Calcium antagonists in the treatment of hypertension in patients with ischaemic heart disease

Are lives saved or heart attacks prevented by antihypertensive therapy, as a result of blood pressure reduction alone, or because of other properties of the antihypertensive medications which are independent of blood pressure lowering? Long-acting calcium antagonists seem to be as effective as thiazide diuretics and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors in preventing all-cause mortality and stroke in patients with hypertension, but are probably inferior to ACE inhibitors in preventing coronary artery disease. In patients with symptomatic coronary artery disease, calcium antagonists are generally as effective as beta-blockers in relieving angina and improving exercise time-to-onset of angina or ischaemia. Unstable angina or myocardial infarction require treatment with a beta-blocker, with an ACE inhibitor added when necessary for blood pressure control or if there is significant left ventricular (LV) dysfunction. If beta-blockers are contraindicated and if there is no LV dysfunction, a non-dihydropyridine calcium antagonist can be substituted.     

Do different hemodynamic effects of antihypertensive drugs translate into different safety profiles?

Various antihypertensive drugs reduce blood pressure by different mechanisms. In some instances, adverse reactions occur because of specific hemodynamic effects. Examples include syncope with alpha-blockade or vasodilator therapy; fatigue or exercise intolerance with the reduction in cardiac output following the use of beta-adrenergic inhibitors; edema, headaches, or dizziness with the use of vasodilators such as calcium entry blockers; renal failure in patients with renal artery stenosis or renal insufficiency following the use of ACE inhibitors; and marked hyponatremia with volume depletion following the use of diuretics, especially in elderly patients. In the majority of patients, however, blood pressure lowering can be achieved without significant adverse effects. Combining small doses of different agents with different hemodynamic actions often results in good blood pressure control and minimal reactions. Examples of these include diuretics and beta-adrenergic inhibitors, diuretics and ACE inhibitors, and beta-blockers and vasodilators.     

Enalapril. A reappraisal of its pharmacology and therapeutic use in hypertension.

Enalapril, an angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor usually administered orally once daily, decreases blood pressure by lowering peripheral vascular resistance without increasing heart rate or output. It is effective in lowering blood pressure in all grades of essential and renovascular hypertension. Patients not responding adequately to enalapril monotherapy usually respond with the addition of a thiazide diuretic (or a calcium antagonist or beta-blocker), and rarely require a third antihypertensive agent. Enalapril is at least as effective as other established and newer ACE inhibitors, and members of other antihypertensive drug classes including diuretics, beta-blockers, calcium antagonists and alpha-blockers, but therapy with enalapril may be less frequently limited by serious adverse effects or treatment contraindications than with other drug classes. The most frequent adverse effect limiting all ACE inhibitor therapy in clinical practice is cough. This favourable profile of efficacy and tolerability, and the substantial weight of clinical experience, explain the increasing acceptance of enalapril as a major antihypertensive treatment and supports its use as logical first-line therapeutic option.     

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and stroke risk: benefit beyond blood pressure reduction?

Hypertension, a leading cause of morbidity and mortality, accounts for 25-49% of all strokes. Randomized placebo-controlled trials primarily with diuretics and beta-blockers administered in patients with hypertension have demonstrated a 38% reduction in primary stroke. Placebo-controlled trials with angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors have not been conducted in patients with hypertension. However, in a meta-analysis of four placebo-controlled trials of ACE inhibitors in patients with coronary heart disease and/or diabetes mellitus, the overall risk of primary stroke was significantly reduced. Results of the Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation trial, which produced a substantial reduction in stroke with an apparently small reduction in blood pressure, suggest that the benefit of ACE inhibitors may be related to their effects on the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system more than on blood pressure reduction. In active-control comparisons in patients with hypertension, ACE inhibitors have demonstrated reductions in primary stroke risk similar to reductions with diuretics, beta-blockers, and calcium channel blockers. The data suggest that for primary prevention of stroke antihypertensive therapy should be individualized in patients. Relatively few data are available concerning the benefit of antihypertensive therapy in the secondary prevention of stroke. In patients who had experienced a stroke or transient ischemic attack, therapy with a diuretic or a combination of a diuretic plus an ACE inhibitor could be recommended based on available outcome studies conducted in this patient population. It is premature to conclude that the benefit of ACE inhibitor therapy in primary or secondary prevention of stroke is an effect independent of blood pressure reduction. Hypertension detection, treatment, and control in patients still must be the principal focus of clinicians for both primary and secondary prevention of stroke.     

Calcium channel blockers as the treatment of choice for hypertension in renal transplant recipients: fact or fiction

Posttransplantation hypertension has been identified as an independent risk factor for chronic allograft dysfunction and loss. Based on available morbidity and mortality data, posttransplantation hypertension must be identified and managed appropriately. During the past decade, calcium channel blockers have been recommended by some as the antihypertensive agents of choice in this population, because it was theorized that their vasodilatory effects would counteract the vasoconstrictive effects of the calcineurin inhibitors. With increasing data becoming available, reexamining the use of traditional antihypertensive agents, including diuretics and beta-blockers, or the newer agents, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers, may be beneficial. Transplant clinicians must choose antihypertensive agents that will provide their patients with maximum benefit, from both a renal and a cardiovascular perspective. Beta-blockers, diuretics, and ACE inhibitors have all demonstrated significant benefit on morbidity and mortality in patients with cardiovascular disease. Calcium channel blockers have been shown to possess the ability to counteract cyclosporine-induced nephrotoxicity. When compared with beta-blockers, diuretics, and ACE inhibitors, however, the relative risk of cardiovascular events is increased with calcium channel blockers. With the long-term benefits of calcium channel blockers on the kidney unknown and a negative cardiovascular profile, these agents are best reserved as adjunctive therapy to beta-blockers, diuretics, and ACE inhibitors.     

New hypertension guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence and the British Hypertension Society.

A joint initiative between the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) and the British Hypertension Society (BHS) has led to the publication of new guidelines for the management of hypertension in the community. Recent trial evidence highlighting the increased incidence of new-onset diabetes in those exposed to beta-blocker-based treatment regimens, with or without diuretics, compared with those based on calcium channel blockers (CCBs) or angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE-Is) inhibitors has led to a recommendation that in the uncomplicated patient, beta-blockers are no longer considered suitable options for first-line therapy. Together with mounting evidence that age and ethnicity dictate blood pressure (BP) responsiveness to different classes of antihypertensive drugs, the ACD algorithm is now proposed (formerly ABCD), with ACE inhibitors (ACE-Is) (or angiotensin receptor blockers [ARBs] when ACE-Is are poorly tolerated) preferred in younger patients and CCBs or diuretics preferred for older patients and in black patients of any age. Pathophysiological considerations have influenced proposals for combination therapies with CCBs or diuretics added to ACE-Is in younger patients and vice versa in older patients. Health economic analyses have clearly indicated the cost effectiveness of CCBs which are now elevated to equal standing with diuretics in older patients.     

Treatment of hypertension with calcium antagonists

Calcium antagonists are the latest addition to the antihypertensive armamentarium. The evidence available suggests that they lower blood pressure at least as effectively as diuretics, beta-receptor blockers and other vasodilators. Nifedipine is as effective as hydralazine as a third-line drug. Both nifedipine and verapamil may be used alone as first-line therapy, but they are more expensive and probably cause more symptomatic side-effects than diuretics or beta-receptor blockers.     

Adult hypertension: reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality

(1) Since our last review of treatments for arterial hypertension in 1999 (Prescrire International no.41), many new data have been published and new antihypertensive drugs have appeared on the market. (2) The working definition of hypertension is unchanged, namely blood pressure of at least 160/95 mm Hg in the general population, and at least 140/80 mm Hg in patients with diabetes and a history of stroke; these figures must be found on several occasions using a standardised method, with the patient at rest. (3) The goals of antihypertensive therapy are to reduce mortality and cardiovascular events, and not simply to drive blood pressure below a fixed (and often controversial) threshold. (4) Some drug and non drug interventions have a positive risk-benefit balance in the long term. (5) When antihypertensive drug therapy is needed, trials based on clinical endpoints show that it is best to start treatment with a single drug. (6) New data support the use of certain thiazide diuretics (chlortalidone, or hydrochlorothiazide if chlortalidone is not available) as first line treatment for most hypertensive patients, including non diabetic adults, diabetic adults, elderly subjects (over 65 years), and stroke patients. Some betablockers and angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors (ACE inhibitor) are second-line alternatives. (7) Assessment of other antihypertensive drugs has also progressed since 1999, including indapamide (thiazide-like diuretic), amlodipine, diltiazem and verapamil (calcium channel blockers), lisinopril (ACE inhibitor), and losartan and valsartan (angiotensin II antagonists). However, these drugs are not as thoroughly evaluated as thiazide diuretics, betablockers and some ACE inhibitors.     

The Effect of Antihypertensive Agents on New-Onset Diabetes Mellitus

Recent large hypertension trials have shown great differences in incidence of new-onset diabetes mellitus among patients receiving different antihypertensive drug therapies. The incidence of diabetes is unchanged or increased by the use of thiazide diuretics and beta-adrenoceptor antagonists (beta-blockers) and unchanged or decreased by ACE inhibitors, calcium channel blockers (CCBs), and angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists (angiotensin receptor blockers). Recent results from ASCOT (Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial) showed superiority of the 'new' combination of CCBs and ACE inhibitors over the 'old' or 'conventional' combination of beta-blockers and diuretics. In this review, the results from some of the large hypertension trials are discussed, and the hypotheses on how different antihypertensive drug regimens can affect glucose homeostasis are considered. The question now is whether the results from these recent trials should affect the choice of antihypertensive treatment, particularly for special groups. However, the key goal is still to reduce BP, and this usually requires combinations of drugs.     

Calcium antagonists in the treatment of hypertension in patients with ischaemic heart disease

Are lives saved or heart attacks prevented by antihypertensive therapy, as a result of blood pressure reduction alone, or because of other properties of the antihypertensive medications which are independent of blood pressure lowering? Long-acting calcium antagonists seem to be as effective as thiazide diuretics and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors in preventing all-cause mortality and stroke in patients with hypertension, but are probably inferior to ACE inhibitors in preventing coronary artery disease. In patients with symptomatic coronary artery disease, calcium antagonists are generally as effective as β-blockers in relieving angina and improving exercise time-to-onset of angina or ischaemia. Unstable angina or myocardial infarction require treatment with a β-blocker, with an ACE inhibitor added when necessary for blood pressure control or if there is significant left ventricular (LV) dysfunction. If β-blockers are contraindicated and if there is no LV dysfunction, a non-dihydropyridine calcium antagonist can be substituted.     

The management of diabetic proteinuria. Which antihypertensive agent?

Diabetic renal disease is a clinical syndrome in which proteinuria is followed by the development of renal failure, and is commonly associated with the concomitant development of hypertension. In insulin-dependent diabetic (IDDM) patients, hypertension often first appears in the microalbuminuric phase of diabetic nephropathy whereas in non-insulin-dependent diabetic (NIDDM) patients, hypertension often antecedes nephropathy and may precede the diagnosis of diabetes. Antihypertensive regimens including diuretics, vasodilators such as hydralazine, beta-blockers and ACE inhibitors reduce proteinuria and delay the decline in renal function in IDDM patients with established nephropathy. No such data are as yet available for calcium antagonists. In microalbuminuric diabetic patients with hypertension, conventional antihypertensive agents, ACE inhibitors and calcium antagonists have been shown to decrease urinary albumin excretion. In the diabetic patient with normal blood pressure and microalbuminuria, there is much less information. It appears likely that ACE inhibitors reduce or retard the rate of increase in albuminuria in these patients. The effect on ultimately delaying or preventing renal failure remains unknown although the preliminary evidence is encouraging. Data on calcium antagonists remain inconclusive with some reports suggesting an increase in proteinuria with the dihydropyridine calcium antagonists. However, a recent longer term study suggested that nifedipine may prevent the rise in albuminuria which is generally observed in the untreated normotensive microalbuminuric subject.     

Felodipine. A review of the pharmacology and therapeutic use of the extended release formulation in cardiovascular disorders.

Felodipine is a vascular-selective, dihydropyridine calcium antagonist previously investigated as a conventional tablet formulation administered twice daily. More recently considerable experience has been gained with an extended release (ER) formulation which has the convenience of once daily administration. Felodipine ER has been well studied in patients with essential hypertension. As monotherapy in mild to moderate essential hypertension, felodipine ER is at least as effective in reducing blood pressure as other calcium antagonists, beta-blockers, diuretics and ACE inhibitors, with some results favouring felodipine ER at a statistically significant level at the dosages used. It is also effective combined with controlled release metoprolol or enalapril in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension. In patients with more severe forms of essential hypertension uncontrolled by beta-blocker and/or diuretic therapy, felodipine ER was effective as an 'add-on' therapy in placebo-controlled trials, and, at the dosages used, more effective than either sustained release nifedipine or nitrendipine. Felodipine produces effective control of blood pressure without negative effects on cardiac performance. In addition to its antihypertensive action, results suggest that felodipine therapy is associated with significant regression of left ventricular hypertrophy. Furthermore, it appears suitable for use in patients with concomitant diabetes, renal dysfunction or asthma, and is also being investigated for use in patients with congestive heart failure or angina pectoris. Felodipine ER is an effective drug for the treatment of all grades of essential hypertension, and can be used both as monotherapy and in combination with other antihypertensive agents. Further clinical experience should fully establish the long term tolerability of felodipine ER and consequently its place in therapy relative to other accepted antihypertensive drugs. However, with the convenience of once daily administration, felodipine ER is a worthwhile innovation in the treatment of hypertension.     

How to use calcium antagonists in hypertension: putting the JNC-VI guidelines into practice. Joint National Committee for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Pressure.

The prevention and treatment of hypertension remain as major challenges for clinicians all over the world. The recently published Sixth Report of the Joint National Committee for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC-VI) uses evidence-based medicine in providing guidelines to aid clinicians in the prevention, detection and treatment of high blood pressure, including pharmacological approaches. Calcium antagonists are used widely for the treatment of hypertension, and JNC-VI focuses on specific situations where calcium antagonists could be considered as preferred treatments. There are a large number of calcium antagonists available, with a variety of pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic actions. Several sustained-release formulations of these drugs are also available. In terms of blood pressure control, calcium antagonists are more effective as antihypertensive treatments than beta-blockers, ACE inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers in Black patients. The dihydropyridine calcium antagonists have been shown to reduce morbidity and mortality in elderly patients with isolated systolic hypertension. The rate-lowering calcium antagonists can be used as alternatives to beta-blockers in patients with coronary artery disease and hypertension. Calcium antagonists can be used as alternatives to ACE inhibitors in patients with hypertension and concomitant diabetes mellitus and/or renal disease. Some dihydropyridine calcium antagonists may be useful as alternatives to ACE inhibitors in patients with hypertension and systolic heart failure. Calcium antagonists appear to be extremely useful in patients with cyclosporin-induced hypertension, and in patients with hypertension and concomitant Raynaud's phenomenon and/or migraine. The rate-lowering agents can be used in patients with atrial tachyarrhythmias and hypertension. Clinicians should be aware of drug-drug interactions involving calcium antagonists, especially after the recent problems with mibefradil. Although retrospective studies have caused controversy regarding the safety of calcium antagonists in patients with hypertension, recent prospective studies have revealed no major safety concerns with these drugs.     

The fixed combination of verapamil SR/trandolapril

Fixed verapamil SR/trandolapril combinations 180/1 mg and 180/2 mg (Tarka, Knoll AG) have a significantly superior antihypertensive effect compared to equal dosages of either agent alone. Verapamil SR/trandolapril 180/2 mg combination produces the best dose-response ratio of different dose combinations of these two drugs. Combination therapy has the most pronounced effect on blunting the early morning rise in blood pressure. Thus, verapamil SR/trandolapril combination therapy may be an appropriate treatment option in patients with moderate essential hypertension, particularly in those who have a tendency toward the early morning rise in blood pressure. The adverse effect profile of the fixed combination of verapamil SR/trandolapril includes the typical side effects of its monocompounds. The fixed combination of verapamil SR/trandolapril is also effective and safe in the treatment of hypertension in the elderly. The fixed low-dose combination therapy with verapamil SR/trandolapril 180/2 mg is a suitable treatment option for patients with moderate essential hypertension and Type 2 diabetes mellitus, because it improves parameters of carbohydrate metabolism and uricaemia and does not alter the lipid profile. The insulin-sensitising effect of angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor monotherapy with its theoretical risk of hypoglycaemia is completely neutralised in the combination with verapamil SR. Comparative studies have shown that the low-dose combination of verapamil SR/trandolapril may be a suitable alternative to combinations containing a thiazide diuretic or a beta-blocking agent for the long-term management of hypertensive patients for whom combination therapy is indicated. The combination of an ACE inhibitor with a non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker reduces proteinuria to a greater extent than either agent alone. A combination of an ACE inhibitor and a calcium channel blocker may provide additional benefit in inducing the regression of left ventricular hypertrophy. Combination therapy leads to a significant increase in left ventricular ejection fraction, improvement of wall motion index and increases exercise duration time in patients with coronary heart disease and left heart failure. It also improves the ratio of exercise to rest rate-pressure product and decreases the number of angina attacks. These findings support the hypothesis that the combination of verapamil and trandolapril might be useful in patients with attenuated left ventricular function and angina pectoris. Thus, Tarka is an effective and well-tolerated antihypertensive agent with a good safety profile and positive metabolic effects.     

Current role of beta-blockers in the treatment of hypertension

Importance of the field: It is important to know which patients with hypertension will benefit from beta-blocker therapy and which beta-blockers should be used in the treatment of hypertension to reduce cardiovascular events and mortality.

Areas covered in this review: Studies between 1981 and 2009 using a Medline search are reported. Beta-blockers should be used to treat hypertension in patients with previous myocardial infarction, acute coronary syndromes, angina pectoris, congestive heart failure, ventricular arrhythmias, supraventricular tachyarrhythmias, diabetes mellitus, after coronary artery bypass graft surgery, and in patients who are pregnant, have thyrotoxicosis, glaucoma, migraine, essential tremor, perioperative hypertension, or an excessive blood pressure response after exercise.

What the reader will gain: The use of beta-blockers as first-line therapy in patients with primary hypertension has been controversial. However, the 2009 guidelines of the European Society of Hypertension state that large-scale meta-analyses of available data confirm that diuretics, beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers and calcium channel blockers do not significantly differ in their ability to lower blood pressure and to exert cardiovascular protection both in elderly and in younger patients.

Take home message: The key message of this paper is that atenolol should not be used as an antihypertensive drug and that the degree of reduction of mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke and congestive heart failure by antihypertensive therapy is dependent on the degree of lowering of aortic blood pressure. Newer vasodilator beta-blockers such as carvedilol and nebivolol may be more effective in reducing cardiovascular events than traditional beta-blockers, but this needs to be investigated by controlled clinical trials.     

Antihypertensive treatment according to age, plasma renin and race

Recent large scale antihypertensive treatment trials emphasise the importance of blood pressure control in reducing both cerebrovascular accidents and myocardial infarction. Obviously therefore, the drug that best normalises blood pressure while producing the fewest adverse effects should be sought. On the basis of studies demonstrating cellular membrane and calcium homeostatic derangements and an age-dependent transition of overall cardiovascular regulation and peripheral vasoconstrictor forces during the course of essential hypertension, this review proposes an alternative treatment. Under this treatment scheme angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors or beta-blockers should be used in younger patients and in those with high plasma renin activity, while calcium antagonists are used in place of diuretics in older low-renin or Black patients. Age-oriented 2-way drug selection enables a normalisation of blood pressure without untoward effects in about 80% of patients with essential hypertension and helps to optimise drug combinations in those patients who are difficult to treat.     

Felodipine. A review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and therapeutic use in hypertension

Felodipine is a dihydropyridine calcium antagonist which selectively relaxes vascular smooth muscle. By acting at peripheral arterioles, it lowers systemic vascular resistance and thereby produces substantial decreases in blood pressure and increases in cardiac output. Felodipine is indicated for the management of hypertension, and in patients with mild to moderate disease felodipine monotherapy markedly lowers blood pressure. It proved as effective as atenolol, and equivalent to hydrochlorothiazide, either with or without amiloride, in terms of antihypertensive activity. Comparative studies also demonstrated that once daily administration with an extended-release formulation provides equivalent antihypertensive efficacy to the same amount of drug administered twice daily as the standard tablets. As a second- or third-line treatment for patients with moderate to severe hypertension refractory to standard drug combinations, felodipine produced considerable reductions in blood pressure when added to beta-blockers and diuretics, either alone or in combination, in studies lasting up to 48 weeks. In comparative studies of multiple-drug treatments felodipine was found to have superior efficacy to hydralazine and prazosin, and was at least as effective as nifedipine, minoxidil and propranolol, when used with diuretics and/or beta-blockers. As an alternative to hydrochlorothiazide, in combination with beta-blockers, felodipine consistently controlled blood pressure in a greater percentage of patients and usually provided greater decreases in blood pressure. The main side effects with felodipine are ankle oedema, headache and flushing. Although the overall incidence of effects is quite high, they are usually mild in nature. Nevertheless, withdrawal due to side effects has been necessary in about 7% of patients overall. Thus, the efficacy of felodipine has been demonstrated in mild, moderate and severe hypertension. At the present time it seems particularly suitable as a second- or third-line treatment in refractory hypertension, but it also can be used as monotherapy for mild to moderate disease.     

An evaluation of antihypertensive prescribing practices

We evaluated the management of patients with hypertension (including drug prescribing) by US physicians, compared their prescribing to National Institutes of Health (NIH) guidelines, and compared the pharmacoeconomics of the prescribed antihypertensive drugs. A 1991 national US database, using physician-patient encounter forms, was our data source. Results showed that physicians generally met the NIH guidelines regarding diagnostic/screening services, patient counselling/education, antihypertensive drug prescribing and follow-up. Two areas should be the foci of continuing medical education for US physicians. Firstly, physicians need to be reminded that centrally acting alpha 2-agonists are optimally used as supplemental antihypertensive drugs rather than as initial agents, which is how some physicians utilised them. Secondly, if once-daily administration is used to promote patient compliance, physicians should be aware that, of the frequently prescribed first-line antihypertensive drugs, hydrochlorothiazide, chlorthalidone and atenolol presently have substantially less expensive once-daily dosage forms than other diuretics or beta-blockers, calcium antagonists or ACE inhibitors.     

The fixed combination of verapamil SR/trandolapril

Fixed verapamil SR/trandolapril combinations 180/1 mg and 180/2 mg (Tarka?, Knoll AG) have a significantly superior antihypertensive effect compared to equal dosages of either agent alone. Verapamil SR/trandolapril 180/2 mg combination produces the best dose-response ratio of different dose combinations of these two drugs. Combination therapy has the most pronounced effect on blunting the early morning rise in blood pressure. Thus, verapamil SR/trandolapril combination therapy may be an appropriate treatment option in patients with moderate essential hypertension, particularly in those who have a tendency toward the early morning rise in blood pressure. The adverse effect profile of the fixed combination of verapamil SR/trandolapril includes the typical side effects of its monocompounds. The fixed combination of verapamil SR/trandolapril is also effective and safe in the treatment of hypertension in the elderly. The fixed low-dose combination therapy with verapamil SR/trandolapril 180/2 mg is a suitable treatment option for patients with moderate essential hypertension and Type 2 diabetes mellitus, because it improves parameters of carbohydrate metabolism and uricaemia and does not alter the lipid profile. The insulin-sensitising effect of angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor monotherapy with its theoretical risk of hypoglycaemia is completely neutralised in the combination with verapamil SR. Comparative studies have shown that the low-dose combination of verapamil SR/trandolapril may be a suitable alternative to combinations containing a thiazide diuretic or a β-blocking agent for the long-term management of hypertensive patients for whom combination therapy is indicated. The combination of an ACE inhibitor with a non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker reduces proteinuria to a greater extent than either agent alone. A combination of an ACE inhibitor and a calcium channel blocker may provide additional benefit in inducing the regression of left ventricular hypertrophy. Combination therapy leads to a significant increase in left ventricular ejection fraction, improvement of wall motion index and increases exercise duration time in patients with coronary heart disease and left heart failure. It also improves the ratio of exercise to rest rate-pressure product and decreases the number of angina attacks. These findings support the hypothesis that the combination of verapamil and trandolapril might be useful in patients with attenuated left ventricular function and angina pectoris. Thus, Tarka? is an effective and well-tolerated antihypertensive agent with a good safety profile and positive metabolic effects.     

Efficacy and Tolerability of Nebivolol Compared with Other Antihypertensive Drugs

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Lowering BP to normal levels without quality of life deterioration is the most important means of reducing cardiovascular risk. Recent studies have challenged the position of beta-adrenoceptor antagonists (beta-blockers) as first-line antihypertensive drugs. Nebivolol is a third-generation, highly selective beta(1)-blocker that causes vasodilation through nitric oxide (NO) release. This meta-analysis investigates the efficacy and tolerability of nebivolol compared with other antihypertensive drugs and placebo in patients with hypertension. METHODS: Twelve randomized controlled studies were included in which nebivolol 5 mg once daily was compared with the recommended clinical doses of other antihypertensive drugs (n = 9), placebo (n = 2), and both (n = 1). The clinical studies were selected after a MEDLINE search up to 2007 using the key words 'nebivolol' and 'hypertension.' RESULTS: Antihypertensive response rates (the percentage of patients achieving target BP levels or a defined DBP reduction) were higher with nebivolol than with ACE inhibitors (odds ratio [OR] 1.92; p = 0.001) and all antihypertensive drugs combined (OR 1.41; p = 0.001) and similar to beta-blockers, calcium channel antagonists (CCAs) and the angiotensin receptor antagonist (ARA) losartan. Moreover, a higher percentage of patients receiving nebivolol achieved target BP levels compared with patients treated with losartan (OR 1.98; p = 0.004), CCAs (OR 1.44; p = 0.024), and all antihypertensive drugs combined (OR 1.35; p = 0.012). The percentage of patients experiencing adverse events did not differ between nebivolol and placebo; adverse event rates were significantly lower with nebivolol than losartan (OR 0.52; p = 0.016), other beta-blockers (OR 0.56; p = 0.007), nifedipine (OR 0.49; p < 0.001), and all antihypertensive drugs combined (OR 0.59; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Results of previous pharmacokinetic studies suggest that nebivolol 5 mg may not conform completely to the definition of a classic beta-blocker demonstrating additional antihypertensive effect due to endothelial NO release-mediated vasodilation. This meta-analysis showed that nebivolol 5 mg achieved similar or better rates of treatment response and BP normalization than other drug classes and other antihypertensive drugs combined, with similar tolerability to placebo and significantly better tolerability than losartan, CCAs, other beta-blockers, and all antihypertensive drugs combined. Although not definitive, this meta-analysis suggests that nebivolol 5 mg is likely to have advantages over existing antihypertensives and may have a role in the first-line treatment of hypertension.