Effects of nabumetone,celecoxib, and ibuprofen on blood pressure control in hypertensive patients on angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs interfere with certain antihypertensive therapies. In a double-blind study, 385 hypertensive patients stabilized on an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor were treated with nabumetone, celecoxib, ibuprofen, or placebo for 4 weeks. Ibuprofen caused significantly greater increases in systolic (P < .001) and diastolic (P < .01) blood pressures (BPs) compared to placebo, but not nabumetone or celecoxib. The proportion of patients with systolic BP increases of clinical concern at end point was significantly higher (P < .001) for the ibuprofen group (16.7%; 15 of 90), but not for the nabumetone group (5.5%; 5 of 91) or the celecoxib group (4.6%; 4 of 87) compared to the placebo group (1.1%; 1 of 91).     

Circadian blood pressure patterns in ambulatory hypertensive patients: Effects of age

Circadian blood pressure monitoring was performed in 50 untreated ambulatory hypertensive patients to study the effects of age on the pattern and variability of Mood pressure and heart rate. Casual blood pressure, measured in the morning, was greater than the average of the blood pressures measured at 7.5 minute intervals for 24 hours (148 ± 2/95 ± 2 and 137 ± 2/88 ± 2 mm Hg, p < 0.001). The correlation between casual systolic pressure and the 24 hour average was stronger (p < 0.05) in younger (less than 55 years of age) patients (r = 0.69, n = 24, p < 0.001) than in older patients (r = 0.42, n = 26, p < 0.1). Similarly, diastolic pressures correlated more strongly (p < 0.05) in younger patients (r = 0.71, p < 0.001) than in older patients (r = 0.43, p < 0.05). Variability of systolic pressure, defined as the standard deviation of all readings obtained during 24 hours, was greater than that of diastolic pressure (16.7 and 13.1 mm Hg, respectively, p < 0.001). Moreover, the variability of systolic pressure was greater in older than in younger patients (18.1 and 15.2 mm Hg, respectively, p < 0.01). The variability of diastolic pressure was slightly but not significantly greater in older patients (13.7 and 12.5 mm Hg, not significant). The Circadian pattern of blood pressure, expressed as averages of readings obtained during consecutive 2 hour intervals, was similar in the two age groups. However, the level of systolic pressure was consistently higher (p < 0.01) and that of both diastolic pressure and heart rate consistently tower (p < 0.01) in older patients. Thus, ambulatory circadian blood pressure monitoring reveals significant changes in blood pressure levels and its variability with age; the casual blood pressure does not accurately reflect these changes. Longer periods of Mood pressure monitoring are required for accurate assessment of the characteristics of hypertension in the aged.     

糖尿病对高血压患者动态血压及血压变异性的影响

目的 探讨2型糖尿病（T2DM）对原发性高血压（EH）患者动态血压（ambulatory blood pressure，ABP）及血压变异性（blood pressure variability，BPV）的影响。方法 选取36例单纯EH及33例合并T2DM的EH患者，行24hABP监测，对2组患者的ABP及BPV进行对比分析。结果 与单纯EH患者相比，合并T2DM的EH患者日间平均收缩压（dmSBP）（P〈0，05）、日间脉压（dmPP）（P〈0.01）、日间收缩压标准差（dSBPSD）（P〈0.01）及日间收缩压标准差变异系数（dSBPCV）（P〈0．05）显著增大。结论 T2DM加重EH患者心血管系统的结构与功能异常，引起ABP及BPV增大；改善其体内糖代谢状况，将有助于改善其心血管系统血流动力学，从而减少心血管并发症。     

Usefulness of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in hypertensive patients

Treated or untreated hypertensive patients may have very different blood pressure levels when measured by the doctor in his surgery and when measured by ambulatory monitoring during their usual everyday activities. It is now possible to record blood pressure non-invasively with a portable blood pressure measuring device, the Remler M2000. Using this device, we observed that less than half of the patients referred by their medical practitioner for hypertension had abnormally high blood pressures during their everyday activities. We also noted that the ambulatory blood pressure profile of a given hypertensive patient cannot be predicted from the blood pressure recorded by his or her doctor. Consequently, we concluded that ambulatory blood pressure recordings would appear to be essential for the detection of patients with high blood pressure readings at the doctor's surgery and during everyday activities. These patients probably include the only group which really needs appropriate antihypertensive therapy.     

Effects of vitamin E on clinic and ambulatory blood pressure in treated hypertensive patients

A randomized controlled open trial studied the effect of vitamin E supplementation (300 mg/day) on clinic and 24-h ambulatory blood pressure (BP) in 142 treated hypertensive patients. After 12 weeks, clinic BP decreased whether or not patients were randomized to vitamin E. Ambulatory BP showed no change in systolic BP and a small decrease in diastolic BP (−1.6 mm Hg, 95% confidence intervals from −2.8 to −0.4 mm Hg), approaching statistical significance in comparison to the control group (P = .06). Vitamin E supplementation thus seems to have no clinically relevant effect on BP in hypertensive patients already under controlled treatment.     

Effects of low-dose aspirin on clinic and ambulatory blood pressure in treated hypertensive patients

Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs may affect blood pressure (BP) control in hypertensive patients receiving drug treatment, but data on the effects of low-dose aspirin are scanty. This study assessed the effects of chronic treatment with low doses of aspirin (100 mg/day) on clinic and ambulatory systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) BP in hypertensives on chronic, stable antihyper- tensive therapy. The study was conducted in the framework of the Primary Prevention Project (PPP), a randomized, controlled factorial trial on the preventive effect of aspirin or vitamin E in people with one or more cardiovascular risk factors. Fifteen Italian hypertension units studied 142 hypertensive patients (76 men, 66 women; mean age 59 ± 5.9 years) treated with different antihypertensive drugs: 71 patients were randomized to aspirin and 71 served as controls. All patients underwent a clinic BP evaluation with an automatic sphygmomanometer and a 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring, at baseline and after 3 months of aspirin treatment. At the end of the study the changes in clinic SBP and DBP were not statistically different in treated and untreated subjects. Ambulatory SBP and DBP after 3 months of aspirin treatment were similar to baseline: ΔSBP −0.5 mmHg (95% confidence intervals [CI] from −1.9 to +2.9 mm Hg) and ΔDBP −1.1 mm Hg (95% CI from −2.5 to +0.3 mm Hg). The pattern was similar in the control group. No interaction was found between aspirin and the most used antihypertensive drug classes (angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and calcium antagonists). Despite the relatively small sample size our results seem to exclude any significant influence of low-dose aspirin on BP control in hypertensives under treatment.     

The effect of amlodipine on ambulatory blood pressure in hypertensive patients

Certain high-risk populations, such as diabetics and blacks, have sustained elevation in blood pressure and heart rate throughout the day and night, with blunting of the usual diurnal variability pattern. This may contribute to their higher incidence of left ventricular hypertrophy (blacks) and cardiovascular complications (diabetics). Hypertensives who maintain a diurnal pattern of blood pressure variation still exhibit higher daytime and nocturnal blood pressure levels than normotensives. Thus, to achieve maximum effectiveness in treating hypertension, 24-hour control of blood pressure is necessary. Antihypertensive agents should effectively reduce blood pressure consistently throughout a 24-hour period. The objective of this study was to assess the effects of amlodipine, 5 mg once daily, on blood pressure measured by 24-hour ambulatory monitoring in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled single-site study. Patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension were randomized to receive amlodipine (n = 11) or placebo (n = 5) in a 2:1 ratio. A 4-week single-blind placebo run-in period was followed by a 4-week double-blind phase. Ambulatory monitoring of blood pressure was carried out for 24 hours at the end of each 4-week phase. Patients receiving amlodipine had significantly lower blood pressure compared with placebo 24 hours after the last dose (supine blood pressure −25.1/−10.1 mm Hg; standing blood pressure −21.2/−9.7 mm Hg) after 4 weeks of treatment. This effect was clearly demonstrated by the 24-hour postdose measurement and the mean blood pressure over the 24-hour interval as measured by ambulatory recordings. The mean hourly ambulatory recordings showed that amlodipine maintained both diastolic and systolic pressures below the baseline levels at every hour during the 24-hour observation period. Nine of 10 evaluable patients (90%) on amlodipine responded vs only 1 of 5 patients (20%) on placebo. The decrease in blood pressure for the amlodipine patients was not accompanied by a significant increase in pulse rate. Amlodipine was well tolerated; possibly drug-related side effects of intermittent headache and nocturia were experienced by 1 patient each; the latter had been present during the placebo run-in phase. Amlodipine is effective, well tolerated, and may be administered once daily for effective 24-hour blood pressure control.     

The effect of caffeine on ambulatory blood pressure in hypertensive patients

Because the potential impact of habitual caffeine intake on blood pressure is a controversial issue, a study was carried out to explore the relationship between caffeine and various humoral factors that could account for a coffee-induced rise in blood pressure. Twenty-three hypertensive patients who refrained from caffeine for 2 to 3 weeks were given 250 mg oral caffeine powder dissolved in water. Blood pressure was recorded every 15 min by blood pressure monitor. Caffeine blood level, renin and endothelin were measured before and 1, 2, 3, and 6 h after caffeine intake. Urinary electrolytes and catecholamines were measured under caffeine influence (period I), and for the next 6 h (period II). A significant increase in systolic (P = .017) and diastolic blood pressure (P = .023) occurred in 13 subjects who were 58 ± 10.4 years old. Nonresponders were younger (44.5 ± 15.8 years). A statistically significant decrease in heart rate was seen during the first hour after caffeine intake in both responders (P = .008) and nonresponders (P = .004). Marked diuresis and natriuresis were observed during period I in both groups. Renin and endothelin levels were unchanged. Although chronic studies point to development of tolerance to long-term caffeine ingestion, acute studies like the one described are essential to obtain data on the immediate effects that can be of practical importance, especially in the elderly.     

Role of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in hypertensive patients having controlled office blood pressure

Background and objectivesAmbulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring has become useful in the diagnosis and management of hypertensive individuals. In this study we tried to know the role of office and ambulatory BP in treated hypertensive patients.Methods and patientsProspective cohort of 561 treated hypertensive patients were enrolled in the study. Hypertension definitions were according to JNC 8 classification. Office BP and ambulatory BP monitoring was done according to defined protocol.ResultsFrom a subgroup of 158 treated hypertensive patients, 91(16.2%) patients were having white coat hypertension (p value 0.00 by Pearson chi square test). In a subset of 403 patients who were having controlled BP on the day of enrolment as well as on the day of attaching ambulatory BP monitor; 98 (17.4%) patients were having masked uncontrolled hypertension (MUCH). In addition there was very significant percentage of non-dippers and reverse dippers. In our study we found that office BP has a moderate to low specificity and sensitivity and low negative predictive value for overall control in treated hypertensive patients.ConclusionAmbulatory BP monitoring should be included in the management protocol of treated hypertensive patients, for the optimal BP control.     

Twenty-four hour ambulatory blood pressure in therapeutically resistant hypertensive patients

Circadian blood pressure and heart rate rhythms were determined in essential and renal hypertensive patients who failed to respond to drug therapy. Indirect ambulatory blood pressure and heart rate recordings were measured in 31 subjects for 24 hours. Essential hypertensive patients exhibit 'white coat hypertension', are normotensive outside the clinic and have a higher awake than sleep blood pressure. Blood pressure and heart rate of renal hypertensive patients do not increase in the presence of a physician and there is no difference between awake and sleep values. In contrast to patients with essential hypertension, the circadian fluctuations of blood pressure were depressed in renal hypertensive patients. We conclude that essential hypertensive patients who appear clinically uncontrolled are in fact well controlled in their domestic environment, whereas renal hypertensive patients are consistently uncontrolled. Ambulatory monitoring may help in differentiating the various types of patient and in the evaluation of antihypertensive therapy.     

Nocturnal blood pressure monitored by ambulatory blood pressure measurement in elderly hypertensive patients.

This study was designed to characterize the nocturnal fall of blood pressure (NFBP) of elderly hypertensive patients (EH), with or without cerebrovascular disease or diabetes mellitus, as measured by automated blood pressure (BP) monitoring. Systolic and diastolic BP and heart rate was measured every 15 minutes in 133 hospitalized patients with nearly similar schedules and diets. The patients were divided into five groups: I, normotensive elderly patients over age 65: II, EH without cardiovascular diseases, controlled without medication: III, EH with cerebral infarction, chronic stage: IV, EH with noninsulin-dependent diabetes mellitus: and V, hypertensives under age 65, without cardiovascular diseases. A significant NFBP was observed in the patients of groups I and V, a significant but smaller NFBP in the hypertensives of groups II and IV, and no NFBP in the patients of group III. Administration of the antihypertensive drugs, enalapril and nifedipine, tended to augment the NFBP. These preliminary observations showed that NFBP did occur in elderly hypertensives but the fall was smaller than that observed in younger hypertensives or elderly normotensives. Although the ambulatory BP measurements were useful in the overall clinical evaluation of elderly patients, NFBP in elderly patients was affected by hypertensive drugs and therefore NFBP should be interpreted with caution.     

Effects of amlodipine and valsartan on vascular damage and ambulatory blood pressure in untreated hypertensive patients

The present study was performed to compare the long-term effects of 24-h ambulatory blood pressure (BP) control with amlodipine versus valsartan on vascular damage in untreated hypertensive patients. Amlodipine and valsartan have benefits on cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in hypertensive patients. Although ambulatory BP is associated with severity of target-organ damage in hypertensive patients, beneficial effects of ambulatory BP control with amlodipine versus valsartan on vascular damage have not been compared. Pulse wave velocity (PWV), intima-media thickness (IMT) of the carotid arteries, urinary albumin excretion (UAE) and 24-h ambulatory BP were determined in 100 untreated hypertensive patients before and 12 months after the start of antihypertensive therapy with amlodipine or valsartan. Amlodipine and valsartan decreased ambulatory BP similarly, but the variability of 24-h and daytime ambulatory systolic BP was significantly reduced by amlodipine but not by valsartan. The reduced variability of ambulatory systolic BP caused by amlodipine significantly contributed to the improvement of PWV, although both drugs decreased PWV similarly. Carotid IMT was unaffected by treatment with either drug. Valsartan significantly decreased UAE independently of its depressor effect, but amlodipine had no effect on UAE. These results suggest that the 24-h control of ambulatory BP with amlodipine had functionally improved the stiffened arteries of hypertensive patients by the end of 12 months of treatment, in part through reducing BP variability, whereas ambulatory BP control with valsartan decreased the arterial stiffness to the same degree as amlodipine without affecting BP variability maybe through some pleiotropic effects.     

高血压合并颈动脉粥样硬化患者动态血压特征分析

目的研究高血压合并颈动脉粥样硬化患者的动态血压特征和临床意义。方法选择高血压患者111例,行动态血压监测。所有患者行颈动脉超声检查,根据结果将患者分为斑块组66例和无斑块组45例,斑块组又根据斑块数量分为单一斑块组24例和多发斑块组42例。比较各组动态血压情况。结果斑块组较无斑块组患者24 h、昼间和夜间平均收缩压、舒张压和动脉压均显著增高(P<0.05),且斑块组非杓型血压发生率较无斑块组也显著增高(63.6%vs 44.4%,P<0.05);多发斑块组较单一斑块组患者24 h、昼间和夜间平均收缩压、舒张压和动脉压均显著增高(P<0.05),且多发斑块组非杓型血压发生率较单一斑块组显著增高(76.2%vs 41.7%,P<0.05)。结论持续血压升高是产生颈动脉粥样硬化的重要影响因素,且颈动脉斑块更易引发血压昼夜节律调节紊乱。     

动态血压监测对老年高血压病人预后的评价

目的：确定动态血压是否比诊室血压能更好地预测经治老年高血压患靶器官的损害。方法：根据24小时收缩压（SBP）的水平将69例病人分为3组（＜130mmHg、130－139mmHg,≥140mmHg)进行回顾性分析。结果：I组患的靶器官损害发生率明显低于后两组。结论：24小时SBP＞130mmHg和／或PP≥60mmHg可作为老年高血压患危险分层的指标。     

Sleep disturbance during ambulatory blood pressure monitoring of hypertensive patients

BACKGROUND: Hypertensive patients who fail to exhibit a normal fall in blood pressure at night may have a greater risk of target-organ damage. Sleep, with associated cessation of physical activity, is the principal determinant of nocturnal blood pressure 'dip'. OBJECTIVE: To ascertain whether hypertensive patients, who experience the discomfort of higher cuff-inflation pressures during ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, experience more interference with sleep, manifested by greater nocturnal physical activity. DESIGN: A retrospective case- control study. METHODS: Subjects were selected from a database of 475 patients who had undergone simultaneous 24 h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and monitoring of physical activity with a wrist-mounted piezoelectric accelerometer. Sixty-one hypertensives (average daytime systolic blood pressure >/= 150 mmHg) were age matched to 61 subjects with average daytime systolic blood pressures 相似文献   

老年高血压病人动态血压波动特征

目的：通过对调查资料的分析,了解和掌握老年高血压患者动态血压（ABP）波动特点。方法：分析707例虱的ABP测量资料,比较高血压病人和血压正常值的ABP以及ABP与诊室血压（CBP）之间的异同。结果：老年高血压患者的ABP主要表现为收缩压（SBP）和脉压（PP）升高,高血压患者和血压正常者的24小时ABP波动曲线类似,均呈双峰双谷状。结论：大动脉顺应性下降是SBP和PP升高的原因,老年人24小时ABP的波动特性可能是其自主神经功能失调的反映。     

肾血管性与原发性高血压患者24h动态血压的比较

目的 比较肾血管性高血压(RVH)与原发性高血压(EH)患者24 h动态血压的差别.方法 应用动态血压监测仪观察51例RVH患者的24 h动态血压,并与年龄、性别与之相匹配的51例EH患者的24 h动态血压进行比较.结果 RVH组24 h、白天及夜间动态收缩压、舒张压及脉压均值都比EH组有不同程度的升高(P<0.05),尤以夜间收缩压升高明显;血压负荷增加明显,24 h收缩压、舒张压负荷分别达到58.96%和35.98%,而EH组血压负荷均在20.00%左右,两组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05).EH组夜间血压下降率为10.36%,血压曲线呈勺型(60.8%的患者夜间血压下降率>10%);而RVH组夜间血压下降率为5.39%,血压曲线呈非勺型(仅有27.50%的患者夜间血压下降率>10%).结论 RVH患者动态血压均值、脉压和血压负荷明显增加,昼夜节律减弱.

Abstract：

Objective To compare 24 h ambulatory blood pressure changes between patients with renovascular hypertension and essential hypertension.Methods The 24 h ambulatory blood pressure of patients with age and gender matched renovascular hypertension (RVH, n=51) was compared with that of patients with essential hypertension (EH, n=51).Results The 24 h, daytime and nighttime systolic blood pressures(SBP),diastolic blood pressures(DBP) and pulse pressures (PP) in RVH were significantly higher than in EH (all P<0.05), especially the nocturnal SBP (P<0.05). The SBP and DBP loads in RVH were 58.96% and 35.98% respectively, while blood pressure loads were around 20.00% in EH (P<0.05). In patients with RVH, The nocturnal blood pressure fall was 5.39%, and only 27.50% patients were dippers, while the nocturnal blood pressure fall was 10.36% and 60.8% patients were dippers in EH.Conclusion RVH patients have higher dynamic BP, PP, BP loads and blunted diurnal rhythm compared to those with EH.     

Comparison of valsartan and amlodipine on ambulatory blood pressure variability in hypertensive patients

We tested the hypothesis that calcium channel blockers (CCBs: amlodipine group, n = 38)) are superior to angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs: valsartan group, n = 38) against ambulatory blood pressure variability (BPV) in untreated Japanese hypertensive patients. Both drugs significantly reduced ambulatory systolic and diastolic BP values. With regard to BPV, standard deviation (SD) in SBP did not change with the administration of either drug, but the ARB significantly increased SD in awake DBP (12 ± 4–14 ± 4 mmHg). The ARB also significantly increased the coefficients of variation (CVs)in awake and 24-h SBP/DBP (all P < 0.05), but amlodipine did not change the CV. CCB significantly reduced the maximum values of awake SBP (193 ± 24–182 ± 27 mmHg, P = 0.02), sleep SBP (156 ± 18–139 ± 14 mmHg, P < 0 .001), and awake and sleep DBP (P < 0.01 in both cases), but the ARB did not change the maximum BP values. In conclusion, a once-daily morning dose of CCB amlodipine was more effective at controlling ambulatory BPV than ARB valsartan, especially in reducing maximum BP levels.     

高血压患者24h动态血压的昼夜规律及变异性研究

目的 探讨原发性高血压（EH）患者血压昼夜规律及血压波动程度即变异性的临床意义.方法 回顾分析65例EH患者24 h动态血压（24 h ABPM）监测报告.将65例EH患者分为两组：一组为高血压伴左心室肥大（LVH）30例,另一组为高血压不伴左心室肥大35例.选择同期健康体检者30名为正常血压对照组.对下列参数进行分析：①24 h平均收缩压（24 h SBP）与舒张压（24 h DBP）;②白昼平均收缩压（dSBP）与舒张压（dDBP）;③夜间平均收缩压（nSBP）与舒张压（nDBP）;④24 h收缩压标准差（24 h SSD）与舒张压标准差（24 h DSD）;⑤白昼收缩压标准差（dSSD）与舒张压标准差（dDSD）;⑥夜间收缩压标准差（nSSD）和舒张压标准差（nDSD）;⑦夜间/白昼平均收缩压比值（nSBP/dSBP）与舒张压比值（nDBP/dDBP）.结果 高血压伴LVH组与正常对照组或高血压无LVH组比较,24 h各时间段的血压均值及血压变异性差异有统计学意义（P＜0.01）,血压昼夜（清醒/睡眠）规律性不明显,nSBP/dSBP比值显著高于对照组（P＜0.01）.高血压无LVH组与正常对照组比较,血压均值差异有统计学意义（P＜0.01）,血压大多有较明显昼夜（清醒/睡眠）变化规律,血压变异性比较除白昼收缩压变异性有明显差异外,其余差异无统计学意义.结论 高血压不合并靶器官损害时,血压的变异性不显著,有明显昼夜规律性;高血压合并靶器官损害时,血压的变异性增大,无明显昼夜规律性,nSBP/dSBP比值明显增高.利用这些指标可评估高血压患者是否有靶器官损害,以便更有效地控制血压,减少并发症.     

Predictors of controlled ambulatory blood pressure in treated hypertensive patients with uncontrolled office blood pressure.

Although some treated hypertensive patients have controlled 24-h ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) despite their uncontrolled office blood pressure (BP), the factors relating to the control of 24-h ABP remain unknown. We conducted a study to assess 24-h ABP and its association with other cardiovascular risk factors, including echocardiographic left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), in elderly hypertensive patients (n =41) with uncontrolled office BP (>140/90 mmHg) during long-term medication. Although a majority of the patients had isolated elevation of office systolic BP (SBP), there was no significant relationship between office SBP and 24-h SBP, and about half of the patients had controlled 24-h ABP (125+/-8/69+/-6 mmHg). Patients with controlled 24-h ABP (125+/-8/69+/-6 mmHg) had similar office BP (150+/-6/77+/-5 vs. 150+/-7/79+/-7 mmHg), but lower left ventricular mass index (LVMI) (123+/-34 vs. 156+/-34 g/m(2)) and body mass index (BMI) (24.4+/-2.1 vs. 26.4+/-3.6 kg/m(2)) compared with those with uncontrolled 24-h ABP (149+/-13/78+/-7 mmHg). Multivariate analysis showed that LVMI and BMI were independently associated with controlled 24-h ABP, and the control status of 24-h ABP was highly dependent on the presence of LVH and obesity. Therefore, absence of LVH and obesity may be useful for predicting the level of control of 24-h ABP in treated patients whose office BP is uncontrolled without ABP measurements.