Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0085580 (essential hypertension)
 14,686 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

Sixteen patients with essential hypertension were treated with N-Amidino-2-(2,6-dichlorophenyl) acetamide hydrochloride (BS 100--141) and clonidine for five weeks each in a double-blind cross-over trial. Dosage ranged from 2 to 6 mg BS 100--141 and from 0.3 to 0.9 mg clonidine daily in two or three divided doses. Both compounds caused a significant and comparable fall in blood pressure. Patients whose blood pressure was not reduced to normal levels by 2 to 3 mg BS 100--141 daily did not respond better to an increase in the dose. Dry mouth and constipation occurred about equally frequently with both agents, but sedation and orthostatic circulatory effects were considerably more frequent with clonidine. Rebound hypertension likewise occurred in five patients following clonidine withdrawal as opposed to no patient after BS 100-141.
 ...
PMID:Antihypertensive effect of N-amidino-2-(2,6-dichlorophenyl) acetamide hydrochloride. A double-blind cross-over trial versus clonidine. 34 14

A multicenter open trial involving 50 hypertension patients enabled evaluation of the efficacy and tolerability of Isoptine L.P. (sustained release verapamil) in mild to moderate essential hypertension. Following a 2-week placebo run-in period, patients were given Isoptine L.P. (240 mg/24 h) as a morning dose for 3 months, with a possible dose increase (360 mg/24 h) in case of diastolic blood pressure of 95 mmHg or more at the 30-day evaluation. Blood pressure was measured by mercury sphygmomanometer and, in 20 patients, by a Dinamap type Automatic device. After 3 months of treatment, blood pressure levels in supine and standing position, measured manually and automatically, showed a highly significant decrease, with a mean fall of 18.4 mmHg for systolic (13.7 percent) and 13.2 mmHg diastolic (-14.6 percent). 67 percent of patients were responders after 1 month of treatment and 79 percent at 3 months, including one-fifth at the dose of 360 mg/24 h. Seventeen patients, i.e. 34 percent, reported one or more adverse reactions. Among these, four patients had to stop treatment, twice because of headache and twice for constipation. Adverse events seen most frequently were constipation, headache, tiredness and vomiting. No cardiac adverse events were reported with the exception of one case of atrial premature contractions. The electrocardiogram revealed significant slowing of heart rate, as well as slight prolongation of PR and QT intervals and slight widening of the QRS complex. Tolerability on the basis of laboratory parameters was good.
 ...
PMID:[Efficacy and tolerability of isoptine LP in mild to moderate hypertension. A multicenter study with 50 patients]. 130 Sep 22

From a hemodynamic point of view, the calcium antagonists represent an interesting way of treating hypertension, because they reduce total peripheral resistance without compromising cardiac output. Blood flow is also maintained during muscular exercise. Verapamil and diltiazem induce slight reduction in heart rate, but this is compensated by increase in stroke volume. Verapamil and diltiazem also prolong atrioventricular conduction time, in contrast to the dihydropyridines. Most clinical data are available for verapamil, diltiazem, and nifedipine. In patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension, these compounds seem as effective as diuretics and beta-blockers. They do not induce disturbances in glucose metabolism, serum uric acid, or serum potassium, and unwanted disturbances in blood lipids have not been described. The dihydropyridines may safely be combined with beta-blockers, but the combination of either verapamil or diltiazem with a beta-blocker should be avoided (because of the high risk of bradycardia). The calcium antagonists seem particularly useful in patients with the combination of hypertension and angina pectoris or peripheral vascular diseases or chronic obstructive lung diseases or diabetes. They are also effective in hypertensive crises. They may also be tried as a first line drug in patients with mild and moderate essential hypertension, particularly when diuretics or beta-blockers are contraindicated. Temporary side effects due to vasodilatation (headache, flushing, and palpitations) are seen frequently, particularly on the dihydropyridines. Edema is the most frequent serious side effect of the dihydropyridines, and constipation is most common with verapamil. At this point, few long-term data are available and it is not known whether the calcium antagonists will give better or worse results, with respect to morbidity and mortality, than the beta-blockers, diuretics, or other more recent antihypertensive agents.
 ...
PMID:Clinical use of calcium antagonists in hypertension: update 1986. 245 35

We have treated 128 patients aged 40 +/- 9 years (60 males and 68 females), all with essential hypertension (W.H.O. I and II), over a period of 10 yr. The treatment was performed with clonidine at a dose that ranged from 0.150 to 1,200 mg (twice daily). Forty-two patients also received a diuretic (HCTZ 25 mg daily). Mean blood pressure decreased significantly from 169 +/- 10 mm Hg systolic, 107 +/- 3 diastolic to 145 +/- 6 mm Hg (p less than 0.001) 90 +/- 3 mm Hg diastolic (p less than 0.001). Side effects occurred during the first month. These were drowsiness 28%, dry mouth 35%, constipation 13%, dizziness 9%, postural hypotension 2%, and male impotence 3.3% (2/60). Side effects still present after 120 months of treatment were drowsiness 11.7%, dry mouth 26.6%, constipation 14.1%, dizziness 4.7%, and male impotence 1.7% (1/59). The number of patients who discontinued treatment resulting from side effects were 3.34%, all of them within the first 6 months. There were no changes in renal or liver function or in serum electrolytes or lipids. Retinopathy improved in most patients. Electrocardiogram (ECG) improved in 45 patients with LVH. It is concluded that clonidine provided sustained blood pressure control with minimum side effects during 10-year therapy for hypertension.
 ...
PMID:Safety aspects of long-term antihypertensive therapy (10 years) with clonidine. 245 59

The purpose of the present article is to review a number of studies dealing with the efficacy of calcium antagonists, in particular verapamil, in the treatment of essential hypertension. Several well-controlled studies have shown that verapamil causes a significant decrease in both systolic and diastolic pressure. Blood pressure decrease, which is of the same magnitude as with propranolol, is related to pretreatment values and, according to some authors, to age, but the latter statement is being refuted by others. Using a slow-release preparation, it can be shown that the 24-h blood pressure profile with once-daily administration is quite similar to the profile seen with three-times-daily administration of the regular formulation of verapamil. It has also been documented that the blood pressure decrease persists during 1-year continued administration. Optimal effect is seen at 240-320 mg/day. The most frequent side effects are constipation, flushing, and conduction disturbances. It is often proposed that the addition of a diuretic to verapamil does not increase the antihypertensive effect, but recent studies provide evidence to the contrary. Finally, ambulatory pressure recordings have shown that nifedipine does not decrease blood pressure variability. In general, calcium antagonists seem to be effective antihypertensive drugs but their place in the daily antihypertensive treatment has still to be defined.
 ...
PMID:Calcium antagonists in the treatment of essential hypertension: review of international studies. 247 94

The efficacy and safety of isradipine (PN 200-110), a new dihydropyridine calcium antagonist, was evaluated in 87 hypertensive patients in a placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized multicenter trial. After a 3-week single-blind washout phase, isradipine (or matching placebo) was administered for 4 weeks, beginning at 2.5 mg b.i.d. with increments of 2.5 mg b.i.d. at weekly intervals if supine diastolic blood pressure remained greater than or equal to 90 mm Hg. At the end of 1 week average supine blood pressure in the isradipine group (n = 45) fell from a baseline of 156 +/- 13/104 +/- 4 mm Hg to 146 +/- 14/97 +/- 7 mm Hg. By week 4 blood pressure was reduced by 19/14 mm Hg compared with 4/5 mm Hg in the placebo group (P less than 0.001 between groups). Supine and standing pulse rates were slightly increased initially with isradipine therapy but returned to baseline with increasing isradipine doses. Blood pressure responses at week 4 were good or excellent (supine diastolic less than or equal to 90 mm Hg or greater than or equal to 10 mm Hg decrease from baseline) in 87% of isradipine-treated patients and in 26% of placebo-treated patients. Headache, edema, abdominal discomfort, and constipation occurred slightly more frequently in isradipine-treated patients than in placebo-treated control subjects. The results indicate that isradipine, administered as monotherapy in doses of 2.5 to 10 mg b.i.d., is safe and effective in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension.
 ...
PMID:Evaluation of isradipine (PN 200-110) in mild to moderate hypertension. 295 26

We compared verapamil and propranolol hydrochloride for monotherapy of hypertension. Verapamil lowered blood pressure (BP) more effectively than propranolol in black and white patients. Verapamil was equally effective in blacks and whites, whereas propranolol was more effective in whites. Heart rate was reduced by 6.0 beats per minute by verapamil, and by 13.6 beats per minute by propranolol. In blacks, verapamil lowered systolic BP 16.9 vs 8.1 mm Hg for propranolol; verapamil reduced diastolic BP 12.8 vs 8.6 mm Hg for propranolol. In whites, verapamil lowered systolic BP 19.0 vs 12.7 mm Hg for propranolol; verapamil reduced diastolic BP 16.7 vs 12.3 mm Hg for propranolol. Increases in systolic BP were observed in 22% and 3.4% of patients receiving propranolol and verapamil, respectively. The PR interval was increased from 163.5 to 174.9 ms for verapamil vs 160.3 to 164.4 ms for propranolol. Constipation (15%) and headaches (10%) were most frequent complaints for verapamil vs fatigue (18%) and dizziness (7%) for propranolol. Changes in blood biochemistry values were of small magnitude. We conclude that verapamil monotherapy is a safe and effective means of achieving BP control in patients with essential hypertension.
 ...
PMID:A comparison of verapamil and propranolol for the initial treatment of hypertension. Racial differences in response. 353 60

The ancient Chinese formula of "San-Huang-Hsieh-Hsin-Tang" (S-T) was originally used for patients with "epigastric fullness, flushing, restlessness, constipation and a hard pulse" (Chang 115 B.C.). All these symptoms are frequently observed in patients with essential hypertension. We assessed the antihypertensive and hemodynamic effects of this formula, and found that S-T decreased blood pressure, total peripheral resistance, heart rate and cardiac contractile force. S-T had no apparent effects on cardiac output and blood volume.
 ...
PMID:Hemodynamic effects of "san-huang-hsieh-hsin-tang" in patients with essential hypertension. 379 32

The antihypertensive efficacy of monotherapy with the calcium antagonists nifedipine (n = 60) and verapamil (n = 43) was investigated in patients with essential hypertension. Relationships between age, pretreatment blood pressure, pretreatment plasma renin activity, and hypotensive response were examined. Intraindividual differences in the responses to both drugs were also studied (n = 16). Treatment with verapamil had to be discontinued because of constipation in one patient; treatment with nifedipine was discontinued because of headache in 11 and ankle edema in one. The antihypertensive efficacy of nifedipine and verapamil was comparable and was positively related to pretreatment mean blood pressure (p less than 0.001) and inversely to pretreatment plasma renin activity (p less than 0.05). With verapamil, the fall in blood pressure correlated positively with the patient's age (p less than 0.001). Thus, calcium antagonists can be used as first-line drugs, especially in older and low renin patients. The relationship between the antihypertensive response and pretreatment blood pressure suggests that there may be a calcium influx-dependent vasoconstrictor mechanism in essential hypertension which may be more pronounced in patients with low plasma renin.
 ...
PMID:Factors influencing the hypotensive effects of calcium antagonists. 634 78

Twenty-four subjects with mild to moderate essential hypertension completed this 9-wk parallel, randomized, double-blind study of the antihypertensive effects of verapamil (V) (240 to 480 mg%) and propranolol (P) (120 to 360 mg%). V lowered systolic and diastolic blood pressures in all postural positions, with an average reduction of 20/16 mm Hg. With the exception of standing systolic blood pressure, P also lowered systolic and diastolic blood pressures in all postural positions, with an average reduction of 9/11 mm Hg. Differences between V and P were significant only for sitting systolic blood pressure. Heart rate was decreased by P but was not affected by V. The PR interval was prolonged by V. Plasma levels of V and P were directly related to dose. Plasma levels of V were linearly related to those of its major metabolite, norverapamil (r = 0.81). There was no correlation between clinical response and the dose or plasma level of V or P, but all subjects who received 480 mg% V had an average blood pressure reduction of 20/16 mm Hg and plasma levels of the parent drug above 200 ng/ml. V is an effective antihypertensive for mild to moderate essential hypertension. Constipation, pedal edema, and a maculopapular rash were reported as side effects of V.
 ...
PMID:Verapamil and propranolol in essential hypertension. 649 55


1 2 Next >>