Literature DB >> 27340919

Different associations between beta-blockers and other antihypertensive medication combinations with brachial blood pressure and aortic waveform parameters.

John D Sluyter1, Alun D Hughes2, Andrew Lowe3, Kim H Parker4, Carlos A Camargo5, Bernhard Hametner6, Siegfried Wassertheurer6, Robert K R Scragg7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Comparing the relationships of antihypertensive medications with brachial blood pressure (BP) and aortic waveform parameters may help clinicians to predict the effect on the latter in brachial BP-based antihypertensive therapy. We aimed to make such comparisons with new waveform measures and a wider range of antihypertensive regimens than examined previously.
METHODS: Cross-sectional analysis of 2933 adults (61% male; aged 50-84years): 1637 on antihypertensive treatment and 1296 untreated hypertensives. Sixteen medicine regimens of up to 4 combinations of drugs from 6 antihypertensive classes were analysed. Aortic systolic BP, augmentation index (AIx), excess pressure integral (EPI), backward pressure amplitude (Pb), reflection index (RI) and pulse wave velocity (PWV) were calculated from aortic pressure waveforms derived from suprasystolic brachial measurement.
RESULTS: Forest plots of single-drug class comparisons across regimens with the same number of drugs (for between 1- and 3-drug regimens) revealed that AIx, Pb, RI and/or loge(EPI) were higher (maximum difference=5.6%, 2.2mmHg, 0.0192 and 0.13 loge(mmHg⋅s), respectively) with the use of a beta-blocker compared with vasodilators and diuretics, despite no brachial systolic and diastolic BP differences. These differences were reduced (by 34-57%) or eliminated after adjustment for heart rate, and similar effects occurred when controlling for systolic ejection period or diastolic duration.
CONCLUSIONS: Beta-blocker effects on brachial BP may overestimate effects on aortic waveform parameters. Compared to other antihypertensives, beta-blockers have weaker associations with wave reflection measures and EPI; this is predominantly due to influences on heart rate.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Arterial stiffness; Beta-blocker; Central blood pressure; Pulse waveform; Vasodilating antihypertensive agents; Wave reflection

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27340919      PMCID: PMC4964932          DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.06.051

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cardiol        ISSN: 0167-5273            Impact factor:   4.164


  40 in total

1.  Effects of an angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor, ramipril, on cardiovascular events in high-risk patients.

Authors:  S Yusuf; P Sleight; J Pogue; J Bosch; R Davies; G Dagenais
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2000-01-20       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Letter by Nieminen et al regarding article, "Differential impact of blood pressure-lowering drugs on central aortic pressure and clinical outcomes: principal results of the Conduit Artery Function Evaluation (CAFE) study".

Authors:  Tuomo Nieminen; Mika Kähönen; Tiit Kööbi
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2006-10-10       Impact factor: 29.690

3.  Amlodipine-valsartan combination decreases central systolic blood pressure more effectively than the amlodipine-atenolol combination: the EXPLOR study.

Authors:  Pierre Boutouyrie; Assya Achouba; Patrick Trunet; Stéphane Laurent
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  2010-04-19       Impact factor: 10.190

4.  Validity and reliability of central blood pressure estimated by upper arm oscillometric cuff pressure.

Authors:  Rachel E D Climie; Martin G Schultz; Sonja B Nikolic; Kiran D K Ahuja; James W Fell; James E Sharman
Journal:  Am J Hypertens       Date:  2012-01-05       Impact factor: 2.689

5.  Atenolol and eprosartan: differential effects on central blood pressure and aortic pulse wave velocity.

Authors:  Zahid Dhakam; Carmel M McEniery; John R Cockcroft; Morris J Brown; Ian B Wilkinson
Journal:  Am J Hypertens       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 2.689

6.  Mechanism(s) of selective systolic blood pressure reduction after a low-dose combination of perindopril/indapamide in hypertensive subjects: comparison with atenolol.

Authors:  Gérard M London; Roland G Asmar; Michaël F O'Rourke; Michel E Safar
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2004-01-07       Impact factor: 24.094

7.  Do losartan and atenolol have differential effects on BNP and central haemodynamic parameters?

Authors:  Justine Davies; Elaine Carr; Margaret Band; Andrew Morris; Allan Struthers
Journal:  J Renin Angiotensin Aldosterone Syst       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 1.636

8.  Resistant hypertension: diagnosis, evaluation, and treatment. A scientific statement from the American Heart Association Professional Education Committee of the Council for High Blood Pressure Research.

Authors:  David A Calhoun; Daniel Jones; Stephen Textor; David C Goff; Timothy P Murphy; Robert D Toto; Anthony White; William C Cushman; William White; Domenic Sica; Keith Ferdinand; Thomas D Giles; Bonita Falkner; Robert M Carey
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  2008-04-07       Impact factor: 10.190

9.  Wave reflections, assessed with a novel method for pulse wave separation, are associated with end-organ damage and clinical outcomes.

Authors:  Thomas Weber; Siegfried Wassertheurer; Martin Rammer; Anton Haiden; Bernhard Hametner; Bernd Eber
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  2012-05-14       Impact factor: 10.190

Review 10.  Central blood pressure: current evidence and clinical importance.

Authors:  Carmel M McEniery; John R Cockcroft; Mary J Roman; Stanley S Franklin; Ian B Wilkinson
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2014-01-23       Impact factor: 29.983

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.