Effects of Oral Administration of Alprazolam and Lorazepam as Hypnotics on Cardiovascular Parameters in Hypertensive Patients.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have suggested that evening intake of benzodiazepine affects blood pressure (BP) and/or heart rate (HR) in healthy and hypertensive subjects. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of chronic oral administration of alprazolam and lorazepam as hypnotics on ambulatory BP and HR in patients with mild hypertension. METHODS: Consecutive outpatients of both sexes with newly diagnosed, never-treated mild hypertension were randomized, after a 4-week placebo run-in period, to receive alprazolam 0.5 mg plus placebo, lorazepam 1 mg plus placebo, or placebo plus placebo for 2 weeks in 3 crossover periods, each separated by a 1-week placebo wash-out period. At the end of the initial placebo run-in and of each treatment period, 24-hour ambulatory BP and HR monitoring was performed using a noninvasive device. RESULTS: In the 32 patients, no treatment had any effect on 24-hour and daytime systolic BP (SBP), diastolic BP (DBP), and HR, which remained unchanged. During the nighttime, SBP and DBP values were unaffected by alprazolam, as compared with placebo, whereas DBP was significantly higher after treatment with lorazepam (+3.7%, P < 0.05 vs placebo). Nocturnal HR mean values were significantly increased by lorazepam (+10.1%, P < 0.01 vs placebo), whereas they did not change after alprazolam. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with mild hypertension, oral intake of alprazolam or lorazepam as hypnotics did not affect ambulatory BP or HR values. A slight increase in nighttime DBP was observed with lorazepam, whereas alprazolam showed no effect on nocturnal BP and HR, probably reflecting a stimulating effect of the drug on central α2-receptors.

Effect of Evening Bromazepam Administration on Blood Pressure and Heart Rate in Mild Hypertensive Patients.

AIM: To assess the effects of chronic evening oral administration of bromazepam alone or in combination with propranolol on ambulatory blood pressure (BP) and heart rate (HR) in mild hypertensive subjects. METHODS: Thirty-seven mild hypertensive patients after a 2-week placebo period were randomized to bromazepam 3 mg, propranolol 40 mg, bromazepam 3 mg plus propranolol 40 mg or placebo for 2 weeks according to a double-blind, double dummy, cross-over design. After each treatment period, 24-h BP and HR ambulatory monitoring was performed by using a non-invasive device. RESULTS: Ambulatory monitoring showed that during night-time SBP and DBP values were unaffected by bromazepam as compared to placebo, whereas SBP was significantly reduced by propranolol both when taken alone and in combination with bromazepam. HR nocturnal values were significantly reduced by propranolol, whereas they were significantly increased by bromazepan both when taken alone (+11.5%, p < 0.05 vs. placebo) and in combination with propranolol (+12.8%, p < 0.05 vs. propranolol). No significant difference in day-time values of SBP, DBP and HR was observed among the 4 treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: In mild hypertensive patients, evening consumption of bromazepam for a 2-week period did not affect BP, while it increased nocturnal HR. Such an increase was observed both when bromazepam was taken alone and in combination with propranolol, which suggests that it depends on a bromazepam mediated decrease in vagal tone. Whatever the mechanism, the HR nocturnal increase might be of clinical relevance, due to the role of high HR as cardiovascular risk factor, particularly in already at risk hypertensive subjects.

Diazepam as an oral hypnotic increases nocturnal blood pressure in the elderly.

BACKGROUND: No study has evaluated the cardiovascular effects of diazepam in elderly subjects that assume diazepam to induce sleep. PURPOSE: The present study was carried out in order to evaluate the effects of chronic administration of diazepam as hypnotic drug on blood pressure (BP) and heart rate (HR) in healthy elderly subjects. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Healthy, elderly subjects, aged 65-74 years, were treated with diazepam 5 mg or placebo-both administered once a day in the evening-for 4 weeks in two cross-over periods, each separated by a 2-week placebo period, according to a randomized, double-blind, cross-over design. At the end of each study period, clinical as well as 24-h ambulatory BP and HR were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 25 subjects were included in the analysis. At the end of a 4-week diazepam treatment, clinical as well 24-h BP and HR mean values were not significantly affected. Analysis of sub-periods showed that during night-time, systolic BP (SBP) values under diazepam were 7.6% higher than under placebo, with a mean difference of 7.9 mmHg (p < 0.01), diastolic BP (DBP) values were 5.8% higher, with a mean difference of 3.7 mmHg (p < 0.05 vs placebo) and HR values were 6.6% higher with a mean difference of 4.2 b/min (p < 0.05). The HR increase observed with diazepam persisted during the morning hours, whereas during the afternoon and evening hours SBP, DBP and HR values were similar in the two treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: In elderly subjects chronic assumption of diazepam as hypnotic agent produced an increase in BP, in particular SBP, during night-time and of HR during night-time and morning hours. These effects, which probably depend on a diazepam-mediated increase in sympathetic drive and decrease in vagal tone, might be of clinical relevance due to the role of increased BP and HR as independent predictors of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.

Effect of flunitrazepam as an oral hypnotic on 24-hour blood pressure in healthy volunteers.

PURPOSE: The present study was carried out in order to assess the effects of chronic administration of flunitrazepam (as an oral hypnotic) on 24-h blood pressure (BP) and heart rate (HR) in healthy young adults. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Following a 2-week placebo run-in period, 28 healthy volunteers (13 males and 15 females) between 21 and 30 years were randomized to receive either flunitrazepam 1 mg or placebo (both administered once a day in the evening) for 4 weeks in two cross-over periods; each separated by a 2-week placebo period. At the end of each study period, non-invasive 24-h BP and HR ambulatory monitoring was performed. RESULTS: Flunitrazepam produced a significant decrease in nighttime systolic blood pressure (SBP) (- 6.4 mmHg) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) (- 4.1 mmHg) (both P < 0.05 vs placebo) without affecting nocturnal HR. During the morning hours, significantly higher values of SBP (+ 7.4 mmHg, P < 0.01), DBP (+ 3.4 mmHg, P < 0.05) and HR (+ 3.9 beats/min, P < 0.05) were observed in the flunitrazepam group compared to the placebo-treated group. No significant differences were noted between the two groups during afternoon and evening hours. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that chronic oral administration of 1 mg flunitrazepam as a hypnotic agent causes a significant nocturnal fall in BP and a transient rebound increase of both BP and HR at awakening in the morning. Mechanisms underlying these cardiovascular effects remain unclear, although the direct vasodilatory effect, which is typical of flunitrazepam (with consequent reflex counter-regulatory responses), and the attenuation of baroreflex sensitivity are likely to play a major role.

Effect of Diazepam on 24-Hour Blood Pressure and Heart Rate in Healthy Young Volunteers.

AIM: To assess the effects of evening chronic administration of diazepam on 24-h blood pressure (BP) and heart rate (HR) in healthy young adults. METHODS: This randomized double blind, cross-over study evaluated the effects of diazepam 5 mg or placebo, both ingested in the evening, on 24-h ambulatory BP and HR in healthy subjects aged 21-30. RESULTS: A total of 30 subjects were included in the analysis. At the end of 4-week diazepam intake, an increase in 24-h HR mean values was found (+5.2 beats/min, p < 0.05). Analysis of subperiods showed that diazepam produced a 10.1% increase in night-time HR (+6.1 beats/min, p < 0.01) without affecting BP. A significant HR rise (+4.9 beats/min, p < 0.05) and SBP reduction (-3.8 mm Hg, p < 0.05) were observed in the morning hours. The HR increase persisted in day-time hours (+4.6 beats/min, p < 0.05), while BP values resulted unaffected. CONCLUSIONS: In healthy subjects, diazepam taken as a hypnotic agent induces a significant HR increase, possibly mediated by a decrease in vagal tone. This effect might be of clinical relevance due to the role that HR plays as an independent cardiovascular risk factor.

Ambulatory 24-h ECG monitoring and cardiovascular autonomic assessment for the screening of silent myocardial ischemia in elderly type 2 diabetic hypertensive patients.

The aim of the study was to evaluate the usefulness of Holter monitoring for the detection of silent myocardial ischemia (SMI) in elderly type 2 diabetic patients with hypertension and the possible relationship between SMI and cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy (CAN). Two hundred and forty-three asymptomatic outpatients, aged 65-75 years, with type 2 diabetes and essential hypertension underwent 24-h ECG monitoring and 5 tests for the evaluation of both parasympathetic (heart rate variability, response to breath deeping, and Valsalva manoeuvre) and sympathetic (cold pressor test and orthostatic hypotension test) autonomic function. A total of 518 asymptomatic episodes of ST depression during Holter monitoring indicative of SMI were detected in 51 of the 243 studied patients (20.9 %). None of the patients with ST depression episodes exhibited a normal response to at least one of the evaluated autonomic function tests, whereas 22 of the 192 patients without ST changes (11.4 %) exhibited a normal response to all tests. Abnormality in both parasympathetic and sympathetic function test responses was found in 94.1 % of patients with ST depression episodes vs 26.1 % of those without ST changes (P < 0.001). Statistical evaluation of the relationship between the abnormal response to single autonomic function test and episodes of ST depression was highly significant for all the 5 tests (P < 0.001). These results indicate that: (a) Holter monitoring enables to detect ST segment changes indicative of SMI in 20.9 % of elderly diabetic patients with hypertension; (b) the presence of autonomic cardiac dysfunction in these patients suggests a role of diabetic neuropathy in the pathogenesis of SMI; and

Twenty-four-hour blood pressure profile, orthostatic hypotension, and cardiac dysautonomia in elderly type 2 diabetic hypertensive patients.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between orthostatic hypotension (OH), defined as a decrease in systolic blood pressure (SBP) ≥20 mmHg and/or a decrease in diastolic blood pressure (DBP) ≥10 mmHg, and 24-h ambulatory BP profile in elderly hypertensive type 2 diabetic patients. METHODS: After a 2-week antihypertensive wash-out period, 200 hypertensive well-controlled diabetic outpatients, aged 65-75 years, underwent a clinical examination, including BP measurements, ECG, 24-h ABP monitoring (ABPM), an orthostatic test, and three tests for cardiovascular autonomic function assessment [deep breathing, heart rate (HR) variability, resting HR]. RESULTS: According to their nighttime BP profile, patients were divided into three groups: dippers (n = 86) (BP fall during nighttime ≥10 %), non-dippers (n = 80) (BP fall during nighttime 0-10 %), and reverse dippers (n = 34) (nighttime BP > daytime BP). Orthostatic test produced a significantly greater orthostatic SBP fall in dippers and even more in reverse dippers. In these latter, a significant fall was observed also in DBP. Prevalence of OH was 9.3 % in dippers, 30 % in non-dippers, and 79.4 % in reverse dippers. CONCLUSIONS: In elderly hypertensive type 2 diabetics, a blunted nocturnal BP fall is associated with OH and autonomic dysfunction. These data suggest that ABPM should be performed in the assessment of hypertensive diabetic patients in whom the cardiovascular dysautonomia is suspected or the signs of it are present (such as OH).

Potential Contribution of Hypertension to Evolution of Chronic Migraine and Related Mechanisms.

AIMS: To investigate the potential contributions of diastolic and systolic blood pressure (BP) and the circadian rhythm of BP to chronic migraine evolution. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included four groups of patients selected based on migraine frequency (high frequency ≥ 10 days per month and low frequency < 10) and on the presence of hypertension. Among-group and pairwise comparisons were carried out to investigate potential neurophysiologic differences in the cerebral vessel reactivity to a nitroglycerin test, in autonomic balance (tilting test), and BP circadian rhythm. RESULTS: A more marked decrease in cerebral blood flow velocity was observed in hypertensive high-frequency migraineurs compared to all other groups (P = .037). Moreover, a smaller decrease in vagal tone was recorded in the orthostatic position in hypertensive subjects, whether they were high- (P = .032) or low-frequency migraineurs (P = .014), with a consistently higher vagal to sympathetic tone ratio (P = .033). Finally, in nonhypertensive subjects, a higher but not significant prevalence of systolic nondippers was detected in high-frequency migraineurs (67%) compared to low-frequency subjects (25%; P = .099). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that hypertension may contribute to the chronic evolution of headache with mechanisms shared with migraine; ie, vascular tone alteration and autonomic dysregulation.

Dynamic interactions between musical, cardiovascular, and cerebral rhythms in humans.

BACKGROUND: Reactions to music are considered subjective, but previous studies suggested that cardiorespiratory variables increase with faster tempo independent of individual preference. We tested whether compositions characterized by variable emphasis could produce parallel instantaneous cardiovascular/respiratory responses and whether these changes mirrored music profiles. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-four young healthy subjects, 12 musicians (choristers) and 12 nonmusician control subjects, listened (in random order) to music with vocal (Puccini's "Turandot") or orchestral (Beethoven's 9th Symphony adagio) progressive crescendos, more uniform emphasis (Bach cantata), 10-second period (ie, similar to Mayer waves) rhythmic phrases (Giuseppe Verdi's arias "Va pensiero" and "Libiam nei lieti calici"), or silence while heart rate, respiration, blood pressures, middle cerebral artery flow velocity, and skin vasomotion were recorded.Common responses were recognized by averaging instantaneous cardiorespiratory responses regressed against changes in music profiles and by coherence analysis during rhythmic phrases. Vocal and orchestral crescendos produced significant (P=0.05 or better) correlations between cardiovascular or respiratory signals and music profile, particularly skin vasoconstriction and blood pressures, proportional to crescendo, in contrast to uniform emphasis, which induced skin vasodilation and reduction in blood pressures. Correlations were significant both in individual and group-averaged signals. Phrases at 10-second periods by Verdi entrained the cardiovascular autonomic variables. No qualitative differences in recorded measurements were seen between musicians and nonmusicians. CONCLUSIONS: Music emphasis and rhythmic phrases are tracked consistently by physiological variables. Autonomic responses are synchronized with music, which might therefore convey emotions through autonomic arousal during crescendos or rhythmic phrases.

Time to achieve blood pressure goal with a combination versus a conventional monotherapy approach in hypertensive patients with metabolic syndrome.

The time to achieve a blood pressure (BP) goal < or =130/85 mmHg with a combination versus a conventional monotherapy approach was evaluated in 308 hypertensive patients with metabolic syndrome. They were randomized to valsartan (V) 8 mg/amlodipine (A) 5 mg combination or to V 160 mg monotherapy for 12 weeks and every 2 weeks, there was a titration in nonresponder patients: in the combination group V/A was progressively increased to V 160/A 5 mg; V160/A 7.5 mg; V160/A 10 mg; V 240/A 10 mg, and V 320/A 10 mg. In the monotherapy group, the regimen was progressively modified as following: V 240 mg; V 320 mg; V 320/A 5 mg; V 320/A 7.5 mg, and V 320/A 10 mg. The mean time to achieve the BP goal was shorter in patients randomized to combination therapy compared to those randomized to conventional monotherapy (4.7 +/- 2.7 weeks vs. 7.1 +/- 3.9 weeks, respectively, p < 0.001). The percentage of patients who achieved target BP in the combination approach group statistically exceeded that of the monotherapy treated one already after 2 weeks of treatment (30.5 vs. 14.9%, p < 0.01) and again after 4, 6, 8, and 10 weeks of treatment. Only at 12 weeks the percentage of normalized patients was similar in the two treatment groups (78.8% vs. 75.3%, ns). These results suggest that initial therapy with a V/A combination approach may be more quickly effective than a conventional sequential monotherapy approach in achieving target BP in hypertensive patients with metabolic syndrome.

Efficacy and safety of olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg combination therapy versus olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg monotherapy in patients with moderate to severe hypertension: a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicentre, multinational, phase III study.

BACKGROUND: Current hypertension guidelines recommend using two antihypertensive agents when blood pressure (BP) control is not achieved with one single agent. OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to assess the antihypertensive benefit of the olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 12.5 mg combination versus olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg monotherapy in patients with moderate to severe hypertension. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, up-titration, multicentre, multinational, phase III study. Following a 2-week single-blind placebo run-in phase, 846 hypertensive patients with mean seated systolic BP (SeSBP) of 160-200 mmHg and mean seated diastolic BP (SeDBP) of 100-120 mmHg were randomized (1 : 2 ratio) to receive double-blind treatment with olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg or olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg for 8 weeks (phase A). At week 8, patients not reaching BP goal (<140/90 mmHg; <130/80 mmHg in patients with diabetes mellitus) were up-titrated from olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg to olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg or from olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg to olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/HCTZ 25 mg for an additional 8 weeks (phase B). Patients on goal continued their initial treatment. The primary efficacy parameter was the change in mean SeDBP during phase A. RESULTS: Olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg reduced mean SeDBP significantly more (-18.9 mmHg) than olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg (-15.8 mmHg) after 8 weeks of double-blind treatment (difference: -3.1 mmHg, p < 0.0001). Olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg also reduced mean SeSBP significantly more than olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg (-5.4 mmHg, p < 0.0001). As a result, BP goal rates at week 8 were significantly higher with olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg than with olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg (58.5% vs 44.3%; odds ratio 1.88; 95% CI 1.32, 2.54). During phase B, mean BP reductions were greater in patients up-titrated from olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg to olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg than in those continuing on olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg (SeDBP: -9.3 mmHg vs -0.5 mmHg; SeSBP: -12.4 mmHg vs -0.5 mmHg). Similarly, mean BP reductions were greater in patients up-titrated from olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg to olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/HCTZ 25 mg than in those continuing on olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg (SeDBP: -8.0 mmHg vs -0.3 mmHg; SeSBP: -12.1 mmHg vs -0.4 mmHg). In patients not on goal at week 8, addition of HCTZ 12.5 mg to olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg or up-titration from olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg to olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/HCTZ 25 mg brought additional patients to goal at week 16 (38.8% vs 36.9%). All treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: The olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg combination is superior to olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg monotherapy in reducing SeDBP and SeSBP and increasing BP goal rates after 8 weeks. Patients not on goal at week 8 with olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg or olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg benefited from adding HCTZ 12.5 mg or up-titrating to olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/HCTZ 25 mg, respectively, confirming that up-titration is a clinically meaningful way to improve BP control. [ TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00441350 (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier)].

Efficacy of manidipine/delapril versus losartan/hydrochlorothiazide fixed combinations in patients with hypertension and diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension markedly increases the already high risk for cardiovascular complications in patients with diabetes mellitus. Less than one in eight patients with hypertension and type 2 diabetes have adequately controlled blood pressure. As a result, antihypertensive combinations are now widely used in management of hypertension associated with diabetes. METHODS: This double-blind study investigated efficacy of a new fixed dose combination of a calcium antagonist, manidipine 10 mg, and an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, delapril 30 mg, compared with a combination of an angiotensin receptor blocker, losartan 50 mg, and a diuretic, hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg. Patients with hypertension (blood pressure > or = 130/80 mmHg) with controlled type 2 diabetes (HbA1c < or = 7.5%) were randomized to manidipine/delapril (n = 153) or losartan/hydrochlorothiazide (n = 161), administered once daily for 12 weeks. Patients underwent ambulatory blood pressure monitor evaluation at baseline and end of treatment. RESULTS: Mean decreases in 24-h systolic blood pressure were seen with both manidipine/delapril (-9.3 mmHg) and losartan/hydrochlorothiazide (-10.7 mmHg) combinations. The mean (95% confidence interval) treatment difference was -1.4 (-4.5/1.8) mmHg, demonstrating noninferiority of the manidipine/delapril combination. Reduction in 24-h diastolic blood pressure (-4.6 versus -4.5 mmHg) and daytime (systolic blood pressure -10.5 versus -11.1 mmHg) and night-time (systolic blood pressure -7.1 versus -9.3 mmHg) blood pressure were also not significantly different between treatments. Compliance and adverse events were comparable for both groups. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrated that the combination of manidipine and delapril is as effective as losartan and hydrochlorothiazide in treatment of hypertension in type 2 diabetes.

Effect of valsartan and ramipril on atrial fibrillation recurrence and P-wave dispersion in hypertensive patients with recurrent symptomatic lone atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: This study compared the effect of antihypertensive treatment with valsartan or ramipril on atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence, on P-wave dispersion, (PWD) and on serum procollagen type I carboxy terminal peptide (PIP). METHODS: A total of 369 mild hypertensive (systolic blood pressure (SBP) >140 and/or 90 < diastolic blood pressure (DBP) < 110 mm Hg) outpatients in sinus rhythm but with at least two episodes of AF in the previous 6 months were randomized to valsartan (n = 122), ramipril (n = 124), or amlodipine (n = 123) for 1 year. Clinic blood pressure (BP) and a 24-h electrocardiogram (ECG) were evaluated monthly. Patients were asked to report any episode of symptomatic AF and to perform an ECG as early as possible. PWD and serum PIP levels were evaluated before and after each treatment period. RESULTS: SBP and DBP were significantly reduced by the three treatments (P < 0.001). A total of 46 (47.4%) patients treated with amlodipine had a recurrence of AF as did 26 (27.9%) patients treated with ramipril (P < 0.01 vs. amlodipine) and 16 (16.1%) patients treated with valsartan (P < 0.01 vs. amlodipine and P < 0.05 vs. ramipril). The Kaplan-Meyer analysis showed a significant reduction of AF episodes in the valsartan group (P = 0.005 log-rank test) as well as in the ramipril group (P = 0.021), even if at a lesser degree. PWD values were significantly reduced by ramipril (-4.2 ms, P < 0.05) and even more by valsartan (-11.2 ms, P < 0.01), the difference being significant (P < 0.01). Serum PIP levels were reduced by ramipril (-49.7 microg, P < 0.001) and valsartan (-49.3 microg, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite similar BP lowering, valsartan and ramipril were more effective than amlodipine in preventing new episodes of AF, but the effect of valsartan was greater than that of ramipril. This could be related to the greater PWD reduction observed with valsartan.

Effects of manidipine/delapril versus olmesartan/hydrochlorothiazide combination therapy in elderly hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

The purpose of this study was to compare the combination treatments of manidipine/delapril and olmesartan/hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) in elderly diabetic hypertensives. After a 4-week placebo period, 158 hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes (age range: 66 to 74 years) were randomized to receive combination treatment of 10 mg manidipine plus 30 mg delapril or 20 mg olmesartan plus 12.5 mg HCTZ for 48 weeks in a prospective, parallel arm trial. After 12 weeks, manidipine or HCTZ was doubled in nonresponders (systolic blood pressure [SBP] > or =130 mmHg and/or diastolic blood pressure [DBP] > or =80 mmHg). Patients were checked at the end of the placebo period and every 12 weeks thereafter. At each visit, lying, sitting and standing BP as well as fasting glycemia, glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), electrolytes, uric acid, total cholesterol (TC), high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) and triglycerides (TG) were evaluated. Both combinations reduced sitting SBP (-27.7 and -28.3 mmHg, respectively; both p<0.001) and DBP (-15.1 and -14.8 mmHg, respectively; both p<0.01) with no difference between the two treatments. Standing DBP was more markedly reduced by olmesartan/HCTZ (-19.5 mmHg; p<0.001) than by manidipine/delapril (-14.7 mmHg; p<0.05 vs. olmesartan/HCTZ). No changes in metabolic parameters were observed with manidipine/delapril, whereas an increase in HbA1c (+0.7%; p<0.05), uric acid (+0.4 mg/dL; p<0.05) and TG (+41.3 mg/dL; p<0.05), and a decrease in serum potassium (-0.3 mmol/L; p<0.05) and HDL-C (-3.4 mg/dL; p<0.05) were found in the olmesartan/HCTZ group. In conclusion, both combinations were similarly effective in reducing BP in elderly hypertensive diabetic patients. However, manidipine/delapril offered some advantages in terms of the less-pronounced BP orthostatic changes and absence of metabolic adverse effects.

Effectiveness of hydrochlorothiazide in combination with telmisartan and olmesartan in adults with moderate hypertension not controlled with monotherapy: a prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded end point (PROBE), parallel-arm study.

BACKGROUND: The potential combinations of antihypertensive agents are many, and making rational choices depends on the characteristics of each drug and on their complementary mechanisms of action. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of adding hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 12.5 mg to olmesartan 20 mg or telmisartan 80 mg on blood pressure (BP) in patients with moderate hypertension. METHODS: Consecutive outpatients at the Centro per l'Ipertensione e la Fisiopatologia Cardiovascolare, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy, of both sexes aged 39 to 75 years were considered eligible for enrollment if they had a sitting diastolic BP (DBP) ->99 mm Hg and <110 mm Hg at the end of an initial 2-week washout period. Patients were random- ized to olmesartan 20 mg QD or telmisartan 80 mg QD according to a prospective, open-label, blinded end point, parallel-arm design. After 8 weeks of monotherapy, patients whose BP was not controlled (DBP ->90 mm Hg) received HCTZ 12.5 mg QD for 8 additional weeks. Clinical and ambulatory BPs were measured at the end of the washout period and at the end of both treatment periods. Adverse events (AEs) were recorded from spontaneous reports and direct inquiry from investigators. RESULTS: One hundred forty-five patients, all of whom were white, were recruited for the study. After the initial washout period, 13 patients did not meet the inclusion criteria and 6 refused to continue. A total of 126 white patients (69 men, 57 women; mean [SD] age, 60.2 [11.6] years) were randomized to receive monotherapy. Of these, 35 patients (56%) in the olmesartan group and 33 (52%) in the telmisartan group had previously received antihypertensive therapy. At the end of monotherapy, the 52 patients in the olmesartan group and the 49 patients in the telmisartan treatment group who were still in the study and had their BP inadequately controlled by treatment had HCTZ 12.5 mg QD added to their treatment regimen. Both combinations induced a greater ambulatory mean (SD) systolic BP (SBP) and DBP reduction than monothera- py (SBP: 145.3 [6.1] in the olmesartan group and 140.1 [6.4] in the telmisartan group, P < 0.05; DBP: 88.1 [5.1] in the olmesartan group and 84.9 [4.9] in the telmisartan group, P < 0.05). The mean (SD) reduction from baseline in the telmisartan/HCTZ-treated patients (21.5 [10.1]/14.6 [5.2] mm Hg for 24 hours, 21.8 [10.2]/14.9 [5.2] mm Hg for daytime, and 20.4 [10.3]/13.7 [5.9] mm Hg for nighttime; all, P < 0.001 vs baseline) was significantly greater than that observed in the olmesartan/HCTZ-treated patients (18.8 [9.8]/12.3 [4.9] mm Hg for 24 hours, 19.3 [9.8]/12.8 [4.9] mm Hg for daytime, and 17.4 [10.2]/10.6 [5.5] mm Hg for nighttime; all, P < 0.001 vs baseline), with a significant difference between the 2 treatment groups (P < 0.01). Compared with mono- therapy, the add-on effect of HCTZ 12.5 mg QD administration was significantly greater in the telmisartan group than in the olmesartan group (P < 0.05); the differ- ence being more evident for nighttime BP values (SBP, P 0.031; DBP, P 0.025). Reported AEs were similar in the olmesartan/HCTZ and the telmisartan/HCTZ groups (4 patients [7%] vs 3 patients [6%]). CONCLUSION: The addition of HCTZ 12.5 mg to telmisartan 80 mg monothera- py was associated with greater BP reduction than the addition of the same dose of HCTZ to olmesartan 20 nag monotherapy in these patients previously uncontrolled on monotherapy.

Effect of telmisartan-amlodipine combination at different doses on urinary albumin excretion in hypertensive diabetic patients with microalbuminuria.

BACKGROUND: Aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of the telmisartan-amlodipine combination at different doses on urinary albumin excretion rate (UAER) in hypertensive diabetic patients with microalbuminuria. METHODS: After a 2-week placebo period, 300 hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes and microalbuminuria were treated with the 40 mg of telmisartan and 2.5 mg of amlodipine combination. After 4 weeks 210 patients whose blood pressure (BP) was not controlled (BP >130/80 mm Hg) were randomized to two-dose titration regimens, one based on increasing doses of telmisartan (up to 160 mg daily) and fixed 2.5-mg dose of amlodipine, the other based on increasing doses of amlodipine (up to 10 mg daily) and fixed 40-mg dose of telmisartan. After 12 weeks the nonresponder patients were given transdermic clonidine (0.1mg/d). After 16 weeks the patients yet not controlled were discontinued, the others were followed for 48 weeks. Office BP, UAER, creatinine clearance, plasma potassium, fasting glycemia, and glycosylated hemoglobin were assessed at the end of the telmisartan (40 mg)/amlodipine (2.5 mg) treatment period and after 48 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: Similar decrease in systolic/diastolic BP values were obtained with both regimens (-24/-21, -23/-21, and -24/-21 mm Hg, all P < .001 v baseline, with increasing telmisartan; -25/-22, -25/-21, and -25/-22 mm Hg, all P < .001 v baseline with increasing amlodipine). Reductions of UAER were 47.5% (P < .01), 65.3% (P < .001), and 77% (P < .0001) for telmisartan 80, 120, and 160 mg/amlodipine 2.5 mg daily, respectively, whereas reductions of UAER were 34% (P < .03), 37% (P < .03), and 33% (P < .03) for amlodipine 5, 7.5, and 10 mg/telmisartan 40 mg daily, respectively, The difference between the two regimens was statistically significant (P < .05, P < .01, and P < .001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that, at comparable levels of BP reduction, UAE decreased more in subjects treated with escalating doses of telmisartan.

Addition of manidipine improves the antiproteinuric effect of candesartan in hypertensive patients with type II diabetes and microalbuminuria.

BACKGROUND: We sought to compare the effect of manidipine versus hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) in addition to candesartan on the urinary albumin excretion rate (UAER) in hypertensive patients with type II diabetes and microalbuminuria. METHODS: After a 2-week washout and run-in period, and 8-week monotherapy with candesartan 16 mg every day, 174 microalbuminuric diabetic hypertensive patients with uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) (>130/80 mm Hg) were randomized to addition of manidipine 10 mg every day (n = 87) or HCTZ 12.5 mg every day (n = 87) for 24 weeks, with a titration after 4 weeks (manidipine or HCTZ dose-doubling) in nonresponder patients. Blood pressure, UAER, creatinine clearance, serum electrolytes, fasting plasma glycemia, and glycosylated hemoglobin were evaluated at baseline (end of run-in period), after candesartan monotherapy, and at the end of the combination treatment period. RESULTS: Both combinations produced greater systolic BP/diastolic BP reduction than candesartan monotherapy (-28/21 mm Hg versus -16/11 mm Hg and -28/20 mm Hg versus -15/11 mm Hg, respectively; all P < .05 versus monotherapy), with no significant difference between the two combinations. The addition of manidipine produced a greater reduction in UAER than candesartan monotherapy (-55.4 mg/24 h v -36.1 mg/24 h, P < .05), whereas the addition of HCTZ did not significantly modify UAER; the difference between the two combinations was statistically significant (P < .05). Similarly, the percentage of patients moving to a normoalbuminuric state (UAER <30 mg/24 h) was increased by the addition of manidipine to candesartan (from 35% to 64%, P < .05), but not by the addition of HCTZ (from 34% to 39%, NS), with a statistical difference between the two combinations (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: These findings show that, despite equivalent reduction in BP, the addition of manidipine to candesartan further reduced the UAER, whereas the addition of HCTZ did not modify the UAER. This suggests that the antiproteinuric effect of manidipine is partially independent of BP reduction, and is attributable to mechanisms different from those mediated by angiotensin receptor blockade.

Matrix metalloprotease activity is enhanced in the compensated but not in the decompensated phase of pressure overload hypertrophy.

BACKGROUND: During the transition of pressure overload hypertrophy (POH) to heart failure (HF) there is intense interstitial cardiac remodeling, characterized by a complex balance between collagen deposition and degradation by matrix metalloproteases (MMPs). This study was aimed at investigating the process of cardiac remodeling during the different phases of the transition of POH to HF. METHODS: Guinea pigs underwent thoracic descending aortic banding or sham operation. Twelve weeks after surgery, left-ventricular (LV) end-diastolic internal dimension and ventricular systolic pressure were measured by combined M-mode echocardiography and micromanometer cathetherization. The MMP activity, tissue-specific MMP inhibitors (TIMPs), and collagen fraction were evaluated in LV tissue samples by zymography, ELISA, and computer-aided analysis, respectively. RESULTS: Banded animals were divided by lung weight values into either compensated left-ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) or HF groups, as compared with sham-operated controls. All HF animals exhibited a restrictive pattern of Doppler transmitral inflow, indicative of diastolic dysfunction, and developed lung congestion. Compensated LVH was associated with increased MMP-2 activity, which was blunted after transition to HF, at a time when TIMP-2 levels and collagen deposition were increased. CONCLUSIONS: The cardiac remodeling process that accompanies the development of POH is a phase-dependent process associated with progressive deterioration of cardiac function.

Prevalence of primary aldosteronism among unselected hypertensive patients: a prospective study based on the use of an aldosterone/renin ratio above 25 as a screening test.

Primary aldosteronism (PA) has been considered a rare cause of hypertension. The introduction of the aldosterone/renin ratio (ARR) as a screening test has led to an increase in the detection rate. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of PA among unselected hypertensive patients by using an ARR >25 as a screening test. We studied 3,000 consecutive unselected hypertensive patients. Blood samples for the determination of plasma renin activity (PRA), aldosterone (ALD) and electrolytes were drawn in the morning, and patients with an ARR >25 underwent intravenous saline infusion as a confirmatory test. Adrenal CT and a dexamethasone suppression test were performed in patients with confirmed PA. Patients with a positive dexamethasone test underwent genetic testing for glucocorticoid-remediable aldosteronism (GRA). Out of 3,000 hypertensives, 684 (22.8%) showed an ARR >25 and 177 of them (5.9% of the whole population) had a positive saline loading test. Only 44 of them (24.8%) were hypokalemic. CT was performed in all the patients with confirmed PA and 53 of them (29.9%) had a solitary adrenal macroadenoma, 112 (63.3%) had bilateral adrenal enlargement and 12 (6.8%) had normal appearing adrenal glands. Of 177 patients given dexamethasone to identify GRA, 8 (4.5%) showed aldosterone suppression but only one (0.1%) tested positive for the chimeric gene. In conclusion, our findings indicate that standardized application of an ARR >25 to unselected hypertensive patients, followed by i.v. saline loading as a confirmatory test, can result in the detection of a large number of patients with PA (5.9% of the studied population), most of whom are normokalemic. Bilateral adrenal hypertrophy represents the more common form of PA.

Blood pressure control and inflammatory markers in type 2 diabetic patients treated with pioglitazone or rosiglitazone and metformin.

The aim of the study was to assess the effects of the combination of metformin plus pioglitazone or rosiglitazone on glucose and blood pressure in type 2 diabetic patients with metabolic syndrome, as well as its tolerability in those patients. In this 12-month, multicentric, double-blind, randomized, controlled, parallel-group trial, all patients began with metformin. Patients were randomized for self-administration of either pioglitazone or rosiglitazone for 12 months. We assessed body mass index (BMI), glycemic control (glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA(1c)], fasting and postprandial plasma glucose and insulin levels [FPG, PPG, FPI and PPI, respectively] and homeostasis model assessment [HOMA] index) and systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP, respectively), at baseline and at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months of treatment, as well as high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), nitrites/nitrates and adiponectin (ADN) at baseline and at 12 months of treatment. Significant HbA(1c) decreases were obtained after 9 (p<0.05) and 12 (p<0.01) months in both groups. After 9 and 12 months, mean FPG and PPG levels were decreased in both groups (p<0.05 and p<0.01, respectively). We observed decreases in FPI and PPI at 9 and 12 months (p<0.05 and p<0.01, respectively) compared to the baseline values in both groups. Furthermore, HOMA index improvement over the baseline value was obtained only at 12 months (p<0.05) in both groups. SBP and DBP improved significantly (p<0.05, for each) in both groups after 12 months. hs-CRP decreased significantly (p<0.05) in both groups after 12 months; nitrites/nitrates and ADN increased significantly (p<0.05, for each) in both groups after 12 months. The combination of thiazolinediones and metformin is associated with a slight but significant improvement in the long-term blood pressure control of these patients, and with an improvement in the anti-inflammatory state, both of which are related to a similar reduction in insulin-resistance.