Effect of antihypertensive agents on sleep apnea and ambulatory blood pressure in patients with hypertension: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and hypertension are common conditions that may be linked through sympathetic activation and water retention. We hypothesized that diuretics, which reduce the body water content, may be more effective than amlodipine, a blood pressure (BP)-lowering agent implicated with edema, in controlling OSA in patients with hypertension. We also aimed to compare the effects of these treatments on ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind clinical trial, we compared the effects of chlorthalidone/amiloride 25/5 mg with amlodipine 10 mg on OSA measured by portable sleep monitor and BP measured by ABPM. The study included participants older than 40 who had moderate OSA (10-40 apneas/hour of sleep) and BP within the systolic range of 140-159 mmHg or diastolic range of 90-99 mmHg. RESULTS: The individuals in the experimental groups were comparable in age, gender, and other relevant characteristics. Neither the combination of diuretics nor amlodipine alone reduced the AHI after 8 weeks of treatment (AHI 26.3 with diuretics and 25.0 with amlodipine. P = 0.713). Both treatments significantly lowered office, 24-h, and nighttime ABP, but the two groups had no significant difference. CONCLUSION: Chlorthalidone associated with amiloride and amlodipine are ineffective in decreasing the frequency of sleep apnea episodes in patients with moderate OSA and hypertension. Both treatments have comparable effects in lowering both office and ambulatory blood pressure. The notion that treatments could offer benefits for both OSA and hypertension remains to be demonstrated. TRIAL REGISTRATION CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01896661.

Prevenção Farmacológica Secundária da Doença Arterial Coronariana em Pacientes Submetidos ao Manejo Clínico, Intervenção Coronária Percutânea ou Cirurgia de Revascularização Miocárdica / Secondary Pharmacological Prevention of Coronary Artery Disease among Patients Submitted to Clinical Management, Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, or Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery

Resumo Fundamento A prevenção secundária é recomendada a pacientes com evidência de doença arterial coronariana (DAC) independentemente da indicação de tratamento por cirurgia de bypass da artéria coronária (CABG) ou intervenção coronária percutânea (ICP). Objetivos Este estudo avaliou se o tratamento clínico, a ICP ou o CABG teve influência na adesão à prevenção secundária farmacológica em pacientes com DAC estável. Métodos Esta coorte incluiu pacientes com idade ≥40 anos com DAC estável confirmada por angiografia coronária estável. A decisão por tratamento clínico isolado, ou combinado com ICP ou CABG foi feita por médicos assistentes. A adesão às drogas prescritas recomendadas pelas diretrizes de prevenção secundária (tratamento farmacológico ótimo), incluindo agentes antiplaquetários, drogas hipolipemianetes, betabloqueadores, e bloqueadores do sistema angiotensina aldosterona, foi avaliada no acompanhamento. Diferenças com valores de p < 0,05 foram consideradas estatisticamente significativas. Resultados Dos 928 pacientes incluídos inicialmente, 415 apresentaram DAC leve e 66 apresentaram DAC leve a moderada. O período médio de seguimento foi 5,2 ± 1,5 anos. Os pacientes submetidos ao CABG apresentaram maior probabilidade de receberem tratamento farmacológico ótimo que aqueles submetidos à ICP ou tratamento clínico (63,5% versus 39,1% versus 45,7% respectivamente, p=0,003). Fatores basais independentemente associados com maior probabilidade de prescrição de tratamento ótimo foram CABG [39% maior (6% - 83%, p=0,017)] em comparação a outros tratamentos e diabetes [25% maior (1% - 56%), p=0,042] em comparação à ausência de diabetes. Conclusões Pacientes com DAC submetidos ao CABG são mais frequentemente tratados com prevenção secundária farmacológica ótima que pacientes tratados com ICP ou exclusivamente com tratamento clínico.

Abstract Background Secondary prevention is recommended for patients with evidence of coronary artery disease (CAD) regardless of the indication for treatment by coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Objectives This study evaluated whether clinical treatment, PCI or CABG had an influence on adherence to the pharmacological secondary prevention in patients with stable CAD. Methods This cohort included patients aged ≥40 years with stable CAD confirmed by coronary angiography. The decision for medical treatment alone, or additionally with PCI or CABG, was made by the attending physicians. Adherence to the prescribed drugs recommended by the guidelines for secondary prevention (optimal pharmacological treatment), including antiplatelet agents, lipid-lowering drugs, beta-blockers, and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockers, was assessed at follow-up. Differences were considered significant for p values <0.05. Results From 928 patients enrolled at baseline, 415 had mild CAD and 66 moderate to severe CAD. The average follow-up was 5.2 ± 1.5 years. Patients submitted to CABG were more likely to receive the optimal pharmacological treatment than those submitted to PCI or treated clinically (63.5% versus 39.1% versus 45.7% respectively, p=0.003). Baseline factors independently associated with greater probability of having a prescription of optimal treatment at follow-up were CABG [39% higher (6% - 83%, p=0.017) and diabetes [25% higher (1% - 56%), p=0.042] than their counterparts treated by other methods and participants without diabetes, respectively. Conclusions Patients with CAD submitted to CABG are more commonly treated with optimal pharmacological secondary prevention than patients treated by PCI or exclusively with medical therapy.