...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of hypertension >Moderate versus intensive treatment of hypertension with amlodipine/valsartan for patients uncontrolled on angiotensin receptor blocker monotherapy.
【24h】

Moderate versus intensive treatment of hypertension with amlodipine/valsartan for patients uncontrolled on angiotensin receptor blocker monotherapy.

机译:使用氨氯地平/缬沙坦对高血压患者进行中度和强化治疗,这些患者在血管紧张素受体阻滞剂单一疗法的控制下无法控制。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVES: Many angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) monotherapy patients need at least two agents to control blood pressure (BP). We investigated whether initiating intensive treatment with combination amlodipine/valsartan was superior to moderate treatment with amlodipine/valsartan in patients previously uncontrolled on ARB monotherapy. METHODS: In this 12-week study, patients aged at least 18 years on ARB (other than valsartan) for at least 28 days (with treatment-naive patients or those not controlled on agents other than an ARB treated with open-label olmesartan 20 or 40 mg, respectively, for 28 days) and with uncontrolled mean sitting systolic blood pressure (MSSBP; >/= 150-<200 mmHg) were randomized to amlodipine/valsartan 5/320 mg (n = 369) or 5/160 mg (n = 359). At week 2, the dose was increased to 10/320 mg in the intensive arm. Hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg was added to both arms at week 4. Optional up-titration with hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg at week 8 was allowed if MSSBP was more than 140 mmHg. RESULTS: At baseline, mean office sitting BP was comparable in the intensive (163.9/95.5 mmHg) and moderate (163.3/95.0 mmHg) groups. Intensive treatment provided greater BP reductions versus moderate treatment (P < 0.05) from week 4 (-23.0/-10.4 versus -19.2/-8.7 mmHg; primary endpoint) to week 12 (-29.0/-14.8 versus -25.3/-12.3 mmHg). Adverse events were reported by a similar percentage of patients in both groups (36.3% intensive, 37.6% moderate); peripheral edema was more common with intensive versus moderate treatment (8.7 versus 4.5%; P = 0.025). CONCLUSIONS: Initiating treatment with an intensive dose of amlodipine/valsartan provides significantly greater BP lowering versus moderate treatment in hypertensive patients unresponsive to ARB monotherapy. Both treatment regimens were generally well tolerated based on adverse event reports, but the lack of routine laboratory testing after screening limits conclusions on tolerability.
机译:目的:许多血管紧张素受体阻滞剂(ARB)单一疗法患者需要至少两种药物来控制血压(BP)。我们调查了在以前未经ARB单药治疗的患者中,开始使用氨氯地平/缬沙坦联合强化治疗是否优于使用氨氯地平/缬沙坦的中度治疗。方法:在这项为期12周的研究中,年龄至少为18岁的ARB(缬沙坦除外)患者至少28天(初治患者或未接受开放标签奥美沙坦治疗的非ARB药物的患者除外)或分别40毫克或40毫克,持续28天)和平均收缩期血压不受控制(MSSBP;> / = 150- <200 mmHg)随机分配到氨氯地平/缬沙坦5/320毫克(n = 369)或5/160毫克(n = 359)。在第2周,在强化组中剂量增加至10/320 mg。在第4周将12.5 mg氢氯噻嗪添加到两个手臂中。如果MSSBP超过140 mmHg,则在第8周时可选用12.5 mg氢氯噻嗪上调。结果:在基线时,高强度组(163.9 / 95.5 mmHg)和中度组(163.3 / 95.0 mmHg)的平均就诊BP相当。从第4周(-23.0 / -10.4对-19.2 / -8.7 mmHg;主要终点)到第12周(29.0 / -14.8对-25.3 / -12.3 mmHg),强化治疗与中度治疗相比提供了更大的BP降低(P <0.05) )。两组患者报告的不良事件百分比相似(重度36.3%,中度37.6%);强化治疗与中度治疗相比,周围性水肿更为常见(8.7%vs 4.5%; P = 0.025)。结论:与对ARB单一疗法无反应的高血压患者相比,大剂量的氨氯地平/缬沙坦开始治疗与中度治疗相比可显着提高BP降低率。根据不良事件的报道,两种治疗方案的耐受性一般良好,但筛查后缺乏常规实验室检查限制了耐受性的结论。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号