The role of ß-blockers in the management of hypertension: an Asian perspective.

Following publication of the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) Guidelines in 2006, the use of ß-blockers as first-line therapy in hypertension has been somewhat controversial. However, a recent reappraisal of the European Society of Hypertension guidelines highlights that these agents exhibit similar BP lowering efficacy to other classes of agents, prompting a re-examination of the utility of these agents in various patient populations. The authors felt that it is important to address this controversy and provide an Asian perspective on the place of ß-blockers in current clinical practice and the benefits of ß-blockade in selected patient populations. In addition to their use as a potential first-line therapy in uncomplicated hypertension, ß-blockers have a particular role in patients with hypertension and comorbidities such as heart failure or coronary artery disease, including those who had a myocardial infarction. One advantage which ß-blockers offer is the additional protective effects in patients with prior cardiovascular events. Some of the disadvantages attributed to ß-blockers appear more related to the older drugs in this class and further appraisal of the efficacy and safety profile of newer ß-blockers will lend support to the current guideline recommendations in Asian countries and encourage increased appropriate use of ß-blockade in current clinical practice within Asia.

Persistence of the antihypertensive efficacy of amlodipine and nifedipine GITS after two 'missed doses': a randomised, double-blind comparative trial in Asian patients.

Suboptimal management of hypertension is often a result of poor patient compliance in the form of missed doses of their antihypertensive medication. This multicentre, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group trial was designed to compare the persistence of the antihypertensive efficacy of the amlodipine and nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) after two 'missed doses', and also to compare the drugs' overall efficacy and safety in Asian patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension. Following a 2-week placebo run-in period, 222 patients were randomised to receive either amlodipine (5 mg daily, increased after 6 weeks if necessary to 10 mg daily, n=109) or nifedipine GITS (30 mg daily, increased after 6 weeks if necessary to 60 mg daily; n=113) for 12 weeks. A placebo was then substituted for further 2 days with continuous ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring. The increases in the last 9 h of mean ambulatory BP on day 2 after treatment withdrawal were significantly less with amlodipine than with nifedipine GITS: 4.4+/-7.0 vs 11.2+/-11.3 mmHg for systolic BP (P