Administration time-dependent effects of aspirin on blood pressure in untreated hypertensive patients

Previous studies on the potential influence of aspirin on blood pressure have not taken into consideration the chronopharmacological effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. This pilot study investigates the effects of aspirin on blood pressure in untreated hypertensive patients who received aspirin at different times of the day according to their rest-activity cycle. We studied 100 untreated patients with mild hypertension (34 men and 66 women), 42.5+/-11.6 (mean+/-SD) years of age, randomly divided into 3 groups: nonpharmacological hygienic-dietary recommendations; the same recommendations and aspirin (100 mg/d) on awakening; or the same recommendations and aspirin before bedtime. Blood pressure was measured every 20 minutes during the day and every 30 minutes at night for 48 consecutive hours before and after 3 months of intervention. The circadian pattern of blood pressure in each group was established by population multiple-component analysis. After 3 months of nonpharmacological intervention, there was a small, nonsignificant reduction of blood pressure (<1.1 mm Hg; P>0.341). There was no change in blood pressure when aspirin was given on awakening (P=0.229). A highly significant blood pressure reduction was, however, observed in the patients who received aspirin before bedtime (decrease of 6 and 4 mm Hg in systolic and diastolic blood pressure, respectively; P<0.001). Results indicate a statistically significant administration time-dependent effect of low-dose aspirin on blood pressure in untreated patients with mild hypertension. The influence of aspirin on blood pressure demonstrated in this study indicates the need to quantify and control for aspirin effects in patients using this drug in combination with antihypertensive medication.     

Differing administration time-dependent effects of aspirin on blood pressure in dipper and non-dipper hypertensives

Aspirin is a potent antioxidative agent that reduces vascular production of superoxide, prevents angiotensin II-induced hypertension, and induces NO release. Low-dose aspirin administered at bedtime, but not on awakening, has also been shown to reduce blood pressure, possibly enhancing the nocturnal trough in NO production. Because endothelium-dependent vasodilation is blunted through a decrease in NO release in non-dipper compared with dipper patients, we compared the administration time-dependent influence of aspirin on ambulatory blood pressure in dipper and non-dipper hypertensive subjects. We studied 257 patients with mild hypertension (98 men and 159 women), 44.6+/-12.5 years of age, randomly assigned to receive 100 mg per day of aspirin either on awakening or at bedtime. Ambulatory blood pressure was measured for 48 hours at baseline and after 3 months of intervention. Blood pressure was slightly elevated after aspirin on awakening (increase of 1.5/1.0 mm Hg in the 24-hour mean of systolic/diastolic blood pressure; P<0.028). A highly significant blood pressure reduction was observed in patients who received aspirin at bedtime (decrease of 7.2/4.9 mm Hg in systolic/diastolic blood pressure; P<0.001). The reduction in nocturnal blood pressure mean was double in non-dippers (11.0/7.1 mm Hg) compared with dippers (5.5/3.3 mm Hg; P<0.001). This prospective trial corroborates the significant administration time-dependent effect of low-dose aspirin on blood pressure, mainly in non-dipper hypertensive patients. The timed administration of low-dose aspirin could thus provide a valuable approach, beyond prevention of cardiovascular disease, in the blood pressure control of patients with mild hypertension.     

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.     

Effectiveness of the once-daily calcium antagonist, lacidipine, in controlling 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure

The efficacy of the new once-daily dihydropyridine calcium antagonist, lacidipine, in reducing ambulatory intraarterial blood pressure (BP) was examined in 12 untreated hypertensive patients. The intraarterial recording was commenced 24 hours before the first 4-mg dose and was continued for a further 24 hours thereafter. After dose titration and chronic therapy, a second 24-hour ambulatory BP recording was made. There was a steady onset of drug action, maximal at 2 hours, but with reflex tachycardia after the first dose. Chronic administration reduced BP throughout the 24-hour period, without tachycardia. Mean daytime reduction in BP was 20 mm Hg systolic (p less than 0.005) and 12 mm Hg diastolic (p less than 0.02). Mean nighttime reduction was 8-mm Hg systolic (p less than 0.05) and 6-mm Hg diastolic (difference not significant). There was no postural decrease in BP on 60 degrees head-up tilting and hypotensive action was maintained during isometric exercise (reduction at peak of 32/18 mm Hg, p less than 0.05) and throughout dynamic exercise (reduction at peak of 23/14 mm Hg, p less than 0.05). Lacidipine is an effective once-daily antihypertensive agent, with good control of stress response.     

Treatment of non-dipper hypertension with bedtime administration of valsartan

BACKGROUND: Previous results have indicated that valsartan administration at bedtime, as opposed to upon wakening, may improve the diurnal: nocturnal ratio of blood pressure without loss in 24-h coverage and efficacy. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the administration time-dependent antihypertensive efficacy of valsartan in non-dipper patients. METHODS: We studied 148 non-dipper patients with grade 1-2 essential hypertension, aged 53.0+/-12.6 years, who were randomly assigned to receive valsartan (160 mg/day) as a monotherapy either on awakening or at bedtime. Blood pressure was measured every 20 min during the day and every 30 min at night for 48 consecutive hours before and after 3 months of treatment. Physical activity was simultaneously monitored every minute by wrist actigraphy to accurately calculate the diurnal and nocturnal means of blood pressure on a per subject basis. RESULTS: The significant blood pressure reduction after 3 months of valsartan (P<0.001) was similar for both treatment times (13.1 and 8.5 mmHg reduction in the 24-h mean of systolic and diastolic blood pressure with morning administration; 14.7 and 10.3 mmHg with bedtime administration; P>0.126 for treatment-time effect). The diurnal: nocturnal ratio of blood pressure was significantly increased only when valsartan was administered before bedtime, which resulted in 75% of the patients in this group reverting to dippers, a significant increase in the percentage of patients with controlled blood pressure over 24 h, and a reduction in urinary albumin excretion. CONCLUSIONS: In non-dipper hypertensive patients, dosing time with valsartan should be chosen at bedtime, for improved efficacy during the nocturnal resting hours, as well as the potential associated reduction in cardiovascular risk.     

Chronotherapy of Hypertension with Angiotensin Receptor Blockers–A Meta-Analysis of Blood Pressure Measured by Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring in Randomized Trials

BackgroundWe performed this meta-analysis evaluating the efficacy of chronotherapy of hypertension with angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs).MethodsWe searched Pubmed, Web of Science, and Cochrane for all published randomized trials that compare antihypertensive effects of ARBs between bedtime dosing and awakening dosing. Blood pressure (BP) was measured by ambulatory BP monitoring in patients with mild or moderate essential hypertension.ResultsThe effects of ARBs on BP were assessed in 805 essential hypertensive patients included in 8 trials with a follow-up of 12 ± 3 weeks. The sleep-time systolic and diastolic BP (SBP, DBP) with bedtime dosing greatly decreased as compared with awakening dosing (weighted mean differences [WMD] for SBP WMD ?5.23 [95% confidence intervals (CI), ?7.27, ?3.20] mm Hg, p < 0.001; WMD for DBP ?2.94 [95% CI, ?4.52, ?1.36] mm Hg, p < 0.001). The reduction of daytime SBP (WMD 0.98 [95% CI, ?0.20, 2.17] mm Hg, p = 0.10), DBP (WMD 0.11 [95% CI, ?0.68, 0.89] mm Hg, p = 0.79), 24 hour SBP (WMD ?0.75 [95% CI, ?1.93, 0.42] mm Hg, p = 0.21) and DBP (WMD ?0. 77 [95% CI, ?1.55 0.01] mm Hg, p = 0.05) with bedtime dosing was similar with awakening dosing.ConclusionsBedtime dosing with ARBs is more effective in lowering sleep-time BP than awakening dosing in patients with essential hypertension, suggesting a utilization of chronotherapy of hypertension with ARBs to reduce sleep-time high BP. Larger multi-ethnic studies are needed to investigate the efficacy of chronotherapy of hypertension.     

Administration time-dependent effects of valsartan on ambulatory blood pressure in hypertensive subjects

This study investigated the administration time-dependent antihypertensive efficacy of valsartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker. We studied 90 subjects (30 men and 60 women), 49.0+/-14.3 (mean+/-SD) years of age with stage 1 to 2 essential hypertension; they were randomly assigned to receive valsartan (160 mg/d) as a monotherapy either on awakening or at bedtime. Blood pressure was measured by ambulatory monitoring every 20 minutes during the day and every 30 minutes at night for 48 consecutive hours before and after 3 months of treatment. Physical activity was simultaneously monitored every minute by wrist actigraphy to accurately calculate the diurnal and nocturnal means of blood pressure on a per-subject basis. The highly significant blood pressure reduction after 3 months of treatment with valsartan (P<0.001) was similar for both treatment times (17.0 and 11.3 mm Hg reduction in the 24-hour mean of systolic and diastolic blood pressure with morning administration and 14.6 and 11.4 mm Hg reduction with bedtime administration; P>0.174 for treatment time effect). Valsartan administration at bedtime as opposed to on wakening resulted in a highly significant average increase by 6% (P<0.001) in the diurnal-nocturnal ratio of blood pressure; this corresponded to a 73% relative reduction in the number of nondipper patients. The findings confirm that valsartan efficiently reduces blood pressure throughout the entire 24 hours, independent of treatment time. They also suggest that time of treatment can be chosen according to the dipper status of a patient to optimize the effect of antihypertensive therapy, an issue that deserves further investigation.     

Preventing increases in early-morning blood pressure,heart rate,and the rate-pressure product with controlled onset extended release verapamil at bedtime versus enalapril,losartan, and placebo on arising

Background Therapeutic agents for the treatment of hypertension may differ in their efficacy during the early-morning period, a time when both morbid and mortal cardiovascular events are increased compared with other times of the day. Methods We studied the effects of a chronotherapeutic delivery system of verapamil (controlled-onset extended release [COER]-24 system) dosed at bedtime versus conventional morning administration of both enalapril and losartan on the blood pressure (BP), heart rate, and the heart rate systolic BP product during the first 4 hours after awakening in a placebo-controlled, forced-titration trial. There were 357 men and women enrolled in the trial with an untreated sitting diastolic BP of 95 to 114 mm Hg and ambulatory daytime diastolic BP ≥85 mm Hg. Patients were randomized to either COER-verapamil hydrochloride each evening (240 mg titrated to 360 mg), enalapril each morning (10 mg titrated to 20 mg), losartan each morning (50 mg titrated to 100 mg), or placebo. Early morning assessments of BP, heart rate, and the heart rate systolic BP product were performed by use of 24-hour ambulatory recordings after 4 weeks (low dose) and 8 weeks (high dose) of therapy. Results Results were similar at weeks 4 and 8 for all treatment groups except that the magnitude of change was greater at week 8. After 8 weeks of treatment, reductions in early morning BP by COER-verapamil were significantly greater (−15/−10 mm Hg) than enalapril (−9/−7 mm Hg, P < .01) and losartan (−8/−5 mm Hg, P < .001). COER-verapamil also led to greater reductions in morning heart rate, the rate-pressure product, and the rate-of-rise of BP compared with the other 2 active treatment groups. Reductions in mean 24-hour BP were greater in patients treated with COER-verapamil compared with placebo and losartan, and similar to reductions in patients treated with enalapril. Conclusions Bedtime administration of an agent designed to parallel the circadian rhythm of BP and heart rate led to significantly greater early morning hemodynamic effects compared with other conventional once-daily antihypertensive agents dosed in the morning. (Am Heart J 2002;144:657-65.)     

The bedtime administration of doxazosin controls morning hypertension and albuminuria in patients with type-2 diabetes: evaluation using home-based blood pressure measurements

The control of high blood pressure (BP) after awakening in the morning (morning hypertension) as determined by home BP (HBP), as well as BP control throughout the day, may prevent diabetic vascular complications. We examined the effect of an alpha-adrenergic blocker (doxazosin) on BP measurements taken by HBP after awakening and during clinic visits (CBP) in 50 patients with type-2 diabetes and morning hypertension. We evaluated the urinary albumin excretion rate as an indicator of nephropathy. Doxazosin was taken orally once at bedtime for 1 to 3 months. The mean (+/- SD) dose was 2.9 +/- 2.1 mg/day (1 to 8 mg/day). The BP was measured monthly at the clinic during the day and at home after awakening in the morning. In this short-term trial (2.8 +/- 0.4 months), the systolic HBP decreased significantly from 164 +/- 17 mmHg before treatment to 146 +/- 19 mmHg after treatment, and the diastolic HBP decreased significantly from 85 +/- 14 mmHg before treatment to 80 +/- 9 mmHg after treatment. The systolic, but not the diastolic CBP, decreased significantly after treatment. There was no significant difference in the systolic or diastolic values between the HBP and the CBP after treatment. The percentage change in the systolic HBP after treatment was three times greater than for the systolic CBP. The median (interquartile) urinary albumin excretion rate decreased significantly (P < 0.001) from 62 (25-203) mg/g creatinine before treatment to 19 (9-76) mg/g creatinine after treatment. On multiple regression analysis, the decrease in the systolic HBP with treatment positively correlated with the reduction in urinary excretion of albumin. The control of morning hypertension reduced the albuminuria found in both untreated and treated hypertensive patients with type-2 diabetes. Bedtime administration of doxazosin appears to be safe and effective in reducing morning hypertension as measured by HBP. This finding also demonstrates that HBP taken in the morning has a stronger predictive power for the albuminuria level than does CBP.     

Effects of graded-release diltiazem versus ramipril, dosed at bedtime, on early morning blood pressure, heart rate, and the rate-pressure product

Background

Therapeutic agents for the treatment of hypertension may differ in their efficacy during the early morning period, a time when both morbid and mortal cardiovascular events are increased compared to other times of the day.

Methods

We studied the effects of a graded-release delivery system of diltiazem (diltiazem HCL extended release tablets) versus ramipril, both dosed at bedtime, on blood pressure (BP), heart rate, and the heart rate-systolic BP product during the first 4 hours after awakening in a double-blind, titration-to-effect trial. There were 261 men and women enrolled in the trial with an untreated sitting diastolic BP of 90 to 109 mm Hg and ambulatory daytime diastolic BP of 85 to 109 mm Hg. Patients were randomized to either diltiazem extended release (ER) tablets each evening (240 mg titrated to 360 mg and to 540 mg) or ramipril each evening (5 mg titrated to 10 mg and to 20 mg). Early morning assessments of BP, heart rate, and the heart rate-systolic BP product were performed using 24-hour ambulatory recordings after 10 weeks of therapy.

Results

In each therapeutic group, 76% of patients were titrated to the highest possible dose. After 10 weeks of treatment, reductions in early morning BP by diltiazem ER tablets were significantly greater (−18/−15 mm Hg) than reductions by ramipril (−13/−8 mmHg , P < .005 for systolic BP and P < .001 for diastolic BP). Diltiazem ER tablets also led to greater reductions in morning heart rate and the heart rate-pressure product compared to ramipril. Reductions in mean 24-hour diastolic BP, heart rate, and the rate-pressure product were greater in patients treated with diltiazem ER tablets compared to ramipril, while reductions in 24-hour systolic BP were similar in each group. The observed adverse effects were not serious and incidences were similar for the 2 treatment groups.

Conclusions

These data demonstrate that bedtime administration of diltiazem ER, an agent designed to parallel the circadian rhythm of BP and heart rate, led to significantly greater early morning hemodynamic effects compared to the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor ramipril, also dosed in the evening.     

The Bedtime Administration of Doxazosin Controls Morning Hypertension and Albuminuria in Patients with Type-2 Diabetes: Evaluation Using Home-Based Blood Pressure Measurements

The control of high blood pressure (BP) after awakening in the morning (morning hypertension) as determined by home BP (HBP), as well as BP control throughout the day, may prevent diabetic vascular complications. We examined the effect of an α-adrenergic blocker (doxazosin) on BP measurements taken by HBP after awakening and during clinic visits (CBP) in 50 patients with type-2 diabetes and morning hypertension. We evaluated the urinary albumin excretion rate as an indicator of nephropathy. Doxazosin was taken orally once at bedtime for 1 to 3 months. The mean (± SD) dose was 2.9 ± 2.1 mg/day (1 to 8 mg/day). The BP was measured monthly at the clinic during the day and at home after awakening in the morning. In this short-term trial (2.8 ± 0.4 months), the systolic HBP decreased significantly from 164 ± 17 mmHg before treatment to 146 ± 19 mmHg after treatment, and the diastolic HBP decreased significantly from 85 ± 14 mmHg before treatment to 80 ± 9 mmHg after treatment. The systolic, but not the diastolic CBP, decreased significantly after treatment. There was no significant difference in the systolic or diastolic values between the HBP and the CBP after treatment. The percentage change in the systolic HBP after treatment was three times greater than for the systolic CBP. The median (interquartile) urinary albumin excretion rate decreased significantly (P < 0.001) from 62 (25–203) mg/g creatinine before treatment to 19 (9–76) mg/g creatinine after treatment. On multiple regression analysis, the decrease in the systolic HBP with treatment positively correlated with the reduction in urinary excretion of albumin. The control of morning hypertension reduced the albuminuria found in both untreated and treated hypertensive patients with type-2 diabetes. Bedtime administration of doxazosin appears to be safe and effective in reducing morning hypertension as measured by HBP. This finding also demonstrates that HBP taken in the morning has a stronger predictive power for the albuminuria level than does CBP.     

Lisinopril for the treatment of hypertension within the first 24 hours of acute ischemic stroke and follow-up

BACKGROUND: Hypertension immediately after acute ischemic stroke is associated with impaired morbidity and mortality, although there are few data on antihypertensive use immediately after ictus. This randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study explored the hemodynamic effect and safety of oral lisinopril initiated within 24 h after an ictus. METHODS: Forty hypertensive (systolic blood pressure [BP] >/=140 or diastolic BP >/=90 mm Hg) acute ischemic stroke patients (14 lacunar, 13 partial anterior, 7 total anterior, 6 posterior circulation infarct) were randomized to 5 mg of oral lisinopril (n = 18) or matching placebo (n = 22). Dose was increased to 10 mg (or 2 x placebo) on day 7 if casual systolic BP was >/=140 mm Hg and continued to day 14. After the initial dose, automated BP levels were monitored for 16 h. The BP levels and stroke outcome measures were assessed at day 14, and all patients were followed to day 90. RESULTS: At h 4 after the first dose, systolic/diastolic BP change was -20 +/- 21/-6 +/- 10 mm Hg (mean +/- SE) in the lisinopril group and 1 +/- 11/0 +/- 8 mmHg in the placebo group (group differences: systolic BP, P < .05; diastolic BP, P = .07). With a daily dosing regime, systolic BP, mean arterial pressure (MAP), diastolic BP, and pulse pressure (PP) were significantly lower in the lisinopril group compared to the placebo group at day 14 (P < .01). Neurologic and functional measures were similar between groups at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Lisinopril, even at small dosages, is well tolerated and an effective hypotensive agent after acute ischemic stroke, gradually reducing BP by 4 h after oral first-dose administration. Oral lisinopril is now being studied in a larger outcome-based trial in acute hypertensive stroke patients.     

Difference in blood pressure, but not in heart rate, between measurements performed at a health centre and at a hospital by one and the same physician

Background: Blood pressure (BP) has been found to vary between examiners, for example it is often higher when measured by a physician than by a nurse. Whether the location for the physician-measured BP is also a source of variation has, however, not been studied. Hence, we found it of interest to find out if the location used for examination was of any significance.Objective: To explore if BP and/or heart rate measured in the same subjects by the same general practitioner in the health centre and at the hospital, differed.Method: Twenty-five hypertensive and 25 age-matched normotensive middle-aged men had their office BP and heart rate recorded by one and the same female general practitioner (IE) who was well known to them, at both the health centre before ambulatory BP equipment was attached to the subject and at the clinical physiological department before an exercise test. The hypertensive patients performed an exercise test and ambulatory BP was measured before and after being treated.Results:The hypertensive patients' office BP was lower at the health centre than at the hospital, both when they were untreated and after they were treated. The difference (systolic/diastolic (s.d.)) was 9.4/6.0 (7.4/2.7) mm Hg (P < 0.001 for systolic and diastolic BP), when they were untreated. Corresponding figures when they were treated were 5.4/4.0 (9.4/4.7) mm Hg, a significant difference in diastolic BP (P < 0.001). The normotensive subjects also had a lower office BP at the health centre than at the hospital. The difference (systolic/diastolic (s.d. ) was 1.8/5.3 (7.0/5.0) mm Hg (P < 0.001 for diastolic BP). Heart rate did not differ between recordings in the health centre and in the hospital, either in the hypertensives or in the normotensives. Conclusion: Office BP differed significantly between measurements performed in the health centre and at the hospital. Hence, being examined at a hospital seemed to be a stronger stimuli in most patients than to be examined in a health centre. When diagnosing or evaluating treatment in hypertension, this may have implications. Journal of Human Hypertension (2000) 14, 355-358     

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

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular events occur most frequently in the morning. We aimed to study the effects of monotherapy with the long-acting angiotensin II receptor blocker valsartan compared with the long-acting calcium antagonist amlodipine on ambulatory and morning blood pressure (BP). METHODS: We performed ambulatory BP monitoring before and after once-daily dose of valsartan (valsartan group, n = 38) and amlodipine (amlodipine group, n = 38) therapy in 76 hypertensive patients. To achieve the target BP of < or =140/90 mm Hg, valsartan was titrated from 40 mg/day to 160 mg/day (mean dose 124 mg/day) and amlodipine was titrated from 2.5 mg/day to 10 mg/day (mean dose 6.4 mg/day). RESULTS: Both drugs significantly reduced clinic and 24-h systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) (P <.002). However, the antihypertensive effect of amlodipine was superior to that of valsartan in clinical SBP (-26 mm Hg v -13 mm Hg, P =.001) and 24-h SBP (-14 mm Hg v -7 mm Hg, P =.008). In addition, morning SBP was significantly reduced by amlodipine from 156 to 142 mm Hg (P <.001) but not by valsartan. Both agents reduced lowest night SBP to a similar extent (amlodipine 121 to 112 mm Hg, P <.001; valsartan 123 to 114 mm Hg, P <.002). Reduction in morning SBP surge (morning SBP minus lowest night SBP) was significantly greater in patients treated with amlodipine compared with those treated with valsartan (-6.1 mm Hg v +4.5 mm Hg, P <.02). CONCLUSIONS: Amlodipine monotherapy was more effective than valsartan monotherapy in controlling 24-h ambulatory BP and morning BP in hypertensive patients.     

A comparison of home measurement and ambulatory monitoring of blood pressure in the adjustment of antihypertensive treatment

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare home and ambulatory blood pressure (BP) in the adjustment of antihypertensive treatment. METHODS: After a 4-week washout period, patients whose untreated daytime diastolic ambulatory BP averaged > or = 85 mm Hg were randomized to be treated according to their ambulatory or home BP. Antihypertensive treatment was adjusted at 6-week intervals according to the mean daytime ambulatory diastolic BP or the mean home diastolic BP, depending on the patient's randomization group. If the diastolic BP stayed above 80 mm Hg, the physician blinded to randomization intensified hypertensive treatment. RESULTS: Ninety-eight patients completed the study. During the 24-week follow-up period both systolic and diastolic BP decreased significantly within both groups (P < .001). At the end of the study, the systolic/diastolic differences between ambulatory (n = 46) and home (n = 52) BP groups in home, daytime ambulatory, night-time ambulatory, and 24-h ambulatory BP changes averaged 2.6/2.6 mm Hg, 0.6/1.7 mm Hg, 1.0/1.4 mm Hg, and 0.6/1.5 mm Hg, respectively (P range .06 to .75) A nonsignificant trend to more intensive drug therapy in the ambulatory BP group and a nonsignificant trend to larger share of patients reaching (57.7% v 43.5%, P = .16) the target pressure in the home BP group was observed due to the 3.8 mm Hg difference in ambulatory and home diastolic BP at randomization. CONCLUSIONS: The adjustment of antihypertensive treatment based on either ambulatory or home BP measurement led to good BP control. No significant between-group differences in BP changes were seen at the end of the study. Additional research is needed to provide more conclusive results.     

Guidelines for management of hypertension: report of the third working party of the British Hypertension Society.

Use non-pharmacological measures in all hypertensive and borderline hypertensive people. Initiate antihypertensive drug therapy in people with sustained systolic blood pressures (BP) >/=160 mm Hg or sustained diastolic BP >/=100 mm Hg. Decide on treatment in people with sustained systolic BP between 140 and 159 mm Hg or sustained diastolic BP between 90 and 99 mm Hg according to the presence or absence of target organ damage, cardiovascular disease or a 10-year coronary heart disease (CHD) risk of >/=15% according to the Joint British Societies CHD risk assessment programme/risk chart. In people with diabetes mellitus, initiate antihypertensive drug therapy if systolic BP is sustained >/=140 mm Hg or diastolic BP is sustained >/=90 mm Hg. In non-diabetic hypertensive people, optimal BP treatment targets are: systolic BP <140 mm Hg and diastolic BP <85 mm Hg. The minimum acceptable level of control (Audit Standard) recommended is <150/<90 mm Hg. Despite best practice, these levels will be difficult to achieve in some hypertensive people. In diabetic hypertensive people, optimal BP targets are; systolic BP <140 mm Hg and diastolic BP <80 mm Hg. The minimum acceptable level of control (Audit Standard) recommended is <140/<90 mm Hg. Despite best practice, these levels will be difficult to achieve in some people with diabetes and hypertension. In the absence of contraindications or compelling indications for other antihypertensive agents, low dose thiazide diuretics or beta-blockers are preferred as first-line therapy for the majority of hypertensive people. In the absence of compelling indications for beta-blockade, diuretics or long acting dihydropyridine calcium antagonists are preferred to beta-blockers in older subjects. Compelling indications and contraindications for all antihypertensive drug classes are specified. For most hypertensives, a combination of antihypertensive drugs will be required to achieve the recommended targets for blood pressure control. Other drugs that reduce cardiovascular risk must also be considered. These include aspirin for secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease, and primary prevention in treated hypertensive subjects over the age of 50 years who have a 10-year CHD risk >/=15% and in whom blood pressure is controlled to the audit standard. In accordance with existing British recommendations, statin therapy is recommended for hypertensive people with a total cholesterol >/=5 mmol/L and established vascular disease, or 10-year CHD risk >/=30% estimated from the Joint British Societies CHD risk chart. Glycaemic control should also be optimised in diabetic subjects. Specific advice is given on the management of hypertension in specific patient groups, ie, the elderly, ethnic subgroups, diabetes mellitus, chronic renal disease and in women (pregnancy, oral contraceptive use and hormone replacement therapy). Suggestions for the implementation and audit of these guidelines in primary care are provided.     

The effect of correction of sleep-disordered breathing on BP in untreated hypertension

OBJECTIVES: To compare BP response to 3 weeks of nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) in hypertensive patients with and without sleep-disordered breathing (SDB). DESIGN: A controlled, interventional trial of nasal CPAP in patients with and without SDB. Participants and setting: Twenty-four men, aged 30 to 60 years, with mild to moderate untreated hypertension recruited from employee health and primary care clinics. METHODS: Based on in-laboratory polysomnography, 14 hypertensive patients had SDB, defined by five or more episodes of apnea and hypopnea per hour of sleep (apnea-hypopnea index [AHI], > or = 5), and 10 had no SDB (AHI, < 5). We performed 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring on all patients at baseline, during CPAP, and after CPAP treatment. In patients with an AHI > or = 5, nasal CPAP was titrated to reduce the AHI to < 5. Patients with an AHI < 5 received CPAP of 5 cm H(2)O to control for any potential effect of CPAP per se on BP. Both groups received CPAP for 3 weeks. RESULTS: After adjusting for age and body mass index, the mean nocturnal systolic and diastolic BP changes after CPAP treatment in the SDB group were significantly different from those in the no-SDB group: -7.8 vs +0.3 mm Hg (p = 0.02), and -5.3 vs -0.7 mm Hg (p = 0.03), respectively. There was a similar, although statistically insignificant, difference in the adjusted mean daytime systolic and diastolic BP changes after CPAP treatment between the two groups (-2.7 vs +0.4 mm Hg and -2.3 vs -1.7 mm Hg, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Three weeks of nasal CPAP treatment of SDB in hypertensive men caused the lowering of nocturnal systolic and diastolic BP values, suggesting that increased nocturnal BP in persons with hypertension was causally related to the apnea and hypopnea events of SDB.     

First dose response and 24-hour antihypertensive efficacy of the new once-daily angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor, ramipril

The reduction in blood pressure (BP) after the first dose and after 8 weeks of treatment with a new once-daily angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor, ramipril, was examined in 12 untreated hypertensive patients, using ambulatory intraarterial BP monitoring. The first period of monitoring began 24 hours before the first dose was given, and continued for 24 hours afterwards. A second 24-hour period of monitoring was carried out after 8 weeks of treatment, commencing immediately after the morning dose. Angiotensin II levels and serum drug levels were measured at 0, 2, 6 and 24 hours after the acute dose. BP decreased progressively from the first hour after the first dose, reached a maximum in the fifth hour (p less than 0.001) and then the effect diminished. The maximum reduction of systolic BP in any patient was 64 mm Hg, the minimum 4 mm Hg. Blood pressure was significantly (p less than 0.05) reduced throughout the 24 hours after dosing, with a mean daytime reduction of 13/12 mm Hg, and a mean nighttime reduction of 15/7 mm Hg. Angiotensin II levels were significantly (p less than 0.02) and maximally reduced by 2 hours after administration, but the reduction was no longer significant after 24 hours. Serum drug levels were also maximal 2 hours after administration. The trial population could be clearly divided into groups of good and poor responders on the basis of BP reduction. The angiotensin II levels were higher before treatment, and decreased further, in all patients with a good response than in those with a poor response.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Chronotherapy with nifedipine GITS in hypertensive patients: improved efficacy and safety with bedtime dosing

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that the circadian pattern of blood pressure (BP) remains unchanged after either morning or evening dosing of several calcium-channel blockers (CCBs), including amlodipine, isradipine, verapamil, nitrendipine, and cilnidipine. This trial investigated the administration-time dependent antihypertensive efficacy of the slow-release, once-a-day nifedipine gastrointestinal-therapeutic-system (GITS) formulation. METHODS: We studied 180 untreated hypertensives (86 men and 94 women), 52.5 +/- 10.7 years of age, randomly assigned to receive nifedipine (30 mg/day) as a monotherapy either upon awakening or at bedtime. BP was measured for 48 h before and after 8 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: The BP reduction after treatment was significantly larger with bedtime dosing mainly during night time sleep (P < 0.012). The number of patients with controlled ambulatory BP after treatment was greater with bedtime than morning treatment (P = 0.016). The baseline prevalence of nondipping was unaltered after ingestion of nifedipine on awakening, but reduced from 51 to 35% after bedtime dosing (P = 0.025). The morning surge of BP, a risk factor for stroke, was significantly reduced (P < 0.001) only after bedtime administration of nifedipine. Bedtime in comparison to awakening-time ingestion of nifedipine was also associated with a reduction in the incidence of edema from 13 to 1% (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The increased efficacy on ambulatory BP as well as the significantly reduced prevalence of edema after bedtime as compared to morning ingestion of nifedipine should be taken into account when prescribing this medication to patients with essential hypertension.     

Sildenafil citrate potentiates the hypotensive effects of nitric oxide donor drugs in male patients with stable angina

OBJECTIVE: We sought to study the effects of a single oral dose of sildenafil citrate (50 mg) on blood pressure (BP) in men taking the nitric oxide (NO) donor drugs isosorbide mononitrate (ISMN) or glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) for stable angina. BACKGROUND: Sildenafil, a selective phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor, is an orally effective treatment for erectile dysfunction. The presence of phosphodiesterases in the vasculature suggests the possibility of an interaction between sildenafil and NO donor drugs. METHODS: Two double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, two-way crossover trials were undertaken. Sixteen male patients received oral ISMN (20 mg twice a day) for five to seven days before their dose of sildenafil or placebo and continued receiving ISMN daily until administration of the alternate drug seven days later. For the second study, 15 male patients received sublingual GTN (500 microg) 1 h after sildenafil or placebo on each of two study days, which were seven days apart. Sitting or standing BP was measured before and for 6 h after the administration of the study drug. RESULTS: The effects of sildenafil plus ISMN on BP (standing mean maximum reductions from baseline in systolic/diastolic BP, -52/-29 mm Hg) were greater than the effects of placebo plus ISMN on BP (-25/-15 mm Hg; p < 0.001). Sildenafil plus GTN also resulted in greater sitting mean maximum reductions from baseline in systolic/diastolic BP (-36/-21 mm Hg) compared with placebo plus GTN (-26/-12 mm Hg; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Coadministration of sildenafil with ISMN or GTN produced significantly greater reductions in BP than ISMN or GTN alone. Based on these data, sildenafil should not be administered to patients taking nitrates.