» Articles » PMID: 32808250

Comparative Effectiveness of Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers and Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors in Older Nursing Home Residents After Myocardial Infarction: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Overview
Journal Drugs Aging
Specialties Geriatrics
Pharmacology
Date 2020 Aug 19
PMID 32808250
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Evidence regarding differences in outcomes between angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) among older nursing home (NH) residents after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is limited.

Objectives: The purpose of our study was to estimate the post-AMI effects of ARBs versus ACEIs on mortality, rehospitalization, and functional decline outcomes in this important population.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study used national Medicare claims linked to Minimum Data Set assessments. The study population included individuals aged ≥ 65 years who resided in a US NH ≥ 30 days, were hospitalized for AMI between May 2007 and March 2010, and returned to the NH. We compared 90-day mortality, rehospitalization, and functional decline outcomes between ARB and ACEI users with inverse-probability-of-treatment-weighted binomial and multinomial logistic regression models.

Results: Of the 2765 NH residents, 270 (9.8%) used ARBs and 2495 (90.2%) used ACEIs. The mean age of ARB versus ACEI users was 82.3 versus 82.7 years, respectively. No marked differences existed between ARB and ACEI users for mortality [odds ratio (OR) 1.18; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78-1.79], rehospitalization (OR 1.22; 95% CI 0.90-1.65), or functional decline (OR 1.23; 95% CI 0.88-1.74). In subgroup analyses, ARBs were associated with increased mortality and rehospitalization in individuals with moderate to severe cognitive impairment and with increased rehospitalization in those aged < 85 years.

Conclusions: Our findings align with prior data and suggest that clinicians can prescribe either ARBs or ACEIs post-AMI for secondary prevention in NH residents, although the subgroup findings merit further scrutiny and replication. Providers should consider factors such as patient preferences, class-specific adverse events, and costs when prescribing.

References
1.
Carpenter G, Hastie C, Morris J, Fries B, Ankri J . Measuring change in activities of daily living in nursing home residents with moderate to severe cognitive impairment. BMC Geriatr. 2006; 6:7. PMC: 1522014. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2318-6-7. View

2.
VanderWeele T . On the distinction between interaction and effect modification. Epidemiology. 2009; 20(6):863-71. DOI: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181ba333c. View

3.
Stuhec M, Keuschler J, Serra-Mestres J, Isetta M . Effects of different antihypertensive medication groups on cognitive function in older patients: A systematic review. Eur Psychiatry. 2017; 46:1-15. DOI: 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2017.07.015. View

4.
Huitfeldt A, Hernan M, Kalager M, Robins J . Comparative Effectiveness Research Using Observational Data: Active Comparators to Emulate Target Trials with Inactive Comparators. EGEMS (Wash DC). 2016; 4(1):1234. PMC: 5108633. DOI: 10.13063/2327-9214.1234. View

5.
Zullo A, Ofori-Asenso R, Wood M, Zuern A, Lee Y, Wu W . Effects of Statins for Secondary Prevention on Functioning and Other Outcomes Among Nursing Home Residents. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2020; 21(4):500-507.e8. PMC: 7127965. DOI: 10.1016/j.jamda.2020.01.102. View