Search

Background and Objective: Apelin is a bioactive peptide manifesting a potent vasodilatory property. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to investigate for the first time whether circulating apelin differed significantly between hypertensive patients and normotensive controls.Methods: Both PubMed and Embase were searched for eligible articles. Eligibility evaluation and data collection were done independently by two investigators. Weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated under random-effects model by STATA.Results: Ten studies were synthesized finally, including 1610 patients and 1105 controls. Overall analysis revealed that circulating apelin was significantly lowered in patients than in controls (WMD = −39.85 pg/mL, 95% CI: −65.56 to −14.15; P = 0.002), with significant heterogeneity (I2= 89.4%). By race, patients had lower circulating apelin than controls in Caucasian populations (WMD = −79.82 pg/mL, 95% CI: −105.80 to −53.85; P < 0.001), without heterogeneity (I2=0.0%), while no significance was observed in Chinese and African-Americans. Further grouping studies by source of controls found a significant reduction in circulating apelin in studies with hospital-based controls (WMD = −96.28 pg/mL, 95% CI: −129.67 to −62.88; P < 0.001) (I2= 49.4%), but not in studies with population-based controls.Conclusions: Via a meta-analysis of 10 studies and on 2715 subjects, our findings demonstrated that lowered circulating apelin was significantly associated with an increased risk for hypertension, especially in Caucasian populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: This meta-analysis of randomized parallel controlled trials was designed to compare the efficacy of atenolol with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) in changing pulse wave velocity (PWV), peripheral blood pressure and heart rate (HR) among patients with essential hypertension.Methods: This study was conducted according to the PRISMA guideline. Data collection was independently completed by two investigators. Statistical analyses were completed by Stata software (v12.0).Results: Eight clinical trials were meta-analyzed in this study. Overall changes in PWV (weighted mean difference or WMD = 0.068, 95% confidence interval or CI: −0.487 to –0.623, P = 0.811) and peripheral systolic blood pressure (PSBP) (WMD = −1.281 mmHg, 95% CI: −6.936 to 4.375, P = 0.657) did not differ significantly between atenolol and ACEIs treatment. Relative to ACEIs, atenolol had a more favorable impact on peripheral diastolic blood pressure (PDBP) (WMD = −1.912 mmHg, 95% CI: −3.732 to −0.091, P = 0.040) and HR (WMD = −9.23 bpm, 95% CI: −12.53 to −5.93, P < 0.001). In stratified analyses, particularly by follow-up period, atenolol was observed to be superior over ACEIs within early 3-month treatment in PSBP (WMD = −4.097 mmHg, 95% CI: −6.589 to −1.605, P = 0.001), PDBP (WMD = −6.802 mmHg, 95% CI: −8.517 to −5.087, P < 0.001) and HR (WMD = −14.242 bpm, 95% CI: −16.427 to −12.058, P = 0.028), without heterogeneity (I2= 0.0%). There were low probabilities of publication bias for all comparisons.Conclusions: Our findings demonstrate that atenolol and ACEIs were equally effective in reducing PWV and PSBP, while atenolol was superior over ACEIs in improving PDBP and HR, especially within short-term treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]