Suppr超能文献

肼屈嗪治疗动脉高血压。传统/缓释剂型与每日两次/每日四次给药方案的随机双盲比较。

Hydralazine in arterial hypertension. Randomized double-blind comparison of conventional/Slow-Release formulation and of b.i.d./q.i.d. dosage regimens.

作者信息

Wulff K, Lenz K, Krogsgaard A R, Holst B

出版信息

Acta Med Scand. 1980;208(1-2):49-54.

PMID:7435247
Abstract

Blood pressure (BP) control and tolerability of three two-week dosage regimens of hydralazine--conventional hydralazine q.i.d., conventional hydralazine b.i.d. and slow-release hydralazine b.i.d--were compared in a double-blind, randomized, cross-over trial in 20 out-patients with arterial hypertension controlled with hydralazine in combination with other antihypertensive drugs. The efficacy of the treatments was assessed during the last two days of each treatment period by determination of BP and pulse rate every hour between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. No statistically significant differences in BP and pulse rate were found between the three treatment regimens, either in the variation during the day or in the mean value for the day. There was a tendency to lowest BPs on conventional hydralizine q.i.d. and to highest on conventional hydralazine b.i.d. Mean differences in supine BP between conventional hydralazine b.i.d. and slow-release hydralazine b.i.d. were 3.2 systolic and 0.5 mmHg diastolic. In this short-term study, mean values with 95% confidence limits indicate that conventional hydralazine in a q.i.d. dosage can be replaced by the same preparation or slow-release formulation in a b.i.d. dosage. Acetylator phenotype was determined and had no significant influence on the results, although there was a tendency to more widespread variability in systolic pressure and to a lower pulse rate in fast acetylators. Unwanted effects were few and did not differ obviously between the treatments. Whether the frequency of late toxicity of hydralazine is lower with slow-release formulation remains to be evaluated in long-term studies.

摘要

在一项双盲、随机、交叉试验中,对20名联用肼屈嗪及其他抗高血压药物控制血压的门诊高血压患者,比较了三种为期两周的肼屈嗪给药方案(传统肼屈嗪每日四次、传统肼屈嗪每日两次和缓释肼屈嗪每日两次)的血压控制情况和耐受性。在每个治疗期的最后两天,通过测定上午8点至下午6点每小时的血压和脉搏率来评估治疗效果。三种治疗方案之间在日间变化或日间平均值方面,血压和脉搏率均未发现统计学上的显著差异。传统肼屈嗪每日四次时血压倾向于最低,传统肼屈嗪每日两次时血压倾向于最高。传统肼屈嗪每日两次与缓释肼屈嗪每日两次之间仰卧位血压的平均差异为收缩压3.2 mmHg,舒张压0.5 mmHg。在这项短期研究中,具有95%置信区间的平均值表明,传统肼屈嗪每日四次给药可被相同制剂或每日两次给药的缓释制剂替代。测定了乙酰化表型,其对结果无显著影响,尽管快乙酰化者收缩压变异性更广泛且脉搏率较低。不良反应较少,各治疗组之间无明显差异。缓释制剂的肼屈嗪晚期毒性发生率是否较低仍有待长期研究评估。

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