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)

1. The antihypertensive effects of alpha-methyldopa and metoprolol have been compared in 110 patients (fifty-one males and fifty-nine females) with previously untreated essential hypertension (sixty-eight WHO stage 1 and forty-two WHO stage 2). 2. After 2 weeks of placebo, the patients were randomly allocated to treatment with either of the two drugs: alpha-methyldopa up to 500 mg b.i.d. and metroprolol up to 200 mg b.i.d. for 6 weeks. Periodical clinical, biochemical, haematological, radiological and electrocardiographical measurements were performed. 3. The average reduction in blood pressure produced by the two drugs was comparable. 4. In general, side-effects were few and tolerable: mainly bradycardia in the metoprolol group and dizziness and drowsiness in the alpha-methyldopa group. 5. The plasma renin activity was significantly reduced in the metoprolol but not in the alpha-methyldopa group.
 ...
PMID:Antihypertensive activity of alpha-methyldopa on a twice daily regimen in comparison to metoprolol. A multi-centre controlled clinical trial. 35 27

Two hundred and thirty-eight patients with essential hypertension from 39 general practice centres were treated in a double-blind trial with either oxprenolol 160 mg in a slow-release (SR) formulation with cyclopenthiazide 0,25 mg and potassium chloride 600 mg given once daily, or methyldopa 250 mg 3 times daily. After a 2-week placebo washout period, each patient was treated for 10 weeks. Both treatments significantly reduced blood pressure. Oxprenolol SR plus cyclopenthiazide-KCl was shown to possess significantly superior antihypertensive activity to methyldopa. Pulse rate, as expected, was significantly decreased by the beta-blocker and virtually unaffected by methyldopa. The overall incidence of side-effects was low. The incidence of sleepiness and dry mouth was significantly higher in the methyldopa group, and erythema in the oxprenolol group. The principle of general practitioners conducting multi-centre double-blind trials for research purposes, on drugs which are predominantly given to ambulatory patients, has been established for the first time in South Africa. Virtually no difficulty was encountered in getting patients' consent in the general practice milieu.
 ...
PMID:Oxprenolol slow-release with cyclopenthiazide-KCl compared with methyldopa in the treatment of essential hypertension. A multicentre general practice trial. 37 Oct 21

The antihypertensive efficacy and safety of guanabenz were evaluated against clonidine in two groups of 18 patients with uncomplicated essential hypertension. Both compounds reduced systolic and diastolic blood pressure at the doses used, whether pressures were measured in the supine or standing positions. Side-effects, such as dry mouth and drowsiness, were similar in both groups of patients. No postural hypotension occurred.
 ...
PMID:Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of guanabenz versus clonidine. 37 Oct 36

Guanfacine, an alpha 2 adrenoceptor agonist, was compared with prazosin hydrochloride for the treatment of patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension in an 8-week, double-blind, randomized, parallel evaluation to determine efficacy and safety. The study consisted of a 2-week screening/weaning period (phase I), a 3-week treatment period with chlorthalidone 25 mg every morning (phase II), and an 8-week double-blind treatment period with diuretic plus prazosin or guanfacine (phase III). Those who had an average seated diastolic blood pressure (BP) of 95 to 114 mm Hg at the end of the phase II period were eligible to enter the phase III period and were randomly assigned to chlorthalidone plus either guanfacine, 1 mg every night, or prazosin, 1 mg three times a day. Of the 102 patients who were randomly assigned to guanfacine or prazosin, 80% completed the entire study. Guanfacine and prazosin appeared to be equally effective and reduced seated as well as standing diastolic and systolic BP. The mean seated systolic and diastolic BP were reduced 11/9 mm Hg by guanfacine and 11/10 mm Hg by prazosin. The mean reduction in seated pulse was 3 beats/minute for guanfacine and no change with prazosin. Similar changes occurred in the standing position. Very few adverse effects were reported during the study. Adverse effects with an incidence of 5% or greater for either drug group were dizziness (6% guanfacine, 8% prazosin), xerostomia (6% guanfacine, 2% prazosin), and somnolence (0% guanfacine, 6% prazosin). Three patients (6%) in the prazosin group experienced symptoms of orthostasis requiring premature discontinuation of the drug and termination from the study.
 ...
PMID:Antihypertensive efficacy of guanfacine and prazosin in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension. 227 80

Seventeen subjects with essential hypertension (14 men, 3 women, 40-69 years of age), 13 of whom continued their previous antihypertensive therapy, completed a double-blind crossover trial of ketanserin 40 mg twice daily versus placebo tablets twice daily. Each treatment phase was 6 weeks in duration. For the group as a whole, blood pressure (BP) was reduced in the ketanserin phase compared with the placebo phase: supine mean BP decrease: 4 +/- 1 mm Hg (p less than 0.05); standing mean BP decrease: 7 +/- 1 mm Hg (p less than 0.001). Heart rate (HR) was also significantly decreased in the ketanserin phase (5 +/- 1 beats/min) (p less than 0.001). When individual subgroups were analysed, the reductions in BP and HR were greater in subjects already receiving antihypertensive therapy, diuretics, and/or beta-adrenergic blockers. Changes were observed in 24-h urine sodium and potassium excretion: Sodium (mmol/day): placebo 137 +/- 17, ketanserin 174 +/- 19 (p less than 0.05); potassium (mmol/day): placebo 74 +/- 8, ketanserin 57 +/- 5. For the group as a whole, there were no significant adverse effects during the ketanserin phase, although two subjects had a dose reduction of ketanserin because of drowsiness and dizziness. Two additional subjects withdrew from the study owing to adverse effects, one in the placebo phase. In conclusion, ketanserin in the dose administered has a modest hypotensive effect, which is best seen in subjects already receiving other antihypertensive agents.
 ...
PMID:Effect of ketanserin on blood pressure and biochemical parameters in patients with essential hypertension. 241 43

The safety and efficacy of indoramin and prazosin added to hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) were compared in a double-blind trial involving 209 patients with mild to moderately severe essential hypertension. Patients whose supine diastolic blood pressure (SDBP) did not decrease to less than or equal to 90 mm Hg after 6 weeks of HCTZ therapy had indoramin or prazosin added to their regimen. Mean SDBP during 6 months of combination therapy with either regimen decreased by approximately 10 mm Hg from that at the final evaluation during HCTZ therapy (p less than 0.001); differences between the groups were not statistically significant. Mean heart rate was unchanged, whereas mean weight increased (p less than 0.001) above final HCTZ values by approximately 2 kg in both groups. Mean weight increased significantly (p less than 0.01) from baseline values, however, only in the prazosin/HCTZ group. Approximately 95% of the patients in each group had clinically significant decreases in SDBP. Fatigue or tiredness and dizziness were the most commonly reported adverse effects, and their frequencies were not significantly different in the two groups. Cardiac arrhythmias occurred only in patients in the prazosin/HCTZ group and were significantly (p less than 0.05) more frequent than among patients in the indoramin/HCTZ group; less severe adverse experiences, i.e., dry mouth, ejaculatory problems, drowsiness, and sedation, were significantly (p less than 0.05) more frequent in the indoramin/HCTZ group. When added to HCTZ, indoramin and prazosin are equally safe and effective in the treatment of hypertension.
 ...
PMID:Antihypertensive effects of indoramin and prazosin in combination with hydrochlorothiazide. 242 99

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

Twenty Nigerians with labile essential hypertension (LEH) were asked to record their blood pressure and pulse rate for 14-16 hours using the Remler Portable Ambulatory Blood Pressure Recorder while exposing themselves to the stress of Lagos traffic. The average blood pressure (systolic and diastolic) and pulse rate for the test day (ASBP, ADBP and APR) were determined in a cross-over randomised open design before (C), after one week on placebo bidaily (P1), after one week on bromazepam 1.5 mg bidaily (B), after one week on placebo bidaily (P2) and after one week on labetalol 100 mg bidaily (L). Allocation to the active drugs was randomised. All drugs were administered at 8.00a.m. and 8.00p.m. respectively. The maximum blood pressure (systolic and diastolic) and pulse rate MxSBP, MxDBP and MxPR were similarly determined. Both B and L significantly reduced ASBP, ADBP, APR, MxSBP, MxDBP and MxPR but L produced a much greater reduction in the above parameters than B. Side effects observed included drowsiness with B (two subjects) and postural dizziness with L (one subject). Both drugs were effective in controlling LEH but L was more effective than B in reducing stress hypertension.
 ...
PMID:Comparative effects of labetalol and bromazepam on ambulatory blood pressure of Nigerians with labile and stress hypertension. 256 2

More than 5,000 primary-care physicians enrolled more than 22,000 patients with mild to moderate hypertension in a postmarketing study in which guanfacine hydrochloride, a centrally acting antihypertensive agent, was given for 28 days. The objectives of the evaluation were: (1) to obtain broad experience with guanfacine for the management of essential hypertension in a clinical practice setting; (2) to obtain information on patient acceptance of guanfacine, 1 mg HS, for the control of essential hypertension; and (3) to obtain more information on the drug's safety in clinical practice. Patients had to be at least 21 years of age, to be receiving a thiazide-type diuretic, and to have a sitting diastolic blood pressure of 95 to 114 mmHg. Women who were pregnant or lactating or planning to become pregnant during the evaluation were excluded. Blood pressure and heart rate were measured before guanfacine was started and at the completion of the study. Adverse on-therapy events were reported at the return visit. The average blood pressure in the general patient population decreased by 17/12 mmHg, that is, from 164/100 to 147/88 mmHg in four weeks. The magnitude of the reduction was not significantly influenced by age, race, sex, duration of hypertension, or the use of concomitant antihypertensive therapy. Adding guanfacine to another antihypertensive regimen resulted in mean reductions of 11 to 15 mmHg diastolic pressure, and the substitution of guanfacine for another antihypertensive agent resulted in mean reductions of 10 to 11 mmHg diastolic pressure. The most common side effect reported was dry mouth in 6% of patients, followed by dizziness, somnolence, fatigue, headache, and nausea, each reported in fewer than 3% of patients. More than 80% of the participants continued to receive guanfacine after the study. Of the total patient population, 7% discontinued guanfacine because of lack of efficacy, 10% because of side effects, and 3% for other reasons. The results of this large postmarketing study confirmed the results of controlled clinical trials conducted prior to marketing.
 ...
PMID:A postmarketing evaluation of guanfacine hydrochloride in mild to moderate hypertension. 306 7

Guanfacine, an alpha 2-adrenoceptor agonist, was compared with clonidine as step-2 therapy of mild to moderate essential hypertension in a 24-week, double-blind, randomized, parallel evaluation to determine efficacy, safety and occurrence of withdrawal syndrome. During a 5-week period, patients were weaned from current antihypertensives, if any, and stabilized on step-1 therapy with 25 mg of chlorthalidone once a day. Those with a diastolic blood pressure (BP) from 95 to 114 mm Hg while taking chlorthalidone were randomized to treatment. The 2 agents had equal efficacy; 149 of 270 patients treated with guanfacine (55%) and 164 of 276 treated with clonidine (59%) achieved goal diastolic BP of less than or equal to 90 mm Hg. Terminations because of adverse effects were relatively low. Dry mouth (30% of guanfacine and 37% of clonidine groups) and somnolence (21% of guanfacine and 35% of clonidine groups, p less than 0.05) were reported most frequently. Nonsyncopal dizziness was reported in 11% of guanfacine-treated and 8% of clonidine-treated patients. This difference was not statistically significant. To evaluate the occurrence of a withdrawal syndrome in 316 outpatients and 156 inpatients, vital signs were monitored at least twice a day for up to 7 days after the end of therapy. Segmented 24-hour urine studies were performed on inpatients. Abrupt withdrawal of clonidine produced a rapid increase in diastolic and, especially, systolic BP, whereas guanfacine withdrawal produced more gradual increases. The differences were significant over the first 3 withdrawal days. It is concluded that guanfacine is a safe, effective, second-generation alpha 2-adrenoceptor agonist.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
 ...
PMID:Comparison of guanfacine versus clonidine for efficacy, safety and occurrence of withdrawal syndrome in step-2 treatment of mild to moderate essential hypertension. 351 30


1 2 3 Next >>