...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of the Chinese Medical Association: JCMA >Efficacy of a very-low-dose combination of perindopril and indapamide--preterax compared with cilazapril monotherapy in patients with inadequate blood pressure control--a randomized, double-blind, add-on study.
【24h】

Efficacy of a very-low-dose combination of perindopril and indapamide--preterax compared with cilazapril monotherapy in patients with inadequate blood pressure control--a randomized, double-blind, add-on study.

机译:培哚普利和吲达帕胺极低剂量联合用药–普瑞特罗与西拉普利单药治疗在血压控制不佳的患者中的疗效-一项随机,双盲,附加研究。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Combined regimen may be superior to monotherapy in blood pressure (BP) control. Since BP control is critically related to cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in hypertensive patients, this study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a low-dose combined regimen of preterax compared with cilazapril monotherapy for better BP control in treated hypertensive patients. METHODS: Stable hypertensive patients were evaluated if their systolic BP (SBP) was 130 mmHg and/or diastolic BP (DBP) was 85 mmHg even with up to 2 antihypertensive drugs. Patients were excluded if they were on angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers or a diuretic. They were then randomized to receive either preterax (perindopril 2 mg and indapamide 0.625 mg) or cilazapril 2.5 mg once daily in a double-blind fashion for a period of 12 weeks after a 2-week placebo run-in phase. Sitting BP was recorded and the safety and efficacy were evaluated at each visit every 4 weeks. Response was defined as positive if SBP was or = 140 mmHg and DBP was or = 90 mmHg at the last visit or there was 20 mmHg reduction in SBP and/or 10 mmHg reduction in DBP using either treatment. Plasma biochemical analysis was performed both before and after the treatment. RESULTS: Among the 47 patients initially enrolled, 41 completed the study (21 in the preterax group, 20 in the cilazapril group). There was no difference in the number of adverse events between the 2 groups. SBP was significantly reduced by preterax (13.43 +/- 12.48mmHg, p 0.0001) and cilazapril (9.00 +/- 13.75 mmHg, p 0.05). However, DBP was significantly reduced only by preterax (7.67 +/- 9.40 mmHg, p = 0.0009) but not by cilazapril (3.60 +/- 8.37 mmHg, p 0.05). The response rate was significantly higher to preterax (100%) than to cilazapril (70%) (p = 0.0086). CONCLUSION: Though similar in safety, combined regimen preterax was more effective than cilazapril to facilitate adequate BP control in already-treated hypertensives. It can be added on to other antihypertensives for better BP control in clinical hypertension.
机译:背景:在控制血压(BP)方面,联合治疗可能优于单一疗法。由于高血压患者的血压控制与心血管疾病的死亡率和发病率密切相关,因此本研究旨在评估与西拉普利单药治疗相比,先天性低剂量复方普雷司特的疗效和安全性,以更好地控制高血压患者。方法:即使使用最多两种降压药,他们的收缩压(SBP)> 130 mmHg和/或舒张压(DBP)> 85 mmHg,对稳定的高血压患者进行评估。如果患者使用血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂,血管紧张素II受体阻滞剂或利尿剂,则将其排除在外。然后将他们随机分组,接受安慰剂(培哚普利2 mg和吲达帕胺0.625 mg)或西拉普利2.5 mg每天一次,以双盲方式接受安慰剂治疗2周后的12周。记录坐姿BP,每4周评估每次就诊的安全性和有效性。如果在最后一次就诊时,SBP≤140 mmHg,DBP≤90 mmHg,或者采用上述两种治疗方法,SBP降低> 20 mmHg和/或DBP降低> 10 mmHg,则将反应定义为阳性。治疗前后均进行血浆生化分析。结果:在最初入组的47位患者中,有41位完成了研究(前磨牙组21位,西拉普利组20位)。两组之间不良事件的数量没有差异。 Preterax(13.43 +/- 12.48mmHg,p <0.0001)和cilazapril(9.00 +/- 13.75 mmHg,p <0.05)可显着降低SBP。然而,仅通过前异位(7.67 +/- 9.40 mmHg,p = 0.0009)显着降低DBP,而通过西拉普利(3.60 +/- 8.37 mmHg,p> 0.05)则不会显着降低DBP。对terterax(100%)的应答率显着高于对cilazapril(70%)的应答率(p = 0.0086)。结论:尽管在安全性方面相似,但联合治疗方案比有效剂量西拉普利更有效,以利于已治疗的高血压患者充分控制血压。可以将其添加到其他降压药中,以更好地控制临床高血压中的BP。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
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