de Leeuw P W, Notter T, Zilles P
Department of Internal Medicine, University Hospital, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
J Hypertens. 1997 Jan;15(1):87-91. doi: 10.1097/00004872-199715010-00009.
To compare the effects of fixed-dose preparations containing 180 mg sustained-release verapamil and 2 mg trandolapril, 100/25 mg atenolol/chlorthalidone, 20/12.5 mg lisinopril/hydrochlorothiazide and placebo in patients with essential hypertension.
A 4-week placebo run-in period followed by a double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel group study lasting 8 weeks.
Office practices (21 centres).
Patients with essential hypertension (World Health Organization grades I or II); supine diastolic blood pressure 101-114 mmHg in week 4 of the run-in period; 215 patients were enrolled, of whom 205 were assigned randomly to double-blind therapy.
Reduction in supine and standing blood pressures.
All three active treatments with a single daily dose were significantly more effective than was placebo in reducing the blood pressure of seated subjects (P=0.0001). The reductions in sitting diastolic blood pressure (DBP) from baseline to the last visit with each active treatment were comparable: 13 mmHg [95% confidence interval (CI) 16-9] with sustained-release verapamil/trandolapril, 13 mmHg (16-9) with atenolol/chlorthalidone and 12 mmHg (15-8) with lisinopril/hydrochlorothiazide. Normalization of blood pressure (DBP < 90 mmHg) was observed in 48% of patients with sustained-release verapamil/trandolapril, in 46% with atenolol/chlorthalidone and in 40% with lisinopril/hydrochlorothiazide. Response rates (normalization of DBP or a reduction in DBP by > 10 mmHg) with each active treatment were 72% for sustained-release verapamil/trandolapril, 76% for atenolol/chlorthalidone and 69% for lisinopril/hydrochlorothiazide. All three active treatments were tolerated well.
This study demonstrates that the low-dose combination sustained-release verapamil/trandolapril may be a suitable alternative for combinations containing a thiazide diuretic or a beta-blocker for longer term management of hypertensive patients for whom combination therapy is indicated.
比较含180毫克缓释维拉帕米和2毫克群多普利的固定剂量制剂、100/25毫克阿替洛尔/氯噻酮、20/12.5毫克赖诺普利/氢氯噻嗪以及安慰剂对原发性高血压患者的疗效。
为期4周的安慰剂导入期,随后是一项为期8周的双盲、安慰剂对照平行组研究。
门诊(21个中心)。
原发性高血压患者(世界卫生组织I级或II级);导入期第4周仰卧位舒张压为101 - 114毫米汞柱;共纳入215例患者,其中205例被随机分配接受双盲治疗。
仰卧位和站立位血压的降低情况。
所有三种每日单剂量活性治疗在降低坐位受试者血压方面均显著优于安慰剂(P = 0.0001)。每种活性治疗从基线到最后一次访视时坐位舒张压(DBP)的降低幅度相当:缓释维拉帕米/群多普利为13毫米汞柱[95%置信区间(CI)16 - 9],阿替洛尔/氯噻酮为13毫米汞柱(16 - 9),赖诺普利/氢氯噻嗪为12毫米汞柱(15 - 8)。48%接受缓释维拉帕米/群多普利治疗的患者、46%接受阿替洛尔/氯噻酮治疗的患者以及40%接受赖诺普利/氢氯噻嗪治疗的患者血压恢复正常(DBP < 90毫米汞柱)。每种活性治疗的有效率(DBP恢复正常或DBP降低> 10毫米汞柱):缓释维拉帕米/群多普利为72%,阿替洛尔/氯噻酮为76%,赖诺普利/氢氯噻嗪为69%。所有三种活性治疗耐受性良好。
本研究表明,低剂量复方缓释维拉帕米/群多普利可能是含噻嗪类利尿剂或β受体阻滞剂的复方制剂的合适替代药物,用于对有联合治疗指征的高血压患者进行长期管理。