skip to content
Dovepress - Open Access to Scientific and Medical Research
View our mobile site

8838

Ambulatory blood pressure in hypertensive patients with left ventricular hypertrophy: efficacy of first-line combination perindopril/indapamide therapy

(2365) Views  (482) Full article downloads

Authors: Roland Asmar, Juan Garcia-Puig, Philippe Gosse, Yuri A Karpov, Peter Wilhem De Leeuw, Dieter Magometschniggs, Lajos Matos, Roland Schmieder

Published Date October 2007 Volume 2007:3(4) Pages 371 - 380
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/VHRM.S

Roland Asmar1, Juan Garcia-Puig2, Philippe Gosse3, Yuri A Karpov4, Peter Wilhem De Leeuw5, Dieter Magometschniggs6, Lajos Matos7, Roland Schmieder8

1Institut Cardiovasculaire, Paris, France; 2Hospital La Paz, Madrid, Spain; 3Hôpital Saint André, Bordeaux, France; 4Russian Academy of Medical Sciences, Moscow, Russia; 5Academisch Ziekenhuis, Maastricht, the Netherlands; 6Institut für Hypertoniker, Vienna, Austria; 7Hungarian Institut of Cardiology, Budapest, Hungary; 8Medizinische FakultÄt, Erlangen Germany

Background: Ambulatory blood pressure (BP) is more sensitive than office BP and is highly correlated with the left ventricular mass (LVM) of hypertensive patients with left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH).

Methods: In this prospectively designed ancillary study of the PICXEL trial, the effects of first-line combination perindopril/indapamide on ambulatory BP were compared with those of monotherapy with enalapril in 127 patients. Hypertensive patients with LVH received once daily either perindopril 2 mg/indapamide 0.625 mg (n = 65) or enalapril 10 mg (n = 62) for 52 weeks. Dose adjustments were allowed for uncontrolled BP. Twenty-four-hour ambulatory BP and echocardiographic parameters were measured at baseline, week 24, and week 52.

Results: At study end, both treatments significantly improved ambulatory BP compared with baseline (p ≤ 0.01). Perindopril/indapamide treatment reduced 24-hour and daytime systolic BP (SBP) and pulse pressure (PP) significantly more than enalapril treatment (p < 0.01). No significant between-group differences were noted for diastolic BP (DBP) or for night-time measurements. Trough/peak ratios were higher with perindopril/indapamide than with enalapril (88.5 vs 65.8 for SBP and 86.7 vs 63.9 for DBP, respectively). The global smoothness index was higher with perindopril/indapamide than with enalapril (6.6 vs 5.2 for SBP and 5.6 vs 4.9 for DBP, respectively). With perindopril/indapamide treatment, LVM index was significantly reduced (−9.1 g/m2 from baseline; p vs baseline <0.001). More patients required dose increases with enalapril (87%) than with perindopril/indapamide (71%). No unusual safety elements were noted.

Conclusions: First-line perindopril/indapamide combination decreased ambulatory SBP and PP, and LVM more effectively than enalapril.

Keywords: left ventricular hypertrophy, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, perindopril, indapamide, enalapril








Readers of this article also read:

A review of telmisartan in the treatment of hypertension: blood pressure control in the early morning hours
Blood pressure normalization in a large population of hypertensive patients treated with perindopril/indapamide combination: results of the OPTIMAX trial
Arterial Stiffness and Pharmacological Interventions – The TRanscend Arterial stiffNess Substudy (TRANS study)
Combined use of brain natriuretic peptide and C-reactive protein for predicting cardiovascular risk in outpatients with type 2 diabetes mellitus
Blood pressure normalization by fixed perindopril/indapamide combination in hypertensive patients with or without associate metabolic syndrome: results of the OPTIMAX 2 study
Periosteoplasty for covering gingival recessions: Clinical results
The pathophysiology of bronchiectasis
New standards in hypertension and cardiovascular risk management: focus on telmisartan
Corrigendum
Erratum
  • Join ISVH

    Be part of the World's leading experts in vascular health by joining the International Society of Vascular Health (ISVH)

  • Testimonials

    "... I was impressed at the rapidity of publication from submission to final acceptance." Dr Edwin Thrower, PhD, Yale University