奈比洛尔与赖诺普利治疗原发性动脉高血压的疗效和耐受性评价:一项随机、多中心、双盲研究。

Enrico Agabiti Rosei, Damiano Rizzoni, Silvia Comini, Gianluca Boari
{"title":"奈比洛尔与赖诺普利治疗原发性动脉高血压的疗效和耐受性评价:一项随机、多中心、双盲研究。","authors":"Enrico Agabiti Rosei,&nbsp;Damiano Rizzoni,&nbsp;Silvia Comini,&nbsp;Gianluca Boari","doi":"10.1080/08038020310000104","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The main objective of this study was to compare the anti-hypertensive efficacy and safety of nebivolol (5 mg once daily) and lisinopril (20 mg once daily) given for 12 weeks in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension. Fourteen centres participated in this randomized, double-blind parallel group study. Sixty-eight patients with uncomplicated mild-to-moderate hypertension were randomized, and sixty-five were eligible for the analysis of efficacy (intention-to-treat). Hypertensive patients were newly diagnosed, or previous antihypertensive therapy was withdrawn at least 1 month before active treatment, and were included in the study if their diastolic blood pressure (DBP) was > 95 and < 114 mmHg. The age range was 24-65 years. The primary endpoints of the study were: (i) response rate: patients were defined as \"normalized\" responders if their blood pressure values were < 140/90 mmHg, or as \"non-normalized\" responders if the reduction in blood pressure was 10 mmHg or more, compared with baseline; (ii) changes in sitting blood pressure at the end of the study. The secondary endpoints were: standing blood pressure and sitting or standing heart rate (HR). Results showed that baseline sitting DBP was significantly different between groups. Analysis of covariance of the raw data performed with baseline as covariate demonstrated that the DBP and HR values were significantly lower in the nebivolol group at the 8th week. However, when an analysis of variance for repeated measures was performed, a significant reduction in sitting systolic blood pressure (SBP) (p < 0.0001), DBP (p < 0.0001) and HR (p < 0.0001) was observed throughout the study in both groups. No difference was observed between treatments, although for DBP, a significant interaction between treatment-weeks was observed (p = 0.016). There was also a statistically significant difference in favour of the nebivolol group in the distribution of responders and non-responders at week 8. Lisinopril and nebivolol were equally well tolerated. In conclusion, nebivolol was slightly more effective, in comparison with lisinopril, in terms of reduction in DBP. This greater efficacy was obtained without any increase in adverse effects, since both treatments were equally well tolerated.</p>","PeriodicalId":8974,"journal":{"name":"Blood pressure. Supplement","volume":"1 ","pages":"30-5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/08038020310000104","citationCount":"36","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of the efficacy and tolerability of nebivolol versus lisinopril in the treatment of essential arterial hypertension: a randomized, multicentre, double-blind study.\",\"authors\":\"Enrico Agabiti Rosei,&nbsp;Damiano Rizzoni,&nbsp;Silvia Comini,&nbsp;Gianluca Boari\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/08038020310000104\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The main objective of this study was to compare the anti-hypertensive efficacy and safety of nebivolol (5 mg once daily) and lisinopril (20 mg once daily) given for 12 weeks in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension. Fourteen centres participated in this randomized, double-blind parallel group study. Sixty-eight patients with uncomplicated mild-to-moderate hypertension were randomized, and sixty-five were eligible for the analysis of efficacy (intention-to-treat). Hypertensive patients were newly diagnosed, or previous antihypertensive therapy was withdrawn at least 1 month before active treatment, and were included in the study if their diastolic blood pressure (DBP) was > 95 and < 114 mmHg. The age range was 24-65 years. The primary endpoints of the study were: (i) response rate: patients were defined as \\\"normalized\\\" responders if their blood pressure values were < 140/90 mmHg, or as \\\"non-normalized\\\" responders if the reduction in blood pressure was 10 mmHg or more, compared with baseline; (ii) changes in sitting blood pressure at the end of the study. The secondary endpoints were: standing blood pressure and sitting or standing heart rate (HR). Results showed that baseline sitting DBP was significantly different between groups. Analysis of covariance of the raw data performed with baseline as covariate demonstrated that the DBP and HR values were significantly lower in the nebivolol group at the 8th week. However, when an analysis of variance for repeated measures was performed, a significant reduction in sitting systolic blood pressure (SBP) (p < 0.0001), DBP (p < 0.0001) and HR (p < 0.0001) was observed throughout the study in both groups. No difference was observed between treatments, although for DBP, a significant interaction between treatment-weeks was observed (p = 0.016). There was also a statistically significant difference in favour of the nebivolol group in the distribution of responders and non-responders at week 8. Lisinopril and nebivolol were equally well tolerated. In conclusion, nebivolol was slightly more effective, in comparison with lisinopril, in terms of reduction in DBP. This greater efficacy was obtained without any increase in adverse effects, since both treatments were equally well tolerated.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8974,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Blood pressure. Supplement\",\"volume\":\"1 \",\"pages\":\"30-5\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2003-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/08038020310000104\",\"citationCount\":\"36\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Blood pressure. Supplement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/08038020310000104\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Blood pressure. Supplement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08038020310000104","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 36

摘要

本研究的主要目的是比较奈比洛尔(5mg每日1次)和赖诺普利(20mg每日1次)治疗轻至中度原发性高血压患者12周的降压疗效和安全性。14个中心参与了这项随机双盲平行组研究。68例无并发症的轻中度高血压患者被随机分组,其中65例符合疗效分析(意向治疗)。新诊断的高血压患者,或在积极治疗前至少1个月停止既往降压治疗的高血压患者,舒张压(DBP) > 95和< 114 mmHg纳入研究。年龄范围为24-65岁。该研究的主要终点是:(i)缓解率:如果患者的血压值< 140/90 mmHg,则定义为“正常化”缓解者,如果与基线相比,血压降低10 mmHg或更高,则定义为“非正常化”缓解者;(ii)研究结束时坐着血压的变化。次要终点是:站立血压和坐着或站立心率(HR)。结果显示,两组患者基线坐位舒张压差异显著。以基线为协变量对原始数据进行协方差分析表明,在第8周时,纳比洛尔组的DBP和HR值显著降低。然而,当对重复测量进行方差分析时,在整个研究过程中,两组的坐位收缩压(SBP) (p < 0.0001)、舒张压(p < 0.0001)和心率(p < 0.0001)均显著降低。治疗组间无差异,但DBP治疗周间有显著的相互作用(p = 0.016)。在第8周,在应答者和无应答者的分布上,纳比洛尔组也有统计学上的显著差异。赖诺普利和奈比洛的耐受性同样良好。总之,奈比洛尔在舒张压降低方面比赖诺普利更有效。这种更大的疗效没有任何不良反应的增加,因为两种治疗都同样耐受良好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evaluation of the efficacy and tolerability of nebivolol versus lisinopril in the treatment of essential arterial hypertension: a randomized, multicentre, double-blind study.

The main objective of this study was to compare the anti-hypertensive efficacy and safety of nebivolol (5 mg once daily) and lisinopril (20 mg once daily) given for 12 weeks in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension. Fourteen centres participated in this randomized, double-blind parallel group study. Sixty-eight patients with uncomplicated mild-to-moderate hypertension were randomized, and sixty-five were eligible for the analysis of efficacy (intention-to-treat). Hypertensive patients were newly diagnosed, or previous antihypertensive therapy was withdrawn at least 1 month before active treatment, and were included in the study if their diastolic blood pressure (DBP) was > 95 and < 114 mmHg. The age range was 24-65 years. The primary endpoints of the study were: (i) response rate: patients were defined as "normalized" responders if their blood pressure values were < 140/90 mmHg, or as "non-normalized" responders if the reduction in blood pressure was 10 mmHg or more, compared with baseline; (ii) changes in sitting blood pressure at the end of the study. The secondary endpoints were: standing blood pressure and sitting or standing heart rate (HR). Results showed that baseline sitting DBP was significantly different between groups. Analysis of covariance of the raw data performed with baseline as covariate demonstrated that the DBP and HR values were significantly lower in the nebivolol group at the 8th week. However, when an analysis of variance for repeated measures was performed, a significant reduction in sitting systolic blood pressure (SBP) (p < 0.0001), DBP (p < 0.0001) and HR (p < 0.0001) was observed throughout the study in both groups. No difference was observed between treatments, although for DBP, a significant interaction between treatment-weeks was observed (p = 0.016). There was also a statistically significant difference in favour of the nebivolol group in the distribution of responders and non-responders at week 8. Lisinopril and nebivolol were equally well tolerated. In conclusion, nebivolol was slightly more effective, in comparison with lisinopril, in terms of reduction in DBP. This greater efficacy was obtained without any increase in adverse effects, since both treatments were equally well tolerated.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Post-registration studies for the evaluation of antihypertensive drugs. Effect of fixed dose combinations of metoprolol and amlodipine in essential hypertension: MARS--a randomized controlled trial. Efficacy and safety of valsartan in hypertensive Taiwanese patients: post-marketing surveillance study. Efficacy and safety of early versus late titration of fixed-dose irbesartan/hydrochlorothiazide: ACTUAL study. Clevidipine for severe hypertension in patients with renal dysfunction: a VELOCITY trial analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1