TY - JOUR
T1 - Efficacy of losartan vs. atenolol for the prevention of aortic dilation in Marfan syndrome: A randomized clinical trial
AU - Forteza, Alberto
AU - Evangelista, Arturo
AU - Sánchez, Violeta
AU - Teixidó-Turà, Gisela
AU - Sanz, Paz
AU - Gutiérrez, Laura
AU - Gracia, Teresa
AU - Centeno, Jorge
AU - Rodríguez-Palomares, José
AU - Rufilanchas, Juan Jose
AU - Cortina, José
AU - Ferreira-González, Ignacio
AU - García-Dorado, David
PY - 2016/3/21
Y1 - 2016/3/21
N2 - © 2015 Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. Aims To determine the efficacy of losartan vs. atenolol in aortic dilation progression in Marfan syndrome (MFS) patients. Methods and results A phase IIIb, randomized, parallel, double-blind study was conducted in 140 MFS patients, age range: 5-60 years, with maximum aortic diameter <45 mm who received losartan (n = 70) or atenolol (n = 70). Doses were raised to a maximum of 1.4 mg/kg/day or 100 mg/day. The primary end-point was the change in aortic root and ascending aorta maximum diameter indexed by body surface area on magnetic resonance imaging after 36 months of treatment. No serious drug-related adverse effects were observed. Five patients presented aortic events during a follow-up (one in the losartan and four in the atenolol groups, P = 0.366). After 3 years of follow-up, aortic root diameter increased significantly in both groups: 1.1 mm (95% CI 0.6-1.6) in the losartan and 1.4 mm (95% CI 0.9-1.9) in the atenolol group, with aortic dilatation progression being similar in both groups: absolute difference between losartan and atenolol -0.3 mm (95% CI -1.1 to 0.4, P = 0.382) and indexed by BSA -0.5 mm/m 2 (95% CI -1.2 to 0.1, P = 0.092). Similarly, no significant differences were found in indexed ascending aorta diameter changes between the losartan and atenolol groups: -0.3 mm/m 2 (95% CI -0.8 to 0.3, P = 0.326). Conclusion Among patients with MFS, the use of losartan compared with atenolol did not result in significant differences in the progression of aortic root and ascending aorta diameters over 3 years of follow-up.
AB - © 2015 Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. Aims To determine the efficacy of losartan vs. atenolol in aortic dilation progression in Marfan syndrome (MFS) patients. Methods and results A phase IIIb, randomized, parallel, double-blind study was conducted in 140 MFS patients, age range: 5-60 years, with maximum aortic diameter <45 mm who received losartan (n = 70) or atenolol (n = 70). Doses were raised to a maximum of 1.4 mg/kg/day or 100 mg/day. The primary end-point was the change in aortic root and ascending aorta maximum diameter indexed by body surface area on magnetic resonance imaging after 36 months of treatment. No serious drug-related adverse effects were observed. Five patients presented aortic events during a follow-up (one in the losartan and four in the atenolol groups, P = 0.366). After 3 years of follow-up, aortic root diameter increased significantly in both groups: 1.1 mm (95% CI 0.6-1.6) in the losartan and 1.4 mm (95% CI 0.9-1.9) in the atenolol group, with aortic dilatation progression being similar in both groups: absolute difference between losartan and atenolol -0.3 mm (95% CI -1.1 to 0.4, P = 0.382) and indexed by BSA -0.5 mm/m 2 (95% CI -1.2 to 0.1, P = 0.092). Similarly, no significant differences were found in indexed ascending aorta diameter changes between the losartan and atenolol groups: -0.3 mm/m 2 (95% CI -0.8 to 0.3, P = 0.326). Conclusion Among patients with MFS, the use of losartan compared with atenolol did not result in significant differences in the progression of aortic root and ascending aorta diameters over 3 years of follow-up.
KW - Aorta
KW - Losartan
KW - Magnetic resonance imaging
KW - Marfan
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84964661457
U2 - 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv575
DO - 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv575
M3 - Article
SN - 0195-668X
VL - 37
SP - 978
EP - 985
JO - European Heart Journal
JF - European Heart Journal
IS - 12
ER -