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)

A double-blind multicentre study of 349 hypertensive patients was performed to compare the side-effects of the two beta-blockers atenolol (selective beta 1-blocker) and pindolol (beta 1- and beta 2-blocker with Intrinsic sympathomimetic activity (ISA] in equipotential doses (100 mg atenolol vs. 15 mg pindolol). Male and female patients aged 20-65 years with essential hypertension WHO stages I and II were included. Patients were examined 1 and 6 months after the start of treatment, and side-effects were recorded. The antihypertensive effect was similar for the two drugs. After 1 month there was significantly less bradycardia (P less than 0.01), cold hands and feet (P less than 0.05) and tiredness (P less than 0.02) in the pindolol group, and less sleep disturbance (P less than 0.02) in the atenolol group. After 6 months there was no significant difference in sleep disturbance, but the differences in the other side-effects remained significant.
 ...
PMID:Comparison of the side-effects of pindolol and atenolol in the treatment of hypertension. 220 4

Recently there has been extensive development of orally active angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors in addition to those already marketed, for example, captopril, enalapril, lisinopril and ramipril. It was initially thought that ACE inhibitors were likely to be most useful as antihypertensive agents in conditions in which circulating renin and angiotensin II were elevated. However, it is now clear that they can also lower arterial pressure when plasma renin is not high. In addition, they have beneficial effects in cardiac failure. Thus, captopril, enalapril, lisinopril and ramipril can be used in the treatment of mild to moderate hypertension either alone or in conjunction with diuretics or calcium antagonists. Broadly speaking, efficacy appears to be similar to that of beta-blockers or diuretics. Unfortunately, however, there are no long term studies comparing one ACE inhibitor with another or with other classes of antihypertensive agents. Furthermore, there are no prognostic studies which show that use of ACE inhibitors reduces morbidity or mortality in hypertension. Many new ACE inhibitors are undergoing clinical assessment, including alacepril, cilazapril, fosenopril, perindopril, quinapril and ramipril. The drugs vary, in that some exist in the active form whereas others are prodrugs which are converted to the active agent following absorption. In addition they each possess one of several ligands, for example, carboxyl, phosphinyl or sulfhydryl groups, and so vary in their affinity for ACE. Although many of these agents are renally excreted, a small number are metabolised via the liver (e.g. quinapril and spirapril) and this may prove advantageous in the presence of renal impairment. In common with captopril and enalapril, the new ACE inhibitors inhibit the renin-angiotensin system and initial results suggest that they are effective in lowering blood pressure in essential hypertension. Furthermore, they reduce systemic vascular resistance in the absence of a reflex tachycardia. There are a number of adverse effects which are attributable to the pharmacological mechanism of the ACE inhibitors as a group; these include hypotension, particularly in patients with high renin levels, prior diuretic use, renal impairment or in the elderly. Additional adverse effects may relate to chemical structure. The high incidence of adverse effects noted in early studies related to excess dosage and to the presence of a sulfhydryl group, which the more recently developed ACE inhibitors lack. The adverse effects most commonly reported with established and new ACE inhibitors include headache and fatigue, cough, skin rashes, hypotension and diarrhoea. As a group, ACE inhibitors have an acceptable but not negligible adverse effect burden.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
 ...
PMID:Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and moderate hypertension. 222 19

The authors tested in an open, uncontrolled trial in a group of 23 patients with essential hypertension grade I-II (WHO classification) the effect of Metoprolol OROS. The OROS system is a new form of Metoprolol administration which makes it possible to maintain by a single dose per day a steady plasma concentration, while preserving the cardioselectivity and total 24-hour effectiveness during treatment of hypertension and angina pectoris. After eight weeks of Metoprolol OROS administration, in doses gradually adjusted to the therapeutic action, gradually a significant decrease of the heart rate (HR) occurred, of the systolic blood pressure (BPs) and diastolic blood pressure (BPd) (p less than 0.01 for all values) in a recumbent as well as upright position. A reduction of the BPd in an upright position by greater than or equal to 10 mm Hg was achieved in 85% of the patients, in 73.9% of the patients the BPd in an upright position dropped below 95 mm Hg. Four patients developed side-effects which were mild to medium severe (vertigo, palpitations, fatigue, sensation of tremor, tension in the lower extremities). Two patients discontinued treatment early, the main reason in both being palpitations which were under better conversely, in two patients palpitations which were not adequately controlled by previous metoprolol treatment, disappeared completely during Metoprolol OROS treatment. During the trial no significant changes in the investigated laboratory values incl. total cholesterol were recorded, Metoprolol OROS administered once per day is an effective, safe and well tolerated preparation in treatment of mild to medium severe essential hypertension.
 ...
PMID:[The effect of OROS metoprolol in mild and moderately severe essential hypertension]. 239 74

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

Several disturbances of cellular Ca2+ metabolism have been described in essential hypertension and in the spontaneously hypertensive rat. Possibly the elevation of intracellular free Ca2+ concentration in arterial smooth muscle cells is one important step in the pathogenesis of primary hypertension. In most studies a decreased energy-dependent Ca2+ transport has been proposed as a mechanism. However, disturbances in cellular Ca2+ metabolism, which can be exclusively ascribed to essential hypertension, have not yet been found. The cause of altered cellular Ca2+ transport in primary hypertension may either be a genetically determined defect of membrane transport or a still-unidentified humoral factor.
 ...
PMID:Cellular calcium metabolism in primary hypertension. 243 55

In the Swiss Ketanserin Study the antihypertensive efficacy and tolerability of ketanserin (given in 20 or 40 mg doses twice daily) was investigated, after a placebo run-in phase, as monotherapy (n = 68) as well as in combination with either atenolol (100 mg/day) (n = 30) or the potassium-sparing diuretic hydrochlorothiazide (50 mg/day) and amiloride (5 mg/day) (n = 26) in 124 patients with essential hypertension, aged 41 to 82 years. With the addition of ketanserin, diastolic blood pressure fell by 8 +/- 8, 8 +/- 8, and 7 +/- 9 (+/- SD) mm Hg, respectively (p less than 0.05 for all) in the three treatment groups; heart rate remained unchanged or fell slightly. Ketanserin had no effect on body weight, or biochemical variables, including total serum cholesterol and triglycerides, with the exception of a minor increase in apolipoprotein B. Using a patient self-assessment questionnaire (30 items), the addition of ketanserin was associated with a reduction of most of the symptoms encountered in the placebo phase, including sleep disturbances, general feeling of weakness, headaches, nervousness, and fatigue, but there was a tendency toward increases in stuffy nose and dry mouth. In patients older than 60 years, the antihypertensive efficacy of ketanserin was greater, with 59% achieving a diastolic pressure less than or equal to 95 mm Hg versus 45% in the younger patients. This age trend also emerged when ketanserin was combined with either atenolol or the diuretic.
 ...
PMID:Antihypertensive efficacy of ketanserin alone or in combination with a beta-blocker or a diuretic: the Swiss Ketanserin Study. 244 58

The role of dietary calcium in essential hypertension remains controversial. Various studies have found on the one hand a weak negative correlation between blood pressure and Ca2+ intake in special groups, and on the other hand a positive correlation between serum Ca2+ concentration and blood pressure. Several disturbances of cellular Ca2+ metabolism have been described in essential hypertension and in the spontaneously hypertensive rat. Possibly the elevation of intracellular free Ca2+ concentration in arterial smooth muscle cells is one important step in the pathogenesis of primary hypertension. In most studies a decreased energy-dependent Ca2+ transport has been proposed as a mechanism. However, disturbances in cellular Ca2+ metabolism, which can be exclusively ascribed to essential hypertension, have not yet been found. The cause of altered cellular Ca2+ transport in primary hypertension may either be a genetically determined defect of membrane transport or a still unidentified humoral factor.
 ...
PMID:Calcium and primary hypertension. 244 13

Lisinopril, a long-acting angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor, and the calcium channel blocker nifedipine in its retard formulation, were compared as monotherapy in a group of 45 patients with essential hypertension. Lisinopril in single daily doses (range 20-80 mg, median dose 40 mg) and nifedipine retard in twice daily doses (total daily dose range 40-80 mg, median dose 60 mg) were equally effective in controlling hypertension. The lisinopril group (n = 30), at baseline supine blood pressure 178/109 +/- 23/9 mm Hg (mean +/- 1 SD), after 12 weeks' therapy measured 148/88 +/- 27/14 mm Hg; the nifedipine group (n = 15), at baseline 185/110 +/- 23/11 mm Hg, after 12 weeks' therapy measured 151/89 +/- 14/10 mm Hg. The number of patients who experienced clinical adverse effects was significantly greater in the nifedipine group: 8 of 15 (53%) compared to 4 of 30 (13%) in the lisinopril group. The commonest adverse effects of patients on nifedipine were swollen ankles, flushing, and headache. Two patients on nifedipine were withdrawn from the study because of their adverse experiences. Of the patients on lisinopril there were single reports of flushing, ankle swelling, tiredness, and chest pain. No patient withdrew from lisinopril because of an adverse experience. No adverse laboratory experiences were recorded in either group. In conclusion, lisinopril and nifedipine retard were equally effective in controlling essential hypertension. Lisinopril was, however, better tolerated during this study.
 ...
PMID:Comparative efficacy of lisinopril and nifedipine retard in essential hypertension: a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. 245 54

The efficacy and safety of prazosin GITS (gastro-intestinal therapeutic system), a new extended-release once-a-day formulation, were assessed both as monotherapy in mild essential hypertension and in combination with a diuretic in moderate essential hypertension in two multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials. Prazosin GITS (Minipress XL) given once daily in doses of either 10 or 20 mg significantly reduced sitting and standing systolic and diastolic blood pressure compared with placebo in both mild and moderate essential hypertension. There were minimal, clinically insignificant changes in heart rate following prazosin-GITS treatment (2.5, 10, and 20 mg) compared with placebo treatment. Prazosin GITS was well tolerated; the most common adverse experiences reported were headache, dizziness, and fatigue. All adverse experiences in the moderate hypertension group and the majority (91 percent) in the mild hypertension group were mild-to-moderate in severity. The results from these multicenter trials demonstrate the efficacy and safety of this new extended-release once-a-day formulation of prazosin in the treatment of patients with mild and moderate essential hypertension.
 ...
PMID:Efficacy and safety of Minipress XL, a new once-a-day formulation of prazosin. 266 73

Urapidil is a postsynaptic alpha 1-adrenoceptor antagonist with a pharmacodynamic profile similar to prazosin. Unlike prazosin, however, urapidil also has some central activity which may explain the apparent improved tolerability of urapidil, including the absence of first-dose syncope. In clinical trials urapidil therapy resulted in significant reductions in blood pressure in patients with mild to severe essential hypertension, with little influence on heart rate. It is an effective antihypertensive when administered as monotherapy or in combination with beta-blockers and thiazide diuretics. In the few patients with cardiac dysfunction who have been studied to date, urapidil has improved myocardial oxygen consumption, systemic vascular resistance, left ventricular function, cardiac output and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure; however, further study is needed to assess the full therapeutic potential of urapidil in these patients. Urapidil has also been used successfully in the treatment of hypertensive emergencies, including eclampsia and pre-eclampsia, hypertensive crisis and hypertension occurring during general and cardiac surgery, rapidly lowering blood pressure without altering heart rate. Urapidil does not affect lipid or glucose metabolism, nor does it impair renal function. In addition, urapidil may be beneficial to patients with pulmonary hypertension, in whom it dilates pulmonary vascular beds to a greater extent than systemic vasculature, although therapeutic trials have not examined this effect. The most common adverse effects associated with urapidil therapy are dizziness, nausea, headache, fatigue and palpitations; however, these tend to be mild and transient and usually do not require discontinuation of treatment. Thus, urapidil offers a useful alternative to currently available drugs for the treatment of mild to severe hypertension, either as monotherapy or in combination with other antihypertensive drugs.
 ...
PMID:Urapidil. A review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and therapeutic potential in the treatment of hypertension. 269 46


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