0
selected
-
1.
Comparison of amlodipine versus other calcium channel blockers on blood pressure variability in hypertensive patients in China: a retrospective propensity score-matched analysis.
Zhang, L, Yang, J, Li, L, Liu, D, Xie, X, Dong, P, Lin, Y
Journal of comparative effectiveness research. 2018;(7):651-660
Abstract
AIM: Reducing the fluctuation of blood pressure has recently been recognized as a potential target for improving management of hypertension to prevent cardiovascular events, particularly for strokes. Some randomized controlled trials demonstrated that amlodipine can effectively reduce blood pressure as a well-established, long-acting calcium channel blocker (CCB). However, few data are available for amlodipine on blood pressure variability (BPV) in China in a real-world setting. This study aimed to assess the effect of amlodipine versus other CCB antihypertensive agents on BPV. MATERIALS & METHODS A retrospective propensity score-matched analysis was conducted, which retrieved the encounter data from 5582 hypertensive inpatients (with a median age of 69, female percentage of 48%, diastolic blood pressure ≥40 and <150 mmHg; systolic blood pressure (SBP) ≥70 mmHg and <260 mmHg), who had taken at least one antihypertensive agent and completed at least three SBP measurements during the visit. International Classification of Diseases was used to identify the hypertensive patients. BPV was calculated with standard deviation (SD) and coefficient of variation (CV) of SBP during a single inpatient visit. The Propensity Score Matching was used to balance the cohort of patients prescribed amlodipine or other CCBs. A series of appropriate statistical tests were applied to the propensity score-matched samples to examine the different effects on BPV. Additionally, the hypertensive patients with comorbidity such as coronary artery disease, diabetes mellitus, myocardial infarction, heart failure and chronic kidney disease were analyzed. RESULTS For the hypertensive patients (n = 1756, for each cohort), patients prescribed amlodipine showed lower BPV than patients prescribed other CCBs (12.90 vs 13.76 mmHg, p < 0.05 [SD] and 9.47 vs 10.06, p < 0.05 [CV]). For the hypertensive patients with comorbidity (n = 1080, for each cohort), patients prescribed amlodipine had lower BPV than patients prescribed other CCBs as well (13.24 vs 14.23 mmHg, p < 0.05 [SD] and 9.66 vs 10.28, p < 0.05 [CV]). CONCLUSION amlodipine was associated with lower BPV than other CCBs for both hypertensive patients and hypertensive patients with comorbidity.
-
2.
Effects of combination of statin and calcium channel blocker in patients with cardiac syndrome X.
Zhang, X, Li, Q, Zhao, J, Li, X, Sun, X, Yang, H, Wu, Z, Yang, J
Coronary artery disease. 2014;(1):40-4
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Statins and calcium channel blockers have been proven beneficial toward improvement of endothelial function. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of combination therapy of statin and calcium channel blocker with solo treatment in patients with cardiac syndrome X. METHODS AND RESULTS Sixty-eight patients with cardiac syndrome X were divided randomly into three groups: fluvastatin (40 mg/day, n=23), diltiazem (90 mg/day, n=22), and combination of fluvastatin (40 mg/day) and diltiazem (90 mg/day, n=23). At the end of 90 days, the coronary flow reserve was improved in the three groups (fluvastatin-treated group: 23.2%; diltiazem-treated group: 12.4%; fluvastatin+diltiazem-treated group: 29.1%, all P<0.05). The time to 1 mm ST segment depression increased significantly in the fluvastatin-treated group (from 241±97 to 410±140 s, P<0.05), the diltiazem-treated group (from 258±91 to 392±124 s, P<0.05), and the fluvastatin+diltiazem-treated group (from 250±104 to 446±164 s, P<0.05). The improvement in coronary flow reserve and prolonged time to 1 mm ST segment depression in the combination treatment group were more remarkable than in those who received monotherapy. Combination therapy also induced a significant increase (35.6%, P<0.05) in nitric oxide and an apparent reduction (48.7%, P<0.05) in endothelin-1. CONCLUSION Combination treatment with fluvastatin and diltiazem is more effective on endothelial function and exercise tolerance than solo treatment in patients with cardiac syndrome X. The benefits of these drugs may be related to the elevation of nitric oxide and reduction of endothelin-1.
-
3.
Calcium antagonists for acute ischemic stroke.
Zhang, J, Yang, J, Zhang, C, Jiang, X, Zhou, H, Liu, M
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2012;(5):CD001928
Abstract
BACKGROUND The sudden loss of blood supply in ischemic stroke is associated with the increase of calcium ions within neurons. Inhibiting this increase could protect neurons and hence might reduce neurological impairment, disability and handicap after stroke. OBJECTIVES To determine whether calcium antagonists reduce the risk of death or dependency after acute ischemic stroke. To investigate the influence of different drugs, dosages, routes of administration, time intervals after stroke and trial design on the risk of a primary outcome. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (January 2012), MEDLINE (1950 to December 2011), EMBASE (1980 to December 2011), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, 2011 issue 4) and four Chinese databases (December 2011): Chinese Biological Medicine Database (CBM-disc), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese scientific periodical database of VIP information and Wanfang Data. We also contacted trialists and researchers. SELECTION CRITERIA All truly randomized trials comparing a calcium antagonist with control in patients with acute ischemic stroke. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two authors assessed all trials and extracted the data. We used death or dependency at the end of long-term follow-up (at least three months) in activities of daily living as the primary outcome. Analyses were, if possible, intention-to-treat. MAIN RESULTS We included 34 trials including 7731 patients. There was no effect of calcium antagonists on the primary outcome (risk ratio (RR) 1.05; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98 to 1.13), or on death at the end of follow-up (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.17). Comparisons of different doses of nimodipine suggested that the highest doses were associated with poorer outcome. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS No evidence is available using calcium antagonists in patients with acute ischemic stroke is effective.
-
4.
Calcium channel blockers versus other classes of drugs for hypertension.
Chen, N, Zhou, M, Yang, M, Guo, J, Zhu, C, Yang, J, Wang, Y, Yang, X, He, L
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2010;(8):CD003654
Abstract
BACKGROUND Calcium channel blockers (CCBs) are a relatively new antihypertensive class. The effect of first-line CCBs on the prevention of cardiovascular events, as compared with other antihypertensive drug classes, is unknown. OBJECTIVES To determine whether CCBs used as first-line therapy for hypertension are different from other first-line drug classes in reducing the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events. SEARCH STRATEGY Electronic searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASEand the WHO-ISH Collaboration Register (up to May 2009) were performed. We also checked the references of published studies to identify additional trials. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing first-line CCBs with other antihypertensive classes, with at least 100 randomized hypertensive participants and with a follow-up of at least two years. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two authors independently selected the included trials, evaluated the risk of bias and entered the data for analysis. MAIN RESULTS Eighteen RCTs (14 dihydropyridines, 4 non-dihydropyridines) with a total of 141,807 participants were included. All-cause mortality was not different between first-line CCBs and any other first-line antihypertensive classes. CCBs reduced the following outcomes as compared to beta-blockers: total cardiovascular events (RR 0.84, 95% CI [0.77, 0.92]), stroke (RR 0.77, 95% CI [0.67, 0.88]) and cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.90, 95% CI [0.81, 0.99]). CCBs increased total cardiovascular events (RR 1.05 , 95% CI [1.00, 1.09], p = 0.03) and congestive heart failure events (RR 1.37, 95% CI [1.25, 1.51]) as compared to diuretics. CCBs reduced stroke (RR 0.89, 95% CI [0.80, 0.98]) as compared to ACE inhibitors and reduced stroke (RR 0.85, 95% CI [0.73, 0.99]) and MI (RR 0.83, 95% CI [0.72, 0.96]) as compared to ARBs. CCBs also increased congestive heart failure events as compared to ACE inhibitors (RR 1.16, 95% CI [1.06, 1.27]) and ARBs (RR 1.20, 95% CI [1.06, 1.36]). The other evaluated outcomes were not significantly different. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Diuretics are preferred first-line over CCBs to optimize reduction of cardiovascular events. The review does not distinguish between CCBs, ACE inhibitors or ARBs, but does provide evidence supporting the use of CCBs over beta-blockers. Many of the differences found in the current review are not robust and further trials might change the conclusions. More well-designed RCTs studying the mortality and morbidity of patients taking CCBs as compared with other antihypertensive drug classes are needed for patients with different stages of hypertension, different ages, and with different co-morbidities such as diabetes.