ASEAN heart journal : Official journal of the ASEAN Federation of Cardiology最新文献

Background: Angiotensin Receptor Blockades (ARB) is becoming a first line drug for essential Hypertension for many types of patient. Losartan is the prototype of ARB due to its vast clinical trials. Home Blood pressure monitoring can provide accurate evaluation of certain drug effect on blood pressure with small number of patient samples. Local production of medicine has made the Medicine readily available and could bring about clinical improvement. Our hypothesis was that Thai population with essential hypertension responded quite well to Losartan and Generic Losartan was not inferior to Original- Losartan.

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety in BP reduction by Losartan in certain Thai population and to compare these parameters between Generic Losartan and Original-Losartan using both office and HBPM method.

Method: After a two-week run-in period when they would learn to use HBPM device and their blood pressure were still recorded to be higher than 140/90 by office BP or 135/85 by HBPM with or without previous medical regimen, 24 patients were randomized to receive either Generic Losartan or Original-Losartan for 6 weeks. Then they would cross over to receive the alternative and were followed again at 6 weeks. HBPM was performed in the morning and in the evening for 5 days, at baseline, and after 6 & 12 weeks. Office BP measurements were obtained at baseline and after 6 & 12 weeks.

Result: One patient in each group dropped out from the study. 22 patients with average age of 54 and averaged office BP 154/88 completed the 12 weeks study. By office BP, SBP was reduced by 27±14.2 at week 6 and 28±15.1 mmHg at week 12. By HBPM, SBP dropped by 17±10.8 at week 6 and by 18±9. at week12. At the end of 12 weeks 68% (15/22) of patients had Office BP <140/90 and 64% (14/22) of patients had HBPM <135/85. There was no significant difference of BP reduction at week 6 between Original-xLosartan and Generic Losartan group. After crossover the BP reduction was maintained in both groups. The percentage of patient whose Office BP <140/90 or HBPM <135/85 were not different among the two Losartan groups. There was no serious adverse side effect.

Conclusion: Using both office BP and HBPM this group of Thai patient with essential hypertension responded well to Losartan and Generic Losartan.

Introduction: For suitable end-stage renal failure (ESRF) patients, renal transplantation gives better long term survival and quality of life as compared to dialysis. Prior to entry into the renal transplant wait list, potential candidates are screened for the presence of cardiovascular disease. However, the waiting time on the transplant list is long, and interval screening for cardiac fitness for surgery is not well defined. We aim to study the risk factors for the development of a cardiovascular event (CVE) and the time interval from recruitment to onset of a CVE that resulted in their removal from the transplant wait list.

Methods: A retrospective study of all patients registered under the cadaveric renal transplant waiting list in Singapore General Hospital (SGH) from 16^th April 1987 to 31^st October 2010. We identified patients who developed a CVE among this cohort. We compared the demographics and clinical characteristics of patients who experienced a CVE versus those who did not. Univariable and multivariable cox regression were performed to investigate the significant variables for the development of a CVE. The time to development of CVE was estimated using Kaplan Meier estimation and log-rank test was used to compare the time to CVE between those with diabetes mellitus and those without.

Results: 1265 patients were enrolled in this study. 273 patients dropped out of the wait list due to medical reasons or death, of which 38.8% were due to CVE. The mean and median time duration from recruitment into the waiting list to development of a CVE was 14.42 (95% CI 13.72 to 15.11) and 15.69 (95% CI 13.86 to 17.51) years respectively. For patients with diabetes mellitus, this was 8.22 (95% CI 6.30 to 10.14) and 8.16 (95% CI 4.95 to 11.36) years respectively. Factors associated with an increased risk of developing a CVE included male gender (adjusted HR 2.21, 95% CI 1.43 to 3.41, p<0.001), presence of diabetes mellitus (adjusted HR 5.13, 95% CI 2.85 to 9.24, p<0.001) and patients who were either not working or working part-time as compared to their full-time counterparts (adjusted HR 1.76, 95% CI 1.14 to 2.72, p=0.010). In addition, hazard ratio for CVE significantly increased with advancing age quartile (p<0.001 by log rank test for trend).

Conclusion: A significant proportion of patients exited from the renal transplant wait list due to a CVE. Being male, age 37 years old or more, presence of diabetes mellitus and non-working or part-time workers as compared to full-time workers were found to increase the risk of developing a CVE during the wait period for transplantation. The presence of diabetes mellitus significantly shortened the time to development of a CVE.