...
首页> 外文期刊>Stroke: A Journal of Cerebral Circulation >Morbidity and Mortality After Stroke, Eprosartan Compared with Nitrendipine for Secondary Prevention: principal results of a prospective randomized controlled study (MOSES).
【24h】

Morbidity and Mortality After Stroke, Eprosartan Compared with Nitrendipine for Secondary Prevention: principal results of a prospective randomized controlled study (MOSES).

机译:中风后依普沙坦与尼群地平的二级预防比较:发病率和死亡率:一项前瞻性随机对照研究(MOSES)的主要结果。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In hypertensive stroke patients, for the same level of blood pressure control, eprosartan will be more effective than nitrendipine in reducing cerebrovascular and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. METHODS: A total of 1405 well-defined, high-risk hypertensives with cerebral event during the last 24 months (proven by cerebral computed tomography scan or nuclear magnetic resonance) were randomized to eprosartan or nitrendipine (mean follow-up 2.5 years). Primary end point was the composite of total mortality and all cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, including all recurrent events. RESULTS: Randomization was successful without significant differences in the baseline characteristics. Blood pressure was reduced to a comparable extent without any significant differences between the 2 groups during the whole study period (150.7/84 mm Hg and 152.0/87.2 mm Hg with eprosartan and nitrendipine therapy to 137.5/80.8 mm Hg and 136.0/80.2 mm Hg, respectively, confirmed by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring). Moreover, already after 3 months, normotensive mean values were achieved, and 75.5% reached values <140/90 mm Hg with the eprosartan regimen and 77.7% with the nitrendipine regimen. During follow-up, in total, 461 primary events occurred: 206 eprosartan and 255 nitrendipine (incidence density ratio [IDR], 0.79; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.96; P=0.014). Cardiovascular events were: 77 eprosartan and 101 nitrendipine (IDR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.55 to 1.02; P=0.06); cerebrovascular events: 102 eprosartan and134 nitrendipine (IDR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.97; P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: The Morbidity and Mortality After Stroke, Eprosartan Compared With Nitrendipine for Secondary Prevention (MOSES) study was the first to compare an angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonist with a calcium antagonist in secondary stroke prevention. In these high-risk hypertensive stroke patients, an early normotensive and comparable blood pressure was achieved. The combined primary end point was significantly lower inthe eprosartan group.
机译:背景与目的:在高血压中风患者中,在血压控制水平相同的情况下,依普罗沙坦在降低脑血管和心血管疾病的发病率和死亡率方面比尼群地平更有效。方法:在过去的24个月中(通过计算机断层扫描或核磁共振证实)共1405例定义明确的高危高血压并发脑事件的患者被随机分配至依普罗沙坦或尼群地平(平均随访2。5年)。主要终点是总死亡率与所有心血管和脑血管事件(包括所有复发事件)的总和。结果:随机化成功,基线特征无明显差异。在整个研究期间,两组患者的血压均降低至可比较的程度,无明显差异(使用依普罗沙坦和尼群地平治疗的150.7 / 84 mm Hg和152.0 / 87.2 mm Hg分别为137.5 / 80.8 mm Hg和136.0 / 80.2 mm Hg分别通过动态血压监测确认)。此外,在3个月后,血压已达到正常平均值,依普罗沙坦方案为75.5%<140/90 mm Hg,而尼群地平方案为77.7%。在随访期间,总共发生了461例主要事件:206依普罗沙坦和255尼群地平(发生密度比[IDR]为0.79; 95%CI为0.66至0.96; P = 0.014)。心血管事件为:77依普罗沙坦和101尼群地平(IDR,0.75; 95%CI,0.55至1.02; P = 0.06);脑血管事件:102依普罗沙坦和134尼群地平(IDR,0.75; 95%CI,0.58至0.97; P = 0.03)。结论:依普罗沙坦与尼群地平用于二级预防的中风发病率和死亡率比较是首次比较血管紧张素II 1型受体拮抗剂和钙拮抗剂在二级中风预防中的发病率和死亡率。在这些高危高血压中风患者中,可以实现早期的正常血压和相当的血压。依普罗沙坦组的合并主要终点显着降低。

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