Suppr超能文献

盎格鲁-斯堪的纳维亚心脏结局试验-降压分支(ASCOT-BPLA):氨氯地平降压方案按需加用培哚普利与阿替洛尔按需加用苄氟噻嗪预防心血管事件的多中心随机对照试验

Prevention of cardiovascular events with an antihypertensive regimen of amlodipine adding perindopril as required versus atenolol adding bendroflumethiazide as required, in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial-Blood Pressure Lowering Arm (ASCOT-BPLA): a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

作者信息

Dahlöf Björn, Sever Peter S, Poulter Neil R, Wedel Hans, Beevers D Gareth, Caulfield Mark, Collins Rory, Kjeldsen Sverre E, Kristinsson Arni, McInnes Gordon T, Mehlsen Jesper, Nieminen Markku, O'Brien Eoin, Ostergren Jan

机构信息

Department of Medicine, Sahlgrenska University Hospital/Ostra, SE-416 85 Göteborg, Sweden.

出版信息

Lancet. 2005;366(9489):895-906. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67185-1.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The apparent shortfall in prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD) noted in early hypertension trials has been attributed to disadvantages of the diuretics and beta blockers used. For a given reduction in blood pressure, some suggested that newer agents would confer advantages over diuretics and beta blockers. Our aim, therefore, was to compare the effect on non-fatal myocardial infarction and fatal CHD of combinations of atenolol with a thiazide versus amlodipine with perindopril.

METHODS

We did a multicentre, prospective, randomised controlled trial in 19 257 patients with hypertension who were aged 40-79 years and had at least three other cardiovascular risk factors. Patients were assigned either amlodipine 5-10 mg adding perindopril 4-8 mg as required (amlodipine-based regimen; n=9639) or atenolol 50-100 mg adding bendroflumethiazide 1.25-2.5 mg and potassium as required (atenolol-based regimen; n=9618). Our primary endpoint was non-fatal myocardial infarction (including silent myocardial infarction) and fatal CHD. Analysis was by intention to treat.

FINDINGS

The study was stopped prematurely after 5.5 years' median follow-up and accumulated in total 106 153 patient-years of observation. Though not significant, compared with the atenolol-based regimen, fewer individuals on the amlodipine-based regimen had a primary endpoint (429 vs 474; unadjusted HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.79-1.02, p=0.1052), fatal and non-fatal stroke (327 vs 422; 0.77, 0.66-0.89, p=0.0003), total cardiovascular events and procedures (1362 vs 1602; 0.84, 0.78-0.90, p<0.0001), and all-cause mortality (738 vs 820; 0.89, 0.81-0.99, p=0.025). The incidence of developing diabetes was less on the amlodipine-based regimen (567 vs 799; 0.70, 0.63-0.78, p<0.0001).

INTERPRETATION

The amlodipine-based regimen prevented more major cardiovascular events and induced less diabetes than the atenolol-based regimen. On the basis of previous trial evidence, these effects might not be entirely explained by better control of blood pressure, and this issue is addressed in the accompanying article. Nevertheless, the results have implications with respect to optimum combinations of antihypertensive agents.

摘要

背景

早期高血压试验中发现预防冠心病(CHD)方面存在明显不足,这被归因于所使用的利尿剂和β受体阻滞剂的缺点。对于给定的血压降低幅度,一些人认为新型药物比利尿剂和β受体阻滞剂具有优势。因此,我们的目的是比较阿替洛尔与噻嗪类药物联合使用与氨氯地平与培哚普利联合使用对非致命性心肌梗死和致命性冠心病的影响。

方法

我们对19257例年龄在40 - 79岁且至少有其他三种心血管危险因素的高血压患者进行了一项多中心、前瞻性、随机对照试验。患者被随机分配接受氨氯地平5 - 10 mg并根据需要加用培哚普利4 - 8 mg(氨氯地平组方案;n = 9639)或阿替洛尔50 - 100 mg并根据需要加用苄氟噻嗪1.25 - 2.5 mg和钾剂(阿替洛尔组方案;n = 9618)。我们的主要终点是非致命性心肌梗死(包括无症状性心肌梗死)和致命性冠心病。分析采用意向性治疗。

结果

在中位随访5.5年后,该研究提前终止,共积累了106153患者 - 年的观察数据。与阿替洛尔组方案相比,氨氯地平组方案中发生主要终点事件的个体较少(429例对474例;未调整的风险比0.90,95%置信区间0.79 - 1.02,p = 0.1052),致命性和非致命性卒中较少(327例对422例;0.77,0.66 - 0.89,p = 0.0003),总的心血管事件和手术较少(1362例对1602例;0.84,0.78 - 0.90,p < 0.0001),全因死亡率较低(738例对820例;0.89,0.81 - 0.99,p = 0.025)。基于氨氯地平的方案发生糖尿病的发生率较低(567例对799例;0.70,0.63 - 0.78,p < 0.0001)。

解读

与基于阿替洛尔的方案相比,基于氨氯地平的方案预防了更多的主要心血管事件且诱发糖尿病的情况较少。根据先前的试验证据,这些效应可能无法完全通过更好地控制血压来解释,相关文章中对此问题进行了探讨。尽管如此,这些结果对于抗高血压药物的最佳联合使用具有启示意义。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验