Impact of renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system inhibition on mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients with pre-existing hypertension: a prospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The influence of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors on the critically ill COVID-19 patients with pre-existing hypertension remains uncertain. This study examined the impact of previous use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) on the critically ill COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Data from an international, prospective, observational cohort study involving 354 hospitals spanning 54 countries were included. A cohort of 737 COVID-19 patients with pre-existing hypertension admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) in 2020 were targeted. Multi-state survival analysis was performed to evaluate in-hospital mortality and hospital length of stay up to 90 days following ICU admission. RESULTS: A total of 737 patients were included-538 (73%) with pre-existing hypertension had received ACEi/ARBs before ICU admission, while 199 (27%) had not. Cox proportional hazards model showed that previous ACEi/ARB use was associated with a decreased hazard of in-hospital death (HR, 0.74, 95% CI 0.58-0.94). Sensitivity analysis adjusted for propensity scores showed similar results for hazards of death. The average length of hospital stay was longer in ACEi/ARB group with 21.2 days (95% CI 19.7-22.8 days) in ICU and 6.7 days (5.9-7.6 days) in general ward compared to non-ACEi/ARB group with 16.2 days (14.1-18.6 days) and 6.4 days (5.1-7.9 days), respectively. When analysed separately, results for ACEi or ARB patient groups were similar for both death and discharge. CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill COVID-19 patients with comorbid hypertension, use of ACEi/ARBs prior to ICU admission was associated with a reduced risk of in-hospital mortality following adjustment for baseline characteristics although patients with ACEi/ARB showed longer length of hospital stay. Clinical trial registration The registration number: ACTRN12620000421932; The date of registration: 30, March 2020; The URL of the registration: https://www.australianclinicaltrials.gov.au/anzctr/trial/ACTRN12620000421932 .
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".