Guha Santanu, Avasthi Rajnish, Narain V S, Rajendiran C, Mitra Monjori, Ray Sayantan, Majumdar Debdutta, Mondal Md Miraj, Mani Siddhartha, Mookerjee Soura, Saha Jayanta, Dastidaro Dipankar Ghosh
J Indian Med Assoc. 2013 Dec;111(12):821-5.
Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring provides a more reliable assessment of actual BP than office BP and is a more sensitive risk predictor of clinical cardiovascular outcomes. Recent international guidelines for hypertension have emphasised the usefulness of ambulatory BP for diagnosis and management of hypertension. We used ambulatory blood pressure monitoring to monitor the effect of the pharmacological treatment in patients with stage 1 or 2 hypertension. This was a multicentric randomised controlled trial having 360 subjects with 180 in each treatment arm. The duration of study was 6 months. The patients were randomly selected to receive atenolol or losartan as initial therapy. The dose of atenolol or losartan was 50 mg once daily at 8 am in the morning. Ambulatory BP assessment was done in a subgroup of subjects using Schiller BR-102 plus machine. One hundred and thirty patients were recruited for the study using ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. There were 66 patients in atenolol arm and 64 patients in the losartan arm. A significant white coat hypertension was noticed in both the arms. Out of 130 subjects in the ambulatory group, 41.53% had a white coat hypertension. Statistically significant reduction of office BP was observed with both atenolol and losartan; however, no significant difference in efficacy of the two drugs was found in reducing office BP. However, when using ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, the reduction with either drug was not significant. The dipper status was better in the atenolol group than the losartan group. Neither of the drugs prevent morning surge of BP when administered once daily in the morning. There was high prevalence of white coat hypertension in patients with stage 1 and stage 2 hypertension. There was similar reduction of systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure by the 2 study drugs. Atenolol scores over losartan in converting non-dipper to dipper but its' impact on clinical outcome is not known. Morning surge of BP was unaffected by either of the study drugs.
动态血压监测比诊室血压能更可靠地评估实际血压,并且是临床心血管结局更敏感的风险预测指标。近期国际高血压指南强调了动态血压在高血压诊断和管理中的作用。我们采用动态血压监测来监测1或2级高血压患者药物治疗的效果。这是一项多中心随机对照试验,有360名受试者,每个治疗组180人。研究持续时间为6个月。患者被随机选择接受阿替洛尔或氯沙坦作为初始治疗。阿替洛尔或氯沙坦的剂量为每天早上8点50毫克一次。使用席勒BR - 102 plus仪器对一部分受试者进行动态血压评估。130名患者采用动态血压监测纳入研究。阿替洛尔组有66名患者,氯沙坦组有64名患者。两组均发现明显的白大衣高血压现象。在动态血压监测组的130名受试者中,41.53%患有白大衣高血压。阿替洛尔和氯沙坦均可使诊室血压有统计学意义的降低;然而,在降低诊室血压方面,两种药物的疗效无显著差异。然而,使用动态血压监测时,两种药物的降压效果均不显著。阿替洛尔组的杓型状态优于氯沙坦组。两种药物每日早晨单次给药时均不能预防血压晨峰。1级和2级高血压患者中白大衣高血压的患病率较高。两种研究药物降低收缩压和舒张压的效果相似。在将非杓型转变为杓型方面,阿替洛尔优于氯沙坦,但其对临床结局的影响尚不清楚。两种研究药物均未影响血压晨峰。