Long-acting lacidipine versus short-acting nifedipine in the treatment of asymptomatic acute blood pressure increase

We compared antihypertensive efficacy and safety of a single administration of equipotent doses of lacidipine versus nifedipine in the hypertensive urgencies. Twenty-nine asymptomatic essential hypertensive patients (nine men, 20 women) with a mean age of 55.03+/-11.19 years and baseline diastolic blood pressure (DBP) of > or =120 mm Hg after resting 30 min, not taking antihypertensive drugs for the last 24 h, were randomized in a single-blind fashion to receive lacidipine, 4 mg (LCD, 15 patients) or short-acting nifedipine, 20 mg (NFD, 14 patients) in a single dose. Blood pressure (BP) and heart rate (HR) were taken every 30 min during the first 8 h and every 2 h until 24 h of follow-up. Baseline BP values were similar in the two groups (LCD, 222.5+/-32.8/124.6+/-8.4 mm Hg vs. NFD, 215.9+/-20.6/128+/-7.7 mm Hg; p = NS). Both drugs promoted a significant reduction of systolic blood pressure (SBP; 169.6+/-27.8 vs. 170.6+/-25.3 mm Hg) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP; 104.1+/-16 vs. 102.9+/-12.4 mm Hg) after 8 h. However, either SBP (165+/-27.3 vs. 190.6+/-18.2 mm Hg; p = 0.008) and DBP (99.9+/-12.3 vs. 117.2+/-11.4 mm Hg; p = 0.001) were significantly higher in the NFD group after 24-h dosing. Eleven patients in the LCD group had a decrease in BP >25% of the baseline value both 8 and 24 h after the dose. Although 10 patients showed the same response in the NFD group 8 h after the dose, only four patients maintained these values at 24 h. One patient treated with NFD had a transient cerebrovascular ischemic attack. No adverse effects were observed in the LCD group. We conclude that the long-acting calcium antagonist lacidipine was more effective than the short-acting nifedipine in both controlling BP and maintaining this BP reduction over 8 h in essential hypertensive patients with acute asymptomatic BP increase.     

Chronic administration of carvedilol improves cardiac function in 6-month-old Syrian cardiomyopathic hamsters

Heart failure (HF) is a multifactorial and progressive disease that has been linked to activation of the renin-angiotensin and sympathetic systems. In recent years, beta-blockers have been shown to improve the status of HF patients, although the precise mechanisms remain unclear. The present study evaluates the effect of beta-blockade with carvedilol (1 mg/kg/day) on cardiovascular function in 2- and 6-month-old cardiomyopathic hamsters (SCH) after 1-month and 5-month treatment periods with the drug, respectively. Age-matched golden hamsters were used as controls (CT). Systolic blood pressure (SBP) and echocardiographic studies were evaluated. The latter studies included left ventricular end-systolic (LVESV) and end-diastolic (LVEDV) volumes, ejection fraction (EF), cardiac output index (COI), heart rate (HR), and left ventricular posterior wall thickness (LVPWT). In 2-month-old SCH, carvedilol administration during a 1-month period reduced SBP from 107.59 +/- 3.49 to 77.26 +/- 3.49 mm Hg (n = 5, p < 0.05). At this stage, cardiac parameters in SCH were similar to those of controls and were not affected by carvedilol administration. In 6-month-old SCH, 5-month administration of carvedilol decreased SBP from 102.16 +/- 3.61 to 90.60 +/- 2.80 mm Hg (n = 5, p < 0.05), HR from 363 +/- 14 to 324 +/- 14 bpm (n = 5, p < 0.05), and LVESV from 0.18 +/- 0.01 to 0.13 +/- 0.01 ml/100 g BW (n = 5, p < 0.05), and increased EF and COI by 14 and 23%, respectively (n = 5, p < 0.05). The drug did not modify LVEDV or LVPWT. These results reveal that carvedilol significantly improves cardiac function in 6-month-old cardiomyopathic hamsters, but it does not prevent ventricular dilatation. Improved cardiac function appears to be secondary to decreased total peripheral resistance, due mainly to the vasodilator properties of the drug. Thus, overactivation of the sympathetic system is not likely to be a determining factor in the etiology of dilated cardiomyopathy in this animal model.     

Trough-to-peak ratio,smoothness index,and circadian blood pressure profile after treatment with once-daily fixed combination of losartan 100 and hydrochlorothiazide 25 in essential hypertension

The once-daily fixed combination of losartan 100 mg/hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg was evaluated for safety and efficacy in a multicenter open study by using 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in untreated patients with moderate-to-severe essential hypertension or patients with uncontrolled hypertension despite treatment with monotherapy or low-dose combination. After a 2-week washout period, 41 patients (22 men, 19 women) aged 34-74 years, showing a mean daytime blood pressure > 135/85 mm Hg, were treated with losartan 100 mg/hydrochlorothiazide 25 for 8 weeks. Ambulatory blood pressure was monitored at the end of the washout period and during the last week of treatment. A significant reduction in the average values of clinic blood pressure (from 169.9 +/- 13.5 mm Hg to 139.5 +/- 15.6 mm Hg, p < 0.001 for systolic blood pressure [SBP]; and from 102.2 +/- 7.1 mm Hg to 85.1 +/- 9.5 mm Hg, p < 0.001 for diastolic blood pressure [DBP]) was observed after treatment in the whole group of 41 patients. Likewise, average values of both 24-h SBP and 24-h DBP were significantly reduced (from 145.7 +/- 13.1 mm Hg to 128.3 +/- 14.6 mm Hg, p < 0.001 for 24-h SBP; and from 90.3 +/- 7.3 mm Hg to 79.2 +/- 8.6 mm Hg, p < 0.001 for 24-h DBP). The average lowering at peak was 20.2 +/- 11.8 mm Hg for 24-h SBP and 12.1 +/- 7.4 mm Hg for 24-h DBP, whereas the lowering at trough was 17.8 +/- 12.0 mm Hg and 10.4 +/- 8.1 mm Hg, respectively. The trough-to-peak ratio (T/P) was 0.88 for SBP and 0.86 for DBP, and the smoothness index was 7.36 for SBP and 6.37 for DBP. The response rate was 87.8% (blood pressure lowering > 5 mm Hg of either 24-h SBP or 24-h DBP average values). Among responders, T/P ratio was 0.89 for SBP and 0.87 for DBP, and the smoothness index was 8.09 for SBP and 7.15 for DBP. No side effects or changes in metabolic parameters were observed. The fixed combination of losartan 100 mg/hydrochlorothiazide 25 was very effective and well tolerated.     

Effects of Nebivolol versus Carvedilol on Left Ventricular Function in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure and Reduced Left Ventricular Systolic Function

BACKGROUND: Beta-adrenoceptor antagonist (beta-blocker) therapy results in a significant improvement in left ventricular (LV) systolic function and prognosis in patients with chronic heart failure. Both carvedilol and nebivolol produce hemodynamic and clinical benefits in chronic heart failure, but it is unknown whether their peculiar pharmacologic properties produce different effects on LV function. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects on LV function of nebivolol compared with carvedilol in patients with chronic heart failure and reduced LV systolic function. METHODS: Seventy patients with a LV ejection fraction 相似文献   

Safety and antihypertensive efficacy of carvedilol and atenolol alone and in combination with hydrochlorothiazide

Carvedilol has been shown to be effective and safe in patients with essential hypertension when given as monotherapy. In this double-blind, randomized, group-comparative study, 2 groups of 59 patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension [median supine systolic/diastolic blood pressure at baseline (SBP/DBP), 168/105 mm Hg] were treated with either 25 mg carvedilol once daily (o. d.) or 50 mg atenolol o. d. for 4 weeks. Responders at 4 weeks (DBP, < 90=" mmhg)=" terminated=" the=" study.=" nonresponders=" continued=" the=" study.=" hydrochlorothiazide=" (hctz)=" was=" added=" at=" 25=" mg=" o.=" d.=" for=" a=" further=" 6=" weeks.=" the=" median=" blood=" pressure=" decreased=" under=" monotherapy=" with=" carvedilol=">n = 59) from 167/105 at baseline to 155/94 mmHg after 4 weeks, and in the atenolol group (n=59) it decreased from 168/105 to 162/97 mmHg. The patients who received carvedilol in combination with HCTZ and were evaluated for efficacy (n = 38) showed a decrease in SBP/DBP from 156/97 at the end of monotherapy to 145/88 mmHg after 10 weeks; the combination of atenolol with HCTZ (n = 44) reduced BP from 162/97 to 147/88. Both carvedilol and atenolol were safe when given either alone or in combination with HCTZ. In conclusion, after long-term administration, 25 mg carvedilol o. d. and 50 mg atenolol o. d. significantly reduced both SBP and DBP over 24 h. The addition of HCTZ led to a further increase in antihypertensive efficacy. Combined treatment with carvedilol or atenolol and HCTZ was very well tolerated, without hypotensive events or relevant changes in objective safety parameters.     

Efficacy and Safety of Olmesartan Medoxomil and Hydrochlorothiazide Compared with Benazepril and Amlodipine Besylate

BACKGROUND: Most patients with stage 2 hypertension require two or more antihypertensive agents in order to achieve the BP goals recommended in current treatment guidelines. Accordingly, combinations of two drugs with different mechanisms of antihypertensive action are widely used. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this randomized, double-blind, multicenter 12-week study was to compare the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of a combination of olmesartan medoxomil/hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) with that of benazepril plus amlodipine besylate in patients with stage 2 hypertension. METHODS: Patients were eligible for randomization following a 3- to 4-week placebo run-in period if they had either (i) mean seated DBP>or=90 mm Hg but<115 mm Hg and mean seated SBP>or=160 mm Hg but <200 mm Hg, or (ii) mean seated DBP>or=100 mm Hg but<115 mm Hg. The difference in mean seated SBP measured on two separate visits during the run-in period was required to beor=95 mm Hg and<115 mm Hg or SBP>145 mm Hg and相似文献   

BP goal achievement in patients with uncontrolled hypertension : results of the treat-to-target post-marketing survey with irbesartan

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Despite the fact that high BP is a leading risk factor for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, BP goals are achieved in less than 10-30% of hypertensive patients. Irbesartan alone or in combination with hydrochlorothiazide has been shown to control BP in >70% of hypertensive patients in clinical trials. We set out to investigate the role in clinical practice of irbesartan in improving BP in uncontrolled hypertensive patients with a particular focus on patients with the metabolic syndrome through analysis of data from a post-marketing surveillance study. METHODS: A multicentre, prospective, post-marketing surveillance study was conducted over 9 months in 14 200 patients aged > or =18 years with previously uncontrolled hypertension (either receiving therapy or newly diagnosed), paying particular attention to a subgroup of patients receiving irbesartan/hydrochlorothiazide as first-line combination therapy. BP was measured by a sphygmomanometer. The main outcome measures were systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) reduction, response rate (DBP reduction of > or =10mm Hg or to <90 mm Hg), and BP normalisation (SBP <140 and DBP <90 mm Hg) in patients treated with irbesartan alone or in combination with hydrochlorothiazide. Analyses per patient subgroup, previous medication and whether treatment was initiated by the treating physician as first-line combination therapy were conducted. The number and nature of adverse events were documented. RESULTS: Use of irbesartan 300 mg/day as monotherapy in previously uncontrolled patients resulted in a significant reduction in SBP/DBP (-26.8/-13.3mm Hg, p < 0.0001), which was comparable to the subgroup of patients with the metabolic syndrome (-26.3/-13.0mm Hg, p < 0.0001 vs baseline). Combination therapy (irbesartan 300 mg/hydrochlorothiazide 12.5mg once daily) lowered BP by -27.9/-14.2mm Hg (p < 0.0001) in previously uncontrolled patients; again the subgroup of patients with the metabolic syndrome achieved a comparable BP reduction (-27.5/-14.1mm Hg, p < 0.0001 vs baseline). Overall, no linear dose-response relationship was observed. Use of irbesartan/hydrochlorothiazide as first-line combination therapy was effective (BP normalisation rates between 65.7% and 78.6%) and safe. The mean number of antihypertensive tablets taken was reduced and after a mean period of 9 months, 92% of patients were still taking irbesartan therapy. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrates that treatment with an irbesartan-based regimen for 9 months results in a strong BP reduction and is feasible as first-line combination therapy. Similar BP reductions were observed in the subgroup of patients with the metabolic syndrome. Compliance with treatment is particularly good, with >90% of patients continuing with treatment after 9 months.     

A dose-finding, placebo-controlled study on extended-release felodipine once daily in treatment of hypertension

Hypertensive patients received a beta-blocker plus placebo once daily for 4 weeks. If their diastolic blood pressure (DBP) was then 95-115 mm Hg, they were randomized to receive, in addition to the beta-blocker, placebo (n = 36), felodipine-extended release (ER) 10 mg (n = 36), or felodipine-ER 20 mg (n = 37) in a 4-week double-blind parallel-group trial. All medication was administered once daily and, when BP was measured 24 h after the last dose, felodipine-ER 10 mg reduced DBP by 14 +/- 9 mm Hg (mean +/- SD) from a mean of 103 mm Hg and felodipine-ER 20 mg reduced DBP by 18 +/- 9 mm Gg from 101 mm Hg. The reductions in DBP with both doses of felodipine were greater than reductions with placebo (5 +/- 8 mm Hg, from 102 mm Hg--both p less than 0.001). At the end of the study, 21% of patients receiving placebo had a DBP less than or equal to 90 mm Hg. In contrast, 69% of patients receiving felodipine-ER 10 mg and 82% receiving 20 mg attained this level. More than 90% of patients receiving 10 mg felodipine-ER once daily had a reduction in DBP greater than 5 mm Hg 24 h postdose. Felodipine-ER was well tolerated. Felodipine-ER once daily is an effective antihypertensive drug for patients who require therapy in addition to a beta-blocker; the tolerability in this study was good, and a starting dose greater than 10 mg once daily is not indicated.     

First-step treatment of mild to moderate uncomplicated essential hypertension by a new calcium antagonist: nicardipine

Nicardipine, a new calcium antagonist, was tested in a 14-week double-blind trial including 15 outpatients with uncomplicated essential hypertension. They were randomly assigned to nicardipine (20-30 mg three times daily) or placebo as first-step treatment. When necessary but always after a minimum of 4 weeks, pindolol (15 mg/day) was combined with nicardipine or placebo. At the end of step 1 (85 +/- 6 days with nicardipine vs. 58 +/- 6 days with placebo, p less than 0.01), nicardipine induced larger drops in supine systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP) than the placebo (21 +/- 2.5 vs 1.4 +/- 3 mm Hg, p less than 0.001, and 13 +/- 2 vs. 3.5 +/- 1.5 mm Hg, p less than 0.001, respectively). In the nicardipine group (n = 57), 53% of patients had controlled blood pressure (SBP less than 160 mm Hg and DBP less than 95 mm Hg) versus 17% in the placebo group (n = 47), p less than 0.001. There was no significant correlation between the decrease in blood pressure and the age of patients. The most common side effects in the nicardipine group were flushes (12%), headache (8%), ankle edema (5%), and asthenia (4%). When blood pressure was not brought under control and pindolol was prescribed as the second-step treatment, the nicardipine group (n = 52) displayed larger drops in SBP and DBP than the placebo group (n = 40) (27 +/- 5 vs. 15 +/- 3 mm Hg, p less than 0.01, and 18 +/- 1 vs. 9 +/- 2 mm Hg, p less than 0.001, respectively). These results show that a calcium antagonist is useful for first-step treatment of hypertension.     

Evaluation of electrocardiographic and hemodynamic effects of caffeine with acute dosing in healthy volunteers

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of moderate, single-dose caffeine consumption on electrocardiographic variables: PR, QRS, QT, QTc, and RR intervals, and QT and QTc interval dispersion. Effects of caffeine on blood pressure and heart rate also were evaluated. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study. SETTING: University school of pharmacy. PATIENTS: Ten healthy volunteers aged 17 years or older. INTERVENTION: Participants abstained from caffeinated products for at least 2 days before the study began and were randomly designated to receive placebo or caffeine 400 mg on various days. For each of the study phases, a baseline 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) was performed and a subsequent 12-lead ECG performed 3 hours after ingesting the study drug. Blood pressure readings were taken with each ECG. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: No significant changes in any intragroup or intergroup electrocardiographic variables occurred. Caffeine increased blood pressure (systolic blood pressure [SBP]/diastolic blood pressure [DBP]) from 118+/-5/75+/-6 mm Hg to 128+/-8/77+/-7 mm Hg versus baseline (p=0.0022 and p=0.0368 for SBP and DBP, respectively). After drug dosing, SBP in the caffeine group was significantly higher than in the placebo group (128+/-8 mm Hg versus 119+/-7 mm Hg, p=0.0174). CONCLUSION: Moderate caffeine consumption by healthy young adults does not acutely affect PR, QRS, QT, QTc, and RR intervals, or QT and QTc interval dispersion. Caffeine-naive subjects experienced persistent elevations in SBP and DBP 3 hours after caffeine ingestion, indicating that longer caffeine abstinence than that which is recommended is necessary for blood pressure determination in the clinical setting.     

Effect of doxazosin gastrointestinal therapeutic system on patients with uncontrolled hypertension: the ASOCIA Study

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate extended-release doxazosin gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) as add-on therapy in patients with treated, but uncontrolled hypertension. METHODS: A 16-week, open, noncomparative, multicenter, prospective study of patients with hypertension (> or = 140/> or = 90 mm Hg). Doxazosin GITS 4 mg/d was added to entry medication and increased to 8 mg/d at Week 4 in cases of inadequate blood pressure (BP) control. RESULTS: A total of 3631 patients (40% women) with mean age of 62.4 +/- 0.2 years were included. Proportion of patients reaching goal (< 140/< 90 mm Hg) after 4 weeks of add-on therapy with doxazosin GITS was 39% and increased to 61% at Week 16. Systolic and diastolic BP (mean +/- SEM) decreased, respectively, from 161.6 +/- 0.2 and 95.1 +/- 0.1 mm Hg at baseline to 142.2 +/- 0.2 and 84.1 +/- 0.1 mm Hg at Week 4 (P < 0.0001) and 136.8 +/- 0.2 and 80.6 +/- 0.2 mm Hg at Week 16 (P < 0.0001). Adverse events occurred in 108 patients (3.0%), with 57 (1.6%) related to the study treatment. In 17 patients (0.5%), serious adverse events were described, but only one was related to the study drug. CONCLUSIONS: Doxazosin GITS as add-on therapy achieved target blood pressure and was well tolerated in patients with hypertension uncontrolled by previous regimens. Doxazosin GITS efficacy and tolerability was achieved in combination with all classes of antihypertensives tested.     

Effect of a new calcium antagonist, tiapamil, in hypertension of the elderly.

The antihypertensive effect of a single oral dose of tiapamil (450 mg) and placebo were compared in a single blind randomized cross-over study in 10 71-86 year old hypertensive patients. Blood pressure (BP) and heart rate (HR) were recorded every 15 min for 12 h by an automatic device. Tiapamil led to a decrease in mean daytime systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) BP from 171 +/- 12/98 +/- 10 mm Hg to 159 +/- 11/90 +/- 9 mm Hg (P less than 0.001) without significant variation in HR. Thereafter patients received tiapamil 450 twice daily; by the seventh day of treatment mean daytime SBP and DBP were 155 +/- 13/85 +/- 14 mm Hg (P less than 0.001 vs placebo). The hourly mean values of SBP recorded for 8/12 h (first tiapamil day) and 10/12 h (seventh tiapamil day) were significantly lower than the corresponding values after placebo. We conclude that tiapamil in the elderly exerts a sustained antihypertensive effect lasting 12 h or more, with only minor variations in HR. This effect predominates on systolic pressure and is significant from the first dose.     

A placebo-controlled dose-response study of felodipine extended release in hypertensive patients

This placebo-controlled study assessed antihypertensive effect and tolerability of two dose levels of an extended release (ER) formulation of felodipine (Plendil), given once daily to patients in primary health care. The patients had mild to moderate hypertension and were randomized to receive felodipine ER (FER) 20 mg (n = 50), FER 10 mg (n = 50), or placebo (n = 51) in a 4-week, double-blind, parallel-group multicenter study. After 4 weeks, the 24-h reduction in supine diastolic BP (DBP) was greater (p less than 0.01) in both FER groups (7 +/- 6 and 8 +/- 5 mm Hg) than in the placebo group (4 +/- 6 mm Hg). The 24-h reduction in supine systolic BP (SBP) was greater (p less than 0.01) in the FER 20-mg group (14 +/- 11 mm Hg), but not in the FER 10-mg group, than in the placebo group (8 +/- 11 mm Hg). No significant difference in blood pressure (BP) was found between FER 10 and 20 mg. Heart rate (HR) did not differ between any of the groups, nor did body weight or routine laboratory parameters. During felodipine treatment, 17 patients (12 receiving FER 20 mg) were withdrawn mostly because of vasodilatory side effects such as headache and ankle edema. We conclude that FER 10 mg and 20 mg once daily had an antihypertensive 24-h effect and that FER 10 mg may be more suitable as initial dose.     

Pharmacokinetics and hemodynamic effects of diltiazem in healthy volunteers: comparing resting with the effect of exercise.

PURPOSE: To determine the steady-state plasma concentrations of diltiazem (DTZ) and hemodynamic effect in humans at rest and during exercise. METHODS: Healthy volunteers (10 F, mean age 22, and 11 M, mean age 24) were recruited. Prior to receiving DTZ, each volunteer performed two 3-minute stages of treadmill exercise according to the Bruce protocol. Intra-arterial BP and ECG recordings were obtained before, during and immediately post exercise. Each volunteer then received DTZ 60 mg qid for one week. The same exercise protocol was repeated 1 h after the last dose. Steady-state plasma concentrations of DTZ were determined by a previously reported HPLC. RESULTS: DTZ decreased resting DBP from 84 +/- 13 to 79 +/- 10 mmHg (p > 0.05), and HR from 89 +/- 11 to 82 +/- 13 bpm (p < 0.05). During exercise, an average of 32 and 10% increase in SBP and DBP, respectively, and a 47% increase of HR was found (p < 0.05). DTZ limited these increases to 21% for SBP, 5% for DBP, and 44% for HR (p < 0.05 for drug effect). Steady-state plasma DTZ concentrations were 141 +/- 56 ng/ml. CONCLUSION: DTZ significantly decreased resting HR but not BP in health volunteers. It decreased both hemodynamic variables during exercise. Thus, the hemodynamic effects of diltiazem are more profound during exercise, and may be more useful surrogate markers for calcium antagonists and other cardiovascular agents in healthy volunteer studies.     

Antihypertensive effect of lisinopril assessed by 24-hour ambulatory monitoring: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over study.

The antihypertensive effect of the angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor lisinopril administered in a single dose of 20 mg was evaluated by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over study. Twenty-four patients (21 men and 3 women, mean age 52 +/- 6 years) with mild to moderate hypertension were included in the study and randomly assigned to two consecutive treatments with lisinopril 20 mg and placebo, each administered for 4 weeks. On the last day of each treatment, BP was assessed by noninvasive 24-h ABPM. BP was significantly lower after lisinopril than after placebo in a 24-h period (mean 24-h systolic BP (SBP) with lisinopril 120 +/- 7 mm Hg and with placebo 135 +/- 9 mm Hg; mean day SBP with lisinopril 125 +/- 3 mm Hg and with placebo 142 +/- 5 mm Hg; mean night SBP with lisinopril 112 +/- 4 mm Hg and with placebo 124 +/- 6 mm Hg; mean 24-h diastolic BP (DBP) with lisinopril 76 +/- 6 mm Hg, and with placebo 87 +/- 8 mm Hg; mean day DBP with lisinopril 80 +/- 3 mm Hg and with placebo 93 +/- 4 mm Hg; mean night DBP with lisinopril 69 +/- 2 mm Hg and with placebo 79 +/- 5 mm Hg, p less than 0.001). Mean 24-h, mean day, and mean night heart rate (HR) did not differ significantly between placebo and lisinopril treatments. Repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed a significant influence on SBP (p less than 0.001) and DBP (p less than 0.001) throughout the treatment.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Effect of infusion pump fill-stroke flow interruption on response to sodium nitroprusside in surgical patients

The influence of the piston-cassette pump fill stroke on the pharmacodynamic response to sodium nitroprusside was evaluated prospectively in 10 adult patients in the surgical intensive-care unit. Simultaneous analog recordings of blood pressure and fill stroke were made over three complete pump fill cycles in each patient. Sodium nitroprusside flow rates and concentrations were recorded throughout the data-collection period. Analysis was based on the maximum pressure obtained during the two-minute baseline period before a fill stroke (Pmax baseline), the pressure at the initiation of the fill stroke (P initial), and the maximum pressure obtained during the two-minute period after the fill stroke (Pmax postfill). The maximum systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and mean blood pressure (MBP) during the baseline and post-fill-stroke periods were significantly different. The mean (+/- S.D.) variability in pressure between the time periods Pmax baseline and Pmax postfill was 3.9 +/- 5.8 mm Hg for SBP (range, -8 to +16), 3.5 +/- 5.7 mm Hg for DBP (range, -7 to +13), and 3.6 +/- 5.6 mm Hg for MBP (range, -7 to +14). The likelihood of a pharmacodynamic change was inconsistent both between and within patients. Within patients the difference between cycles for the variability between time periods ranged from a minimum of 2 mm Hg to a maximum of 16 mm Hg for SBP, 2 mm Hg to 17 mm Hg for DBP, and 1 mm Hg to 17 mm Hg for MBP. The variability within the baseline period (Pmax baseline - P initial) in SBP was significantly greater than the variability between the time periods, while the differences for DBP and MBP were not significant.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Antihypertensive efficacy of manidipine and enalapril in hypertensive diabetic patients

Recent studies showed that in diabetic hypertensive patients, administration of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE)-inhibitors or calcium antagonists can effectively lower blood pressure (BP) and prevent diabetes-related cardiovascular complications with no adverse metabolic effects. We sought to assess the antihypertensive and metabolic effects of the new dihydropyridine calcium antagonist manidipine (M) in patients with diabetes mellitus and essential hypertension as compared with the ACE inhibitor enalapril (E). After 3 weeks of placebo, 101 (62 men; age range, 34-72 years) hypertensives with type II diabetes mellitus were randomized to M 10-20 mg or E 10-20 mg, od, for 24 weeks. At the end of the placebo period and the active-treatment phase, BP was measured with a mercury sphygmomanometer (office, O) and over the 24 h by ambulatory (A) monitoring. ABP recordings were analyzed to obtain 24-h, day (6 a.m. to midnight), and night (midnight to 6 a.m.) average systolic (S) and diastolic (D) BP and heart rate (HR) values. Homogeneity of the antihypertensive effect over the 24 h was assessed by the smoothness index [SI: i.e., the ratio between the average of the 24 hourly BP changes after treatment and the corresponding standard deviation (the higher the SI, the more uniform is the BP control by treatment over the 24 h]. The O SBP and DBP were significantly (p < 0.01) and similarly reduced by M (16 +/- 10 and 13 +/- 6 mm Hg, n = 49) and E (15 +/- 10 and 13 +/- 6 mm Hg, n = 45). The percentage of patients whose O DBP was reduced < or = 85 mm Hg (i.e., the value indicated to be the optimal DBP goal in diabetic hypertensives) was similar for M (37%) and E (40%). The reduction of 24-h BP also was similar between M (n = 38) and E (n = 38) for both drugs (systolic, 6 +/- 11 and 8 +/- 10 mm Hg; diastolic, 5 +/- 8 and 5 +/- 7; NS, M vs. E). The antihypertensive effect was distributed in a similar homogeneous fashion throughout the dosing interval, as shown by the similar SI values (M, 0.6 +/- 1.2 for SBP and 0.6 +/- 0.9 for DBP; E, 0.6 +/- 0.8 for SBP and 0.5 +/- 0.7 for DBP; NS, M vs. E). O and A HR were unchanged by either treatment. Markers of glucose and lipid metabolism and renal function were not significantly modified by treatment both with M and with E. In the diabetic hypertensives, M was as effective and metabolically neutral as the ACE-inhibitor E.     

Demographic factors and the antihypertensive effect of diltiazem.

The maximum blood pressure (BP) decrease obtained after dose titration with calcium antagonists is said to be greater in older patients. Because the dose necessary to achieve this maximum effect may also vary, it is not clear whether the sensitivity to treatment is actually increased in older patients. We evaluated the possible influence of pretreatment BP, age, and weight on the BP and heart rate (HR) response to 14-day treatment with a fixed dose of 120 mg diltiazem twice daily (b.i.d.) in 231 hypertensive patients aged 24-82 years (44 +/- 27). Diltiazem decreased BP from 171 +/- 1/103 +/- 7 to 156 +/- 1/91 +/- 1 mm Hg. Decreases in both systolic and diastolic BP (SBP, DBP) were related to their pretreatment values (p less than 0.0001 for both). Although pretreatment SBP was related to age (p less than 0.0001), its decrease with diltiazem was not. Neither pretreatment DBP nor its decrease with diltiazem was related to age; BP decrease was not superior in elderly patients (aged greater than 60 years) as compared with that in younger patients (SBP -16 +/- 2 vs. -15 +/- 1 mm Hg, NS; DBP -13 +/- 1 vs. -12 +/- 1 mm Hg, NS). In conclusion, the response to this average dose of diltiazem is related to pretreatment BP and is not affected by patient's age. Because this result is at variance with the concept that calcium antagonists are more effective in the elderly, this concept should not be used as a general therapeutic guideline.     

Haemodynamic effects of atenolol,pindolol and propranolol during adrenaline infusion in man

Summary In a double blind, cross over study the haemodynamic effects of an i.v. infusion of adrenaline during concomitant administration of atenolol, pindolol, propranolol or placebo were examined in 7 healthy volunteers.During coadministration with placebo, adrenaline caused an increase in systolic blood pressure (SBP) of 26 mm Hg and a decrease in diastolic blood pressure (DBP) of 20 mm Hg. Heart rate (HR) and stroke volume (SV) were increased by about 20–30%. Total peripheral resistance (TPR) fell significantly. When the subjects were pretreated with atenolol, the adrenaline increased SBP by 16 mm Hg, the DBP did not change, HR and SV increased by 19 and 30%, and TPR fell.During concomitant administration of the non-selective betablocker pindolol, which has strong intrinsic sympathomimetic activity (ISA), adrenaline increased SBP by 11 mm Hg and DBP by 17 mm Hg. This pure pressor response led to a significant reduction in HR and SV and an increase in TPR, probably mediated through the baroreceptors. The haemodynamic response to adrenaline during coadministration of propranolol was very similar to that seen after pindolol. It is concluded that a beta₁-selective blocker interferes very little with the haemodynamic response to adrenaline, whereas it is changed to a pure pressor response during coadministration of a non-selective betablockers. ISA did not significantly modify the pressor response.     

Delapril/manidipine

Delapril/manidipine 30 mg/10 mg is a new oral, once-daily, fixed combination of an ACE inhibitor and a dihydropyridine calcium-channel antagonist for the treatment of essential hypertension. In a dose-finding study in 400 patients with mild to moderate hypertension, delapril/manidipine 30mg/10mg once daily produced the greatest reduction in blood pressure (BP) of the combinations tested. Delapril/manidipine 30mg/10mg once daily for 6 weeks reduced systolic BP (SBP)/diastolic BP (DBP) by 15/13mm Hg. In nonresponders to monotherapy with delapril (n = 155) or manidipine (n = 152), delapril/manidipine 30mg/10mg once daily for 12 weeks reduced mean SBP/DBP by 16/11mm Hg and 16/10mm Hg, respectively. Delapril/manidipine 30mg/10mg once daily for 12 weeks in patients with mild to moderate hypertension (n = 131) demonstrated significantly greater antihypertensive efficacy than monotherapy with manidipine 10mg once daily (n = 134) or delapril 15mg twice daily (n = 136). Mean SBP/DBP reductions from baseline were 19/14, 15/11 and 14/10mm Hg, respectively. After 50 weeks of therapy with delapril/manidipine 30mg/10mg once daily, mean SBP/DBP was reduced by 22/14mm Hg in patients with mild to moderate hypertension (n = 309). Delapril/manidipine 30mg/10mg once daily was generally well tolerated. The incidence and nature of adverse events were similar to those observed in recipients of monotherapy with the individual agents. Combination therapy was associated with less ankle oedema than manidipine monotherapy.