Angiotensin Receptor Blockers vs. Beta-Blocker Therapy for Marfan Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE

Several RCTs have been conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) and beta-blocker (BB) therapy for Marfan syndrome (MFS), but the existing evidence is limited and conflicting. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of different therapies.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were electronically searched up to March 2021 to retrieve randomized controlled trials regarding the efficacy and safety of ARB-related (including ARB-only and ARB+BB treatment) and BB-only treatment for treating patients with MFS. The revised risk-of-bias tool was used for quality assessment. The odds ratio (OR) and standard mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to estimate the pooled effect size.

RESULTS

Fourteen reports of 9 trials involving 1,449 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Regarding aortic root dilation, the ARB-related regimen has efficacy comparable with that of the BB-only regimen in patients with MFS (pooled SMD = -0.16, 95% CI [-0.33; 0.01]; P = 0.06), while in the ARB+BB vs. BB-only subgroup, a significant difference was observed (pooled SMD = -0.26; 95% CI [-0.40; -0.11]; P < 0.01). In addition, there were no significant differences in other aortic dilation-related measures (aortic root Z scores, ascending aorta, pulmonary artery, aortic annulus, sinotubular junction, aortic arch, thoracic aorta, and abdominal aorta diameter change) or cardiovascular events (aortic dissection, aortic surgery, and death) between the 2 regimens.

CONCLUSION

Our results showed that the clinical efficacy of ARB-only therapy is not inferior to that of BB-only therapy. Moreover, ARB+BB therapy showed superior therapeutic effects without significant adverse effects.