Ruff D, Gazdick L P, Berman R, Goldberg A I, Sweet C S
Merck Research Laboratories, West Point, PA, USA.
J Hypertens. 1996 Feb;14(2):263-70. doi: 10.1097/00004872-199602000-00017.
To compare the efficacy and safety of a regimen of losartan potassium (losartan) and a regimen of enalapril maleate (enalapril) in a randomized trial of patients with severe hypertension in which the initial treatments were blinded.
Seventy-five patients, 23-74 years of age, with sitting diastolic blood pressure of 115-130mmHg, were enrolled in a 12-site multicenter study. The primary efficacy parameters were the change in trough systolic and diastolic blood pressure, as well as response to treatment in terms of categories of hypertensive response.
A gradual reduction in mean sitting diastolic blood pressure was observed in all patients treated from week 1 to 12 (10-29mmHg for the losartan regimen and 14-32 mmHg for the enalapril regimen). At week 4, a substantial number of patients remained on monotherapy at either the initial dose or double the dose of losartan (52%) or enalapril (72%). The blood pressure curves for each treatment were parallel over time. The enalapril-based regimen elicited a statistically significantly greater reduction in blood pressure than the losartan-based regimen, although the mean differences in the blood pressure response between the two treatment groups was small. Based on sitting diastolic blood pressure < 90 mmHg or a reduction in blood pressure of at least 10 mmHg, 98% of the patients assigned to the losartan regimen and 100% of the patients assigned to the enalapril regimen had a satisfactory response with a regimen of one to three antihypertensive drugs. Headache was the most common adverse experience in both treatment groups (occurring in 22% of patients assigned to the losartan regimen and 20% of patients assigned to the enalapril regimen).
In this study, the losartan-based regimen effectively lowered blood pressure, was generally well tolerated, and was generally similar to the enalapril-based regimen in the treatment of patients with severe hypertension.
在一项针对重度高血压患者的随机试验中,比较氯沙坦钾(氯沙坦)方案和马来酸依那普利(依那普利)方案的疗效和安全性,该试验的初始治疗采用盲法。
75例年龄在23 - 74岁、坐位舒张压为115 - 130mmHg的患者参加了一项在12个地点进行的多中心研究。主要疗效参数为谷值收缩压和舒张压的变化,以及根据高血压反应类别划分的治疗反应。
从第1周到第12周,所有接受治疗的患者坐位舒张压均逐渐降低(氯沙坦方案降低10 - 29mmHg,依那普利方案降低14 - 32mmHg)。在第4周时,相当数量的患者仍接受初始剂量或双倍剂量氯沙坦(52%)或依那普利(72%)的单药治疗。随着时间推移,每种治疗的血压曲线呈平行状态。基于依那普利的方案在血压降低方面比基于氯沙坦的方案具有统计学上显著更大的降幅,尽管两个治疗组之间血压反应的平均差异较小。根据坐位舒张压<90mmHg或血压降低至少10mmHg,分配到氯沙坦方案的患者中有98%以及分配到依那普利方案的患者中有100%对一至三种抗高血压药物方案有满意反应。头痛是两个治疗组中最常见的不良经历(分配到氯沙坦方案的患者中有22%出现,分配到依那普利方案的患者中有20%出现)。
在本研究中,基于氯沙坦的方案有效降低血压,耐受性总体良好,在治疗重度高血压患者方面总体上与基于依那普利的方案相似。