Literature DB >> 8310977

Amlodipine versus atenolol in essential hypertension.

W H Frishman1, R Brobyn, R D Brown, B F Johnson, R L Reeves, D G Wombolt.   

Abstract

The efficacy and safety of amlodipine (2.5-10 mg) once daily was compared with atenolol (50-100 mg) once daily in patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension in a randomized, double-blind, parallel, placebo-controlled study. A total of 125 patients were randomly allocated at the end of a 4-week run-in placebo period to 8 weeks of double-blind treatment with amlodipine (n = 41), atenolol (n = 43), or placebo (n = 41). The placebo group had small mean changes in supine and standing blood pressure compared with baseline. The mean blood pressure changes from baseline 24 hours postdose in the amlodipine group (mean daily dose 8.8 mg) were -12.8/-10.1 mm Hg for supine blood pressure and -11.5/-9.8 mm Hg for standing blood pressure (p < 0.001 compared with placebo), and for the atenolol group (mean daily dose 83.7 mg) the changes were -11.3/-11.7 mm Hg for supine blood pressure and -13.3/-12.3 mm Hg for standing blood pressure (p < 0.001 compared with placebo). There were no statistically significant blood pressure differences between active treatments. The responder rates for amlodipine, atenolol, and placebo were 61.1, 64.9, and 11.1%, respectively. The blood pressure values taken over the 24-hour period at final visit revealed that amlodipine and atenolol maintained the supine blood pressure < or = 140/90 mm Hg throughout the period of observation; the corresponding time-effect curve for the placebo group was clearly in the hypertensive range. Both amlodipine and atenolol were well tolerated.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8310977     DOI: 10.1016/0002-9149(94)90275-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Cardiol        ISSN: 0002-9149            Impact factor:   2.778


  5 in total

Review 1.  Pharmacologic approaches for the management of symptoms and cardiovascular consequences of obstructive sleep apnea in adults.

Authors:  John M Dopp; Barbara J Morgan
Journal:  Sleep Breath       Date:  2010-06-28       Impact factor: 2.816

Review 2.  Amlodipine. A reappraisal of its pharmacological properties and therapeutic use in cardiovascular disease.

Authors:  M Haria; A J Wagstaff
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 9.546

3.  Guiding dose adjustment of amlodipine after co-administration with ritonavir containing regimens using a physiologically-based pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model.

Authors:  Dwaipayan Mukherjee; Jiuhong Zha; Rajeev M Menon; Mohamad Shebley
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2018-02-09       Impact factor: 2.745

4.  Comparative peripheral edema for dihydropyridines calcium channel blockers treatment: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ling Liang; Janice Y Kung; Bradley Mitchelmore; Andrew Cave; Hoan Linh Banh
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2022-03-02       Impact factor: 2.885

Review 5.  Antihypertensive agents: a long way to safe drug prescribing in children.

Authors:  Nida Siddiqi; Ibrahim F Shatat
Journal:  Pediatr Nephrol       Date:  2019-11-01       Impact factor: 3.651

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.