Angiotensin Receptor Blockers and Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors in COVID-19: Meta-analysis/Meta-regression Adjusted for Confounding Factors

[Influence of the Corona pandemic on cardiovascular risk factors - Data from 1775 participants of the ELITE study before and during the Corona pandemic]

BACKGROUND

 The COVID-19 pandemic and its interventions have led to a deficit in medical care and changes in people's lifestyles, which has consequently changed cardio- and cerebrovascular primary and secondary prevention. The existing data are mainly based on surveys. In addition to the problem of the accuracy of self-assessments, the pandemic per se and the massive public reporting may have biased the data.Only a few publications have compared data collected before the pandemic with results during the pandemic. The ELITE study has regularly monitored risk factors (RF) and psychosocial parameters (stress, depression, well-being, diet, brain performance, exercise) in over 5000 participants for years. From this study, data were analyzed from 1775 individuals collected before the onset and again during the pandemic (06/05/2020-25/01/2022). Thus, baseline values were unaffected by the pandemic.

RESULTS

 As expected, both improvements and worsening of the collected parameters were found. Blood pressure and depressive symptoms worsened significantly more often, with women more frequently affected. Weight and stress levels also increased more often than they improved. Only physical activity showed a slight increase. 24.1 % showed only deteriorations and no improvements in these parameters. In contrast, 19.6 % showed improvements exclusively. In the group with only worsening, there was a significant increase in individuals with the risk factors (RF) hypertension, obesity, elevated LDL cholesterol, nicotine, and diabetes mellitus. This resulted in an increase in individuals with 2 or more RF. In contrast, the number of individuals with 2 and more RF decreased in the group with only improvements. Strikingly, individuals with risk factors improved more frequently.

CONCLUSION

 A not insignificant part of the population experienced significant worsening of RF during the pandemic. This particularly affected blood pressure and depressive symptoms, and more often women.

Prior Use of Angiotensin-converting Enzyme Inhibitors or Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers and Clinical Outcomes of Sepsis and Septic Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

ABSTRACT

Sepsis and septic shock are life-threatening conditions that are associated with high mortality and considerable health care costs. The association between prior angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) use and outcomes after sepsis is elusive. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of the prior use of ACEi or ARBs and outcomes after sepsis and septic shock. A relevant literature review was performed in 4 databases from inception until July 2022. Independent reviewers first screened the title, abstract, and full text, and then, data extraction and analysis were performed. One post hoc analysis of a trial and 6 retrospective cohort studies were included in this review. There were 22% lower odds of in-hospital/30-day mortality among patients who have used ACEi/ARBs in the past [23.83% vs. 37.20%; odds ratio (OR), 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.64-0.96], and reduced 90-day mortality (OR, 0.80, 95% CI, 0.69-0.92). ACEi/ARBs users were found to have 31% lesser odds of developing acute kidney injury as compared with nonusers (OR, 0.69, 95% CI, 0.63-0.76). There was no significant difference in the length of hospital stay (MD 1.26, 95% CI, ‒7.89 to 10.42), need for renal replacement therapy (OR, 0.71, 95% CI, 0.13-3.92), mechanical ventilation (OR, 1.10, 95% CI, 0.88-1.37) or use of vasopressors (OR, 1.21, 95% CI, 0.91-1.61). Based on this analysis, prior use of ACEi/ARBs lowers the risk of mortality and adverse renal events in patients with sepsis and septic shock.

Stratification of hypertension and SARS-CoV-2 infection by quantitative NMR spectroscopy of human blood serum

BACKGROUND

Diagnostic approaches like the nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy (NMR) based quantification of metabolites, lipoproteins, and inflammation markers has helped to identify typical alterations in the blood serum of COVID-19 patients. However, confounders such as sex, and comorbidities, which strongly influence the metabolome, were often not considered. Therefore, the aim of this NMR study was to consider sex, as well as arterial hypertension (AHT), when investigating COVID-19-positive serum samples in a large age-and sex matched cohort.

METHODS

NMR serum data from 329 COVID-19 patients were compared with 305 healthy controls. 134 COVID-19 patients were affected by AHT. These were analyzed together with NMR data from 58 hypertensives without COVID-19. In addition to metabolite, lipoprotein, and glycoprotein data from NMR, common laboratory parameters were considered. Sex was considered in detail for all comparisons.

RESULTS

Here, we show that several differences emerge from previous NMR COVID-19 studies when AHT is considered. Especially, the previously described triglyceride-rich lipoprotein profile is no longer observed in COVID-19 patients, nor an increase in ketone bodies. Further alterations are a decrease in glutamine, leucine, isoleucine, and lysine, citric acid, HDL-4 particles, and total cholesterol. Additionally, hypertensive COVID-19 patients show higher inflammatory NMR parameters than normotensive patients.

CONCLUSIONS

We present a more precise picture of COVID-19 blood serum parameters. Accordingly, considering sex and comorbidities should be included in future metabolomics studies for improved and refined patient stratification. Due to metabolic similarities with other viral infections, these results can be applied to other respiratory diseases in the future.

Potential use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors to reduce COVID-19 severity

SARS-CoV-2 infection and its clinical manifestations (COVID-19) quickly evolved to a pandemic and a global public health emergency. The limited effectivity of available treatments aimed at reducing virus replication and the lessons learned from other coronavirus infections (SARS-CoV-1 or NL63) that share the internalization process of SARS-CoV-2, led us to revisit the COVID-19 pathogenesis and potential treatments. Virus protein S binds to the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) initiating the internalization process. Endosome formation removes ACE2 from the cellular membrane preventing its counter-regulative effect mediated by the metabolism of angiotensin II to angiotensin (1-7). Internalized virus-ACE2 complexes have been identified for these coronaviruses. SARS-CoV-2 presents the highest affinity for ACE2 and produces the most severe symptoms. Assuming ACE2 internalization is the trigger for COVID-19 pathogenesis, accumulation of angiotensin II can be viewed as the potential cause of symptoms. Angiotensin II is a strong vasoconstrictor, but has also important roles in hypertrophy, inflammation, remodeling, and apoptosis. Higher levels of ACE2 in the lungs explain the acute respiratory distress syndrome as primary symptoms. Most of the described findings and clinical manifestations of COVID-19, including increased interleukin levels, endothelial inflammation, hypercoagulability, myocarditis, dysgeusia, inflammatory neuropathies, epileptic seizures and memory disorders can be explained by excessive angiotensin II levels. Several meta-analyses have demonstrated that previous use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers were associated with better prognosis for COVID-19. Therefore, pragmatic trials to assess the potential therapeutic benefits of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors should be urgently promoted by health authorities to widen the therapeutic options for COVID-19.

Hypertension care during the COVID-19 pandemic in an integrated health care system

Retention in hypertension care, medication adherence, and blood pressure (BP) may have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. In a retrospective cohort study of 64 766 individuals with treated hypertension from an integrated health care system, we compared hypertension care during the year pre-COVID-19 (March 2019-February 2020) and the first year of COVID-19 (March 2020-February 2021). Retention in hypertension care was defined as receiving clinical BP measurements during COVID-19. Medication adherence was measured using prescription refills. Clinical care was assessed by in-person and virtual visits and changes in systolic and diastolic BP. The cohort had a mean age of 67.8 (12.2) years, 51.2% were women, and 73.5% were White. In 60 757 individuals with BP measurements pre-COVID-19, 16618 (27.4%) had no BP measurements during COVID-19. Medication adherence declined from 86.0% to 80.8% (p < .001). In-person primary care visits decreased from 2.7 (2.7) to 1.4 (1.9) per year, while virtual contacts increased from 9.5 (12.2) to 11.2 (14.2) per year (both p < .001). Among individuals with BP measurements, mean (SD) systolic BP was 126.5 mm Hg (11.8) pre-COVID-19 and 127.3 mm Hg (12.6) during COVID-19 (p = .14). Mean diastolic BP was 73.5 mm Hg (8.5) pre-COVID-19 and 73.5 mm Hg (8.7) during COVID-19 (p = .77). Even in this integrated health care system, many individuals did not receive clinical BP monitoring during COVID-19. Most individuals who remained in care maintained pre-COVID BP. Targeted outreach may be necessary to restore care continuity and hypertension control at the population level.

COVID-19 and the heart

BACKGROUND

There is evidence for a bi-directional relationship between COVID-19 and the cardiovascular (CV) system.

SOURCE OF DATA

Published literature.

AREAS OF AGREEMENT

Pre-existing heart failure (HF) increases the risk of mortality with COVID-19. CV complications are recognized, including increased rates of acute coronary syndromes, HF, arrhythmia and myocarditis. Drugs targeting the angiotensin system are safe and may provide prognostic benefit.

AREAS OF CONTROVERSY

Vaccination as a cause of myocarditis remains a key area of contention.

GROWING POINTS

As the pandemic progresses, we are gaining more data about the long-term effects of COVID-19 on the CV system: long COVID, and medium-to-long-term increases in CV risk.

AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH

Large-scale longitudinal studies will shed light on long-term CV outcomes with COVID-19. Furthermore, the differential effects of COVID-19 variants on the CV system must be investigated.

Renin-Angiotensin System Pathway Therapeutics Associated With Improved Outcomes in Males Hospitalized With COVID-19

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) or angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors are associated with improved outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 according to sex and to report sex-related differences in renin-angiotensin system (RAS) components.

DESIGN

Prospective observational cohort study comparing the effects of ARB or ACE inhibitors versus no ARBs or ACE inhibitors in males versus females. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 downregulates ACE-2, potentially increasing angiotensin II (a pro-inflammatory vasoconstrictor). Sex-based differences in RAS dysregulation may explain sex-based differences in responses to ARBs because the ACE2 gene is on the X chromosome. We recorded baseline characteristics, comorbidities, prehospital ARBs or ACE inhibitor treatment, use of organ support and mortality, and measured RAS components at admission and days 2, 4, 7, and 14 in a subgroup ( n = 46), recorded d -dimer ( n = 967), comparing males with females.

SETTING

ARBs CORONA I is a multicenter Canadian observational cohort of patients hospitalized with acute COVID-19. This analysis includes patients admitted to 10 large urban hospitals across the four most populated provinces.

PATIENTS

One-thousand six-hundred eighty-six patients with polymerase chain reaction-confirmed COVID-19 (February 2020 to March 2021) for acute COVID-19 illness were included.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Males on ARBs before admission had decreased use of ventilation (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.52; p = 0.007) and vasopressors (aOR = 0.55; p = 0.011) compared with males not on ARBs or ACE inhibitors. No significant effects were observed in females for these outcomes. The test for interaction was significant for use of ventilation ( p = 0.006) and vasopressors ( p = 0.044) indicating significantly different responses to ARBs according to sex. Males had significantly higher plasma ACE-1 at baseline and angiotensin II at day 7 and 14 than females.

CONCLUSIONS

ARBs use was associated with less ventilation and vasopressors in males but not females. Sex-based differences in RAS dysregulation may contribute to sex-based differences in outcomes and responses to ARBs in COVID-19.

Biomarkers of Volume Overload and Edema in Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

From a pathogenetic point of view, heart failure (HF) is characterized by the activation of several neurohumoral pathways with a role in maintaining the cardiac output and the adequate perfusion pressure in target organs and tissues. Decreased cardiac output in HF with reduced ejection fraction causes activation of the sympathetic nervous system, the renin angiotensin aldosterone system, arginine-vasopressin system, natriuretic peptides, and endothelin, all of which cause water and salt retention in the body. As a result, patients will present clinically as the main symptoms: dyspnea and peripheral edema caused by fluid redistribution to the lungs and/or by fluid overload. By studying these pathophysiological mechanisms, biomarkers with a prognostic and therapeutic role in the management of edema were identified in patients with HF with low ejection fraction. This review aims to summarize the current data from the specialty literature of such biomarkers with a role in the pathogenesis of edema in HF with low ejection fraction. These biomarkers may be the basis for risk stratification and the development of new therapeutic means in the treatment of edema in these patients.

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.

Effects of Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibitors on Mortality and Disease Severity of COVID-19 Patients: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

There is controversy over the effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) on the prognosis in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), therefore, we aim to further explore the effect of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors on COVID-19-associated disease severity and mortality.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library databases, medRxiv, and bioRxiv from inception to 6 September 2021. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcome was severe disease which was defined as admission to the intensive care unit, the use of noninvasive or invasive mechanical ventilation, or death.

RESULTS

A total of 7 randomized controlled trials involving 1,321 COVID-19 patients were included. Fixed-effects meta-analysis demonstrated that the use of ACEI/ARB was not associated with higher risk of mortality (risk ratio [RR] = 0.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.57-1.22, P = 0.10, I2 = 43%) and disease severity (RR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.71-1.05, P = 0.11, I2 = 47%). However, the subgroup analysis showed that compared with no ACEI/ARB use, the use of ARB was associated with a significant reduction of mortality (RR = 0.23, CI 0.09-0.60, P = 0.55, I2 = 0%) and disease severity (RR = 0.38, CI 0.19-0.77, P = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, based on the available data, ACEI/ARB is not associated with the risk of mortality and disease severity in COVID-19 patients. And ACEI/ARB medications, especially ARB, should not be discontinued for patients with COVID-19.

Renin-angiotensin system blockers during the COVID-19 pandemic: an update for patients with hypertension and chronic kidney disease

Hypertension and chronic kidney disease (CKD) are among the most common comorbidities associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity and mortality risk. Renin–angiotensin system (RAS) blockers are cornerstones in the treatment of both hypertension and proteinuric CKD. In the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, a hypothesis emerged suggesting that the use of RAS blockers may increase susceptibility for COVID-19 infection and disease severity in these populations. This hypothesis was based on the fact that angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), a counter regulatory component of the RAS, acts as the receptor for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 cell entry. Extrapolations from preliminary animal studies led to speculation that upregulation of ACE2 by RAS blockers may increase the risk of COVID-19-related adverse outcomes. However, these hypotheses were not supported by emerging evidence from observational and randomized clinical trials in humans, suggesting no such association. Herein we describe the physiological role of ACE2 as part of the RAS, discuss its central role in COVID-19 infection and present original and updated evidence from human studies on the association between RAS blockade and COVID-19 infection or related outcomes, with a particular focus on hypertension and CKD.

Cardiovascular complications of COVID-19

The emergence of the novel SARS coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causative agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has resulted in an unprecedented pandemic that has been accompanied by a global health crisis. Although the lungs are the main organs involved in COVID-19, systemic disease with a wide range of clinical manifestations also develops in patients infected with SARS-CoV-2. One of the major systems affected by this virus is the cardiovascular system. The presence of preexisting cardiovascular disease increases mortality in patients with COVID-19, and cardiovascular injuries, including myocarditis, cardiac rhythm abnormalities, endothelial cell injury, thrombotic events, and myocardial interstitial fibrosis, are observed in some patients with COVID-19. The underlying pathophysiology of COVID-19-associated cardiovascular complications is not fully understood, although direct viral infection of myocardium and cytokine storm have been suggested as possible mechanisms of myocarditis. In this Review, we summarize available data on SARS-CoV-2-related cardiac damage and discuss potential mechanisms of cardiovascular implications of this rapidly spreading virus.