The use of ACE-inhibitors after myocardial infarction

Background: There is good evidence that angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors are beneficial after myocardial infarction (MI). However, it is not known how widely this evidence is used in practice and whether all eligible patients receive this therapy. Aim: To assess the usage of ACE inhibitors in patients after MI in a large teaching hospital. Method: A one month prospective analysis, combined with a three month retrospective analysis, was conducted at the Royal Brisbane Hospital (RBH) in February-March 2000. Patients admitted with an MI or who had been diagnosed with an MI during admission from November 1999 to March 2000 were identified from the coronary care unit (CCU) records. Inpatient medication charts and outpatient records were then reviewed. Information collected included: ACE inhibitor use, doses, reasons for prescribing/not prescribing ACE inhibitors, and ACE inhibitor prescribers (cardiologists or general physicians). Results: Forty four patients with an MI were included in the study, 28 of whom were prescribed ACE-inhibitors (64%). Twenty four of the 28 patients on ACE inhibitors were prescribed perindopril. The major reason given for prescribing ACE inhibitors was signs of congestive cardiac failure. All ACE inhibitors initiated in patients after MI at RBH were ordered by cardiologists. Conclusion: ACE inhibitors were prescribed appropriately in 88% of patients who met criteria for their use. This high percentage of appropriate prescribing was encouraging. Reevaluation as part of an ongoing quality assurance activity could be used to ensure this is maintained.

Synthesis of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors: an important class of antihypertensive drugs

This report outlines the discovery, the design and development of new compounds, and, structure-activity relationships for this drug category. Updated approaches to planned syntheses of new worthy ACE-inhibitors are also exploited.

Benefits of ACE inhibitors with tissue-active levels in the cardiac-compromised patient

Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) have been proven beneficial to the cardiac-compromised patient, but whether there is an advantage associated with using a tissue-active or systemically-active ACEI is debatable. An investigation into the clinical benefits of tissue ACEI for veterinary patients was undertaken by comparing enalapril with ramipril. Results obtained concluded that although there is much evidence to prove that tissue ACEIs are superior over systemic ACEIs at the cellular level, this does not correlate in the clinical sense. Both enalapril and ramipril provided similar clinical benefits to the cardiac-compromised patient.

The effects of centrally acting ACE inhibitors on the rate of cognitive and functional decline in dementia: a KDD approach

Alzheimer’s Disease and other dementias are one of the most challenging illnesses confronting countries with ageing populations. Treatment options for dementia are limited, and the costs are significant. There is a growing need to develop new treatments for dementia, especially for the elderly. There is also growing evidence that centrally acting angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, which cross the blood-brain barrier, are associated with a reduced rate of cognitive and functional decline in dementia, especially in Alzheimer’s disease (AD). The aim of this research is to investigate the effects of centrally acting ACE inhibitors (CACE-Is) on the rate of cognitive and functional decline in dementia, using a three phased KDD process. KDD, as a scientific way to process and analysis clinical data, is used to find useful insights from a variety of clinical databases. The data used are from three clinic databases: Geriatric Assessment Tool (GAT), the Doxycycline and Rifampin for Alzheimer’s Disease (DARAD), and the Qmci validation databases, which were derived from several different geriatric clinics in Canada. This research involves patients diagnosed with AD, vascular or mixed dementia only. Patients were included if baseline and end-point (at least six months apart) Standardised Mini-Mental State Examination (SMMSE), Quick Mild Cognitive Impairment (Qmci) or Activities Daily Living (ADL) scores were available. Basically, the rates of change are compared between patients taking CACE-Is, and those not currently treated with CACE-Is. The results suggest that there is a statistically significant difference in the rate of decline in cognitive and functional scores between CACE-I and NoCACE-I patients. This research also validates that the Qmci, a new short assessment test, has potential to replace the current popular screening tests for cognition in the clinic and clinical trials.

Angiotensin AT-1 receptor antagonism: complementary or alternative to ACE inhibition in cardiovascular and renal disease

Both angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and AT-1 receptor antagonists reduce the effects of angiotensin II, however they may have different clinical effects. This is because the ACE inhibitors, but not the AT-1 receptor antagonists, increase the levels of substance P, bradykinin and tissue plasminogen activator. The AT-1 receptor antagonists, but not the ACE inhibitors, are capable of inhibiting the effects of angiotensin II produced by enzymes other than ACE. On the basis of the present clinical trial evidence, AT-1 receptor antagonists, rather than the ACE inhibitors, should be used to treat hypertension associated with left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy. Both groups of drugs are useful when hypertension is not complicated by LV hypertrophy, and in diabetes. In the treatment of diabetes with or without hypertension, there is good clinical support for the use of either an ACE inhibitor or an AT-1 receptor antagonist. ACE inhibitors are recommended in the treatment of renal disease that is not associated with diabetes, after myocardial infarction when left ventricular dysfunction is present, and in heart failure. As the incidence of cough is much lower with the AT-1 receptor antagonists, these can be substituted for ACE inhibitors in patients with hypertension or heart failure who have persistent cough. Preliminary studies suggest that combining an AT-1 receptor antagonist with an ACE inhibitor may be more effective than an ACE inhibitor alone in the treatment of hypertension, diabetes with hypertension, renal disease without diabetes and heart failure. However, further trials are required before combination therapy can be recommended in these conditions.

Pharmacokinetics of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors.

1. The pharmacokinetics of most ACE inhibitors have been evaluated indirectly by the measurements of plasma ACE activity and circulating levels of angiotensin I and II. 2. Although plasma ACE activity is very useful to study the degree and the time-course of ACE inhibition, one has to be aware that very different results can be obtained depending on the substrate employed in the assay. It is therefore impossible to compare the results of different inhibitors unless an identical methodology is used. 3. A clear dissociation between plasma angiotensin II levels and the antihypertensive effects of ACE inhibitors has been reported. This observation is in part linked to problems with the measurement of angiotensin II. New methods of determination of plasma angiotensin II have now allowed demonstration of the complete disappearance of plasma angiotensin II following acute ACE inhibition. During chronic treatment, however, angiotensin II generation is effectively blocked only during part of the day, but blood pressure remains controlled permanently. 4. Among the different pharmacokinetic characteristics of ACE inhibitors presently available, the route of excretion and to a lesser degree the half-life appear to be the most clinically relevant. However, the importance of the ability of ACE inhibitors to inhibit tissue renin-angiotensin systems remains to be defined.

La fonction rénale sous inhibition de l'enzyme de conversion de l'angiotensine [Renal function after administration of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors]

Angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors are widely used today for the management of hypertension and congestive heart failure. These agents inhibit angiotensin II synthesis. In some particular circumstances they may be responsible for deterioration of renal function, e.g. in hypertensive patients with bilateral renal artery stenosis or with stenosis of the artery supplying a single kidney, or in patients with severe congestive heart failure or marked nephroangiosclerosis. In these patients renal perfusion pressure may become too low to maintain adequate glomerular filtration as there remains no angiotensin II to increase the tone of the efferent arteriole. In high risk patients it is therefore recommended that serum creatinine be checked after initiating therapy with an ACE inhibitor.

Novel angiotensin II inhibitors in cardiovascular medicine.

Blockade of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone cascade is now recognised as a very effective approach to treat hypertensive, heart failure and high cardiovascular risk patients and to retard the development of renal failure. The purpose of this review is to discuss the state of development of currently available drugs blocking the renin-angiotensin system, such as angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, renin inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor antagonists, with a special emphasis on the results of the most recent trials conducted with AT(2) receptor antagonists in heart failure and Type 2 diabetes. In addition, the future perspectives of drugs with dual mechanisms of action, such as NEP/ACE inhibitors, also named vasopeptidase inhibitors, are presented.

Individual responses to converting enzyme inhibitors and calcium antagonists.

This study was designed to assess whether the acute blood pressure response of an individual hypertensive patient to a calcium antagonist or an angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor is a good predictor of the long-term efficacy of these drug classes in this particular patient. The concept that good responses to ACE inhibitors and calcium antagonists may be mutually exclusive was also tested. Sixteen patients were included in a randomized crossover trial of enalapril, 20 mg daily, and diltiazem, 120 mg daily, for 6 weeks each. Blood pressure was measured by ambulatory blood pressure recording. During the washout phase, the acute effect of nifedipine, 10 mg p.o., and enalaprilat, 5 mg i.v., was evaluated. Nifedipine and enalaprilat reduced blood pressure equally well. The long-term blood pressure reduction induced by enalapril and diltiazem was similar. The acute blood pressure response to a given drug was not a good predictor of the result obtained with long-term therapy. No age dependency of the antihypertensive effect of either drug class was apparent. There was no evidence that a good response to one drug excluded a similarly good response to the other.

Hypertension. Angio-oedème sous inhibition de l'enzyme de conversion de l'angiotensine et de la dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 [Angioedema during ACE and DPP-4 inhibition]

Angioedema is a rare side effect of angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors. Its cause is probably related to the accumulation of bradykinin and substance P, i.e. two proinflammatory peptides normally inactivated by ACE. Angioedema occurs most of the time at the early phase of treatment, but may also develop during long-term treatment. It might involve the gastro-intestinal tract, leading to abdominal pain, vomiting and/or diarrhea, as well as pancreatitis. Dipeptidyl-ptidase-4 (DPP-4) is another enzyme allowing the degradation of bradykinin and substance P. Co-administering an ACE inhibitor and a DPP-4 inhibitor (as an antidiabetic agent) increases significantly the risk of angioedema.

[consensus Of The Brazilian Society Of Rheumatology For The Diagnosis, Management And Treatment Of Lupus Nephritis].

To develop recommendations for the diagnosis, management and treatment of lupus nephritis in Brazil. Extensive literature review with a selection of papers based on the strength of scientific evidence and opinion of the Commission on Systemic Lupus Erythematosus members, Brazilian Society of Rheumatology. 1) Renal biopsy should be performed whenever possible and if this procedure is indicated; and, when the procedure is not possible, the treatment should be guided with the inference of histologic class. 2) Ideally, measures and precautions should be implemented before starting treatment, with emphasis on attention to the risk of infection. 3) Risks and benefits of treatment should be shared with the patient and his/her family. 4) The use of hydroxychloroquine (preferably) or chloroquine diphosphate is recommended for all patients (unless contraindicated) during induction and maintenance phases. 5) The evaluation of the effectiveness of treatment should be made with objective criteria of response (complete remission/partial remission/refractoriness). 6) ACE inhibitors and/or ARBs are recommended as antiproteinuric agents for all patients (unless contraindicated). 7) The identification of clinical and/or laboratory signs suggestive of proliferative or membranous glomerulonephritis should indicate an immediate implementation of specific therapy, including steroids and an immunosuppressive agent, even though histological confirmation is not possible. 8) Immunosuppressives must be used during at least 36 months, but these medications can be kept for longer periods. Its discontinuation should only be done when the patient achieve and maintain a sustained and complete remission. 9) Lupus nephritis should be considered as refractory when a full or partial remission is not achieved after 12 months of an appropriate treatment, when a new renal biopsy should be considered to assist in identifying the cause of refractoriness and in the therapeutic decision.