首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     


Effect of ramipril vs amlodipine on renal outcomes in hypertensive nephrosclerosis: a randomized controlled trial
Authors:Agodoa L Y,Appel L,Bakris G L,Beck G,Bourgoignie J,Briggs J P,Charleston J,Cheek D,Cleveland W,Douglas J G,Douglas M,Dowie D,Faulkner M,Gabriel A,Gassman J,Greene T,Hall Y,Hebert L,Hiremath L,Jamerson K,Johnson C J,Kopple J,Kusek J,Lash J,Lea J,Lewis J B,Lipkowitz M,Massry S,Middleton J,Miller E R,Norris K,O'Connor D,Ojo A,Phillips R A,Pogue V,Rahman M,Randall O S,Rostand S,Schulman G,Smith W,Thornley-Brown D,Tisher C C,Toto R D,Wright J T,Xu S  African American Study of Kidney Disease  Hypertension Study Group
Affiliation:Case Western Reserve University, Clinical Hypertension Program, University Hospitals of Cleveland and the Louis Stokes Cleveland Veterans Affairs Medical Center, 10900 Euclid Ave, Wood Bldg Room W-165, Cleveland, OH 44106-4982, USA. jxw20@po.cwru.edu
Abstract:CONTEXT: Incidence of end-stage renal disease due to hypertension has increased in recent decades, but the optimal strategy for treatment of hypertension to prevent renal failure is unknown, especially among African Americans. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor (ramipril), a dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker (amlodipine), and a beta-blocker (metoprolol) on hypertensive renal disease progression. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Interim analysis of a randomized, double-blind, 3 x 2 factorial trial conducted in 1094 African Americans aged 18 to 70 years with hypertensive renal disease (glomerular filtration rate [GFR] of 20-65 mL/min per 1.73 m(2)) enrolled between February 1995 and September 1998. This report compares the ramipril and amlodipine groups following discontinuation of the amlodipine intervention in September 2000. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomly assigned to receive amlodipine, 5 to 10 mg/d (n = 217), ramipril, 2.5 to 10 mg/d (n = 436), or metoprolol, 50 to 200 mg/d (n = 441), with other agents added to achieve 1 of 2 blood pressure goals. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was the rate of change in GFR; the main secondary outcome was a composite index of the clinical end points of reduction in GFR of more than 50% or 25 mL/min per 1.73 m(2), end-stage renal disease, or death. RESULTS: Among participants with a urinary protein to creatinine ratio of >0.22 (corresponding approximately to proteinuria of more than 300 mg/d), the ramipril group had a 36% (2.02 [SE, 0.74] mL/min per 1.73 m(2)/y) slower mean decline in GFR over 3 years (P =.006) and a 48% reduced risk of the clinical end points vs the amlodipine group (95% confidence interval [CI], 20%-66%). In the entire cohort, there was no significant difference in mean GFR decline from baseline to 3 years between treatment groups (P =.38). However, compared with the amlodipine group, after adjustment for baseline covariates the ramipril group had a 38% reduced risk of clinical end points (95% CI, 13%-56%), a 36% slower mean decline in GFR after 3 months (P =.002), and less proteinuria (P<.001). CONCLUSION: Ramipril, compared with amlodipine, retards renal disease progression in patients with hypertensive renal disease and proteinuria and may offer benefit to patients without proteinuria.
Keywords:
本文献已被 PubMed 等数据库收录!
点击此处可从《》浏览原始摘要信息
点击此处可从《》下载全文
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号