Literature DB >> 2188826

Comparative efficacy and safety of enalapril and sustained-release nifedipine in patients with mild to moderate hypertension. The Enalapril vs Nifedipine French Study Group.

P Gueret1, J Y Artigou, M Benichou, J Berland, P Fressinaud, G Grollier, C D Nguyen.   

Abstract

The long acting angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor enalapril was compared with the calcium channel blocker nifedipine as sustained-release formulation in 136 patients with mild to moderate hypertension. This multicentre study was carried out in a double-blind, double-dummy fashion by 28 cardiologists in private practice. After a 2-week placebo period, patients were randomly allocated to 2 treatment groups; the first group received enalapril 20 mg daily (n = 68), and the second group received sustained-release nifedipine 20 mg twice daily (n = 68). The duration of treatment was 12 weeks. In both groups, hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg was added at week 4 if diastolic blood pressure remained greater than 90 mm Hg. At week 8, if the target diastolic pressure of less than 90 mm Hg was not achieved, the dosage of hydrochlorothiazide was increased to 50mg. The clinical characteristics of the patients in each group were comparable. After 4 weeks of treatment, the reduction in supine diastolic blood pressure was similar in both groups (12.1 mm Hg in the enalapril group vs 10.3 mm Hg in the nifedipine group). Moreover, although the difference between the groups was more noticeable after 12 weeks of treatment (16.3 vs 13.9 mm Hg, respectively), it did not reach significance. The number of patients experiencing clinical adverse effects was significantly greater in the nifedipine group than in the enalapril group [33 (48.5%) vs 18 (26.5%), respectively]. The most common complaints of patients administered nifedipine included swollen ankles, flushing and headaches, whereas complaints in the enalapril group included cough, asthenia, and epigastralgia. Three patients were withdrawn from the study because of side effects in the enalapril group and 10 were withdrawn from the nifedipine group. These results indicate that enalapril and sustained-release nifedipine are equally effective in controlling mild to moderate hypertension. However, enalapril was much better tolerated in this study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2188826     DOI: 10.2165/00003495-199000392-00013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Drugs        ISSN: 0012-6667            Impact factor:   9.546


  13 in total

1.  A clinical pharmacological study of nifedipine and lisinopril alone and in combination.

Authors:  K R Lees; P A Meredith; J L Reid
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Pharmacol       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 3.105

2.  Comparative trial of lisinopril and nifedipine in mild to severe essential hypertension.

Authors:  C Mörlin; H Baglivo; J K Boeijinga; A M Breckenridge; D Clement; G D Johnston; W Klein; R Kramer; R Luccioni; K A Meurer
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Pharmacol       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 3.105

3.  Hemodynamic and reflex responses to acute and chronic antihypertensive therapy with the calcium entry blocker nifedipine.

Authors:  W Kiowski; O Bertel; P Erne; P Bolli; U L Hulthén; R Ritz; F R Bühler
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  1983 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 10.190

Review 4.  Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibition and calcium channel blockade as primary antihypertensive therapy.

Authors:  F R Bühler; F B Müller
Journal:  J Hypertens Suppl       Date:  1986-12

5.  Captopril: contrasting effects of adding hydrochlorothiazide, propranolol, or nifedipine.

Authors:  G A MacGregor; N D Markandu; S J Smith; G A Sagnella
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Pharmacol       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 3.105

6.  Mortality and morbidity results from the European Working Party on High Blood Pressure in the Elderly trial.

Authors:  A Amery; W Birkenhäger; P Brixko; C Bulpitt; D Clement; M Deruyttere; A De Schaepdryver; C Dollery; R Fagard; F Forette
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1985-06-15       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Cardiovascular risk and risk factors in a randomized trial of treatment based on the beta-blocker oxprenolol: the International Prospective Primary Prevention Study in Hypertension (IPPPSH). The IPPPSH Collaborative Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Hypertens       Date:  1985-08       Impact factor: 4.844

8.  MRC trial of treatment of mild hypertension: principal results. Medical Research Council Working Party.

Authors: 
Journal:  Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)       Date:  1985-07-13

9.  The effects of nifedipine and captopril on renal function in patients with essential hypertension: comparison with sodium nitroprusside.

Authors:  A Hara; M Matsunaga; K Ogawa; C H Pak; C Kawai; T Nakamura
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Pharmacol       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 3.105

10.  Captopril in essential hypertension; contrasting effects of adding hydrochlorothiazide or propranolol.

Authors:  G A MacGregor; N D Markandu; R A Banks; J Bayliss; J E Roulston; J C Jones
Journal:  Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)       Date:  1982-03-06
View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  [Transcultural symptomatology. Its expression in family practice].

Authors:  M Ferron
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 3.275

Review 2.  Enalapril. A reappraisal of its pharmacology and therapeutic use in hypertension.

Authors:  P A Todd; K L Goa
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 9.546

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.