Jackson B, Morgan T O, Gibson J, Anderson A
Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Heidelberg.
Drugs. 1987;34 Suppl 3:109-19. doi: 10.2165/00003495-198700343-00025.
The efficacy and tolerability of felodipine and prazosin were compared in a double-blind randomised parallel group study of 100 patients with moderately severe essential hypertension, treated concomitantly with a beta-blocking drug. After a 2- to 8-week run in phase (beta-blocking drug plus placebo), patients with a diastolic blood pressure greater than or equal to 95mm Hg were randomly given felodipine (n = 50) or prazosin (n = 50). After an initial dose of either felodipine 2.5mg bid or prazosin 0.5mg bid for 3 days, the drugs were titrated at 2-week intervals (felodipine 5, 10, 20mg bid, prazosin 1, 2, 4mg bid) if the supine diastolic blood pressure was greater than or equal to 90mm Hg. Treatment was continued for 8 weeks. Baseline supine blood pressures of each group were similar (177/104mm Hg, felodipine; 176/103mm Hg, prazosin). At week 6, supine blood pressures in the felodipine group were 144/82mm Hg and 161/90 in the prazosin group. The reductions in systolic and diastolic blood pressures were significantly greater for the felodipine group than the prazosin group in both the supine and standing positions at all visits after baseline. At 8 weeks, supine diastolic blood pressure less than 90mm Hg was achieved in more patients in the felodipine (36/47) than in the prazosin group (20/43, p less than 0.01). The total number of adverse reactions was similar in both groups. During active therapy, a greater number of patients experienced vascular adverse reactions (oedema and flushing) with felodipine (23) than with prazosin (12). Most events were mild and did not necessitate withdrawal from therapy. There were no clinically significant changes in laboratory variables in either treatment group. Felodipine was an effective, well tolerated hypotensive agent when used concomitantly with a beta-blocking drug. In the doses used it was more effective than prazosin at reducing blood pressure.
在一项针对100例中度严重原发性高血压患者的双盲随机平行组研究中,比较了非洛地平和哌唑嗪的疗效及耐受性,这些患者同时接受β受体阻滞剂治疗。在为期2至8周的导入期(β受体阻滞剂加安慰剂)后,舒张压大于或等于95mmHg的患者被随机给予非洛地平(n = 50)或哌唑嗪(n = 50)。在初始剂量为非洛地平2.5mg bid或哌唑嗪0.5mg bid治疗3天后,如果仰卧位舒张压大于或等于90mmHg,则每2周对药物进行滴定(非洛地平5、10、20mg bid,哌唑嗪1、2、4mg bid)。治疗持续8周。每组的基线仰卧位血压相似(非洛地平组为177/104mmHg;哌唑嗪组为176/103mmHg)。在第6周时,非洛地平组的仰卧位血压为144/82mmHg,哌唑嗪组为161/90mmHg。在基线后的所有访视中,非洛地平组仰卧位和站立位的收缩压和舒张压降低幅度均显著大于哌唑嗪组。在第8周时,非洛地平组(36/47)比哌唑嗪组(20/43,p<0.01)有更多患者的仰卧位舒张压低于90mmHg。两组的不良反应总数相似。在积极治疗期间,非洛地平组(23例)出现血管不良反应(水肿和潮红)的患者数量多于哌唑嗪组(12例)。大多数事件为轻度,无需停止治疗。两个治疗组的实验室指标均无临床显著变化。非洛地平与β受体阻滞剂合用时是一种有效的、耐受性良好的降压药物。在所使用的剂量下,它在降低血压方面比哌唑嗪更有效。