 0.001, Cohen's d = 0.34), the cumulative negative conversion rates at 3-8 days being all higher than non-RAAS inhibitors groups (P < 0.05). The most significant difference in negative conversion rate between the RAAS inhibitor and non-RAAS inhibitor group was on the 4th day. No significant difference was observed in mean and minimum CT-values from RAAS inhibitor and non-RAAS inhibitor groups (P > 0.05). RAAS inhibitor use in patients with hypertension is associated with nucleic-acid negative conversion duration and negative conversion rate. RAAS inhibitors clearly do not aggravate or prolong 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 blockers in Bulgarian COVID-19 patients with or without chronic kidney disease

When angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker-treated patients present with SARS-CoV-2 infection there is a debate to know whether renin-angiotensin-aldosterone (RAAS) blockers should be stopped or not. We conducted a prospective observational study in Bulgarian COVID-19-infected patients with or without chronic kidney disease (CKD) to assess whether maintenance RAAS blocker therapy has an impact on SARS-CoV-2 infection and its complications. We included 120 in-patient COVID-19 subjects, of whom 70 had CKD and 50 had normal renal function. A total of 30% of the patients (total number of 36 patients, 21 females) were receiving RAAS therapy at admission and it was maintained throughout hospitalization. The overall mortality was 19.2% (23 patients); there was no significant difference across the 2 groups (P-value = .21), except in RAAS blockers-treated hypertensive patients who had a significantly lower mortality as compared to non-RAAS-blockers-treated hypertensive patients (P = .04). Regarding subsequent intensive-care unit admission, there were 50% less patients in the RAAS group (4 out of 36, i.e., 11%) as compared to 19 out of 84 from the non-RAAS group, that is, 22.6% (P = .29). Overall, 37 patients developed acute kidney injury (any stage by KDIGO); of them 14 (37.8%) were receiving RAAS blockers. Acute kidney injury was not significantly associated with the use of RAAS blockers (P-value = .28). Likewise, both in non-CKD and in CKD patients the use of RAAS blockers did not have an impact on renal function recovery after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Finally, regarding RAAS blockers and the biological parameters outcome only D-dimers were significantly lower at the follow-up as compared to that in non-RAAS blocker treated patients. RAAS blockers benefited patients with hypertension by lowering mortality rate. Other than that, RAAS blocker therapy continuation during SARS-CoV-2 infection in CKD and non-CKD patients had no significant impact upon major outcomes.

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.