Suppr超能文献

奥美沙坦与雷米普利治疗老年轻至中度收缩期和舒张期原发性高血压的降压疗效及安全性

Antihypertensive efficacy and safety of olmesartan and ramipril in elderly patients with mild to moderate systolic and diastolic essential hypertension.

作者信息

Mallion Jean-Michel, Omboni Stefano, Barton John, Van Mieghem Walter, Narkiewicz Krzysztof, Panzer Peter-Klaus, Puig Juan García, Stefanadis Christodoulos, Zweiker Robert

机构信息

Cardiology and Arterial Hypertension, CHU de Grenoble, Grenoble, France.

出版信息

Blood Press Suppl. 2011 Apr;1:3-11. doi: 10.3109/08037051.2010.532332. Epub 2010 Nov 23.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and safety of olmesartan medoxomil (O) and ramipril (R) in elderly patients with essential arterial hypertension.

METHODS

After a 2-week placebo washout, 351 elderly hypertensive patients aged 65-89 years (office sitting diastolic blood pressure, DBP, 90-109 mmHg and office sitting systolic blood pressure, SBP, 140-179 mmHg) were randomized double-blind to 12-week treatment with O 10 mg or R 2.5 mg once daily. After the first 2 and 6 weeks, doses could be doubled in non-normalized (blood pressure <140/90 mmHg for non-diabetic and <130/80 mmHg for diabetic) subjects, up to 40 mg for O and 10 mg for R. Office blood pressures were assessed at randomization, after 2, 6 and 12 weeks of treatment; 24-h ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) was recorded at randomization and after 12 weeks.

RESULTS

At week 12, in the intention-to-treat population (170 patients O and 175 R) the rate of normalized subjects was significantly larger in the O group (38.8% vs 26.3% R; p = 0.013). Baseline-adjusted mean sitting office blood pressure reduction at final visit was not significantly greater under O [SBP: 16.6 (95% confidence interval 14.0/19.2) mmHg vs 13.0 (10.4/15.6) mmHg R, p = 0.206; DBP: 11.8 (10.3/13.3) mmHg vs 10.5 (9.0/12.0) mmHg, p = 0.351]. In the subgroup of patients with valid ABP recordings (38 O and 47 R), the reduction in 24-h average blood pressure was significantly (p < 0.01) larger with O [SBP: 8.9 (9.8/8.1) and DBP: 5.7 (6.3/5.1) mmHg] than with R [6.7 (7.9/5.6) and 4.4 (5.1/3.7) mmHg]. The superiority of O was particularly evident in the last 4 h from the dosing interval. The proportion of patients with drug-related adverse events was comparable in the two groups (4.0% O vs 4.5% R), as well as the number of patients discontinuing study drug because of a side-effect (8 O vs 7 R).

CONCLUSIONS

In elderly patients with essential arterial hypertension, O provides an effective, prolonged and well tolerated blood pressure control, with significantly better blood pressure normalization than R and represents a useful option among first-line drug treatments of hypertension in this age group.

摘要

目的

比较奥美沙坦酯(O)与雷米普利(R)治疗老年原发性高血压患者的疗效和安全性。

方法

经过2周的安慰剂洗脱期后,351例年龄在65 - 89岁的老年高血压患者(诊室坐位舒张压,DBP,90 - 109 mmHg,诊室坐位收缩压,SBP,140 - 179 mmHg)被随机双盲分为两组,分别接受每日1次10 mg O或2.5 mg R治疗12周。在最初的2周和6周后,血压未达标的患者(非糖尿病患者血压<140/90 mmHg,糖尿病患者血压<130/80 mmHg)剂量可加倍,O最高可达40 mg,R最高可达10 mg。在随机分组时、治疗2、6和12周后评估诊室血压;在随机分组时和治疗12周后记录24小时动态血压(ABP)。

结果

在第12周时,在意向性治疗人群(170例O组患者和175例R组患者)中,O组血压达标的患者比例显著高于R组(38.8%对26.3%;p = 0.013)。末次访视时,经基线调整后的诊室坐位平均血压降幅在O组并不显著大于R组[SBP:16.6(95%置信区间14.0/19.2)mmHg对13.0(10.4/15.6)mmHg,p = 0.206;DBP:11.8(10.3/13.3)mmHg对10.5(9.0/12.0)mmHg,p = 0.351]。在有有效ABP记录的患者亚组(38例O组和47例R组)中,O组24小时平均血压降幅显著(p < 0.01)大于R组[SBP:8.9(9.8/8.1)和DBP:5.7(6.3/5.1)mmHg]对[6.7(7.9/5.6)和4.4(5.1/3.7)mmHg]。O组的优势在给药间隔的最后4小时尤为明显。两组药物相关不良事件的患者比例相当(O组为4.0%对R组为4.5%),因副作用而停用研究药物的患者数量也相当(O组8例对R组7例)。

结论

在老年原发性高血压患者中,奥美沙坦酯能有效、持久地控制血压,耐受性良好;与雷米普利相比,血压达标情况显著更好,是该年龄组高血压一线药物治疗中的一个有用选择。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验