Faculty Bibliography

The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) plays a pivotal role in the pathogenesis of hypertension (HTN). Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) are first line anti-HTN drug classes that are potent, effective and largely safe. Direct renin inhibitors (DRIs) have shown similar blood pressure (BP) reduction but more side effects. The efficacy of ACEIs and ARBs (for cardiovascular, cerebrovascular and renal protection) has been promoted to extend beyond what could be explained by BP reduction alone. In the current review, we will briefly discuss theBromfield and Muntner (Jun 2013) pathophysiology of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) system,World Health Organization. A Global Brief on Hypertension: Silent Killer, Global Public Health Crisis (April 2013) clinical evidence for ACEIs, ARBs and DRIs in HTN,Bian et al. (Nov-Dec 2010) comparison of ACEIs vs ARBs and combination therapy,Yusuf S, Sleight P, Pogue J, Bosch J, Davies R, Dagenais G. Effects of an angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor, ramipril, on cardiovascular events in high-risk patients. The Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation Study Investigators. N. Engl. J. Med. Jan 20 (2000) role of RAAS inhibitors in specific patient populations,Group PC. Randomised trial of a perindopril-based blood-pressure-lowering regimen among 6,105 individuals with previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack. Lancet. Sep 29 (2001) safety profile of RAAS inhibitors, andPitt B, O'Neill B, Feldman R, et al. The QUinapril Ischemic Event Trial (QUIET): evaluation of chronic ACE inhibitor therapy in patients with ischemic heart disease and preserved left ventricular function. Am. J. Cardiol. May 1 (2001) guideline recommendations and future perspectives. Closer scrutiny of outcome data shows little, if any, evidence that the efficacy of RAAS blockers in HTN extends beyond BP reduction.

OBJECTIVES: Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) seropositive individuals are predisposed to acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We sought to evaluate management strategies and outcomes of AMI in patients with HIV in the contemporary era. METHODS: We analyzed data from the National Inpatient Sample from 2002 to 2011 for patients admitted with AMI with or without HIV. Propensity-score matching was used to identify HIV seropositive AMI patients with similar characteristics who were managed invasively (cardiac catheterization, percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI], or coronary artery bypass graft surgery [CABG]) or conservatively. The primary outcome was in-hospital all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Among 1,363,570 patients admitted with AMI, 3788 (0.28%) were HIV seropositive. The frequency of HIV diagnosis among AMI patients increased over time (0.20% in 2002 to 0.35% in 2011; P for trend <.001). Patients with HIV had lower odds of invasive management (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55-0.65) and were less likely to undergo CABG (OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.57-0.76) or receive drug-eluting stents (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.76-0.92) than HIV-seronegative patients. Patients with HIV had higher in-hospital mortality (adjusted OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.13-1.64) than those without HIV. In a propensity-matched cohort of 1608 patients with HIV treated for AMI with invasive vs conservative management, invasive management was associated with lower in-hospital mortality (3.0% vs 8.2%; P<.001; OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.21-0.56). CONCLUSIONS: Disparities exist in management of AMI by HIV status. HIV seropositive patients were less likely to receive invasive management, CABG, and drug-eluting stents, and had higher in-hospital mortality vs patients without HIV.