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)

The efficacy and safety of amlodipine (2.5 mg, 5 mg, or 10 mg) once daily was compared with atenolol (50 mg to 100 mg) once daily in patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension in a randomized, double-blind, parallel, placebo-controlled study. One hundred and twenty-five patients were randomly allocated at the end of a 4-week run-in placebo period to 8 weeks' double-blind treatment with amlodipine (n = 41), atenolol (n = 43), or placebo (n = 41). The mean changes from baseline in blood pressure 24 h postdose for amlodipine (mean daily dose 8.8 mg) were -12.8/-10.1 mm Hg for supine and -11.5/-9.8 mm Hg for standing blood pressure (P < .001). For atenolol (mean daily dose 83.7 mg) the changes were -11.3/-11.7 mm Hg for supine and -13.3/-12.3 mm Hg for standing blood pressure (P < .001). There were no statistically significant differences between treatments. The responder rates for amlodipine, atenolol, and placebo were 61.1%, 64.9%, and 11.1%, respectively. Determinations taken over the 24-h period at the final visit revealed that amlodipine and atenolol maintained the group mean supine blood pressure at or below 140/90 mm Hg throughout the period of observation; the corresponding time-effect curve for the placebo group was clearly in the hypertensive range. Heart rate was significantly lowered by atenolol only. Both amlodipine and atenolol were well-tolerated. Only one patient was withdrawn because of the development of peripheral edema, arthralgia, and fatigue after treatment with amlodipine. This study demonstrates that once-daily administration of amlodipine or atenolol to mild-to-moderate hypertensive patients was well-tolerated and provided adequate blood pressure control throughout the 24-h dosing interval.
 ...
PMID:A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind comparison of amlodipine and atenolol in patients with essential hypertension. 141 36

Exercise performance in essential hypertension (EH) and its relations to blood pressure (BP) response and left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) were studied. Twenty-three patients with mild to moderate EH and 12 controls underwent symptom-limited (except BP elevation more than 250 mm Hg) ergometer exercise. Exercise performance was evaluated by the oxygen uptake (VO2/kg) at anaerobic threshold (AT) and at peak exercise (Peak). Left ventricular geometry and function, and left ventricular mass index (LVMI) were measured using echocardiography. The endpoints of 12 patients (group A) and controls were fatigue. The endpoints of 11 patients (group B) were BP elevation. Though both group A and group B had concentric hypertrophy, group B showed severe LVH compared to group A and controls. The VO2/kg at AT or at Peak was not different among the three groups. Neither BP response or LVMI correlated with exercise performance in EH. We conclude that exercise performance is not disturbed in EH; that BP response to exercise is not related to exercise performance in EH; and that concentric LVH may be a compensatory mechanism to maintain exercise capacity against exaggerated BP elevation in EH.
 ...
PMID:Exercise performance in essential hypertension with special reference to blood pressure response and left ventricular hypertrophy. 153 18

Cilazapril is a new once-daily angiotensin-converting (ACE) enzyme inhibitor which has been administered to 4,500 patients with mainly mild to moderate essential hypertension in a multinational clinical research program. Sitting diastolic blood pressure was reduced by about 9 mm Hg from baseline (p less than 0.01) after 4 weeks of treatment with cilazapril 1.25-10 mg/day in double-blind placebo-controlled studies. Total responder rates to cilazapril were usually 50-60% compared with 30% to placebo. Adding hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg/day to cilazapril 5.0 mg/day increased the total responder rate from 52 to 71%. Double-blind dose titration studies for 8 weeks showed that cilazapril 2.5-5 mg/day possessed equivalent efficacy to usual therapeutic regimens of sustained release propranolol, captopril, hydrochlorothiazide, atenolol and enalapril, Cilazapril did not affect heart rate. During long-term open administration for 52 weeks, or longer, cilazapril, either alone or in combination with hydrochlorothiazide, effectively maintained control of blood pressure. Treatment of patients with severe hypertension with cilazapril plus hydrochlorothiazide achieved a total responder rate of 73%. Adverse events were mostly observed within the first 8-16 weeks of treatment, with headache, dizziness, fatigue, nausea, cough and chest pain being the most frequent. Non-life-threatening angioedema, facial edema and mild hypotension occurred in less than or equal to 0.2% of patients, and orthostatic hypotension was reported in 2%. Abnormal laboratory test values were rarely found with cilazapril treatment. Of the 2.3% of patients with elevated serum creatinine, at any time point during the study and irrespective of outcome on continuation with cilazapril therapy, about two thirds had prior renal impairment.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
 ...
PMID:Cilazapril: an overview of its efficacy and safety in hypertension. 153 34

A multicenter, randomized double-blind study of 6 months' duration was performed in 540 patients (average age 54 years, 57% male) with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension to determine the relative effects on quality of life of cilazapril, atenolol, and nifedipine retard. Quality of life was assessed by using both a self-administered and an interviewer-administered questionnaire; the assessment included a complaint score (symptoms checklist), Health Status Index, assessment of work satisfaction, Psychological General Well-being Index, Profile of Mood States subscales, and life satisfaction assessment. Psychomotor function was measured by the Reitan Trail Making test B. At the end of the trial, diastolic blood pressure had fallen by an average of 15 mm Hg in all three groups, but significantly (p = 0.01) more patients taking cilazapril required the addition of a diuretic (36%) compared with those taking atenolol (25%) or nifedipine retard (24%). No significant differences in quality of life were observed between cilazapril and atenolol during the trial. Symptomatic complaints increased on nifedipine retard (p = 0.02) and contributed to a higher discontinuation rate (21% discontinued treatment compared with 13% and 14% taking atenolol and cilazapril, respectively, p = 0.04). However, a possible improvement in the fatigue subscale (p = 0.04) was also observed on nifedipine retard. The 95% confidence intervals showed that none of the drugs in this trial produced an effect equivalent to that previously reported between captopril and methyldopa in the Psychological General Well Being Index or between captopril and methyldopa or propranolol in Trail Making test B.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
 ...
PMID:Quality of life with three antihypertensive treatments. Cilazapril, atenolol, nifedipine. 153 12

The relationship between hypertension and emotional depression or anxiety has been long-argued. We assessed the efficacy of etizolam (an antianxiety drug) in 18 patients with essential hypertension accompanied with unspecified complaints. In the assessment of overall improvement, 4 patients (22.2%) were rated as markedly improved, 4 patients (22.2%) as moderately improved, 7 patients (38.9%) as slightly improved, 3 patients (16.7%) as unchanged, and none as worsened. Systolic and diastolic pressure decreased significantly in 13 patients (72.2%) and 10 patients (55.5%), respectively. Many subjective symptoms such as anxiety, fatigue and depression improved. No significant adverse reaction from drug was observed. These results allow us to conclude that etizolam is effective and safe for the treatment of essential hypertension accompanied with unspecified complaints.
 ...
PMID:The efficacy of additive use of etizolam in patients with essential hypertension and unspecified complaints. 155 46

In a randomized, parallel, double-blind study, lisinopril (n = 412; average dose 18.8 mg) reduced systolic and diastolic blood pressure (change = 20.2/13.8 mmHg; P less than 0.01/P less than 0.01) more than nifedipine (n = 416; average dose 37.4 mg; change = 13.3/11.2 mmHg) after 10-week treatment in patients, aged 40-70 years, with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension. Lisinopril was better tolerated than nifedipine. The withdrawals from treatment were fewer in the lisinopril-treated group (11 versus 46; P less than 0.01). The frequency of adverse experiences reported after a general question of discomfort was significantly lower for lisinopril than for nifedipine (P less than 0.01). When questioned on specific symptoms, frequency of coughing was higher with lisinopril (P less than 0.01), while flushing, edema, palpitations, dizziness, tiredness and rash were reported more frequently (P less than 0.01, for all) in the nifedipine-treated group. Quality of life was assessed by both patients and spouses. No significant changes in wellbeing were observed for either drug, except for the highest dose level of nifedipine which caused a deterioration.
 ...
PMID:Lisinopril or nifedipine in essential hypertension? A Norwegian multicenter study on efficacy, tolerability and quality of life in 828 patients. 166 65

In this study of the efficacy and safety of isradipine as first-line therapy in hypertension, 1,647 patients enrolled; 1,472 completed the 4-week placebo run-in period and began treatment with isradipine at 2.5 mg twice daily for 4 weeks. During placebo, 11% (n = 175) of the 1,647 patients withdrew because of normalization of blood pressure, side effects, noncompliance, violation of the study protocol, side effects from concomitant therapy, or other reasons. During isradipine therapy (n = 1,376), blood pressure decreased from 168 +/- 18/102 +/- 8 mm Hg at the end of the placebo period to 155 +/- 17/94 +/- 9 mm Hg after 2 weeks (p less than 0.001) and 151 +/- 16/92 +/- 9 mm Hg after 4 weeks (p less than 0.001). During active treatment, 6.4% (n = 94) were withdrawn because of flushing, headache, edema, palpitations, gastrointestinal side effects, skin rashes, or other side effects, and two patients because of lack of efficacy. The side effect score in the remaining patients worsened for flushing, remained unchanged for edema, but significantly improved for palpitations, fatigue, dizziness, headache, and nervousness. After 4 weeks, 60% of patients had diastolic blood pressures of less than or equal to 90 mm Hg. Thus, isradipine is effective and safe as first-line therapy in patients with primary hypertension as seen in general practice.
 ...
PMID:Calcium antagonists as first-line therapy in hypertension: results of the Swiss Isradipine Study. Swiss Hypertension Society. 172 Apr 76

To document the clinical presentation of malignant accelerated hypertension in Nigerians, 56 patients were studied between 1987 and 1989 (30 months). Age range was 16 to 55 years with 59% in the range of 30-49 years; 47 were male. Mean systolic and diastolic blood pressures were 217 mmHg and 146 mmHg, respectively. Thirty patients had grade III and 26 grade IV hypertensive retinopathy. Mean body mass index was only 22.4 in the 21 patients who had no evidence of fluid retention. Seventy-five percent of patients had no awareness of hypertension. Essential hypertension accounted for 66%, chronic renal disease 32% and renal artery stenosis 2% of cases. The most common clinical features were headaches (80%), fatigue (68%), oliguria (52%), heart failure (46%), weight loss (41%), and poor vision (21%). Multiple symptoms were common and 24 patients had both renal and cardiac failure. Laboratory features included microscopic haematuria (100%) and proteinuria (100%). In 37 patients with essential hypertension, renal failure was a complication in 60%. Microangiopathic haemolytic anaemia was present in 23 patients. In addition to eight deaths from renal failure in the acute stage, 23 of these patients required long-term dialysis. Thus, malignant accelerated hypertension was associated with high morbidity, especially renal failure; it primarily afflicted patients in their prime years. Known survival at one year was 37.5%, but some patients were lost to follow-up.
 ...
PMID:The clinical presentation of malignant hypertension in Nigerians. 195 31

Ketanserin is a 5-HT2 receptor antagonist without partial agonist properties which also possesses weak alpha 1-adrenoceptor antagonistic activity, which may explain its antihypertensive mechanism of action in patients with essential hypertension. It also inhibits the effects of serotonin on platelets in cardiovascular disease, inhibits vasoconstriction caused by the amine, and when administered intravenously improves some haemorheological indices in patients with ischaemic diseases. The antihypertensive effect of oral ketanserin 40 mg twice daily is comparable with that of total daily doses of metoprolol 200 mg, propranolol 160 mg, captopril 100 mg, enalapril 20 mg, hydrochlorothiazide 50 mg, or alpha-methyldopa 1000 mg and is achieved without adverse effect on plasma lipoproteins or carbohydrate metabolism in patients with concomitant diabetes mellitus. Evidence from prospective studies suggests a greater antihypertensive efficacy in the elderly than in younger patients. In patients with intermittent claudication, results have been inconsistent in small studies, while a large study showed no improvement in pain-free walking distance but fewer amputations compared to placebo. In Raynaud's phenomenon symptomatic improvement relative to placebo was achieved in larger trials. Its role in preventing atherosclerotic complications requires further investigation. Ketanserin is reasonably well tolerated, the frequency of adverse effects being comparable with that of other antihypertensive drugs in controlled trials. Dizziness, tiredness, oedema, dry mouth and weight gain are the most commonly reported effects. Ketanserin prolongs QT interval in a dose-related manner, and when given in certain predisposing circumstances ventricular arrhythmias and syncope may occur. Administered intravenously, ketanserin 10mg followed by an infusion of 2 to 4 mg/h controls moderate to severe pre- and postoperative hypertension in most patients, acting as a balanced vasodilator, lowering cardiac pre- and afterload. Although the arrhythmogenic potential of ketanserin in patients receiving potassium-depleting diuretics requires suitable precautions, it appears that its antihypertensive activity is suited to the elderly provided plasma potassium concentrations are normal at the start of treatment and are maintained within the normal range.
 ...
PMID:Ketanserin. A review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and therapeutic potential in hypertension and peripheral vascular disease. 207 1

The efficacy, tolerability and safety of dilevalol in essential hypertension has been documented in an international clinical trials programme which was conducted with doses up to 1600mg daily. Initial double-blind trials confirmed the superiority of dilevalol over placebo in essential hypertensive patients and documented the suitability of a once-daily dosage. Almost all of the subsequent trials have been randomised, double-blind comparative trials of dilevalol versus established anti-hypertensive agents with the duration of treatment ranging from four weeks up to one year. The recommended dosage range of dilevalol, of 200-400 mg once-daily, has generally been shown to be at least as effective at lowering raised blood pressure as established antihypertensive agents given according to their recommended doses. In one study in elderly hypertensives, dilevalol was significantly more effective than atenolol in lowering systolic blood pressure. Safety data is available from a consolidated database of 2011 dilevalol-treated patients representing over 500 patient-years exposure. Overall, dilevalol was well tolerated and evidence of dose-related adverse effects became apparent only for nausea and dizziness above the recommended dose range. The most common adverse effects considered probably or definitely related to treatment were fatigue (2.5%), nausea (1.9%), headache (1.8%) and dizziness (1.7%). 'Typical' beta-blocker adverse effects were observed, though many of these effects were less frequent than seen with comparator beta-blockers. Evidence of excessive vasodilation was rarely found, consistent with the counter-balancing effect of beta-blockade.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
 ...
PMID:Overview of clinical trials of dilevalol in essential hypertension. 214 8


<< Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next >>