Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, Wonju Severance Christian Hospital, Wonju, Republic of Korea.
Department of Medicine, Smith Center for Outcomes Research in Cardiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Am J Hypertens. 2020 Aug 4;33(8):748-755. doi: 10.1093/ajh/hpaa060.
Antihypertensive therapy using renin-angiotensin system blockers and calcium channel blockers to target blood pressure variability (BPV) has not yet been established. We aimed to compare the ability of losartan and amlodipine to lower BPV and systolic blood pressure (SBP) in essential hypertensive patients.
Patients were randomly assigned either losartan 50 mg or amlodipine 5 mg. Medications were uptitrated and hydrochlorothiazide was added according to protocol for 6 months. The primary endpoint was the office visit-to-visit SD of SBP. The secondary endpoints included average real variability (ARV), office SBP, and home SBP.
The losartan group (n = 71) and amlodipine group (n = 73) finished the scheduled visits between April 2013 and May 2017. The office visit-to-visit SD of SBP was comparable between the losartan and amlodipine groups (11.0 ± 4.2 vs. 10.5 ± 3.8, P = 0.468). The office visit-to-visit ARV of SBP was significantly elevated in the losartan group (10.6 ± 4.3 vs. 9.1 ± 3.4, P = 0.02). The absolute SBP decrement from baseline to 6 months was similar between groups, although the office mean SBP at 6 months was higher in the losartan group (132.3 ± 12.9 vs. 127.5 ± 9.0 mm Hg, P = 0.011). In home blood pressure analysis, evening day-to-day BPV indexes (SD and ARV) were significantly higher in the losartan group at 6 months.
The lowering effect of the office visit-to-visit SD of SBP was similar between losartan and amlodipine. However, the losartan group showed a higher office visit-to-visit ARV of SBP and evening day-to-day home BPV indexes. Therefore, amlodipine may be better to lower BPV in essential hypertensive patients.
针对血压变异性(BPV),使用肾素-血管紧张素系统阻滞剂和钙通道阻滞剂的降压治疗尚未确立。我们旨在比较氯沙坦和氨氯地平降低原发性高血压患者 BPV 和收缩压(SBP)的能力。
患者被随机分配接受氯沙坦 50mg 或氨氯地平 5mg。根据方案,将药物滴定增量并添加氢氯噻嗪,持续 6 个月。主要终点是诊室就诊间 SBP 的标准差。次要终点包括平均真实变异性(ARV)、诊室 SBP 和家庭 SBP。
氯沙坦组(n=71)和氨氯地平组(n=73)在 2013 年 4 月至 2017 年 5 月之间完成了计划就诊。诊室就诊间 SBP 的标准差在氯沙坦和氨氯地平组之间无差异(11.0±4.2 对 10.5±3.8,P=0.468)。氯沙坦组诊室就诊间 SBP 的 ARV 显著升高(10.6±4.3 对 9.1±3.4,P=0.02)。尽管氯沙坦组 6 个月时诊室平均 SBP 更高(132.3±12.9 对 127.5±9.0mmHg,P=0.011),但两组之间从基线到 6 个月时的 SBP 绝对下降量相似。在家庭血压分析中,6 个月时氯沙坦组的夜间日间 BPV 指标(SD 和 ARV)显著更高。
氯沙坦和氨氯地平降低诊室就诊间 SBP 的标准差效果相似。然而,氯沙坦组 SBP 的诊室就诊间 ARV 以及夜间日间家庭 BPV 指标更高。因此,氨氯地平可能更适合降低原发性高血压患者的 BPV。