Service of Nephrology and Hypertension Consultation, Department of Medicine, CHUV, Lausanne, Switzerland.
J Hypertens. 2010 Mar;28(3):520-6. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0b013e3283346be1.
The goal of this study was to investigate whether angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) induce a comparable blockade of AT1 receptors in the vasculature and in the kidney when the renin-angiotensin system is activated by a thiazide diuretic.
Thirty individuals participated in this randomized, controlled, single-blind study. The blood pressure and renal hemodynamic and tubular responses to a 1-h infusion of exogenous angiotensin II (Ang II 3 ng/kg per min) were investigated before and 24 h after a 7-day administration of either irbesartan 300 mg alone or in association with 12.5 or 25 mg hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ). Irbesartan 300/25 mg was also compared with losartan 100 mg, valsartan 160 mg, and olmesartan 20 mg all in association with 25 mg HCTZ. Each participant received two treatments with a 1-week washout period between treatments.
The blood pressure response to Ang II was blocked by more than 90% with irbesartan alone or in association with HCTZ and with olmesartan/HCTZ and by nearly 60% with valsartan/HCTZ and losartan/HCTZ (P < 0.05). In the kidney, Ang II reduced renal plasma flow by 36% at baseline (P < 0.001). Irbesartan +/- HCTZ and olmesartan/HCTZ blocked the renal hemodynamic response to Ang II nearly completely, whereas valsartan/HCTZ and losartan/HCTZ only blunted this effect by 34 and 45%, respectively. At the tubular level, Ang II significantly reduced urinary volume (-84%) and urinary sodium excretion (-65%) (P < 0.01). These tubular effects of Ang II were only partially blunted by the administration of ARBs.
These data demonstrate that ARBs prescribed at their recommended doses do not block renal tubular AT1 receptors as effectively as vascular receptors do. This observation may account for the need of higher doses of ARB for renal protection. Moreover, our results confirm that there are significant differences between ARBs in their capacity to induce a sustained vascular and tubular blockade of Ang II receptors.
本研究旨在探讨血管紧张素Ⅱ受体阻滞剂(ARB)在血管和肾脏中对 AT1 受体的阻断作用是否与血管紧张素原-血管紧张素系统(RAS)被噻嗪类利尿剂激活有关。
本研究为随机、对照、单盲试验,共纳入 30 名志愿者。在单独使用厄贝沙坦 300mg 或联合使用氢氯噻嗪 12.5mg 或 25mg 治疗 7 天后,分别于 1 小时内输注外源性血管紧张素Ⅱ(3ng/kg/min)前后,观察血压和肾脏血流动力学及管状反应。还比较了厄贝沙坦 300/25mg 与氯沙坦 100mg、缬沙坦 160mg 和奥美沙坦 20mg 联合使用氢氯噻嗪 25mg 的效果。每位志愿者接受两种治疗,两种治疗之间有 1 周的洗脱期。
单独使用厄贝沙坦或联合使用氢氯噻嗪以及奥美沙坦/氢氯噻嗪治疗时,血管紧张素Ⅱ的血压反应被阻断了 90%以上,而缬沙坦/氢氯噻嗪和氯沙坦/氢氯噻嗪治疗时则被阻断了近 60%(P<0.05)。在肾脏中,血管紧张素Ⅱ使肾血浆流量减少了 36%(P<0.001)。厄贝沙坦/氢氯噻嗪和奥美沙坦/氢氯噻嗪几乎完全阻断了肾血管对血管紧张素Ⅱ的反应,而缬沙坦/氢氯噻嗪和氯沙坦/氢氯噻嗪仅将其反应减弱了 34%和 45%(P<0.01)。在肾小管水平,血管紧张素Ⅱ显著减少尿容量(-84%)和尿钠排泄(-65%)(P<0.01)。这些血管紧张素Ⅱ的肾小管作用仅被 ARB 的给药部分阻断。
这些数据表明,在推荐剂量下使用的 ARB 并不能像血管受体那样有效地阻断肾脏的肾小管 AT1 受体。这种观察结果可能解释了 ARB 用于肾脏保护时需要更高剂量的原因。此外,我们的结果证实,ARB 在持续阻断血管和肾小管血管紧张素Ⅱ受体方面存在显著差异。