Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Sacubitril/valsartan shows greater LVMI regression than some antihypertensives in hypertension with remodeling

Sacubitril/valsartan shows greater LVMI regression than some antihypertensives in hypertension with …
Photo by CDC / Unsplash
Key Takeaway
Consider tentative evidence for sacubitril/valsartan in LVMI regression in hypertension with remodeling.

This network meta-analysis, based on a systematic review, included 851 patients with essential hypertension and cardiovascular remodeling. It compared sacubitril/valsartan to active antihypertensive comparators (amlodipine, valsartan, enalapril, olmesartan) for effects on left ventricular mass index (LVMI) regression, with secondary outcomes including systolic and diastolic blood pressure and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). The study setting and follow-up duration were not reported.

Main results showed sacubitril/valsartan achieved greater LVMI regression versus amlodipine (mean difference = -22.54 g/m2, 95% CI: -40.23, -4.86) and valsartan (mean difference = -11.34 g/m2, 95% CI: -21.45, -1.23). Comparisons to enalapril and olmesartan indicated numerically greater regression but were not statistically significant. For LVEF, there was no significant impact (P > 0.05). Absolute numbers for these outcomes were not reported.

Safety and tolerability data, including adverse events and discontinuations, were not reported. Key limitations include substantial heterogeneity in imaging assessment modalities, evidence of network incoherence, and low-to-very-low certainty of the main comparisons. Funding and conflicts of interest were not reported.

Practice relevance is restrained due to the tentative nature of the evidence; results should be regarded as tentative rather than definitive. Clinicians should consider these findings preliminary, awaiting higher-certainty data from more robust studies.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedApr 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the relative efficacy and impact on cardiac function of sacubitril/valsartan (Sac/Val) vs. active antihypertensive comparators represented in the eligible evidence base for reversing left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) in patients with hypertension using network meta-analysis.MethodsPubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang Data, and SinoMed databases were searched from inception to December 2025 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating sacubitril/valsartan vs. active antihypertensive comparators in patients with essential hypertension and cardiovascular remodeling. The primary outcome was the change in left ventricular mass index (LVMI). Network meta-analysis was performed using STATA 18.0 software based on the frequentist framework. Given the clinical heterogeneity in imaging assessment modalities, a random-effects model was employed to calculate the weighted mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was used as a supportive ranking metric, whereas comparative interpretation primarily relied on effect estimates and their confidence intervals.ResultsEleven RCTs involving 851 patients were included. The network meta-analysis showed that Sac/Val achieved greater LVMI regression than Amlodipine (MD = −22.54 g/m2, 95% CI: −40.23, −4.86) and Valsartan (MD = −11.34 g/m2, 95% CI: −21.45, −1.23) in reversing LVMI. Compared with Enalapril and Olmesartan, Sac/Val also showed numerically greater LVMI regression, but these differences were not statistically significant. Sac/Val had the highest SUCRA value (96.4%); however, rankings were interpreted descriptively only, while comparative interpretation was primarily based on effect sizes and confidence intervals. Secondary outcome analysis indicated that while Sac/Val effectively reduced systolic and diastolic blood pressure, it had no significant impact on left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (P > 0.05).ConclusionIn hypertensive patients with cardiovascular remodeling, sacubitril/valsartan was associated with greater LVMI regression than amlodipine and valsartan within the current network, whereas comparisons with enalapril and olmesartan remained inconclusive. Given the substantial heterogeneity, evidence of network incoherence, and low-to-very-low certainty of the main comparisons, these results should be regarded as tentative rather than definitive.Systematic Review RegistrationPROSPERO CRD420261281426.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.