Stress management versus lifestyle modification on systolic hypertension and medication elimination: a randomized trial

Isolated systolic hypertension is common in the elderly, but decreasing systolic blood pressure (SBP) without lowering diastolic blood pressure (DBP) remains a therapeutic challenge. Although stress management training, in particular eliciting the relaxation response, reduces essential hypertension its efficacy in treating isolated systolic hypertension has not been evaluated. We conducted a double-blind, randomized trial comparing 8 weeks of stress management, specifically relaxation response training (61 patients), versus lifestyle modification (control, 61 patients). Inclusion criteria were >or=55 years, SBP 140-159 mm Hg, DBP <90 mm Hg, and at least two antihypertensive medications. The primary outcome measure was change in SBP after 8 weeks. Patients who achieved SBP <140 mm Hg and >or=5 mm Hg reduction in SBP were eligible for 8 additional weeks of training with supervised medication elimination. SBP decreased 9.4 (standard deviation [SD] 11.4) and 8.8 (SD 13.0) mm Hg in relaxation response and control groups, respectively (both ps <0.0001) without group difference (p=0.75). DBP decreased 1.5 (SD 6.2) and 2.4 (SD 6.9) mm Hg (p=0.05 and 0.01, respectively) without group difference (p=0.48). Forty-four (44) in the relaxation response group and 36 in the control group were eligible for supervised antihypertensive medication elimination. After controlling for differences in characteristics at the start of medication elimination, patients in the relaxation response group were more likely to successfully eliminate an antihypertensive medication (odds ratio 4.3, 95% confidence interval 1.2-15.9, p=0.03). Although both groups had similar reductions in SBP, significantly more participants in the relaxation response group eliminated an antihypertensive medication while maintaining adequate blood pressure control.     

Large-Scale Postmarketing Surveillance of Hypertensive Patients Treated with Verapamil

BACKGROUND: In general clinical practice, physicians prescribe calcium channel blockers to a wide range of patients with differing demographic characteristics and hypertension history. This study was undertaken to investigate the effectiveness and safety of sustained-release verapamil (Verelan((R)), verapamil HCl) in patients with essential hypertension, studied under "usual use" conditions. METHODS: In this prospective, open-label, postmarketing surveillance study, 25 089 patients with hypertension received once-daily verapamil therapy for 4 weeks, during which they were evaluated by 8106 physicians at baseline and at two follow-up visits (weeks 2 and 4). In this study, hypertension was defined as an average sitting diastolic blood pressure (DBP) of greater-than-or-equal 90 mm Hg at baseline. Previously diagnosed hypertensive patients with a sitting DBP <90 mm Hg but experiencing untoward effects requiring discontinuation of current antihypertensive therapy were also included. RESULTS: Eighty-five percent (n = 21 446) of the total patients enrolled at baseline completed this office-based trial. Nearly 24% of patients were newly diagnosed hypertensives. At baseline, the mean systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure were 161 and 96 mm Hg, respectively. In evaluable patients with mild, moderate, and severe hypertension, as stratified by baseline measurements, treatment with verapamil produced DBP reductions of 12, 19, and 29 mm Hg, respectively. Verapamil treatment produced clinically similar SBP, DBP, and HR (heart rate) reductions across gender and racial groups studied (white, black, Hispanic, and Asian). Only 6.1% of patients failed to complete the study because of any reported adverse experiences (4.5% of patients discontinued because of adverse experiences considered drug related). Constipation (5.0%) and headache (1.1%) were the most commonly reported adverse events. CONCLUSION: In general clinical practice, verapamil is well tolerated and effective in a broad range of hypertensive patients.     

Once-daily fixed-combination irbesartan 300 mg/ hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg and circadian blood pressure profile in patients with essential hypertension

BACKGROUND: More than 60% of patients with hypertension included in morbidity and mortality trials needed >or=2 drugs to achieve a substantial, sustained reduction in blood pressure. Tolerable combinations using higher doses of antihypertensive drugs are frequently required to control blood pressure. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to assess the effect of a once-daily fixed combination of irbesartan 300 mg/hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 25 mg on the circadian blood pressure profile in patients with essential hypertension that was not controlled with full-dose single therapy or low-dose combined therapy. METHODS: Study patients were recruited consecutively from the outpatient hypertension clinics of 3 university hospitals in Spain. After a 1-week washout period, patients with a mean daytime blood pressure >135/85 mm Hg were treated with irbesartan 300 mg/HCTZ 25 mg once daily for 12 weeks. Twenty-four-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring was performed at the end of the washout period and during the last week of treatment. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients with essential hypertension (28 men, 29 women) were enrolled; their mean (SD) age was 60.4 (7.2) years (range, 45-78 years). After treatment, a significant reduction in both clinic and ambulatory mean (SD) blood pressure values was observed in the whole group of 57 patients (from 146.0 [11.0] mm Hg to 123.3 [13.3] mm Hg, P < 0.001 for 24-hour systolic blood pressure [SBP]; from 89.9 [8.2] mm Hg to 76.5 [9.4] mm Hg, P < 0.001 for 24-hour diastolic blood pressure [DBP]. The mean lowering of ambulatory SBP and DBP at peak was 25.2 (14.5) mm Hg and 14.7 (9.5) mm Hg, respectively, and at trough, 22.3 (18.3) mm Hg and 12.3 (10.9) mm Hg. The trough-to-peak ratio of the group was 0.92 for SBP (0.97 in responders) and 0.84 for DBP (0.89 in responders). The smoothness index, calculated as the mean of all individual values, was 1.7 (1.0) for SBP (1.8 [0.9] in responders) and 1.3 (0.8) for DBP (1.5 [0.6] in responders). Seven side effects in 6 patients were reported. No metabolic changes were observed, and no patient discontinued the study because of treatment-related adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: The fixed combination of irbesartan 300 mg/HCTZ 25 administered once daily produced a crude meaningful effect in reducing 24-hour blood pressure and was well tolerated. The circadian profile was preserved, as shown by trough-to-peak ratios and smoothness index values for both SBP and DBP.     

Comparison of quality-of-hypertension-care indicators for groups treated by physician versus groups treated by physician-nurse team

PURPOSE: To determine whether the type of health care provider (i.e., physician versus physician-nurse team) affected the quality of hypertension care given to two groups of randomly selected adult women. DATA SOURCES: Three indicators measured the quality of hypertension care: blood pressure control level, knowledge of hypertension, and discussion about blood pressure medications with the health care provider(s). Blood pressure readings were taken with a 24-hr ambulatory blood pressure monitor, and demographic data from survey results taken at orientation and researcher-collected data on posttreatment knowledge of hypertension and cognitive representations of hypertension were gathered. Chi-square and t tests were used to analyze the data. CONCLUSIONS: The group whose care was managed by a physician-nurse team demonstrated lower means for 24-hr systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure (systolic: M = 132, SD = 14.9; diastolic: M = 75, SD = 11.3) than the group whose care was managed only by one or more physicians (systolic: M = 136, SD = 13.4; diastolic: M = 79, SD = 11.24). Also, the group whose care was managed by a physician-nurse team revealed significantly higher scores for discussion of blood pressure medication than the group whose care was managed only by one or more physicians. There were no group differences for knowledge of hypertension. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Nurses qualified to assist with meeting the needs of hypertension clients in primary care settings can positively affect clients' knowledge about blood pressure medication and--perhaps as a result of this knowledge--how well the clients control their blood pressure.     

Aliskiren: renin inhibitor for hypertension management

Background: The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) has long been recognized to play a significant role in hypertension pathophysiology. Certain agents that modify the RAAS can control blood pressure and improve cardiovascular outcomes. Aliskiren is the first of a new class of antihypertensive agents known as renin inhibitors. Objective: The goal of this article was to discuss the clinical pharmacology of aliskiren and its use in the management of hypertension, as well as potential uses in other cardiovascular disorders. Methods: Peer-reviewed articles and abstracts were identified from the MEDLINE and Current Contents databases (both 1966-October 1, 2007) using the search terms aliskiren, drug interaction, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacology. Citations from available articles were reviewed for additional references. Abstracts presented at recent professional meetings were also examined. Results: Nine published clinical studies have evaluated the effect of aliskiren in lowering blood pressure in hypertensive patients, either alone or in combination with other antihypertensive agents. This review summarizes those studies. Patients treated with alis-kiren had significantly lower blood pressure compared with patients with mild to moderate hypertension (systolic blood pressure [SBP] 140-180 mm Hg and diastolic blood pressure [DBP] 95-110 mm Hg) who received placebo. Aliskiren in doses of 75 to 300 mg daily produced reductions of SBP (-5.3 to -15.8 mm Hg) and DBP (-5.8 to -12.3 mm Hg); placebo produced reductions of SBP that ranged from -2.85 to -10.0 mm Hg and DBP reductions from -3.26 to -8.6 mm Hg (P < 0.05 in all studies between aliskiren and placebo). Aliskiren's blood pressure-lowering effect at doses of 75 to 300 mg daily was comparable to irbesartan 150 mg daily and valsartan 80 to 360 mg daily alone. When aliskiren was added to ramipril, hydrochlorothiazide, amlodipine, irbesartan, or valsartan, significant additive blood pressure-lowering effects were reported (P < 0.05 in all clinical trials). The total incidence of adverse events was similar to placebo and other comparative agents, including irbesartan, val-sartan, losartan, ramipril, and hydrochlorothiazide. The overall adverse-event rates were 22%, 35% to 52%, 25% to 52%, 34% to 55%, and 33% to 52% for aliskiren 37.5, 75, 150, 300, and 600 mg, respec-tively. The most commonly reported adverse events included headache, dizziness, and fatigue. Studies with cardiovascular outcomes as end points have not been performed with aliskiren. Conclusions: Aliskiren is an effective alternative agent for blood pressure management. Before aliskiren can be recommended as a routine first-line agent, however, clinical studies must explore if the blood pressure-lowering effect will translate into improvement in cardiovascular outcomes.     

不同类型的降压药物对高血压患者脉搏波速度的影响

目的探讨不同类型的降压药物对高血压患者臂一踝脉搏波速度（brachio—anklepulsewavevelocity,baPWV）的影响。方法健康体检首次确诊的高血压患者120例随机分为四组,每组30例,A组（苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平组）、B组（培多普利组）、C组（琥珀酸美托洛尔缓释片组）、D组（缬沙坦组）,与正常对照组对比分析血压、血糖、血脂和baPWV的变化。分别给予苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平、培多普利、琥珀酸美托洛尔缓释片、缬沙坦治疗12周后重复测量上述指标,前后对比分析血压和baPWV的变化。结果高血压患者与同期健康体检者对比,收缩压（SBP）、舒张压（DBP）、总胆固醇（TC）、低密度脂蛋白胆固醇（LDL—C）和baPWV显著高于正常对照组（P〈0．05）。前述药物治疗12周后,患者SBP、DBP和baPWV显著下降（P〈0．05）,苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平收缩压下降幅度（△SBP）（30．6±6．7）mmHgvs（20．7±5．3）mmHg、（19．6±6．1）mmHg、（21.5±4．3nllnHg）和舒张压下降幅度（ADBP）（20．8±7．1）mmHgvs（13．97±7．6）mmHg、（14．1±6．8）mmHg、（14．9±4．2）mmHg明显高于其他三种药物（P〈0．05）。结论常用降压药物可以降低高血压患者的脉搏波速度,改善动脉顺应性。     

Angiotensin II receptor blocker telmisartan: effect on blood pressure profile and left ventricular hypertrophy in patients with arterial hypertension

In this open-label, non-comparative study, the anti-hypertensive efficacy and effect on left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) of 24 weeks' treatment with once-daily telmisartan 40-80 mg was evaluated in 24 patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension and LVH. Patients were titrated to the higher dose of study drug at week 4 if they did not achieve blood pressure normalization (i.e. systolic blood pressure [SBP]/diastolic blood pressure [DBP] remained > or = 140/90 mmHg). The anti-hypertensive action of telmisartan was assessed using clinic cuff measurements and 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, and left ventricular mass index (LVMI) was determined by two-dimensional echocardiography at baseline and after 24 weeks of therapy. Telmisartan significantly reduced mean 24-h, daytime and night-time SBP and DBP compared with baseline after 12 and 24 weeks of therapy. Target blood pressure levels, defined as SBP/DBP < 140/90 mm Hg, were achieved in 16 (69.6%) patients at the end of the treatment period. After 24 weeks of telmisartan treatment, LVMI decreased from 151.6 +/- 5.4 to 135.1 +/- 5.9 g/m2. In conclusion, anti-hypertensive treatment with telmisartan for 24 weeks produced significant reductions in blood pressure and regression of LVH, as assessed by LVMI, in patients with hypertension and LVH.     

Antihypertensive safety and efficacy and physician and patient satisfaction: results from a phase 4 practice-based clinical experience trial with diltiazem LA

This study was undertaken to assess the safety and efficacy of a new long-acting formulation of diltiazem (DLA) (Cardizem LA; Biovail Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Bridgewater, NJ) in a large heterogeneous group of hypertensive patients, and to evaluate physician and patient treatment satisfaction. In this open-label, 30-day study, physicians enrolled patients with hypertension who were to be evaluated and treated at an initial visit and at 2 follow-up visits. Data recorded for each patient included demographic information, DLA dosing strength, blood pressure (BP) readings, and adverse events (AEs). A total of 15, 155 physicians completed the baseline questionnaire, and 9679 (64%) completed the final clinical evaluation questionnaire. In all, 139,965 patients with hypertension were enrolled. Initial and follow-up BP data were recorded for 50, 856 (36%) of these patients. On average, systolic BP (SBP) decreased from the initial visit by 10.9 mm Hg at the first follow-up (P < .0001) and by 15.5 mm Hg at the second follow-up (mean SBP, 135.7) (P < .0001). On average, diastolic BP (DBP) decreased by 6.7 mm Hg (P < .0001) and by 9.2 mm Hg (mean DBP, 79.4) (P < .0001), respectively. The most commonly reported AEs included edema, headache, dizziness, nausea, and rash; two thirds of these events were attributed to DLA. None of the AEs attributed to DLA was reported in more than 1 % of patients. Both physicians and patients expressed a high degree of satisfaction with DLA. Results from this large-scale, open-label study show that DLA was safe and produced clinically meaningful reductions in SBP and DBP; in addition, a moderate to high degree of physician and patient satisfaction was reported in a large and heterogeneous cohort of patients with hypertension.     

高原地区以卡托普利缓释片为基础的联合降压治疗对高危高血压住院患者血压控制的影响

目的 探讨高海拔地区高危高血压住院患者以卡托普利缓释片为基础的联合降压治疗效果.方法 331例住院高血压患者依据血压值、危险因素和合并靶器官损害分为高危组(229例)和低危组(102例),高危组给予以卡托普利缓释片为基础的联合降血压治疗,低危组给予单一降压治疗,比较2组出院血压水平以及住院期间的降压幅度和出院血压达标率.结果 高危组患者收缩压、舒张压降压幅度均显著大于低危组[收缩压降幅分别为(36.83 ±22.23)、(28.74±18.71)mm Hg,舒张压降幅分别为(22.04±13.57)、(17.98±13.63)mm Hg,t值分别为-3.207、-2.509,P均<0.05),出院时平均收缩压[(125.62±14.74)、(122.28±13.13)mm Hg,t=-1.962]、舒张压[(80.67±9.82)、(78.40±9.97)mm Hg,t=-1.910]均达标且2组间比较差异无统计学意义(P均>0.05).住院期间血压治疗控制率高危组为72.06%(165/229),低危组为71.57%(73/102),2组间比较差异无统计学意义(x2=0.928,P>O.05).结论 在高海拔地区以卡托普利缓释片为基础的联合降压治疗是适合高危高血压患者降压治疗方案,能取得较满意的血压治疗控制率.

Abstract：

Objective To investigate the blood pressure control effect of captopril sustained-releasetablets based combination, antihypertensive therapy on hospitalized high-risk patients with hypertension in high altitude region. Methods According to the blood pressure,risk factors and combined target organ damage,331 hospitalized patients with essential hypertension were divided into 2 groups and accepted different treatment:low-risk group had monotherapy (n=102) , and night-risk group had captopril sustained-release-tablets based combination antihypertensive therapy (n =229). The discharge blood pressure,extent of SBP/DBP decrease and the compliance rate of discharge blood pressure of two groups were compared. Results The extent of SBP/DBP decrease in hight-risk group was significantly greater than low-risk group (SBP [36. 83 ± 22. 23] mm Hg vs.[28. 74 ±18.71] mm Hg,t=-3. 207,P <0. 05;DBP[22. 04±13. 57]mm Hg vs. [17. 98 ± 13.63] mm Hg,t =-2. 509, P < 0.05). The average discharge blood pressure in both groups reach the standard criterion, but no significant difference was observed between the two groups (SBP [125. 62 ± 14. 74] mm Hg vs. [122. 28 ±13.13]mmHg,t=-1. 962,P>0. 05;DBP[80. 67 ±9. 82]mm Hg vs. [78. 40 ±9. 97]mm Hg,t =-1.910,P > 0. 05). Furthermore we found no significant difference in the control rate of blood pressure between high-risk and low-risk group (72. 06% vs. 71. 57% , x2 = 0.928, P > 0. 05). Conclusion The captopril sustainedrelease-tablets based combination antihypertensive therapy is a reliable treatment in high-risk patients with hypertension from high altitude region,which shows satisfying blood pressure control rate.     

Assessment of the antihypertensive efficacy of various doses of delapril by office and ambulatory blood pressure measurement: The DEFIND study

This study was undertaken to compare and verify the antihypertensive effects of various delapril doses versus placebo on office and ambulatory blood pressure (BP). After a 2-wk placebo period, 303 patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension were randomized in a double-blind study to 8 wk of treatment with placebo, or delapril 7.5 mg twice daily, delapril 15 mg twice daily, delapril 30 mg twice daily, or delapril 30 mg once daily. BP changes versus baseline and rates of normalized office systolic blood pressure (SBP) > 140 mm Hg and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) > 90 mm Hg, as well as responder office SBP > 140 mm Hg or reduction ≥20 mm Hg and office DBP > 90 mm Hg or reduction ≥10 mm Hg, were calculated. In the intention-to-treat population (n=296), office SBP and DBP reductions were more notable with 30 mg twice daily (15.6/11.5 mm Hg) and 15 mg twice daily (14.8/12.5 mm Hg) than with other delapril regimens (30 mg once daily: 11.8/10.5 mm Hg; 7.5 mg twice daily: 12.9/10.1 mm Hg) and placebo (P< .05 for DBP;P< .01 for SBP). The same was true for frequency of responders (63.8% and 60.3%; P≤.05 vs placebo) and normalized patients (58.6% and 53.4%;P< .05 vs placebo). Analysis of ambulatory BPs confirmed the accuracy of office BPs. Drug-related adverse events occurred in 3.4% to 6.7% of patients given delapril and in 6.5% of those given placebo. The lowest effective dose of delapril, 15 mg twice daily, may be recommended as the initial dose for patients who begin treatment with this agent.     

Association between human atrial natriuretic peptide Val7Met polymorphism and baseline blood pressure, plasma trough irbesartan concentrations, and the antihypertensive efficacy of irbesartan in rural Chinese patients with essential hypertension

BACKGROUND: Individual variations in the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of antihypertensive drugs are influenced by genetic and environmental factors. The ANP gene, which encodes the precursor of atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP), is among the candidate genes for genetic susceptibility to hypertension. OBJECTIVE: This study examined the relationship between ANP Val7Met polymorphism (Single Nucleotide Polymorphism database ID: rs5063) and baseline blood pressure (BP), plasma trough irbesartan concentrations, and the antihypertensive efficacy of irbesartan in rural Chinese patients with essential hypertension. METHODS: Patients with essential hypertension who had taken no antihypertensive medications within 4 weeks of study initiation received oral irbesartan 150 mg/d for 4 weeks. Genotyping was performed for all patients. BP was measured before dosing on the 1st and 28th days of treatment. Plasma irbesartan concentrations were measured using high-performance liquid chromatography with fluorescent detection. Antihypertensive efficacy was defined as attainment of a diastolic BP (DBP) <90 mm Hg (DBP analysis), a systolic BP (SBP) <140 mm Hg (SBP analysis), and a DBP <90 mm Hg and SBP <140 mm Hg (DBP and SBP analysis). RESULTS: The study included 756 patients, 621 with the Val/Val genotype and 135 with the Val/Met+Met/Met genotypes. There were no significant differences in age, body mass index, sex, education level, occupation, alcohol consumption, or smoking status between the 2 groups. Patients with the Val/Met+Met/Met genotypes had a significantly lower mean baseline DBP compared with those with the Val/Val genotype (adjusted regression coefficient [SE]: -2.5 [1.0] mm Hg; P = 0.012) and significantly lower mean steady-state plasma trough irbesartan concentrations (adjusted regression coefficient: -12.6 [4.1]; P = 0.002). No significant association was found between antihypertensive efficacy and Val7Met polymorphism in the overall population, but in an analysis by baseline DBP status, patients with the Val/Met+Met/Met genotype a baseline DBP > or =100 mm Hg had significantly smaller reductions in DBP (adjusted regression coefficient: -5.7 [1.4] mm Hg; P < 0.001) and SBP compared with those with the Val/Val genotype and a baseline DBP > or =100 mm Hg (adjusted regression coefficient: -9.8 [2.9] mm Hg; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The findings of this study suggest that in these rural Chinese patients with essential hypertension, ANP Val7Met polymorphism may be a genetic marker for baseline DBP, plasma irbesartan concentrations, and the antihypertensive efficacy of short-term irbesartan therapy.     

Metoclopramide enhances labetalol-induced antihypertensive effect during handgrip in hypertensive patients

The effects of metoclopramide, labetalol, and metoclopramide plus labetalol treatments on baseline cardiovascular parameters and isometric handgrip-induced changes were evaluated in 11 hypertensive subjects. Although all treatments were effective in reducing resting systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) blood pressures, the combination of metoclopramide and labetalol appeared to provide a greater decrease (changes in SBP/DBP: 15/11 mm Hg, P < 0.05; from 149 +/- 4/95 +/- 4 mm Hg to 134 +/- 5/84 +/- 3 mm Hg) than did labetalol alone (changes in SBP/DBP: 10/9 mm Hg, P < 0.05; from 149 +/- 4/95 +/- 4 to 139 +/- 4/86 +/- 3 mm Hg). At 2 minutes, handgrip increased blood pressure on placebo (changes in SBP/DBP: 34/7 mm Hg, P < 0. 001). In the presence of metoclopramide and metoclopramide plus labetalol, however, handgrip induced lesser increases in blood pressure (changes in SBP/DBP: 23/7 mm Hg, P < 0.01, and 18/4 mm Hg, P < 0.01, for metoclopramide and metoclopramide plus labetalol treatments). We conclude that (1) metoclopramide lowers blood pressure in hypertensive patients; (2) metoclopramide attenuates blood pressure response to isometric handgrip; and (3) both compounds, labetalol and metoclopramide, seem to have a pharmacologic interaction concerning blood pressure decrease. A clinical significance is suggested for the metoclopramide effect.     

A multicenter, randomized, double-blind study of the antihypertensive efficacy and tolerability of irbesartan in patients aged > or = 65 years with mild to moderate hypertension

BACKGROUND: Blockade of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) is the preferred mechanism of action for controlling hypertension in select groups of patients, including those with diabetic nephropathy and heart failure. Currently, 2 classes of drugs work by blocking the RAAS, albeit by differing mechanisms: angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin II angiotensin type 1 receptor blockers (ARBs). OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to assess the comparative efficacy and tolerability of the ARB irbesartan and the ACE inhibitor enalapril in patients > or = 65 years of age with mild to moderate hypertension (sitting diastolic blood pressure [DBP], 95 to 110 mm Hg). METHODS: Elderly (> or = 65 years of age) patients were recruited from 26 Canadian study centers for a randomized, double-blind, 8-week clinical trial. Exclusion criteria included sitting DBP >110 mm Hg or sitting systolic blood pressure (SBP) >200 mm Hg, angina pectoris, myocardial infarction, cardiac procedure, stroke, or transient ischemic attack within 6 months of randomization, as well as other preexisting or present severe medical or psychologic conditions. Patients were randomly assigned to receive a single daily dose of irbesartan 150 mg (n = 70) or enalapril 10 mg (n = 71) with treatment doses of study drugs doubled at week 4 for sitting DBP > or = 90 mm Hg. Reductions from baseline blood pressure measurements at trough (24 +/- 3 hours after the last dose of medication) were assessed for sitting DBP and sitting SBP. Comparative tolerability to study drugs was also assessed. RESULTS: The intent-to-treat analysis demonstrated similar reductions at week 8 in both DBP and SBP for both groups. For the primary efficacy analysis of sitting DBP, there was a mean reduction from baseline of 9.6 mm Hg and 9.8 mm Hg for the irbesartan and enalapril groups, respectively (P = 0.93). The mean reduction from baseline in sitting SBP was 10.1 mm Hg and 11.6 mm Hg for the irbesartan and enalapril groups, respectively (P = 0.54). Normalization rates (sitting DBP <90 mm Hg) at week 8 did not differ between groups (52.9% in the irbesartan group and 54.9% in the enalapril group; P = 0.81). No statistical difference existed between the 2 groups with respect to serious adverse events or discontinuations due to adverse events. Irbesartan was associated with a significantly lower incidence of cough than was enalapril (4.3% vs 15.5%, respectively; P = 0.046). CONCLUSIONS: Irbesartan is an effective and well-tolerated antihypertensive for elderly patients with mild to moderate hypertension. This study establishes that irbesartan has better tolerability than enalapril with respect to cough and suggests that irbesartan is as effective at lowering blood pressure but better tolerated than an ACE inhibitor in hypertensive patients > or = 65 years of age.     

Pitfalls in the diagnosis and management of systolic hypertension

BACKGROUND: Systolic blood pressure (SBP) is even more important than diastolic blood pressure (DBP) with regard to the risk of cardiovascular complications. METHODS AND RESULTS: Pitfalls in the diagnosis of systolic hypertension include the auscultatory gap, use of the proper size cuff (obese adult size for mid-arm circumference >33 cm and child's cuff for mid-arm circumference <23 cm), a "white coat" effect of about 17 mm Hg, regression toward the mean, and a tendency to focus only on hypertension rather than all of the cardiovascular risk factors. Pitfalls in the pharmacologic management of systolic hypertension include being too aggressive with "acute" therapy, too fast in up-titration, too complacent about adverse effects, too unaware of important drug or food interactions, and too content with the achieved level of SBP. CONCLUSION: In treated hypertensives, SBP is typically less well controlled than DBP. Clinicians must not generally be content with partial control of SBP.     

血红素加氧酶1基因多态性与血压水平的关系分析

目的 探讨血红素加氧酶1基因多态性与血压水平的关系.方法 采用标签SNP策略,选择血红素加氧酶1基因的3个标签SNP位点进行研究.在503例原发性高血压患者中对这3个位点进行基因分型,采用方差分析比较各位点不同基因型个体血压水平的差异,采用haplo.stats软件计算单体型频率并检验其与血压水平的关系.结果 血红素加氧酶1基因rs2071749位点A等位基因携带者收缩压和舒张压水平分别为159.5 mm Hg和97.6 mm Hg,GG基因型携带者收缩压和舒张压水平分别为168.5mm Hg和101.3mm Hg,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05).多因素回归分析进一步证实了该结果 .单体型分析结果 显示在调整年龄、性别、体质指数、吸烟和饮酒等危险因素后,含有rs2071749 A等位基因的单体型T-T-A与收缩压水平和舒张压水平均显著相关.结论 血红素加氧酶1基因多态可能对血压水平有一定的影响.     

Effect of Melothria maderaspatana leaf-tea consumption on blood pressure, lipid profile, anthropometry, fibrinogen, bilirubin, and albumin levels in patients with hypertension

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of Melothria maderaspatana (Linn.) leaf-tea on blood pressure, plasma lipid profile, fibrinogen, albumin together with serum bilirubin and anthropometric measurements in volunteer participants with hypertension, because all these variables have been shown to influence vascular events. SUBJECTS AND DESIGN: A total of 50 subjects-25 (mean age of 58 +/- 9.0 years; 12 were women) with mild-to-moderate hypertension (systolic blood pressure [SBP] >or= 140 mm Hg; diastolic blood pressure [DBP] >or= 90 mm Hg) and 25 normotensives (mean age of 48 +/- 8.0 years; 11 women)-were selected for this study. Plasma lipid profile, fibrinogen, albumin, serum bilirubin, and anthropometric measurements were measured at baseline and after leaf-tea consumption by the patient with hypertension for 45 days. RESULTS: SBP and DBP gradually decreased and pulse rate decreased. The total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and triglycerides, and phospholipids levels decreased significantly and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and serum bilirubin levels increased after tea consumption in patients with hypertension. We also observed significant body weight loss and reduction in fibrinogen levels. There was no significant difference in plasma level of albumin. CONCLUSIONS: Thus, M. maderaspatana leaf-tea consumption gradually decreased BP and showed beneficial effects on blood lipid profile, fibrinogen, bilirubin, and body mass index in patients with hypertension.     

Telmisartan plus hydrochlorothiazide versus telmisartan or hydrochlorothiazide monotherapy in patients with mild to moderate hypertension: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial.

BACKGROUND: Recent surveys reveal continuing deficiencies in the awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension. In many cases, failure to achieve blood pressure targets may be attributable to the use of antihypertensive monotherapy. OBJECTIVES: This study was undertaken to identify combinations of telmisartan, a new oral angiotensin II type 1-receptor antagonist, and hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) that might provide greater antihypertensive efficacy than monotherapy with either agent in the treatment of mild to moderate hypertension. It also examined the dose-response surface for the 2 drugs alone and in combination. METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study that employed all cells of a 4 x 5 factorial design. After a 4-week, single-blind, placebo run-in period, men and women between 18 and 80 years of age with mild to moderate hypertension (defined as mean supine diastolic blood pressure [DBP] between 95 and 114 mm Hg during the last 2 weeks of the placebo run-in period and systolic blood pressure [SBP] between 114 and 200 mm Hg immediately before randomization) were eligible to enter the 8-week, double-blind, double-dummy treatment period. Study comparisons were between once-daily telmisartan monotherapy (20, 40, 80, or 160 mg), HCTZ monotherapy (6.25, 12.5, or 25 mg), 12 combinations of these telmisartan/HCTZ doses, and placebo. The focus was on 2 combinations: telmisartan 40 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg and telmisartan 80 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg. The primary efficacy variable was change in supine trough DBP from baseline to the last evaluable measurement during double-blind treatment. Plasma renin activity and safety parameters, including treatment-emergent adverse events, physical findings, electrocardiograms, and serum electrolyte levels (which are known to increase with HCTZ treatment), were also assessed. RESULTS: Of 1293 patients screened, 818 (63.3%) were enrolled at 47 centers. Of these 818, 749 (91.6%) completed the study. The intent-to-treat population (randomized with > or = 1 postrandomization blood pressure measurement) consisted of 807 patients (98.7%). Telmisartan 80 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg significantly decreased mean supine trough SBP/DBP by 23.9/14.9 mm Hg, a benefit of 8.5/3.4 mm Hg compared with telmisartan 80 mg and of 17.0/7.6 mm Hg compared with HCTZ 12.5 mg (both comparisons, P < 0.01). Telmisartan 40 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg significantly reduced mean supine SBP by 18.8 mm Hg, a benefit of 6.6 mm Hg compared with telmisartan 40 mg and 11.9 mm Hg compared with HCTZ 12.5 mg (both, P < 0.01). This same combination significantly reduced mean supine DBP by 12.6 mm Hg, a benefit of 5.3 mm Hg compared with HCTZ 12.5 mg (P < 0.01), but was not significantly different from telmisartan 40 mg. Telmisartan 80 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg was significantly more effective than telmisartan 40 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg in reducing mean supine DBP and SBP (both, P < 0.05). The response surface and responder analyses confirmed the additive antihypertensive efficacy of the combination of telmisartan and HCTZ. All regimens were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily telmisartan 80 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg was effective and well tolerated when used to reduce SBP and DBP in patients with mild to moderate hypertension. In addition to enhancing efficacy, this combination protected against potassium depletion, a common side effect of thiazide monotherapy.     

The effect of biofeedback in hypertension.

The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of biofeedback in the treatment of stages 1 and 2 essential hypertension via meta-analytical methods. A utilization-focused integrative review was limited to adult randomized clinical trials, and study groups were categorized into biofeedback, active control, and inactive control. Both biofeedback and active control treatments resulted in a reduction in systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP). Only biofeedback (with related cognitive therapy and relaxation training) showed a significantly greater reduction in both SBP (6.7 mm Hg) and DBP (4.8 mm Hg) when compared with inactive control treatments. Nurses in practice settings should consider biofeedback therapy for their hypertensive clients.     

高血压患者血压节律与血管活性物质相关性研究

目的观察高血压患者血压昼夜节律异常的病理生理变化特征,探讨高血压患者血管活性物质与血压昼夜节律的相关性。方法93例高血压患者进行动态血压监测和血栓素A2(TXA2)、前列环素(PGI2)、神经肽Y(NPY)、降钙素基因相关肽(CGRP)测定。结果93例高血压患者按动态血压监测结果分为杓型、非杓型组,在非杓型组中,TXA2、NPY明显增高(TXA2:P<0.01,NPY:P<0.05),PGI2,CGRP明显降低(P均<0.001);且夜间血压下降与TXA2、NPY呈负相关(TXA2:SBP:r=-0.254,P<0.05,DBP:r=-0.229,P<0.05;NPY:SBP:r=-0.277,P<0.01,DBP:r=-0.245,P<0.05),与PGI2,CGRP正相关(PGI2:SBP:r=0.302,P<0.005,DBP:r=0.324,P<0.005;CGRP:SBP:r=0.289,P<0.01,DBP:r=0.332,P<0.01)。多元线性回归分析:TXA2,PGI2,NPY与夜间收缩压下降直线相关(F=7.554,P<0.001),TXA2,PGI2,CGRP与夜间舒张压下降直线相关(F=7.242,P<0.001)。结论高血压患者TXA2,PGI2,NPY,CGRP可能参与血压昼夜节律的调节。     

Disorders of 24-h rhythm of blood pressure in patients with chronic glomerulonephritis

AIM: To characterize 24-h profile of blood pressure (BP) and to clarify prognostic significance of 24-h BP variability in patients with chronic glomerulonephritis (CGN) with intact renal function and hypofunction of the kidneys. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 38 hypertensive CGN patients (29 males and 9 females, mean age 37.9 +/- 12.4 years) entered the trial. All the patients had systolic BP (SBP) > 140 mm Hg and/or diastolic BP (DBP > 90 mm Hg. RESULTS: Twenty patients with renal hypofunction (creatinine > 1.4 mg/dl) had significantly higher (p < 0.05) SBP, day and 24-h SBP duration, high variability of day-time and 24-h SBP. Significantly higher mean day-time, night-time and 24-h SBP, SBP day-time and 24-h duration SBP duration, variability of SBP and DBP for a day and 24-h, respectively, were observed in 15 patients with left ventricular hypertrophy. Of prognostic significance in relation to renal survival estimated by Cox in 21 patients in multifactorial analysis were blood creatinine level, glomerular filtration rate, the patient's age, SBP duration for day, night and 24 hours. In multifactorial analysis, the final model included only age of the patient and blood creatinine. CONCLUSION: CGN patients with renal hypofunction had higher SBP and its variability associated with left ventricular variability.