pathology | treatment | patient | Demonstrated benefit and harm | k | | | |
---|
acute myocardial infarction | captopril | not classified | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy captopril inferior to placebo in terms of Death in ISIS-4, 1995 | 19 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
ISIS-4, 1995 | captopril vs placebo | | Death 0.94 [0.88; 0.99] | | | captopril vs placebo | | | | SAVE, 1992 | captopril vs placebo | | | | | captopril vs placebo | | | | | captopril vs placebo | | | | | captopril vs placebo | | | | | captopril vs placebo | | | | | captopril vs placebo | | | | | captopril vs placebo | | | | | captopril or enalapril vs placebo | | | | | captopril vs placebo | | | | | captopril vs placebo | | | | | captopril vs placebo | | | | | captopril vs placebo | | | | Bussmann, 1992 | captopril vs placebo | | | | Di Pasquale, 1994 | captopril vs placebo | | | | Di Pasquale, 1997 | captopril vs placebo | | | | Galcera, 1993 | captopril vs placebo | | | | Hargreaves, 1992 | captopril vs placebo | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
ISIS-4, 1995 | captopril 6.25mg twice daily initialy titrated up to 50 mg twice daily (for 1 month) (n=29028) vs. placebo (n=29022) | Acute MI <24h of MI, no cardiogenic shock or persistent severe hypotension | double blind Factorial plan Sample size: 29028/29022 Primary endpoint: death FU duration: 1 month | CCS-1, 1995 | captopril6.25 mg initial dose, 12.5 mg 2 h later, and then 12.5 mg three times daily for 28 days (n=13634) vs. placebo (n=0) | Acute MI <36h of MI | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 13634/0 Primary endpoint: death FU duration: 1 month | SAVE, 1992 | Captopril 12·5 mg initial dose, up to 25–50 mg three times daily (n=1115) vs. placebo (n=1116) | patient within 3–16 days of a MI, LVEF <40% | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 1115/1116 Primary endpoint: Mortality from all causes FU duration: 3.5y | Pfeffer, 1988 | Captopril (n=38) vs. placebo (n=0) | patient within 11-31 days after MI, LVEF<=45%, not in overt congestive heart failure | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 38/0 Primary endpoint: hemodynamic function and left ventricular volume FU duration: 1 year | Sogaard, 1994 | Captopril 50mg daily (n=58) vs. placebo (n=0) | patients with left ventricular (LV) dysfunction on day 7 after MI | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 58/0 Primary endpoint: Ventricular arrhythmias FU duration: 6 months | Sharpe, 1988 | Captopril 25 mg thrice a day (n=60) vs. placebo (n=0) | patients with symptomless left ventricular dysfunction (LVEF<45%) 1 week after a myocardial infarction without clinical evidence of heart failure | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 60/0 Primary endpoint: left ventricular volumes FU duration: 1 year | Mortarino, 1990 | Captopril 25 mg bid (n=10) vs. placebo (n=11) | patient with mild congestive heart failure after recent MI | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 10/11 Primary endpoint: none FU duration: 2 months | French, 1999 | captopril 6.25 mg, increasing to 50 mg t.d.s. (n=243) vs. placebo (n=250) | patients aged < or = 75 years with first infarctions, presenting within 4 h of symptom onset | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 243/250 Primary endpoint: regional wall motion FU duration: 1 year | CATS, 1996 | captopril 25 mg three times a day (n=149) vs. placebo (n=149) | patients with a first anterior myocardial infarction treated with intravenous streptokinase within 6h of onset of symptoms | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 149/149 Primary endpoint: left ventricular volume index FU duration: 1 year | PRACTICAL (captopril), 1994 | captopril 25 mg three times daily or enalapril 5 mg three times daily (n=150) vs. placebo (n=75) | patients with acute myocardial infarction within 24 hours of onset | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 150/75 Primary endpoint: LV function FU duration: 1 year | ECCE, 1997 | captopril titrated dose in order to preserve their blood pressure (n=104) vs. placebo (n=104) | patients with acute myocardial infarction | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 104/104 Primary endpoint: exercise testing FU duration: 1 month | Sharpe, 1991 | captopril 50 mg twice daily (n=100) vs. placebo (n=0) | patients with Q wave myocardial infarction, but without clinical heart failure 24-48h after onset of symptoms | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 100/0 Primary endpoint: Left ventricular volumes FU duration: 3 months | Ray, 1993 | captopril 25 mg three times a day (n=99) vs. placebo (n=0) | haemodynamically stable patients with acute myocardial infarction, selected on clinical grounds as being at risk of late ventricular dilatation | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 99/0 Primary endpoint: none FU duration: 1 year | Nabel, 1991 | intravenous followed by oral captopril (n=20) vs. placebo (n=18) | patients with myocardial infarction | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 20/18 Primary endpoint: none FU duration: 3 months | Bussmann, 1992 | slow intravenous bolus injection of 2.5 or 5.0 mg captopril followed by a continuous infusion of 1.5-2.0 mg/h for a period of 48 hours (n=22) vs. placebo (n=24) | patients with acute myocardial infarction | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 22/24 Primary endpoint: QRS complexes FU duration: 48h | Di Pasquale, 1994 | captopril, 6.25 mg, orally 15 min before thrombolysis (n=188) vs. placebo before thrombolysis (n=183) | patients with acute myocardial infarction , hospitalized within 4 h of the onset of symptoms | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 188/183 Primary endpoint: not defined FU duration: 2h | Di Pasquale, 1997 | captopril first dose 2-4 h after starting thrombolysis (the dose was then increased up to 25 mg every 8 h (n=31) vs. placebo (n=30) | patients hospitalized for suspected anterior AMI within 4 h from the onset of symptoms suitable for thrombolysis | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 31/30 Primary endpoint: not defined FU duration: 12h | Galcera, 1993 | captopril (n=21) vs. placebo (n=22) | patients with a first acute myocardial infarction and a pulmonary capillary pressure equal or above 17 mmHg | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 21/22 Primary endpoint: left ventricular volume indexes FU duration: 14 days | Hargreaves, 1992 | 12.5 mg of captopril three times daily (n=36) vs. placebo (n=36) | patients with acute myocardial infarction (systolic blood pressure > 90 mm Hg) within 24 hours of the start of pain | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 36/36 Primary endpoint: none defined FU duration: 28 days |
|
acute myocardial infarction | enalapril | not classified | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
| enalapril vs placebo | | | | | enalapril vs placebo | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
CONSENSUS 2, 1992 | enalapril (1 mg IV infusion +5-20 mg PO daily) for 6 months (n=3044) vs. placebo (n=3046) | patients with acute myocardial infarctions and blood pressure above 100/60 mm Hg, <24h of MI | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 3044/3046 Primary endpoint: all cause death FU duration: 6 months | Schulman, 1995 | intravenous enalaprilat (1 mg) then oral treatment for 1 month (n=22) vs. placebo (n=21) | patients with an acute Q-wave AMI within 24 hours of symptom onset | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 22/21 Primary endpoint: cardiac volumes and ejection fraction FU duration: 1 year |
|
acute myocardial infarction | fosinopril | not classified | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
| fosinopril vs placebo | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
FAMIS, 1998 | fosinopril (n=142) vs. placebo (n=143) | patients with anterior acute myocardial infarction within 9 hours of onset | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 142/143 Primary endpoint: LV volumes FU duration: 2 years |
|
acute myocardial infarction | lisinopril | not classified | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
| lisinopril vs placebo | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
GISSI 3, 1994 | lisinopril (5 mg initial dose and then 10 mg daily) for 42 days (n=9435) vs. open control (n=9460) | Acute MI <24h of MI | open Factorial plan Sample size: 9435/9460 Primary endpoint: all cause mortality FU duration: 6 months |
|
acute myocardial infarction | ramipril | not classified | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
AIRE, 1993 | ramipril vs placebo | | | | Wagner, 2002 | ramipril vs placebo | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
AIRE, 1993 | Ramipril 2·5 mg twice daily initial dose, up to 5 mg twice daily for at least 6 months (n=1004) vs. placebo (n=992) | patient within 3–10 days of a MI,with clinical evidence of heart failure | Double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 1004/992 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 1.25 y | Wagner, 2002 | 2.5 mg ramipril orally prior to thrombolysis and 12 h later (n=51) vs. placebo (n=48) | patients with acute myocardial infarction | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 51/48 Primary endpoint: PAI-1 plasma levels FU duration: 7 days |
|
acute myocardial infarction | trandolapril | not classified | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
TRACE, 1995 | trandolapril vs placebo | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
TRACE, 1995 | Trandolapril 1 mg daily initial dose, up to 4 mg daily (n=876) vs. placebo (n=873) | patient within 3–7 days of a MI,Wall motion index <1·2 (LVEF <35%) | Double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 876/873 Primary endpoint: death from any cause FU duration: 3 y |
|
acute myocardial infarction | zofenopril | not classified | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
SMILE, 1995 | zofenopril vs placebo | Long term death (1 year) 0.70 [0.54; 0.93] death or severe congestive heart failure 0.67 [0.49; 0.93] | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
SMILE, 1995 | zofenopril initial dose 7.5 mg, up to a tagert dos eof 30mg twice daily (n=772) vs. placebo (n=784) | patients within 24 hours after a acute anterior myocardial infarction who were not undergoing thrombolysis | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 772/784 Primary endpoint: death or severe congestive FU duration: 1 year |
|
heart failure | benazepril | not classified | versus placebo or no treatment No demonstrated result for efficacy benazepril inferior to placebo in terms of NYHA class improvement in Colfer, 1992 | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Colfer, 1992 | benazepril vs placebo | | NYHA class improvement 2.18 [1.02; 4.66] | all cause death or hospitalisation 0.25 [0.05; 1.35] | McGany, 1991 | benazepril vs control | | | all cause death or hospitalisation 0.92 [0.31; 2.69] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Colfer, 1992 | benazepriltitrated up to 20mg daily (n=114) vs. placebo (n=58) | Patients with chronic New York Heart Association class II to IV symptoms of CHF and an ejection fraction by radionuclide scanning of less than or equal to 35% | double blind Sample size: 114/58 Primary endpoint: exercise duration FU duration: 12-week | McGany, 1991 | (n=29) vs. (n=32) | | Sample size: 29/32 Primary endpoint: FU duration: |
|
heart failure | captopril | not classified | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 5 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
SAVE, 1992 | captopril vs placebo | | | | | captopril vs placebo | | | | | captopril vs placebo | | | | | captopril vs placebo | | | | | captopril vs placebo | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
SAVE, 1992 | Captopril 12·5 mg initial dose, up to 25–50 mg three times daily (n=1115) vs. placebo (n=1116) | patient within 3–16 days of a MI, LVEF <40% | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 1115/1116 Primary endpoint: Mortality from all causes FU duration: 3.5y | Pfeffer, 1988 | Captopril (n=38) vs. placebo (n=0) | patient within 11-31 days after MI, LVEF<=45%, not in overt congestive heart failure | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 38/0 Primary endpoint: hemodynamic function and left ventricular volume FU duration: 1 year | Sogaard, 1994 | Captopril 50mg daily (n=58) vs. placebo (n=0) | patients with left ventricular (LV) dysfunction on day 7 after MI | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 58/0 Primary endpoint: Ventricular arrhythmias FU duration: 6 months | Sharpe, 1988 | Captopril 25 mg thrice a day (n=60) vs. placebo (n=0) | patients with symptomless left ventricular dysfunction (LVEF<45%) 1 week after a myocardial infarction without clinical evidence of heart failure | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 60/0 Primary endpoint: left ventricular volumes FU duration: 1 year | Mortarino, 1990 | Captopril 25 mg bid (n=10) vs. placebo (n=11) | patient with mild congestive heart failure after recent MI | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 10/11 Primary endpoint: none FU duration: 2 months |
|
heart failure | captopril | not classified | versus placebo or no treatment No demonstrated result for efficacy captopril inferior to placebo in terms of NYHA class improvement in Captopril Digoxin Multicenter Research Group, 1988 | 8 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Magnani, 1986 | captopril vs placebo | | | | Bussmann, 1987 | captopril vs placebo | | | Death 0.61 [0.12; 3.00] | Captopril Digoxin Multicenter Research Group, 1988 | captopril vs placebo | | NYHA class improvement 1.88 [1.20; 2.94] | all cause death or hospitalisation 0.87 [0.56; 1.34] | Barabino, 1991 | captopril vs placebo | all cause death or hospitalisation 0.50 [0.31; 0.82] | | | Munich MHFT (Kleber), 1992 | captopril vs placebo | | | Death 1.05 [0.63; 1.74] all cause death or hospitalisation 1.00 [1.00; 1.00] | | captopril vs placebo | | | | | captopril vs placebo | | | | | captopril vs placebo | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Magnani, 1986 | captopril 25 mg t.i.d. (n=48) vs. placebo (n=46) | patients on digitalis treatment for chronic congestive heart failure (NYHA class II-III) | double blind Sample size: 48/46 Primary endpoint: Clinical status, exercise capacity, cardiac dimensions and performance FU duration: 1 year | Bussmann, 1987 | captopril (n=12) vs. placebo (n=11) | patients with severe heart failure (NYHA classes III and IV) on treatment with digitalis and diuretics | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 12/11 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 6 months | Captopril Digoxin Multicenter Research Group, 1988 | captopril (n=104) vs. placebo (n=100) | patients with mild to moderate heart failure | double blind Sample size: 104/100 Primary endpoint: FU duration: | Barabino, 1991 | captopril (37.5-75 mg/day) (n=52) vs. placebo (n=49) | old patients (>75y) under treatment with digitalis and/or diuretics | double blind Sample size: 52/49 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 6 months | Munich MHFT (Kleber), 1992 | captopril 25 mg twice a day (n=83) vs. placebo
(n=87)
| patients with congestive heart failure New
York Heart Association (NYHA) functional
class I-III on standard treatment
| Double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 83/87 Primary endpoint: Progression of heart failure to NYHA class IV FU duration: 2.7y (median)
| Magnani, 1990 | captopril (n=16) vs. placebo (n=16) | patients with congestive heart failure | double blind Cross over Sample size: 16/16 Primary endpoint: hemodynamic response to static exercise FU duration: | CMRG, 1983 | captopril (n=50) vs. placebo (n=42) | patients with heart failure refractory to digitalis and diuretic therapy | double blind Sample size: 50/42 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 weeks | Cilazapril-Captopril Multi-centre Group (capt vs pbo), 1995 | cilazapril 1-2.5 mg once daily (n=108) vs. placebo
(n=114) | patients with chronic heart failure (New York Heart Association classes II-IV)
| double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 108/114 Primary endpoint: exercise tolerance FU duration: 12 weeks
|
|
heart failure | captopril | not classified | versus angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
| captopril vs enalapril | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
packer, 1986 | captopril 150 mg/d (n=21) vs. enalapril 40mg/d (n=21) | patient with severe chronic heart failure | open Parallel groups Sample size: 21/21 Primary endpoint: none FU duration: 1-3 months |
|
heart failure | cilazapril | not classified | versus placebo or no treatment No demonstrated result for efficacy | 3 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Drexler, 1989 | cilazapril vs placebo | | | all cause death or hospitalisation 0.91 [0.16; 5.30] NYHA class improvement ∞ [NaN; ∞] | | cilazapril vs placebo | | | | | cilazapril vs placebo | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Drexler, 1989 | cilazapril (n=11) vs. placebo (n=10) | patients with chronic heart failure | double blind Sample size: 11/10 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 3 months | Dosseger, 1993 | cilazapril titrated up to 2.5 mg/d (n=7) vs. placebo (n=35) | patients with chronic heart failure (NYHA class II to IV) stabilized on digitalis and/or diuretics | double blind Sample size: 7/35 Primary endpoint: exercise tolerance FU duration: 12 weeks | Cilazapril-Captopril Multi-centre Group, 1995 | cilazapril 1-2.5 mg once daily (n=221) vs. placebo (n=114) | patients with chronic heart failure (New York Heart Association classes II-IV) | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 221/114 Primary endpoint: exercise tolerance FU duration: 12 weeks |
|
heart failure | cilazapril | not classified | versus angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
| cilazapril vs captopril | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Cilazapril-Captopril Multi-centre Group (cila vs capt), 1995 | cilazapril 1-2.5 mg once daily (n=221) vs. captopril 25-50mg three times daily (n=108)
| patients with chronic heart failure (New York Heart Association classes II-IV)
| double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 221/108 Primary endpoint: exercise tolerance FU duration: 12 weeks
|
|
heart failure | enalapril | not classified | versus placebo or no treatment No demonstrated result for efficacy enalapril inferior to placebo in terms of Death in SOLVD treatment, 1991 enalapril inferior to placebo in terms of Hospitalisation in SOLVD treatment, 1991 enalapril inferior to placebo in terms of NYHA class improvement in CONSENSUS, 1987 | 12 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
SOLVD treatment, 1991 | enalapril vs placebo | all cause death or hospitalisation 0.83 [0.77; 0.90] | Death 0.89 [0.80; 0.98] Hospitalisation 0.71 [0.63; 0.79] | | | enalapril vs placebo | | | | Cleland, 1985 | enalapril vs placebo | | | all cause death or hospitalisation NaN [NaN; NaN] | Rucinska-b (enalapril), 1991 | enalapril vs control | | | all cause death or hospitalisation 0.00 [0.00; NaN] | CONSENSUS, 1987 | enalapril vs placebo | | NYHA class improvement 7.94 [1.86; 33.81] | all cause death or hospitalisation 0.97 [0.84; 1.12] | Enalapril CHF investigators, 1987 | enalapril vs control | | | all cause death or hospitalisation 0.52 [0.18; 1.47] | Dickstein, 1991 | enalapril vs placebo | | | all cause death or hospitalisation 0.00 [0.00; NaN] | Rucinska-a (enalapril), 1991 | enalapril vs control | | | all cause death or hospitalisation 0.49 [0.09; 2.56] | | enalapril vs placebo | | | | | enalapril vs placebo | | | | | enalapril vs placebo | | | | | enalapril vs placebo | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
SOLVD treatment, 1991 | Enalapril initial dose 2·5 or 5 mg twice daily up to 10 mg twice daily (n=1285) vs. placebo
(n=1284) | MI >1 month,Congestive HF, LVEF <=35% | Double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 1285/1284 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 3.5 y | SOLVD prevention, 1992 | Enalapril initial dose 2·5 or 5 mg twice daily up to 10 mg twice daily (n=2111) vs. placebo
(n=2117) | MI >1 month,No treatment for CHF, LVEF <=35% | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 2111/2117 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 3.1 y | Cleland, 1985 | enalapril titrated up to 40mg once daily (n=10) vs. placebo (n=10) | patients with New York Heart Association functional class II to IV heart failure who were clinically stable on digoxin and diuretic therapy | double blind Cross over Sample size: 10/10 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 8 weeks | Rucinska-b (enalapril), 1991 | (n=55) vs. (n=55) | | Sample size: 55/55 Primary endpoint: FU duration: | CONSENSUS, 1987 | enalapril (2.5 to 40 mg per day) (n=127) vs. placebo (n=126) | severe congestive heart failure (New York Heart Association [NYHA] functional class IV) | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 127/126 Primary endpoint: mortality FU duration: 188 days | Enalapril CHF investigators, 1987 | (n=126) vs. (n=130) | | Sample size: 126/130 Primary endpoint: FU duration: | Dickstein, 1991 | enalapril (n=20) vs. placebo (n=21) | men with symptomatic heart failure (functional class II or III) and documented myocardial infarction greater than 6 months previously | double blind Sample size: 20/21 Primary endpoint: exercise performance FU duration: 48 weeks | Rucinska-a (enalapril), 1991 | (n=67) vs. (n=65) | | Sample size: 67/65 Primary endpoint: FU duration: | Sharpe, 1984 | enalapril 5mg twice day (n=18) vs. placebo (n=18) | patients with New York Heart Association functional class II to III heart failure who were clinically stable on digoxin and diuretic therapy | double blind Sample size: 18/18 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 3 months | McGrath, 1985 | enalapril (n=13) vs. placebo (n=12) | patients with chronic congestive cardiac failure | double blind Sample size: 13/12 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 week | Chrysant, 1985 | enalapril (n=-9) vs. placebo (n=-9) | patients with congestive heart failure (CHF), New York Heart Association class II-III | double blind Sample size: -9/-9 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 14 weeks | CASSIS (enalapril), 1995 | enalapril 5-10mg daily (n=48) vs. placebo (n=48) | patients with chronic congestive heart failure of NYHA classes II-IV | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 48/48 Primary endpoint: exercise tolerance FU duration: 12 weeks |
|
heart failure | enalapril | not classified | versus angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors No demonstrated result for efficacy | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
| enalapril vs enalapril | | | | | enalapril vs enalapril | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
NETWORK (2.5 bid vs 10 bid), 1998 | enalapril 2.5 mg twice daily (n=506) vs. enalapril 10 mg twice daily (n=516) | patients with NYHA II-IV heart failure | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 506/516 Primary endpoint: death, hospitalization, worsening HF FU duration: 6 months | NETWORK (5 bid vs 10 bid), 1998 | enalapril 5 mg twice daily
(n=510) vs. enalapril 10 mg twice daily
(n=516)
| patients with NYHA II-IV heart failure
| double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 510/516 Primary endpoint: death, hospitalization, worsening HF FU duration: 6 months
|
|
heart failure | enalapril | not classified | versus vasodilators No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
| enalapril vs hydralazine+ISDN | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
V-HeFT II, 1991 | enalapril 20mg daily
(n=403) vs. hydralazine 300 mg plus isosorbide dinitrate 160 mg daily
(n=401)
| men with chronic congestive heart failure and cardiac dilatation (CT ratio>0.55) or LVEF <45% in association with reduced exercise tolerance and diuretic therapy
| double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 403/401 Primary endpoint: death FU duration: 2.5y (range 0.5-5.7y)
|
|
heart failure | fosinopril | not classified | versus placebo or no treatment No demonstrated result for efficacy | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
| fosinopril vs placebo | | | | | fosinopril vs placebo | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Brown, 1995 | fosinopril 10 or 20 mg/day (n=116) vs. placebo (n=125) | patients with chronic congestive heart failure (NYHA II-III) not taking digitalis | double blind Sample size: 116/125 Primary endpoint: exercise tolerance FU duration: 24 weeks | FEST (Erhardt), 1996 | fosinopril 40 mg once daily titrated (n=155) vs. placebo (n=153) | patients with mild to moderately severe heart failure (NYHA II-III) | double blind Sample size: 155/153 Primary endpoint: maximal bicycle exercise time FU duration: 12 weeks |
|
heart failure | lisinopril | not classified | versus placebo or no treatment No demonstrated result for efficacy | 5 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Zwehl, 1990 | lisinopril vs control | | | all cause death or hospitalisation 0.84 [0.20; 3.43] | Giles, 1990 | lisinopril vs control | | | all cause death or hospitalisation 0.32 [0.09; 1.10] | Rucinska-c (lisinopril), 1000 | lisinopril vs control | | | all cause death or hospitalisation 1.07 [0.07; 16.32] | Gilbert, 1993 | lisinopril vs placebo | | | all cause death or hospitalisation NaN [NaN; NaN] | | lisinopril vs placebo | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Zwehl, 1990 | (n=183) vs. (n=92) | | Sample size: 183/92 Primary endpoint: FU duration: | Giles, 1990 | (n=130) vs. (n=63) | | Sample size: 130/63 Primary endpoint: FU duration: | Rucinska-c (lisinopril), 1000 | (n=28) vs. (n=30) | | Sample size: 28/30 Primary endpoint: FU duration: | Gilbert, 1993 | lisinopril (n=14) vs. placebo (n=14) | subjects with heart failure | double blind Cross over Sample size: 14/14 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 weeks | International Study Group (Lewis), 1989 | lisnopril titrated up to 10mg daily (n=87) vs. placebo (n=43) | patients with congestive heart failure NYHA II-IV | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 87/43 Primary endpoint: exercise tolerance FU duration: 12 weeks |
|
heart failure | lisinopril | not classified | versus angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
| lisinopril vs lisinopril | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
ATLAS, 1999 | lisinopril low dose 2.5-5 mg daily (n=1596) vs. lisnopril high dose 32.5-35 mg daily (n=1568) | patients with New York Heart Association class II to IV heart failure
and an ejection fraction <=30% | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 1596/1568 Primary endpoint: all cause mortality FU duration: 39 to 58 months |
|
heart failure | perindopril | not classified | versus placebo or no treatment No demonstrated result for efficacy perindopril inferior to placebo in terms of NYHA class improvement in Lechat, 1993 perindopril inferior to placebo in terms of Hospitalisation in PEP CHF, 2006 | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Lechat, 1993 | perindopril vs placebo | | NYHA class improvement 2.03 [1.24; 3.32] | all cause death or hospitalisation 0.00 [0.00; NaN] | PEP CHF, 2006 | perindopril vs placebo | | Hospitalisation 0.64 [0.43; 0.97] | Death 0.90 [0.47; 1.71] Long term death (1 year) 0.90 [0.47; 1.71] all cause death or hospitalisation 0.69 [0.47; 1.02] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Lechat, 1993 | perindopril, 2 mg once daily (n=61) vs. placebo (n=64) | patients with grade II or III New York Heart Association chronic congestive heart failure on baseline diuretic therapy | double blind Sample size: 61/64 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 3-month | PEP CHF, 2006 | perindopril, 4 mg/day (n=424) vs. placebo (n=426) | patients aged >=70 years with a diagnosis of heart failure, treated with diuretics and an echocardiogram
suggesting diastolic dysfunction and excluding substantial LV systolic dysfunction or valve disease | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 424/426 Primary endpoint: all-cause mortality and unplanned heart failure related hospitalization FU duration: 26.2 months (range 12-54.2m) |
|
heart failure | quinapril | not classified | versus placebo or no treatment No demonstrated result for efficacy | 8 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Riegger, 1990 | vs placebo | | | all cause death or hospitalisation NaN [NaN; NaN] | Northridge, 1991 | vs placebo | | | all cause death or hospitalisation NaN [NaN; NaN] | Uprichard-a, 1994 | vs control | | | all cause death or hospitalisation 0.48 [0.04; 5.25] | Uprichard-b, 1994 | vs control | | | all cause death or hospitalisation 0.65 [0.11; 3.83] | Uprichard-c, 1994 | vs control | | | all cause death or hospitalisation ∞ [NaN; ∞] | Rieger, 1991 | vs placebo | | | NYHA class improvement 1.52 [0.95; 2.44] | Nussberger, 1994 | vs placebo | | | | Quinapril Heart Failure Trial Investigators, 1993 | vs placebo | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Riegger, 1990 | quinapril (5mg bid, 10 mg bid, 20mg bid) (n=169) vs. placebo (n=56) | patients with mild to moderate congestive heart failure (CHF) due to arterial hypertension and ischemic heart disease | double-blind Sample size: 169/56 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 weeks | Northridge, 1991 | quinapril 20mg/d (n=32) vs. placebo (n=32) one daily dosing was compared with twice daily dosing in a 3-way crossover placebo controlled trial | patient with mild heart failure | double blind Cross over Sample size: 32/32 Primary endpoint: exercise FU duration: 8 weeks | Uprichard-a, 1994 | (n=114) vs. (n=110) | | Sample size: 114/110 Primary endpoint: FU duration: | Uprichard-b, 1994 | (n=105) vs. (n=103) | | Sample size: 105/103 Primary endpoint: FU duration: | Uprichard-c, 1994 | (n=139) vs. (n=47) | | Sample size: 139/47 Primary endpoint: FU duration: | Rieger, 1991 | quinalapril 10, 20, or 40 mg/d (n=225) vs. placebo (n=0) | patients with mild to moderate heart failure | double blind Sample size: 225/0 Primary endpoint: exercise tolerance FU duration: 12 weeks | Nussberger, 1994 | quinapril (2.5, 5 or 10 mg b.i.d.) (n=55) vs. placebo (n=0) | patients with moderate heart failure (ejection fraction < or = 35%) | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 55/0 Primary endpoint: Humoral changes FU duration: 12 weeks | Quinapril Heart Failure Trial Investigators, 1993 | quinapril (n=114) vs. placebo (n=110) After > or = 10 weeks of single-blind quinapril therapy, patients were randomized in double-blind fashion to continue quinapril or to receive placebo | patients with New York Heart Association class II or III heart failure | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 114/110 Primary endpoint: treadmill exercise time FU duration: 16 weeks |
|
heart failure | ramipril | not classified | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
AIRE, 1993 | ramipril vs placebo | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
AIRE, 1993 | Ramipril 2·5 mg twice daily initial dose, up to 5 mg twice daily for at least 6 months (n=1004) vs. placebo (n=992) | patient within 3–10 days of a MI,with clinical evidence of heart failure | Double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 1004/992 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 1.25 y |
|
heart failure | ramipril | not classified | versus placebo or no treatment No demonstrated result for efficacy | 7 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Swedberg, 1991 | ramipril vs control | | | all cause death or hospitalisation 0.44 [0.19; 1.03] | Maass-a, 1991 | ramipril vs placebo | | | all cause death or hospitalisation 1.03 [0.33; 3.25] | Gordon, 1991 | ramipril vs placebo | all cause death or hospitalisation 0.21 [0.05; 0.93] | | | Maass-b, 1991 | ramipril vs placebo | | | all cause death or hospitalisation 0.61 [0.28; 1.34] | Maass-c, 1991 | ramipril vs placebo | | | all cause death or hospitalisation 0.68 [0.12; 3.89] | Lemarie, 1992 | ramipril vs placebo | | | all cause death or hospitalisation 0.77 [0.18; 3.23] | | ramipril vs placebo | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Swedberg, 1991 | (n=115) vs. (n=108) | | Sample size: 115/108 Primary endpoint: FU duration: | Maass-a, 1991 | ramipril (n=87) vs. placebo (n=45) | patients with heart failure | Sample size: 87/45 Primary endpoint: FU duration: | Gordon, 1991 | ramipril 10mg/d (n=94) vs. placebo (n=98) | patients with herat failure and LVFE<=35% | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 94/98 Primary endpoint: exercise FU duration: 12 weeks | Maass-b, 1991 | ramirpil 5 or 10 mg once daily (n=329) vs. placebo (n=171) 3 arms trials (placebo, 5 and 10 mg) | patient with NYHA II-III heart failure and LVFE<=40% | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 329/171 Primary endpoint: exercise FU duration: 12 weeks | Maass-c, 1991 | ramipril 10mg once daily (n=47) vs. placebo (n=48) | patient with heart failure with LVFE<=35% | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 47/48 Primary endpoint: Exercise FU duration: 12 weeks | Lemarie, 1992 | ramipril 2.5mg twice daily (n=42) vs. placebo (n=43) | patient with NYHA II-III heart failure | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 42/43 Primary endpoint: Exercise FU duration: 24 weeks | Gundersen, 1994 | ramipril titrated from 1.25 mg to a maximum of 10 mg once daily (n=104) vs. placebo (n=91) | patients with NYHA II-III CHF, LVFE<=40% and size of the heart >600ml/m2 for mean or >550ml/m2 for women | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 104/91 Primary endpoint: maximal exercise time FU duration: 12 weeks |
|
heart failure | trandolapril | not classified | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
TRACE, 1995 | trandolapril vs placebo | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
TRACE, 1995 | Trandolapril 1 mg daily initial dose, up to 4 mg daily (n=876) vs. placebo (n=873) | patient within 3–7 days of a MI,Wall motion index <1·2 (LVEF <35%) | Double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 876/873 Primary endpoint: death from any cause FU duration: 3 y |
|
heart failure | trandolapril | not classified | versus placebo or no treatment No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
| trandolapril vs placebo | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Hampton, 1998 | trandolapril titrated up to 4mg/d (n=144) vs. placebo (n=148) | patients with moderate (New York Heart Association Grades II and III) heart failure | double blind Sample size: 144/148 Primary endpoint: Exercise tolerance FU duration: 16 weeks |
|
patients at high risk for cardiovascular events | enalapril | not classified | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
CAMELOT (enalapril), 2004 | enalapril vs placebo | | | Crit principaux 0.88 [0.71; 1.08] Mortalité totale 1.30 [0.45; 3.72] Décès cardiovasculaires 2.43 [0.47; 12.50] revascularisation 0.90 [0.69; 1.16] Infarctus non mortel 0.56 [0.27; 1.17] AVC mortels et non mortels 0.65 [0.27; 1.58] Ev. cardiovasculaires 0.88 [0.71; 1.08] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
CAMELOT (enalapril), 2004 | Enalapril 20mg daily (n=673) vs. Placebo (n=655) | patients with angiographically documented CAD (>20% stenosis by coronary angiography) and diastolic blood pressure <100 mm Hg | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 673/655 Primary endpoint: cardiovascular events FU duration: 24 months |
|
patients at high risk for cardiovascular events | perindopril | not classified | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy perindopril inferior to placebo in terms of Toux in EUROPA, 2003 perindopril inferior to placebo in terms of hypotension in EUROPA, 2003 perindopril inferior to placebo in terms of Arrêt pour effet secondaire in EUROPA, 2003 | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
EUROPA, 2003 | perindopril vs placebo | Crit principaux 0.81 [0.72; 0.91] EUROPA endpoint 0.81 [0.72; 0.91] Ev. coronariens 0.77 [0.66; 0.88] Infarctus non mortel 0.78 [0.67; 0.90] Ev. cardiovasculaires 0.81 [0.72; 0.91] | Toux 5.06 [3.47; 7.38] hypotension 3.53 [2.06; 6.04] Arrêt pour effet secondaire 1.10 [1.03; 1.17] | Insuffisance rénale 1.25 [0.65; 2.41] Mortalité totale 0.89 [0.78; 1.02] Décès cardiovasculaires 0.86 [0.72; 1.03] revascularisation 0.96 [0.86; 1.07] AVC mortels et non mortels 0.96 [0.73; 1.26] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
EUROPA, 2003 | perindopril 8 mg once daily (n=6110) vs. placebo (n=6108) | low-risk patients with stable coronary heart disease and no apparent heart failure | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 6110/6108 Primary endpoint: cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or cardiac arrest FU duration: 4.2y |
|
patients at high risk for cardiovascular events | quinapril | not classified | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
QUIET, 2001 | quinapril vs placebo | | | Crit principaux 1.02 [0.91; 1.15] Mortalité totale 0.99 [0.59; 1.68] Décès coronariens 0.92 [0.42; 2.00] Ev. coronariens 0.88 [0.61; 1.29] Décès cardiovasculaires 0.92 [0.44; 1.95] revascularisation 1.11 [0.86; 1.42] Infarctus non mortel 0.89 [0.58; 1.39] Ev. cardiovasculaires 0.88 [0.61; 1.29] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
QUIET, 2001 | Quinapril 20mg one daily (n=878) vs. Placebo (n=872) | patients with angiographic evidence of coronary artery disease without systolic leftventricular dysfunction | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 878/872 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 27 months |
|
patients at high risk for cardiovascular events | ramipril | not classified | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy ramipril inferior to placebo in terms of Toux in HOPE, 2000 ramipril inferior to placebo in terms of Angiodème in HOPE, 2000 | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
HOPE, 2000 | ramipril vs placebo | Crit principaux 0.79 [0.72; 0.87] nouveau diabète 0.66 [0.52; 0.84] Mortalité totale 0.85 [0.76; 0.95] Décès cardiovasculaires 0.75 [0.65; 0.87] revascularisation 0.87 [0.80; 0.95] Infarctus non mortel 0.81 [0.72; 0.91] AVC mortels et non mortels 0.69 [0.57; 0.84] Ev. cardiovasculaires 0.79 [0.72; 0.87] HOPE endpoint 0.79 [0.72; 0.87] | Toux 4.01 [3.17; 5.06] Angiodème 2.43 [1.01; 5.86] | hypotension 1.26 [0.92; 1.72] Arrêt pour effet secondaire 1.06 [0.99; 1.13] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
HOPE, 2000 | ramipril 10 mg once per day orally (n=4645) vs. placebo (n=4652) | high-risk patients (55 years of age or older) with evidence of vascular disease or diabetes plus one other cardiovascular risk factor and who were not known to have a low ejection fraction or heart failure | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 4645/4652 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 5 y |
|
patients at high risk for cardiovascular events | ramipril | not classified | versus No demonstrated result for efficacy telmisartan + ramipril inferior to ramipril in terms of Insuffisance rénale in ONTARGET (association vs ramipril), 2008 telmisartan + ramipril inferior to ramipril in terms of hypotension in ONTARGET (association vs ramipril), 2008 telmisartan + ramipril inferior to ramipril in terms of Arrêt pour effet secondaire in ONTARGET (association vs ramipril), 2008 telmisartan + ramipril inferior to telmisartan in terms of Insuffisance rénale in ONTARGET (association vs telmisartan), 2008 telmisartan + ramipril inferior to telmisartan in terms of Toux in ONTARGET (association vs telmisartan), 2008 telmisartan + ramipril inferior to telmisartan in terms of hypotension in ONTARGET (association vs telmisartan), 2008 telmisartan + ramipril inferior to telmisartan in terms of Arrêt pour effet secondaire in ONTARGET (association vs telmisartan), 2008 | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
ONTARGET (association vs ramipril), 2008 | telmisartan + ramipril vs ramipril | | Insuffisance rénale 1.58 [1.14; 2.18] hypotension 2.75 [2.28; 3.31] Arrêt pour effet secondaire 1.20 [1.14; 1.26] | Crit principaux 0.99 [0.93; 1.06] nouveau diabète 0.89 [0.77; 1.03] Mortalité totale 1.06 [0.98; 1.15] Ev. coronariens 1.07 [0.94; 1.22] Décès cardiovasculaires 1.04 [0.93; 1.16] revascularisation 1.04 [0.96; 1.11] AVC mortels et non mortels 0.93 [0.81; 1.07] Toux 1.10 [0.96; 1.26] Ev. cardiovasculaires 1.00 [0.93; 1.08] Angiodème 0.73 [0.40; 1.33] | ONTARGET (association vs telmisartan), 2008 | telmisartan + ramipril vs telmisartan | nouveau diabète 0.81 [0.70; 0.94] | Insuffisance rénale 1.39 [1.02; 1.89] Toux 4.23 [3.38; 5.30] hypotension 1.78 [1.52; 2.09] Arrêt pour effet secondaire 1.28 [1.21; 1.34] | Crit principaux 0.98 [0.91; 1.05] Mortalité totale 1.08 [1.00; 1.17] Ev. coronariens 1.00 [0.88; 1.14] Décès cardiovasculaires 1.04 [0.93; 1.16] revascularisation 1.01 [0.95; 1.09] AVC mortels et non mortels 1.02 [0.88; 1.17] Ev. cardiovasculaires 1.01 [0.94; 1.09] Angiodème 1.81 [0.84; 3.92] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
ONTARGET (association vs ramipril), 2008 | telmisartan 80mg + ramipril 10mg daily (n=8502) vs. ramipril 10 mg daily
(n=8576)
| patients patients with coronary, peripheral, or cerebrovascular disease or diabetes with end-organ damage
| double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 8502/8576 Primary endpoint: cardiovascular events or hospitalization for HF FU duration: 4.7y
| ONTARGET (association vs telmisartan), 2008 | telmisartan 80mg + ramipril 10mg daily
(n=8502) vs. telmisartan 80 mg daily (n=8542)
| patients patients with coronary, peripheral, or cerebrovascular disease or diabetes with end-organ damage
| double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 8502/8542 Primary endpoint: cardiovascular events or hospitalization for HF FU duration: 4.7y
|
|
patients at high risk for cardiovascular events | trandolapril | not classified | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
PEACE, 2004 | trandolapril vs placebo | nouveau diabète 0.83 [0.73; 0.96] | | Crit principaux 0.97 [0.90; 1.05] EUROPA endpoint 0.97 [0.84; 1.11] PEACE endpoint 0.99 [0.92; 1.06] Mortalité totale 0.89 [0.77; 1.03] Ev. coronariens 0.97 [0.90; 1.05] Décès cardiovasculaires 0.95 [0.76; 1.19] revascularisation 0.92 [0.78; 1.07] Infarctus non mortel 1.00 [0.84; 1.20] AVC mortels et non mortels 0.77 [0.56; 1.04] Ev. cardiovasculaires 0.97 [0.84; 1.12] HOPE endpoint 0.94 [0.82; 1.07] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
PEACE, 2004 | Trandolapril at a target dose of 4 mg per day (n=4158) vs. Placebo (n=4132) In February 2002, given the increasing evidence
of the benefit of ACE inhibitors or angiotensinreceptor
blockers in patients with diabetes mellitus
and renal disease,
the investigators were adviced to substitute open-label ACE inhibitors for the masked study treatment in
patients with diabetes and either overt proteinuria
or hypertension and microalbuminuria. | patients with stable coronary artery disease and
normal or slightly reduced left ventricular function | Double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 4158/4132 Primary endpoint: death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or coronary revascularization FU duration: median 4.8 y |
|