Low-Dose Isradipine Once Daily Effectively Controls 24-H Blood Pressure in Essential Hypertension

1991 ◽  
Vol 4 (2_Pt_2) ◽  
pp. 163S-167S ◽  
Author(s):  
W. L Diemont ◽  
C. J. Stegeman ◽  
J. Beekman ◽  
A. M. J. Siegers ◽  
G. Hagels ◽  
...  
2002 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 543-552 ◽  
Author(s):  
J Amerena ◽  
S Pappas ◽  
J-P Ouellet ◽  
L Williams ◽  
D O'Shaughnessy

In this multicentre, prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded-endpoint (PROBE) study, the efficacy of 12 weeks' treatment with once-daily telmisartan 40–80 mg and enalapril 10–20 mg was evaluated using ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) in 522 patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension. Patients were titrated to the higher dose of study drug at week 6 if mean seated diastolic blood pressure (DBP) was ≥ 90 mmHg. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in ambulatory DBP in the last 6 h of the 24-h dosing interval after 12 weeks' treatment. Telmisartan and enalapril produced similar reductions from baseline in DBP and systolic blood pressure (SBP) over all ABPM periods evaluated (last 6 h, 24-h, daytime and night-time). Telmisartan produced a significantly greater reduction in mean seated trough DBP, measured unblinded with an automated ABPM device in the clinic, amounting to a difference of −2.02 mmHg ( P < 0.01). A significantly greater proportion of patients achieved a seated diastolic response with telmisartan than enalapril (59% versus 50%; P < 0.05), also measured with the same ABPM device. Both treatments were well tolerated. Compared with telmisartan, enalapril was associated with a higher incidence of cough (8.9% versus 0.8%) and hypotension (3.9% versus 1.1%). Therefore, telmisartan may provide better long-term compliance and, consequently, better blood pressure control than enalapril.


2011 ◽  
Vol 33 (7) ◽  
pp. 427-436 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomohiro Hanazawa ◽  
Taku Obara ◽  
Kei Ogasawara ◽  
Takahiro Shinki ◽  
Sakiko Katada ◽  
...  

1987 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. S108-S112 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toshio Ogihara ◽  
Masao Ikeda ◽  
Yuichiro Goto ◽  
Kaoru Yoshinaga ◽  
Yuichi Kumahara ◽  
...  

1984 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 221-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
G Muiesan ◽  
C Alicandri ◽  
E Agabiti-Rosei ◽  
R Fariello ◽  
E Montini ◽  
...  

Thirty-two patients with moderate to severe essential hypertension whose supine diastolic blood pressure (SDBP) was ⩾95 mm Hg following 2 weeks' treatment with the optimal dosage of beta blocker-diuretic combination were randomly assigned to the addition of either Captopril 25 mg or 50 mg b.i.d. After 6 weeks' treatment, if patients were not normalized (SDBP <95 mm Hg), the dose of Captopril was doubled for a further 6 weeks. The addition of Captopril led to a significant fall in standing and supine diastolic and systolic blood pressure at the end of the sixth and twelfth week of treatment. There was no difference in the change in blood pressure between the two groups. At the end of the study SDBP was normalized in 66% of patients and a further 12·5% had their SDBP reduced by >10%. Captopril 25 or 50 mg administered twice daily proved to be a very effective antihypertensive agent when added to a beta blocker-diuretic combination in patients resistant to optimal doses of these drugs.


2007 ◽  
Vol 14 (04) ◽  
pp. 627-633
Author(s):  
IMRAN ASHRAF ◽  
Imran Khan ◽  
NOOR KAMIL ◽  
Abdul Mannan ◽  
Muhammad Shamaun Razi

Background: Hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus also tend to coexist.The goal of antihypertensive therapy should consist of reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality associated withhypertension by a strategy focused on lowering blood pressure while minimizing the impact on other associatedcardiovascular risk factors like diabetes mellitus. Objectives: To observe and compare any change in serum glucosein patients with newly diagnosed essential hypertension with Atenolol and Amlodipine. Setting: Department ofPharmacology and Therapeutics, Basic Medical Science Institute (BMSI), Jinnah Post Graduate Medical Centre(JPMC), Karachi. Period: 12 weeks (90 days) Methods: Patients with newly diagnosed essential hypertension (N=70)were enrolled in this study and were divided into two groups, each comprised of 35 patients and were given tabletAtenolol 50/100mg once daily and tablet Amlodipine 5/10 mg once daily respectively for 90 days. Fasting Blood glucosewas measured on day of inclusion i.e. day 0, day 45 and day 90. At each fortnightly visit, blood pressure was recorded.Results: Atenolol raised mean blood glucose levels from baseline levels of 91.82±1.34 mg/dl to 99.73±1.33 mg/dl onday 90 (P<0.001) while Amlodipine had no significant effect on blood glucose level (P= N.S). Conclusion: Atenololmay not be a good choice for essential hypertensive patient with type 2 diabetes mellitus as it is found to impair the normal glucose metabolism. Long term clinical trials in diabetic patients are needed to confirm the observation of thepresent study.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document