Effectiveness of Levoamlodipine Maleate for Hypertension Compared with Amlodipine Besylate: a Pragmatic Comparative Effectiveness Study.

PURPOSE: Antihypertensive treatment is the most important method to reduce the risk of cardiovascular events in hypertensive patients. However, there is scant evidence of the benefits of levoamlodipine maleate for antihypertensive treatment using a head-to-head comparison in the real-world. This study aims to examine the effectiveness of levoamlodipine maleate used to treat outpatients with primary hypertension compared with amlodipine besylate in a real-world setting. METHODS: This was a pragmatic comparative effectiveness study carried out at 110 centers across China in outpatients with primary hypertension treated with levoamlodipine maleate or amlodipine besylate, with 24 months of follow-up. The primary outcomes used for evaluating the effectiveness were composite major cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), adverse reactions, and cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: Among the included 10,031 patients, there were 482 MACCE, 223 (4.4%) in the levoamlodipine maleate group (n = 5018) and 259 (5.2%) in the amlodipine besylate group (n = 5013) (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.90, 95%CI: 0.75-1.08, P = 0.252). The levoamlodipine maleate group had lower overall incidences of any adverse reactions (6.0% vs. 8.4%, P < 0.001), lower extremity edema (1.1% vs. 3.0%, P < 0.001) and headache (0.7% vs. 1.1%, P = 0.045). There was a nearly 100% chance of the levoamlodipine maleate being cost-effective at a willingness to pay threshold of 150,000 Yuan per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained, resulting in more QALYs (incremental QALYs: 0.00392) and cost savings (saving 2725 Yuan or 28.8% reduction in overall costs) per patient. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, levoamlodipine maleate could reduce cost by 29% with a similar MACCE incidence rate and lower occurrence of adverse reactions (especially edema and headache) compared with amlodipine besylate. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01844570 registered at May 1, 2013.

Effects and cost-effectiveness of a guideline-oriented primary healthcare hypertension management program in Beijing, China: results from a 1-year controlled trial.

Hypertension control rates are unacceptably low in China. The present study demonstrates if a customized, guideline-oriented training program can cost-effectively improve hypertension management in primary healthcare. Four typical community health centers in Beijing were selected and randomized to intervention or control (one urban and one rural each). A sample of 140 patients with hypertension and blood pressure uncontrolled was recruited from each center. Primary healthcare providers in intervention centers provided management to the recruited patients for 1 year after receiving training with customized hypertension management guidelines, and primary healthcare providers in control provided with usual care. Intention-to-treat analysis showed that hypertension control (systolic blood pressure (SBP) <140 mm Hg and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) <90 mm Hg)) rate was significantly higher in interventions than controls at month 3 (42.1% vs. 34.3% in urban and 30.7% vs. 10.0% in rural centers) and the trend increased to month 12 (70.7% vs. 40.0% in urban and 72.9% vs. 27.9% in rural); P-values by logistic mixed model were all <0.001 for both urban and rural after adjustment for baseline multiple variables including blood pressure. Mean reductions of SBP and DBP were significantly larger in interventions. The intervention was cost-saving, with an average incremental cost-saving of US$ 20.3 per patient in urban sites and $ 7.0 per patient in rural sites. Corresponding results from per-protocol analysis were very similar. The customized, guideline-oriented hypertension management program in primary healthcare in China effectively improved blood pressure control and was cost-saving.

Use of coronary anatomy and late enhancement information both derived from contrast-enhanced whole-heart coronary MRA at 3 T for the assessment of ischemic left ventricular dysfunction.

Recognizing the etiology of patients with left ventricular dysfunction (LVD) is essential for the risk stratification and treatment selection. We report the case of a 59-year-old man suspected of ischemic LVD with non acute symptoms studied with whole-heart cardiac magnetic resonance imaging including noninvasive coronary angiography and in whom we obtained comprehensive information of both coronary artery stenosis and myocardial tissue damage.