Anti-arrhythmic and hemodynamic effects of oxy nifedipine, oxy nimodipine, oxy nitrendipine and oxy nisoldipine.

Our previous studies have established cardio-protective effects of furnidipine and its active metabolites. We therefore decided to compare the influence of oral and intravenous administration of furnidipine, nifedipine, nitrendipine and nimodipine to examine their effects on hemodynamics and arrhythmias. Since dihydropyridines are oxidatively metabolized in the body and the oxidized metabolites are among the final products, we studied the influence of four oxidized dihydropyridines (oxy nifedipine, oxy nimodipine, oxy nitrendipine and oxy nisoldipine) on the same parameters. In vivo model of ischemia- and reperfusion-induced arrhythmias of rats was used. Dihydropyridines were administered 5 mg/kg orally (24 and 1 h before ischemia) or 5 µg/kg intravenously (10 min before ischemia). 20 mg/kg of the oxidized dihydropyridines was given orally (24 and 1 h before ischemia). The dihydropyridines exhibited significant anti-arrhythmic actions after both forms of administration but their influence on blood pressure was differential and contrasting and depended on route of administration. The oxidized dihydropyridines imparted strong protection against lethal arrhythmias while exerting differential influences on blood pressure with oxy nifedipine and oxy nisoldipine being hypertensive and oxy nitrendipine being most normotensive. The differential effects observed with the dihydropyridines after the two routes of administration lend strength to the hypothesis that their metabolites may have a significant role in mediating the actions of the parent drug. The strong anti-arrhythmic action of the oxidized dihydropyridines along with their differential effect on blood pressure could indicate their potential use as cardio-protective drugs in certain groups of patients.

Morbidity and mortality on combination versus monotherapy: a posthoc analysis of the Systolic Hypertension in Europe trial.

BACKGROUND: The current literature supports the immediate use of combinations of antihypertensive drugs in terms of ease of use and adherence, but the key issue whether combination therapy is more effective than monotherapy in the prevention of cardiovascular complications remains unproven. METHODS: We analysed the double-blind (median follow-up 2.0 years) and open follow-up (6.0 years) phases of the Systolic Hypertension in Europe trial. Patients were 60 years or more with an entry systolic/diastolic blood pressure (BP) of 160-219/less than 95 mmHg. Antihypertensive treatment started immediately after randomization in the active-treatment group, but only after completion of the double-blind trial in control patients. Treatment consisted of nitrendipine (10-40 mg/day) with the possible addition of enalapril (5-20 mg/day). We adjusted our analyses for sex, age, history of cardiovascular complications, baseline systolic BP and previous antihypertensive treatment. RESULTS: During the double-blind trial, adding enalapril to nitrendipine (n = 515), compared with the equivalent combination of placebos (n = 559), decreased systolic BP by a further 9.5 mmHg and reduced all cardiovascular events by 51% (P = 0.0035) and heart failure by 66% (P = 0.032), with similar trends for stroke (-51%; P = 0.066) and cardiac events (-44%; P = 0.075). Over the whole duration of follow-up, combination therapy (n = 871), compared with nitrendipine monotherapy (n = 1552), decreased systolic BP by 3.1 mmHg and reduced total mortality (-32%; P = 0.023), with similar trends for all cardiovascular events (-23%; P = 0.081) and stroke (-42%; P = 0.054). CONCLUSION: Despite the limitations of a posthoc analysis, but congruent with the stronger BP reduction, our results suggest that combination therapy with nitrendipine plus enalapril might improve outcome over and beyond the benefits seen with nitrendipine monotherapy.

Effectiveness and tolerability of fixed-dose combination enalapril plus nitrendipine in hypertensive patients: results of the 3-month observational, post-marketing, multicentre, prospective CENIT study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Monotherapy with any class of antihypertensive drug effectively controls blood pressure (BP) in only about 50% of patients. Consequently, the majority of patients with hypertension require combined therapy with two or more medications. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness (systolic BP [SBP]/diastolic BP [DBP] control) and tolerability of the fixed-dose combination enalapril/nitrendipine 10 mg/20 mg administered as a single daily dose in hypertensive patients. METHODS: This was a post-authorization, multicentre, prospective, observational study conducted in primary care with a 3-month follow-up. Patients throughout Spain with uncontrolled hypertension (> or =140/90 mmHg for patients without diabetes mellitus, or > or =130/85 mmHg for patients with diabetes) on monotherapy or with any combination other than enalapril + nitrendipine, or who were unable to tolerate their previous antihypertensive therapy, were recruited. Change from previous to study treatment was according to usual clinical practice. BP was measured once after 5 minutes of rest in the sitting position. Therapeutic response was defined as follows: 'controlled' meant controlled BP (<140/90 mmHg for nondiabetic patients, or <130/85 mmHg for diabetic patients); 'response' meant controlled BP, or a decrease in SBP of > or =20 mmHg and in DBP of > or =10 mmHg. The main laboratory test parameters were documented at baseline and after 3 months. Patients aged >65 years, with diabetes, with isolated systolic hypertension (ISH; SBP > or =140 mmHg for patients without diabetes, SBP > or =130 mmHg for patients with diabetes) and who were obese (body mass index [BMI] > or =30 kg/m2) were analysed separately. RESULTS: Of 6537 patients included, 5010 and 6354 patients were assessed in effectiveness and tolerability analyses, respectively. In the tolerability analysis population, there were 3023 men (47.6%) and 3321 women (52.4%). The mean (+/- SD) age of the tolerability analysis group was 62.8 (+/- 10.7) years. A total of 71.1% of the patients presented at least one clinical cardiovascular risk factor other than hypertension, with the most frequent being dyslipidaemia (42.3%), obesity (29.2%) and diabetes (23.9%). After 3 months of treatment, SBP and DBP showed mean (+/- SD) decreases of 26.5 (+/- 14.4) mmHg and 14.9 (+/- 9.0) mmHg, respectively, and 73.0% of patients responded to treatment while 40.9% achieved BP control (70.8%/36.1% in 2658 patients aged >65 years; 61.7%/46.8% in 1521 patients with diabetes; 55.3%/44.2% in 731 patients with ISH; 72.0%/36.4% in 1762 obese patients). Adverse events were reported in 10.8% of patients (n = 689). During the follow-up period, ten patients died and seven patients had serious adverse events; in no case was a causal relationship attributed to the study product. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of SBP/DBP control achieved demonstrates the effectiveness of the fixed-dose enalapril/nitrendipine 10 mg/20 mg combination administered as a single daily dose in patients with essential hypertension not adequately controlled with monotherapy or with any combination other than enalapril + nitrendipine. The proportion and type of adverse events reported were as expected and have already been described for both components of the enalapril/nitrendipine 10 mg/20 mg combination. These results confirm the effectiveness of a strategy based on a fixed-dose enalapril/nitrendipine 10 mg/20 mg combination in reducing BP and achieving BP control goals.

The effect of penetration enhancers on permeation kinetics of nitrendipine in two different skin models.

The purpose of this research was to evaluate the effect of penetration enhancers on permeation kinetics of nitrendipine (NTP) through two different skin models. The permeation profile and related kinetics parameters such as activity parameter, diffusion parameter, lag time, relative activity parameter and relative diffusion parameter of NTP was determined in presence of some novel and widely accepted permeation enhancers. Among all the more pronounced enhancing effect was obtained with oleic acid (OA) as it presented the highest permeability coefficient. The enhancement was found to be increased in the following order: Dimethyl sulphoxide (DMSO)

[Study on skin toxicology and penetration enhancement of skin absorption of volatile oil extracted from tender branchers of Camellia oleifera].

OBJECTIVE: To study the toxicity on skin and penetration effect of volatile oil from tender branchers of Camellia oleifera on nitrendipine, baicalin, nimesulide for percutaneous obsorption. METHOD: Acute skin toxicity, irritation and allergy on rats were tested, and mouse skin in vitro was applied for studying the effects of different concentrations of volatile oil in nitrendipine, baicalin, nimesulide on drug permeation. RESULT: Different dosage volatile oil had no acute toxicity, irritation or hypersensitive effects. Compared to azone, more powerful enhancement effects of volatile oil at different concentration on nitrendipine, baicalin, nimesulide were very obvious. CONCLUSION: This paper firstly reported the results of experiment about the toxicity to skin and penetr-ation effect of volatile oil from tender branches of C. oleifera.

Systolic blood pressure reduction with olmesartan medoxomil versus nitrendipine in elderly patients with isolated systolic hypertension.

OBJECTIVE: The prevalence of isolated systolic hypertension (ISH) is high in the elderly, and the objective of this study was to compare the antihypertensive efficacy of olmesartan medoxomil with that of nitrendipine in elderly (65-74 years) and very elderly (>/= 75 years) male and female patients with ISH. METHODS: Patients were randomized to 24 weeks of treatment with either olmesartan medoxomil 20 mg daily (n = 256) or nitrendipine 20 mg (n = 126) twice daily, with possible dose increase (to 40 mg daily) and addition of hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 12.5 or 25 mg daily if required. RESULTS: On the primary endpoint [reduction in mean sitting systolic blood pressure (SBP) after 12 weeks of treatment], the two treatments were similar (olmesartan medoxomil, -30.0 mmHg; nitrendipine, -31.4 mmHg). No significant difference between the treatment groups was observed, and non-inferiority of olmesartan medoxomil to nitrendipine was demonstrated using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model. Reductions in mean sitting and standing SBP and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) up to week 24 were also similar with both treatments. Blood pressure (BP) goal attainment rates (sitting SBP

Effects of immediate versus delayed antihypertensive therapy on outcome in the Systolic Hypertension in Europe Trial.

BACKGROUND: To assess the impact of immediate versus delayed antihypertensive treatment on the outcome of older patients with isolated systolic hypertension, we extended the double-blind placebo-controlled Systolic Hypertension in Europe (Syst-Eur) trial by an open-label follow-up study lasting 4 years. METHODS: The Syst-Eur trial included 4695 randomized patients with minimum age of 60 years and an untreated blood pressure of 160-219 mmHg systolic and below 95 mmHg diastolic. The double-blind trial ended after a median follow-up of 2.0 years (range 1-97 months). Of 4409 patients still alive, 3517 received open-label treatment consisting of nitrendipine (10-40 mg daily) with the possible addition of enalapril (5-20 mg daily), hydrochlorothiazide (12.5-25 mg daily), or both add-on drugs. Non-participants (n = 892) were also followed up. RESULTS: Median follow-up increased to 6.1 years. Systolic pressure decreased to below 150 mmHg (target level) in 2628 participants (75.0%). During the 4-year open-label follow-up, stroke and cardiovascular complications occurred at similar frequencies in patients formerly randomized to placebo and those continuing active treatment. These rates were similar to those previously observed in the active-treatment group during the double-blind trial. Considering the total follow-up of 4695 randomized patients, immediate compared with delayed antihypertensive treatment reduced the occurrence of stroke and cardiovascular complications by 28% (P = 0.01) and 15% (P = 0.03), respectively, with a similar tendency for total mortality (13%, P = 0.09). In 492 diabetic patients, the corresponding estimates of long-term benefit (P < 0.02) were 60, 51 and 38%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Antihypertensive treatment can achieve blood pressure control in most older patients with isolated systolic hypertension. Immediate compared with delayed treatment prevented 17 strokes or 25 major cardiovascular events per 1000 patients followed up for 6 years. These findings underscore the necessity of early treatment of isolated systolic hypertension.

Fixed-dose combination enalapril/nitrendipine: a review of its use in mild-to-moderate hypertension.

The fixed-dose combination of enalapril 10mg with nitrendipine 20mg combines an ACE inhibitor with a calcium channel antagonist (CCA) and is indicated for the treatment of patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension whose blood pressure (BP) is inadequately controlled with enalapril or nitrendipine monotherapy. In randomised, double-blind clinical trials, enalapril/nitrendipine 10/20 mg/day was significantly more effective than its individual components in reducing diastolic BP (DBP) in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension inadequately controlled with enalapril 10 mg/day or nitrendipine 20 mg/day. The fixed-dose combination was similar in efficacy at reducing DBP to amlodipine 10 mg/day in patients who failed to achieve BP control with amlodipine 5 mg/day, and to losartan/hydrochlorothiazide 50/12.5 mg/day in patients who received the combinations as first-line therapy. Enalapril/nitrendipine 10/20 mg produced a consistent antihypertensive effect that persisted for the entire 24-hour dosage interval as shown by ambulatory BP monitoring. Enalapril/nitrendipine 10/20 mg was well tolerated in clinical trials where it was administered to patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension for up to 12 weeks. The adverse events were those expected of ACE inhibitors and CCAs and included cough, headache and flushing. Evidence from clinical trials, including a pooled analysis, suggests that the incidence of oedema may be significantly lower with the fixed-dose combination than with CCA monotherapy. In conclusion, enalapril/nitrendipine 10/20 mg is a well tolerated fixed-dose combination of two established antihypertensive agents administered once daily that effectively lowers BP throughout the 24-hour dosage interval. Importantly, the fixed-dose combination may have a lower incidence of oedema than CCA monotherapy. Enalapril/nitrendipine 10/20 mg provides an additional treatment option for patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension for whom combination therapy is appropriate.

Two useful methods for evaluating antihypertensive drugs in conscious freely moving rats.

AIM: Computerized analysis of blood pressure in conscious freely moving rats is a sound technique for physiological and pharmacological studies. The present work, based on this technique, was designed to introduce two useful methods for the evaluation of antihypertensive drugs in conscious spontaneously hypertensive rat (SHR). They were the directly intragastric administration of drugs and modified probability sum test for evaluating the synergism of the combination of two drugs. METHODS AND RESULTS: (1) Directly intragastric administration was used in conscious rats. A catheter was inserted into stomach immediately after arterial catheter insertion. Three days after operation, blood pressure was recorded and drug might be given intragastrically via the gastric catheter. (2) Modified probability sum test was used to evaluate the synergism of two drugs. The formula was: q=P(A+B)/(PA+PB-PAxB). With this method, it was obtained: q=1.32 for the effects of the combination of atenolol and nitrendipine (20 mg/kg+10 mg/kg) on systolic blood pressure; q=1.41 for the effects of the combination of atenolol and amlodipine (10 mg/kg+1 mg/kg) on systolic blood pressure. CONCLUSION: The two methods introduced by the present work will be important and useful for antihypertensive drug evaluation in conscious freely moving rats.

Moxonidine treatment of hypertensive patients with advanced renal failure.

OBJECTIVES: To compare safety and tolerability of moxonidine versus nitrendipine in hypertensive patients with renal failure. A secondary endpoint was to test whether the sympatholytic drug moxonidine slows decline of renal function when added to standard therapy with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or AT(1) receptor antagonist plus loop diuretic. DESIGN: This prospective, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study recruited 177 patients with advanced renal failure receiving antihypertensive standard therapy at outpatient clinics in Germany and Hungary. Following a 2 week run-in, patients were randomized to 24 weeks of add-on treatment with 0.3 mg/day moxonidine or 20 mg/day nitrendipine. RESULTS: The incidence of pre-defined specific adverse events was 42% in the moxonidine (37/89 patients) and 46% in the nitrendipine group (38/82 patients) in intention-to-treat analysis. Intensity and multiplicity were comparable. The dropout rate due to adverse events was 12.4% in the moxonidine and 9.8% in the nitrendipine group. Creatinine clearance according to Cockcroft and Gault decreased by 0.5 +/- 4.3 ml/min (mean +/- standard deviation) in the moxonidine group and 2.3 +/- 4.0 ml/min in the nitrendipine group. Serum creatinine increased by 12.7 +/- 49.2 micromol/l in the moxonidine group and by 43.4 +/- 71.3 micromol/l in the nitrendipine group. These differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Add-on treatment with 0.3 mg/day moxonidine in hypertensive patients with renal failure is well tolerated and not inferior to 20 mg/day nitrendipine with respect to the incidence of specific adverse events. The idea of a sympatholytic drug to be renoprotective is appealing but needs further evaluation.

Acrylate-based transdermal therapeutic system of nitrendipine.

The objective of the present research investigation was to fabricate an acrylate-based transdermal therapeutic system (TTS) of nitrendipine, which could deliver drug at maximum input rate so as to deliver drug in minimum patch size. Transdermal patches were fabricated using synthesized acrylate pressure-sensitive adhesives (PSAs): PSA1, PSA2, and commercially available PSA3 and PSA4 using d-limonene as permeation enhancer. Effect of concentration of d-limonene on permeation kinetics of nitrendipine in PSAs was studied. Fabricated TTS in mentioned PSAs were evaluated for in-vitro release and permeation kinetics through guinea-pig skin. Cumulative release of drug in PSA1, PSA2, PSA3, and PSA4 was observed to be 45%, 40%, 25%, and 25%, respectively, upto 24 hr. Flux of drug through guinea-pig skin calculated at 48 hr in PSA1, PSA2, PSA3, and PSA4, with and without d-limonene, was observed to be 0.346+/-0.10, 0.435+/-0.17, 0.410+/-0.17, and 0.162+/-0.06, and 0.625+/-0.19, 1.161+/-0.46, 0.506+/-0.17, and 0.520+/-0.18 (microg/cm2/hr), respectively. The TTS in PSA2 showed comparatively high flux and could deliver drug at high input rate through transdermal route. PSA2 was found to have good rate-controlling property and could be successfully employed in transdermal delivery of nitrendipine.

Nitrendipine and enalapril combination therapy in mild to moderate hypertension: assessment of dose-response relationship by a clinical trial of factorial design.

Hypertension is an important cardiovascular risk factor and the goal of its pharmacologic treatment is to reduce morbidity and mortality. Treatment is usually initiated with a low dose of a single agent and titrated to a higher dose as required. As many as 50% of patients require the addition of a second agent to achieve satisfactory blood pressure control. The aim of this study was to assess the dose-response relationship of nitrendipine and enalapril alone or in fixed combination in the treatment of mild to moderate hypertension. A total of 496 patients were enrolled in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, factorial-design, parallel-group clinical trial comparing placebo, nitrendipine (5, 10, and 20 mg) and enalapril (5, 10, and 20 mg) alone or in combination. After a single-blind, 2-week placebo run-in period, 414 patients whose diastolic blood pressure ranged between 90-109 mm Hg were randomly assigned to a treatment group. The combination of nitrendipine and enalapril, particularly regimens including nitrendipine 20 mg and enalapril 5 or 10 mg, were significantly superior to both monotherapies; mean diastolic blood pressure reductions from baseline to last visit were -12.5 and -14.3 mm Hg, respectively. Response surface analysis provided further evidence that these combinations were optimal in terms of anti-hypertensive efficacy. All treatments were well tolerated and the incidence of adverse events did not differ significantly between groups. In summary, the anti-hypertensive efficacy of the combination was found to be superior to both monotherapies at any doses. The dose combination achieving the greatest blood pressure reduction was nitrendipine 20 mg and enalapril 10 mg.

Antihypertensive therapy in renal patients - benefits and difficulties.

High blood pressure values, diastolic and systolic, are associated with decreased renal function. This is particularly true when the diastolic blood pressure is higher than 90 mm Hg. Several studies showed that lowering of the blood pressure within the range of normotension according to the WHO causes a reduction in the rate of progression to terminal renal failure. These studies have led to recommendations to aim at a target blood pressure of approximately 125/75 mm Hg in the treatment of patients with glomerular diseases and particularly diabetic nephropathy with proteinuria >1 g/day. In contrast to these results, blood pressure values corresponding to the recommendation (

Opposite effects of ethanol and nitrendipine on nicotine-induced emesis and convulsions.

The effects of ICV injections were investigated in unanesthetized cats of ethanol alone and in combination with the dihydropyridine calcium antagonist, nitrendipine, on emesis and the convulsions produced by nicotine, which was similarly injected by the ICV route. In the first series of experiments, short lasting convulsions and emesis were the most prominent symptoms after the ICV injection of nicotine in a dose of 1.0 mg. In the second series of experiments the pretreatment of cats with ethanol given ICV in doses of 0.03, 0.2, and 0.3 ml reduced the emesis and prevented the convulsions induced by 1.0 mg dose of ICV nicotine. In the third series of experiments, the ICV injection of nitrendipine in doses of 0.024, 0.16, and 0.24 mg incorporated in the solution of ethanol, given in volumes of 0.03, 0.2, and 0.3 mt, respectively, blocked emesis but not the convulsions induced by the 1.0 mg dose of nicotine given ICV. The results suggest, therefore, that at least two different mechanisms underlie these phenomena. First, the synergistic effects at the neuronal nicotinic ionophores in the brain would act to underlie the antagonistic action of ethanol and nitrendipine on the emetic response. Second, conformational changes brought about by ethanol at voltage-dependent calcium channels in the brain may antagonize the inhibitory effect of the dihydropyridine calcium antagonist, producing the reversal of convulsions.

Anticonvulsant profile of nimodipine and nitrendipine against pentylenetetrazole induced seizures in rats.

The activity of nimodipine and nitrendipine against pentylenetetrazole (PTZ) induced seizures in Albino rats was studied alone and in combination with valproate. The median effective dose [ED50] of valproate, nimodipine and nitrendipine were initially determined. All the 3 drugs were injected i.p. 30 min before the induction of seizures. Seizures were induced by PTZ 85 mg/kg i.p., and subsequently the effect of combining ED50 doses of nimodipine and nitrendipine with ED50 dose of valproate was evaluated. ED50 of valproate and nitrendipine were 129 and 2.5 mg/kg respectively. ED50 of nimodipine could not be established since a dose-response relationship was not obtained. Hence, for the purpose of combination studies, 4 mg/kg of nimodipine was used. Both nimodipine (4 mg/kg) and nitrendipine (2.5 mg/kg) decreased the ED50 of valproate from 129 to 40 mg/kg. Both nimodipine and nitrendipine potentiate the activity of valproate against PTZ induced seizures and can be considered as potential adjuvant anticonvulsants which merit further study.

A calcium agonist, Bay k 8644, suppresses the embryotoxic effects induced by dihydropyridines calcium channel blockers in cultured rat embryos.

Day 9 rat embryos were exposed to 1,4-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers; nifedipine (NIF), nicardipine (NIC) or nitrendipine (NIT), for 48 hr in the whole embryo culture system. There were dose-dependent growth retardation and abnormalities, predominantly in cardiovascular system. The three compounds exhibited very similar pattern of dysmorphogenic effects, but the potency of these compounds were quantitatively different. The incidences of embryos with the abnormalities were 100%, 100% and 85% following either exposure of NIF, NIC or NIT at concentration of 300, 8 and 15 microM, respectively. This study was to investigate whether these blocker-induced embryotoxicity was due to calcium channel blocking properties themselves in the embryos. Day 9 rat embryos were co-exposed to 1,4-dihydropyridine calcium channel agonist, Bay k 8644 (BAY) and each calcium channel blocker under the same culture condition. The retarded embryonic growth induced by 200 or 300 microM of NIF, 8 microM of NIC and 15 microM of NIT nearly of completely ameliorated when embryos were co-exposed with BAY at one-third or half concentration of each calcium channel blocker. Supplementation of BAY reduced the incidence of abnormalities by NIF-, NIC- and NIT-alone. These results suggested that one of mechanisms for embryotoxicity induced by calcium channel blocker was directly related to channel blocking property of the chemicals.

Eficacia de la nitrendipina en pacientes obesos hipertensos / Nitrendipine in obese hipertensive patients

La obesidad puede producir resistencia a la terapia antihipertensiva. La nitrendipina es un bloqueador de los canales del calcio de la familia de las dihidropiridinas, es efectivo en el manejo de la hipertensión arterial y ha demostrado mejorar la sensibilidad a la insulina. Para evaluar la eficacia de la nitrendipina en el control de la presión arterial del paciente hipertenso obeso, 20 pacientes adultos no diabéticos, obesos hipertenso obeso, 20 pacientes adultos no diabéticos, obesos hipertensos que no controlaron su presión arterial con modificaciones al estilo de vida pero sin manejo farmacológico, recibieron tratamiento farmacológico con 10 mg de nitrendipina una vez al día durante cuatro semanas. En todos los pacientes se realizó una prueba de tolerancia a la glucosa antes y después del estudio. Todos los pacientes redujeron la presión arterial a las dos semanas, persistiendo el control hasta el final del estudio. (p< 0.0001). La nitrendipina también mejoró significativamente la tolerancia a la glucosa de esos pacientes, especialmente a los 30 (p< 0.0008), 60 (p< 0.009) y 90 (p< 0.09) minutos, aunque no se observó cambio significativo a los 120 minutos (p> 0.2). Estos resultados sugieren que la nitrendipina tiene eficacia terapéutica como monoterapia en sujetos hipertensos obesos, no diabéticos con resistencia a la insulina