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).

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.

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.

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.

Effect on the development of ankle edema of adding delapril to manidipine in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension: a three-way crossover study.

BACKGROUND: Use of the combination of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) and a calcium channel blocker (CCB) is considered a rational approach in patients whose hypertension is not controlled by monotherapy, providing better blood pressure (BP) control than the individual components with a lower incidence of adverse effects. In particular, such combinations have been found to reduce the incidence of ankle edema, the most common adverse effect of dihydropyridine annhypertensives. OBJECTIVE: The present study was undertaken to evaluate the effect on the development of ankle edema of adding the ACEI delapril to the CCB manidipine in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension. METHODS: Patients between the ages of 30 and 70 years who had mild to moderate hypertension (diastolic BP [DBP] >90 and <110 mm Hg) were included in the study. After a 4-week placebo run-in period, eligible patients were randomized to receive 6 weeks each of manidipine 10 mg/d, delapril 30 mg/d, and both in a crossover fashion. There was a 2-week washout period between treatments. Ankle edema was assessed based on ankle-foot volume (AFV) and pretibial subcutaneous tissue pressure (PSTP). Sitting BP, AFV, and PSTP were measured at the end of the placebo run-in period and the end of each active-treatment period. RESULTS: The study enrolled 40 patients with previously untreated hypertension (21 women, 19 men). Both manidipine and delapril monotherapy were associated with significant reductions from baseline in systolic BP (SBP) (mean [SD], -17.3 [4] and -14.8 [4] mm Hg, respectively; both, P<0.01) and DBP (-14.6 [3] and -12.9 [3] mm Hg; both, P<0.01). Compared with monotherapy, the combination of manidipine and delapril was associated with greater reductions from baseline in SBP (-21.8 [5] mm Hg; P<0.001) and DBP (-18.6 [4] mm Hg; P<0.001). Manidipme monotherapy was associated with significant increases from baseline in both AFV (7.9%; P<0.001) and PSTP (36.6%; P<0.01). Compared with manidipine alone, the combination of manidipine and delapril was associated with less pronounced increases in AFV (3.3%; P<0.05) and PSTP (10.4%; P<0.05). Ankle edema was clinically evident in 3 patients after receipt of manidipine monotherapy and in 1 patient after receipt of combination treatment. CONCLUSION: In these patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension, the addition of delapril to manidipine partially counteracted the manidipine-induced microcirculatory changes responsible for ankle edema.

Effect of ramipril/hydrochlorothiazide and ramipril/canrenone combination on atrial fibrillation recurrence in hypertensive type 2 diabetic patients with and without cardiac autonomic neuropathy.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to compare the effect of ramipril/canrenone versus ramipril/hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) combination on atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence in type 2 diabetic hypertensives with and without cardiac autonomic neuropathy (CAN). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 289 hypertensive type 2 diabetic patients, 95 with CAN, in sinus rhythm but with at least two episodes of AF in the previous 6 months were randomized to ramipril 5 mg plus canrenone 50 mg (titrated to 10/100 mg) or to ramipril 5 mg plus HCTZ 12.5 mg (titrated to 10/25 mg) or to amlodipine 5 mg (titrated to 10 mg) for 1 year. Clinic blood pressure (BP) and a 24-h ECG were evaluated monthly. Patients were asked to report any episode of symptomatic AF and to perform an ECG as early as possible. Serum procollagen type I carboxy-terminal peptide (PIP) and carboxy-terminal telopeptide of collagen type I (CITP) were evaluated before and after each treatment period. RESULTS: Blood pressure was similarly and significantly reduced by all treatments. A total of 51% of patients with amlodipine had a recurrence of AF, as did 31% of patients with ramipril/HCTZ (p < 0.05 vs. amlodipine) and 13% of patients with ramipril/canrenone (p < 0.01 vs. amlodipine and p < 0.05 vs. ramipril/HCTZ). A similar trend was found in diabetic patients with CAN. Both combinations reduced PIP and increased CITP, but the effects of ramipril/canrenone were significantly more marked. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that in type 2 diabetic hypertensives, ramipril/canrenone treatment was more effective than ramipril/HCTZ in reducing AF recurrence. This could be related to the greater improvement in cardiac fibrosis.

Antihypertensive drugs and fibrinolytic function.

Impaired fibrinolytic function, characterized by increased plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1 (PAI-1) levels and decreased tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA) activity, has been found in patients with hypertension and may account in part for the increased risk of atherosclerosis and its clinical complications in these patients. Failure to correct this prothrombotic state may be one of the possible reasons for the disappointing effect of antihypertensive treatment on the incidence of coronary events. In this regard, data from the literature indicate that different antihypertensive drugs may vary in their influence on fibrinolysis. Scarce and conflicting data exist regarding the effects of diuretics and beta-blockers on the fibrinolytic system. Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors (ACE-I) have generally been shown to improve the fibrinolytic balance by reducing plasma PAI-1 levels, calcium channel blockers (CCB) have been reported to increase t-PA activity, and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) seem to be neutral in their effect. Interesting data have been reported about the positive impact on fibrinolysis of combining an ACE-I with a CCB, which resulted in a decrease of PAI-1 caused by ACE inhibition, and an increase in t-PA resulting from calcium channel blockade. The positive effect of ACE-I on the fibrinolytic system has been related to: 1) inhibition of angiotensin II, which stimulates PAI-1 expression; 2) inhibition of degradation of bradykinin, a potent stimulus for tPA production; and 3) improvement of insulin sensitivity. The mechanisms underlying the CCB effect on t-PA are less clear, but a direct action of CCB on vascular endothelium has been reported to play a major role. The greater improvement in the fibrinolytic balance because of the combined action of ACE inhibition and Ca antagonism represents a further indication to the use of combinations of ACE-I and CCB in the treatment of hypertension.

Effect of telmisartan/hydrochlorothiazide combination versus nifedipine GITS on ambulatory blood pressure and sympathetic activation.

BACKGROUND: This study compares the effects of telmisartan hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) combination versus nifedipine GITS on ambulatory blood pressure (BP) and sympathetic activity, in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension. METHODS: One hundred twenty-four outpatients with sitting diastolic BP > or =95 mmHg and <110 mm Hg were randomized to telmisartan 80 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg daily (n = 62) or nifedipine GITS 60 mg daily (n = 62) for 12 weeks, according to a prospective, open-label, blind end point, parallel-group design. At the end of a 2-week washout period and after 12 weeks of active treatment, 24-h noninvasive ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) was performed, clinic BP and heart rate were measured, and plasma norepinephrine and cardiovascular responses to mental stress induced by the color word test were assessed. RESULTS: Both treatments reduced ambulatory and clinic BP. However, the drug combination had an antihypertensive efficacy significantly greater than nifedipine GITS, as shown by the 24-h (P < .001), daytime (P < .001), and night-time (P < .01) ambulatory BP monitoring values, as well as by the clinic BP at trough (P < .05). The trough-to-peak ratio was similar, but the smoothness index was significantly higher with the combination for both systolic and diastolic BP (P < .05). A significant increase in plasma norepinephrine levels in resting conditions was observed with nifedipine GITS (+20%) but not with telmisartan/HCTZ combination. The color word test produced a greater increase in plasma norepinephrine and heart rate values in the patients treated with nifedipine GITS than in those treated with the combination. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the telmisartan 80 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg combination provided a more sustained and homogeneous BP control than nifedipine GITS 60 mg, without producing sympathetic activation.

Serum testosterone levels and arterial blood pressure in the elderly.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between serum testosterone levels and arterial blood pressure (BP) in the elderly. We studied 356 non-diabetic, non-smoking, non-obese men aged 60 to 80 years and untreated for hypertension. All subjects were evaluated in the morning after an overnight fast. Evaluation included measurements of the following: BP (by mercury sphygmomanometer, Korotkoff I and V), body weight, height and free testosterone (T) plasma levels (by radioimmunoassay). According to the BP values, the subjects were classified as normotensives (NT; n=112; SBP/DBP<140/90 mmHg), systolic and diastolic hypertensives (HT; n=127; SBP/DBP>140/90 mmHg), and isolated systolic hypertensives (ISH; n=117; SBP>140 mmHg and DBP<90 mmHg). T values decreased with increasing age in all 3 groups and was significantly lower in HT (-15%) and ISH men (-21%) than in NT men (p<0.05). In each group, the T levels showed a highly significant negative correlation with BMI (p<0.001). A significant negative correlation was also found between T levels and SBP in NT (r=-0.35, p<0.001), ISH (r=-0.67, p<0.001), and HT (r=-0.19, p<0.05) men, whereas a negative correlation with DBP was observed only in the NT men (r=-0.19, p<0.05). Adjusting for the BMI confirmed a significant difference in plasma T levels between ISH and NT men, but not between HT and NT men. Multiple regression analysis employing BP as a dependent variable confirmed a strong relationship between T levels and SBP in all 3 groups, whereas a significant relationship between T levels and DBP was found only in NT men. In conclusion, although further studies are needed to clarify the relationship between plasma T levels and BP, our findings suggest that in elderly men with ISH, the reduced plasma levels of testosterone might contribute to the increased arterial stiffness typical of these subjects.

Comparison of the effects of valsartan and felodipine on plasma leptin and insulin sensitivity in hypertensive obese patients.

Aim of this study was to compare the effect of valsartan and felodipine on blood pressure (BP), plasma leptin (L), insulin sensitivity and plasma norepinephrine (NE) in obese hypertensive patients. Ninty-six obese patients (body mass index [BMI] > or = 30 kg/m2) with mild to moderate essential hypertension (diastolic blood pressure [DBP] > 90 and < 110 mmHg, as evaluated with an appropriately sized cuff) aged 31-60 years, were randomized to a valsartan (80 mg/day for 16 weeks; n = 48) or felodipine (5 mg/day for 16 weeks; n = 48) treatment group after a 2-week wash-out period. After the first 4 weeks of treatment there was a titration with dose-doubling in non responder patients (DBP > 90 mmHg). At the end of the placebo period and of active treatment period, BP and BMI were evaluated and a venous sample was drawn at the same hour in the morning to evaluate plasma L and NE. Insulin resistance index (HOMA-IR) was calculated. No dietary advice was prescribed. Both valsartan and felodipine significantly decreased BP values (-19.3/15 mmHg and -18.9/13.6 mmHg, respectively p < 0.001 vs. placebo), with no difference between treatments. However, felodipine increased plasma NE (+124 pg/ml, +38.2%, p < 0.05 vs. placebo and < 0.01 vs. valsartan) and had no effect on L, body weight and HOMA-IR index, while valsartan did not modify NE and produced a significant reduction in L (-3.7 ng/ml, -10.1%, p < 0.05 vs. placebo), BMI (-1.7 kg/m2, -4.7%, p < 0.01 vs. placebo) and HOMA-IR index (-1.6, -20%, p < 0.05 vs. placebo). These results suggest that in hypertensive obese subjects, treatment with valsartan might offer an advantage over treatment with felodipine, since valsartan may help to improve obesity-related disorders in addition to lowering BP.

Is the effect of antihypertensive drugs on platelet aggregability and fibrinolysis clinically relevant?

Hypertension is associated with decreased fibrinolytic potential, mainly expressed as elevated plasma plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1 (PAI-1) levels, and increased platelet aggregability, which may account in part for the increased risk of atherosclerosis and its clinical complications in hypertensive patients. The effects of antihypertensive drugs on this prothrombotic state have been investigated and controversial findings have been reported, possibly because of differences in study designs, patients selected, and methodology used. Scarce and conflicting data exist about the effects of diuretics and beta-adrenoceptor antagonists on the fibrinolytic system, whereas ACE inhibitors have generally been reported to improve the fibrinolytic balance by decreasing plasma PAI-1 levels, calcium channel antagonists have been shown to increase tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) activity, and angiotensin II type 1 (AT(1)) receptor antagonists seem to exert neutral effects. beta-Adrenoceptor antagonists, calcium channel antagonists, and AT(1)-receptor antagonists have been reported to exert anti-aggregatory effects on platelets, while contrasting data exist about the influence of ACE inhibitors. Clinical implications of the changes induced by antihypertensive drugs on the fibrinolytic balance and platelet function are still debated. In particular, the question of whether these changes may translate into different degrees of cardiovascular protection in hypertensive patients remains unanswered. While awaiting more information from clinical trials, the choice of antihypertensive drugs, particularly in high-risk patients, should take into account effects beyond their BP-lowering efficacy. Selected agents should have a favorable, or at least neutral, impact on fibrinolytic function and platelet activity.