Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2016 Mar 21;37(12):978-85.
doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv575. Epub 2015 Oct 29.

Efficacy of losartan vs. atenolol for the prevention of aortic dilation in Marfan syndrome: a randomized clinical trial

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Efficacy of losartan vs. atenolol for the prevention of aortic dilation in Marfan syndrome: a randomized clinical trial

Alberto Forteza et al. Eur Heart J. .

Abstract

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/m2 (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/m2 (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.

Keywords: Aorta; Losartan; Magnetic resonance imaging; Marfan.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

  • How to treat Marfan syndrome: an update.
    Groenink M, Mulder BJ. Groenink M, et al. Eur Heart J. 2016 Mar 21;37(12):986-7. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv589. Epub 2015 Nov 7. Eur Heart J. 2016. PMID: 26547225 No abstract available.

Publication types