The smoothness index, but not the trough-to-peak ratio predicts changes in carotid artery wall thickness during antihypertensive treatment

Current challenges for hypertension management: From better hypertension diagnosis to improved patients' adherence and blood pressure control

Hypertension control still remains a largely unmet challenge for public health systems. Despite the progress in blood pressure (BP) measurement techniques, and the availability of effective and safe antihypertensive drugs, a large number of hypertensive patients are not properly identified, and a significant proportion of those who receive antihypertensive treatment fail to achieve satisfactory control of their BP levels. It is thus not surprising that hypertension is still a major contributor to disease burden and disability worlwide, even in developed countries. This paper will address current challenges in hypertension management and potential strategies for an improvement in this field. In its first part relevant issues related to hypertension diagnosis will be addressed, in particular how to improve identification of sustained BP elevation and specific BP phenotypes such as white coat and masked hypertension trough the combined use of office and out-of-office BP monitoring techniques. In its second part focus will be on how to improve achievement of hypertension control in treated patients by optimization and simplification of medication regimens, including more efficient selection and titration of antihypertensive drugs and their combinations, aimed at achieving a more consistent 24hBP control; and by favoring a more active patients' and physicians' involvement in hypertension management also through BP telemonitoring and mobile health technologies.

Traditional Risk Factors are Causally Related to Carotid Intima-Media Thickness Progression: Inferences from Observational Cohort Studies and Interventional Trials

In the present review, associations between traditional vascular risk factors (VRFs) and carotid intimamedial thickness progression (C-IMTp) as well as the effects of therapies for VRFs control on C-IMTp were appraised to infer causality between each VRF and C-IMTp. Cohort studies indicate that smoking, binge drinking, fatness, diabetes, hypertension and hypercholesterolemia are associated with accelerated C-IMTp. An exception is physical activity, with mixed data. Interventions for the control of obesity, diabetes, hypertension and hypercholesterolemia decelerate C-IMTp. Conversely, scarce information is available regarding the effect of smoking cessation, stop of excessive alcohol intake and management of the metabolic syndrome. Altogether, these data support a causative role of several traditional VRFs on C-IMTp. Shortcomings in study design and/or ultrasonographic protocols may account for most negative studies, which underlines the importance of careful consideration of methodological aspects in investigations using C-IMTp as the outcome.

How to Choose the Optimal Single-Pill Combination of the First-Line Antihypertensive Drugs? The Benefits of Amlodipine and Telmisartan Combination

In patients with arterial hypertension (AH), an extremely important measure of the effectiveness of antihypertensive drugs (AHD) is not only a direct decrease in blood pressure (BP), but also its stable control throughout the 24 hours, preventing excessive morning surge and increased BP variability, which in turn are recognized cardiovascular risk factors. Currently, in the vast majority of hypertensive patients, the main antihypertensive therapy approach is using single-pill combinations (SPC) of AHD. Among the first-line combinations for a wide range of patients with AH and no special clinical conditions is amlodipine/telmisartan SPC. Distinctive features of these drugs, on the one hand, are unique pharmacological properties, consisting in an ultra-long antihypertensive effects, superior to other AHD in their classes; and on the other hand, there is an large body of evidence from numerous clinical trials confirming their high antihypertensive and target-organ protective potential as well as excellent capabilities in cardiovascular risk reduction. To assess the AHD effectiveness extent, several parameters have been proposed, of which the most rational and useful is the smoothness index, calculated using the ambulatory blood pressure monitoring data. Smoothness index describes both the degree of BP reduction and its distribution during the monitoring period. This index inversely associates with the changes in BP variability, and has predictive value in relation to the hypertension-mediated organ damage regression during different antihypertensive regimens. Amlodipine/telmisartan SPC has also been studied in many trials, including comparative ones with other AHD. In these works its direct powerful antihypertensive effect and a pronounced beneficial impact on the smoothness index have been proved, demonstrating stable BP control throughout the 24 hours (especially in the most dangerous morning hours), and also a decrease in BP variability. Therefore, amlodipine/telmisartan SPC can effectively reduce cardiovascular risk and improve prognosis in patients with AH.

The association of smoothness index of central blood pressure with ambulatory carotid femoral pulse wave velocity after 20-week treatment with losartan in combination with amlodipine versus hydrochlorothiazide

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text

The aim of this study was to identify associations between the smoothness index of central SBP (CSBP) and changes of ambulatory carotid femoral pulse wave velocity in response to 20-week treatments with losartan and amlodipine vs. losartan and hydrochlorthiazide combinations.

Bioinformatics Study on Serum Triglyceride Levels for Analysis of a Potential Risk Factor Affecting Blood Pressure Variability

Objective:

The purpose of this study was to establish whether Triglycerides (TGs) are related to Blood Pressure (BP) variability and whether controlling TG levels leads to better BP variability management and prevents Cardiovascular Disease (CVD).

Methods:

In this study, we enrolled 106 hypertensive patients and 80 non-hypertensive patients. Pearson correlation and partial correlation analyses were used to define the relationships between TG levels and BP variability in all subjects. Patients with hypertension were divided into two subgroups according to TG level: Group A (TG<1.7 mmol/L) and Group B (TG>=1.7 mmol/L). The heterogeneity between the two subgroups was compared using t tests and covariance analysis.

Results:

TG levels and BP variability were significantly different between the hypertensive and non-hypertensive patients. Two-tailed Pearson correlation tests showed that TG levels are positively associated with many BP variability measures in all subjects. After reducing other confounding factors, the partial correlation analysis revealed that TG levels are still related to the Standard Deviation (SD), Coefficient of Variation (CV) of nighttime systolic blood pressure and CV of nighttime diastolic blood pressure, respectively (each p<0.05). In the subgroups, group A had a lower SD of nighttime Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP_night_SD; 11.39±3.80 and 13.39±4.16, p=0.011), CV of nighttime systolic blood pressure (SBP_night_CV; 0.09±0.03 and 0.11±0.03, p=0.014) and average real variability of nighttime systolic blood pressure (SBP_night_ARV; 10.99±3.98 and 12.6±3.95, p=0.024) compared with group B, even after adjusting for age and other lipid indicators.

Conclusion:

TG levels are significantly associated with BP variability and hypertriglyceridemia, which affects blood pressure variability before causing target organ damage.

Effect of antihypertensive treatment on 24-h blood pressure variability: pooled individual data analysis of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring studies based on olmesartan mono or combination treatment

Objective:

To evaluate the impact of olmesartan alone or combined with one to three antihypertensive drugs on 24-h blood pressure variability (BPV) and on distribution of BP reduction in a pooled individual data analysis of 10 double-blind, randomized, ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) studies.

Methods:

ABPMs were performed before and after 6–12 weeks of treatment with placebo (n = 119), active control monotherapy [n = 1195, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (DCCBs)] olmesartan monotherapy (n = 1410), active control dual combination [n = 79, DCCB + thiazide diuretic (TD)], olmesartan dual combination (n = 637, DCCB or TD), and triple combination therapy (n = 102, DCCB+TD). 24-h BPV was calculated as unweighted or weighted SD of the mean BP, and average real variability. BP control was assessed by smoothness index and treatment-on-variability index.

Results:

The greatest effect on 24-h systolic BPV/diastolic BPV was observed under olmesartan triple [−2.6/−1.9; −1.9/−1.3; −1.4/−1.3 mmHg] and active control dual combination [−1.8/−1.4; −1.9/−1.5; −1.2/−1.1 mmHg]. Smoothness indexes and treatment-on-variability indexes were significantly (P = 0.0001) higher under olmesartan dual (1.53/1.22, 1.67/1.29, 2.05/1.59), olmesartan triple (2.47/1.85, 2.80/2.06, 3.64/2.67), or active control dual combination (1.70/1.26, 1.85/1.33, 2.29/1.65) than under monotherapies (control: 0.86/0.73, 0.80/0.65, 1.01/0.82; olmesartan: 1.02/0.86, 0.95/0.78, 1.23/1.00). They were also greater in patients receiving high-dose olmesartan monotherapy or high-dose olmesartan dual combination than in the corresponding low-dose group.

Conclusion:

Olmesartan plus a DCCB and/or a TD produces a larger, more sustained, and smoother BP reduction than placebo and monotherapies, a desirable feature for a more effective prevention of the cardiovascular consequences of uncontrolled hypertension.

Twenty-Four-Hour Blood Pressure Monitoring to Predict and Assess Impact of Renal Denervation: The DENERHTN Study (Renal Denervation for Hypertension)

The DENERHTN trial (Renal Denervation for Hypertension) confirmed the blood pressure (BP) lowering efficacy of renal denervation added to a standardized stepped-care antihypertensive treatment for resistant hypertension at 6 months. We report here the effect of denervation on 24-hour BP and its variability and look for parameters that predicted the BP response. Patients with resistant hypertension were randomly assigned to denervation plus stepped-care treatment or treatment alone (control). Average and standard deviation of 24-hour, daytime, and nighttime BP and the smoothness index were calculated on recordings performed at randomization and 6 months. Responders were defined as a 6-month 24-hour systolic BP reduction ≥20 mm Hg. Analyses were performed on the per-protocol population. The significantly greater BP reduction in the denervation group was associated with a higher smoothness index (P=0.02). Variability of 24-hour, daytime, and nighttime BP did not change significantly from baseline to 6 months in both groups. The number of responders was greater in the denervation (20/44, 44.5%) than in the control group (11/53, 20.8%; P=0.01). In the discriminant analysis, baseline average nighttime systolic BP and standard deviation were significant predictors of the systolic BP response in the denervation group only, allowing adequate responder classification of 70% of the patients. Our results show that denervation lowers ambulatory BP homogeneously over 24 hours in patients with resistant hypertension and suggest that nighttime systolic BP and variability are predictors of the BP response to denervation.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01570777.

Blood pressure variability: assessment, predictive value, and potential as a therapeutic target

A large body of evidence has consistently supported the relationship between blood pressure (BP) levels and the risk of cardiovascular complications. In recent years, several independent studies have also indicated that this risk may not only depend on the magnitude of the blood pressure elevation per se but also on the presence of other associated conditions such as increased blood pressure variability. This concept has been supported by a series of reports, most of which post hoc analyses of clinical trials in hypertension, showing that increasing values of BP variability (BPV) (either in the short term, in the midterm, or in the long term) may predict development, progression, and severity of cardiac, vascular, and renal organ damage, as well as cardiovascular events and mortality. Remarkably, studies conducted in populations at high cardiovascular risk have shown increasing values of BPV in the individual subjects (so-called intra- or within-individual BPV) to be strong predictors of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, even to a larger extent than average BP values. However, in subjects at low to moderate cardiovascular risk, the contribution of BPV to cardiovascular risk prediction over and beyond average BP values has been shown to be only moderate. The aim of this paper is to critically review the evidence addressing the prognostic relevance of different components of BPV addressing a yet open question, i.e., whether routine assessment of BPV in clinical practice should be regarded as an additional target of antihypertensive treatment to improve cardiovascular protection.

Advantages of Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring in Assessing the Efficacy of Antihypertensive Therapy

The cumulative evidence in the past three decades situates ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) as a central element in diagnosing and predicting the prognosis of subjects with hypertension. However, for various reasons, this diagnostic and prognostic importance has not been translated in equal measure into making decisions or guiding antihypertensive treatment. Mean 24-h, daytime, and night-time blood pressure estimates, the occurrence of divergent phenotypes between clinic measurements, and ABPM, as well as the main elements that determine blood pressure variability over 24 h, especially night-time dipping, are all elements that in addition to providing evidence for patient prognosis, can be used to guide antihypertensive treatment follow-up enabling greater precision in defining the effect of the drugs. In recent years, specific indices have been developed using 24-h monitoring, evaluate the duration of treatment action, the homogeneity of the effect over the monitoring period, and its possible effects on variability. In future controlled clinical trials on antihypertensive therapies it is necessary to evaluate the effects of those treatments on hard endpoints based on therapy guided by ABPM.

Measurement of blood pressure variability and the clinical value

Authors have collected and analyzed literature data on blood pressure variability. They present the methods of blood pressure variability measurement, clinical value and relationships with target organ damages and risk of presence of cardiovascular events. They collect data about the prognostic value of blood pressure variability and the effects of different antihypertensive drugs on blood pressure variability. They underline that in addition to reduction of blood pressure to target value, it is essential to influence blood pressure fluctuation and decrease blood pressure variability, because blood pressure fluctuation presents a major threat for the hypertensive subjects. Data from national studies are also presented. They welcome that measurement of blood pressure variability has been included in international guidelines. Orv. Hetil., 2014, 155(42), 1661–1672.

Efficacy of olmesartan/amlodipine combination therapy in reducing ambulatory blood pressure in moderate-to-severe hypertensive patients not controlled by amlodipine alone

This previously unpublished, preplanned analysis investigated the efficacy of the olmesartan/amlodipine combination at different doses on 24-h blood pressure (BP) control, as well as assessed trough estimation of trough-to-peak ratio (TPR) and smoothness index (SI). Ambulatory BP monitoring was performed in patients with moderate-to-severe hypertension whose BP was inadequately controlled after 8 weeks' treatment with amlodipine 5 mg. Patients were randomized to continue with amlodipine 5 mg or to receive olmesartan/amlodipine 10/5, 20/5 or 40/5 mg for 8 weeks (Period II). Patients not achieving BP control were uptitrated to a more powerful regimen for another 8 weeks (Period III). During Period II, each olmesartan/amlodipine combination reduced 24-h systolic and diastolic BP (SBP/DBP), as well as morning and early morning SBP/DBP, significantly more than amlodipine 5 mg (P<0.001 for all). TPRs were higher in each olmesartan/amlodipine group than with amlodipine 5 mg, and SI values showed dose-related increases; olmesartan/amlodipine 40/5 mg produced a significantly higher SI for SBP and DBP (1.55 and 1.33, respectively) than amlodipine 5 mg (0.96 and 0.77, respectively, P<0.0001 for each). During Period III, uptitrated patients showed further BP reductions, which were largest in those on olmesartan/amlodipine 40/10 mg. SI values increased in uptitrated patients and were highest with olmesartan/amlodipine 40/10 mg (SBP 1.62/DBP 1.41). The olmesartan/amlodipine combination effectively reduces BP over 24 h, including the morning hours, in a dose-related manner. Compared with amlodipine alone, the olmesartan/amlodipine combination has a better 24-h coverage (TPR) and a dose-related improvement in BP lowering homogeneity (SI).

Antihypertensive effect of barnidipine 10 mg or amlodipine 5 to 10 mg once daily in treatment-naive patients with essential hypertension: A 24-week, randomized, open-label, pilot study

BACKGROUND

Dihydropyridine calcium antagonists are largely employed for the treatment of hypertension, coronary heart disease, and heart failure.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of our study was to compare the antihypertensive effect of the dihydropyridine calcium antagonists barnidipine and amlodipine.

METHODS

This was a 24-week, randomized, open-label, pilot study. Consecutive treatment-naive patients with grade I or II essential hypertension (office sitting systolic blood pressure [BP] of 140-179 mm Hg and diastolic BP of 90-109 mm Hg) were enrolled. The primary end points were the effect of treatment with either barnidipine 10 mg or amlodipine 5 mg once daily on office and ambulatory BP, left ventricular mass index (LVMI), and markers of cardiac damage, serum procollagen type I C-terminal propeptide, and plasma amino-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide concentrations. Patients were assessed at enrollment, and 12 and 24 weeks. During each visit, the prevalence of adverse events (AEs) was also monitored using spontaneous reporting, patient interview, and physical examination, the relationship to study drug being determined by the investigators. Compliance with treatment was assessed at each study visit by counting returned tablets.

RESULTS

Thirty eligible patients (20 men, 10 women; mean [SD] age, 47 [12] years) were included in the study; all patients completed the 24 weeks of study treatment. Twelve weeks after randomization, 6 patients in the amlodipine group had their dose doubled to 10 mg due to inadequate BP control. Mean BP reductions at study end were not significantly different between the barnidipine and amlodipine groups (office BP, -10.3/-9.4 vs -16.6/-9.1 mm Hg; ambulatory BP, 9.4/6.4 vs 8.1/5.1 mm Hg). Reductions in LVMI and markers of cardiac damage were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Significantly more patients in the amlodipine group reported drug-related AEs compared with those in the barnidipine group (9 [60%] vs 2 [13%]; P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In this small sample of treatment-naive hypertensive patients, the antihypertensive effect of barnidipine 10 mg once daily was not significantly different from that of amlodipine 5 to 10 mg once daily.

Nutraceuticals for blood pressure control in patients with high-normal or grade 1 hypertension

BACKGROUND

Current hypertension management guidelines do not recommend drug treatment in subjects with blood pressure (BP) in the high-normal range due to the risk of side effects of the currently available antihypertensive agents that overcomes the possible benefit. Nutraceuticals are free from relevant side effects and could be a valuable strategy for the treatment of these patients.

AIM

The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of two nutraceutical compositions given by the combination of policosanol, red yeast rice extract, berberine, folic acid and coenzyme Q(10) with or without Orthosiphon stamineus in lowering the BP and lipid profile.

METHODS

Thirty patients with grade 1 essential hypertension and low cardiovascular risk were analysed. At the end of a run-in period, patients were divided into two study arms and assigned to receive the nutraceutical combination with and without Orthosiphon stamineus. All participants underwent 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring at the end of the run-in period and of the 4-week treatment with each of the two different nutraceutical combinations.

RESULTS

In patients treated with Orthosiphon stamineus a significant reduction of mean 24-hour systolic and diastolic BP levels compared with baseline values was registered and the smoothness index calculated for systolic and diastolic BP showed a more reliable and homogeneous effect on BP over 24 hours. In contrast, nutraceutical treatment without Orthosiphon stamineus was not associated with a significant reduction of BP.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that the addition of Orthosiphon stamineus to the combination of nutraceuticals confers an antihypertensive effect that allows a surprisingly effective 24-hour BP control in hypertensive patients.

Nutraceuticals for blood pressure control in patients with high-normal or grade 1 hypertension

BACKGROUND

Current hypertension management guidelines do not recommend drug treatment in subjects with blood pressure (BP) in the high-normal range due to the risk of side effects of the currently available antihypertensive agents that overcomes the possible benefit. Nutraceuticals are free from relevant side effects and could be a valuable strategy for the treatment of these patients.

AIM

The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of two nutraceutical compositions given by the combination of policosanol, red yeast rice extract, berberine, folic acid and coenzyme Q(10) with or without Orthosiphon stamineus in lowering the BP and lipid profile.

METHODS

Thirty patients with grade 1 essential hypertension and low cardiovascular risk were analysed. At the end of a run-in period, patients were divided into two study arms and assigned to receive the nutraceutical combination with and without Orthosiphon stamineus. All participants underwent 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring at the end of the run-in period and of the 4-week treatment with each of the two different nutraceutical combinations.

RESULTS

In patients treated with Orthosiphon stamineus a significant reduction of mean 24-hour systolic and diastolic BP levels compared with baseline values was registered and the smoothness index calculated for systolic and diastolic BP showed a more reliable and homogeneous effect on BP over 24 hours. In contrast, nutraceutical treatment without Orthosiphon stamineus was not associated with a significant reduction of BP.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that the addition of Orthosiphon stamineus to the combination of nutraceuticals confers an antihypertensive effect that allows a surprisingly effective 24-hour BP control in hypertensive patients.

Assessment and management of blood-pressure variability

Blood pressure (BP) is characterized by marked short-term fluctuations occurring within a 24 h period (beat-to-beat, minute-to-minute, hour-to-hour, and day-to-night changes) and also by long-term fluctuations occurring over more-prolonged periods of time (days, weeks, months, seasons, and even years). Rather than representing 'background noise' or a randomly occurring phenomenon, these variations have been shown to be the result of complex interactions between extrinsic environmental and behavioural factors and intrinsic cardiovascular regulatory mechanisms. Although the adverse cardiovascular consequences of hypertension largely depend on absolute BP values, evidence from observational studies and post-hoc analyses of data from clinical trials have indicated that these outcomes might also depend on increased BP variability (BPV). Increased short-term and long-term BPV are associated with the development, progression, and severity of cardiac, vascular, and renal damage and with an increased risk of cardiovascular events and mortality. Of particular interest are the findings from post-hoc analyses of large intervention trials in hypertension, showing that within-patient visit-to-visit BPV is strongly prognostic for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. This result has prompted discussion on whether antihypertensive treatment should be targeted not only towards reducing mean BP levels but also to stabilizing BPV with the aim of achieving consistent BP control over time, which might favour cardiovascular protection.

Ambulatory Blood Pressure Values in the Ongoing Telmisartan Alone and in Combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial (ONTARGET)

In the Ongoing Telmisartan Alone and in Combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial, telmisartan (T; 80 mg daily) and ramipril (R; 10 mg daily) caused similar clinic blood pressure (BP) reductions, with a similar incidence of cardiovascular and renal events. The R+T combination lowered clinic BP somewhat more with no further cardiovascular or renal protection. The aim of this substudy was to see whether these clinic BP changes reflected the changes of 24-hour BP, a BP with a better prognostic value. In 422 patients in whom 24-hour BP monitoring was performed either before or after 6 to 24 months of treatment, demographic and clinical characteristics were similar in the 3 treated groups. Twenty-four-hour systolic BP was similarly reduced by R (−2.0 mm Hg) and T (−2.1 mm Hg), whereas the reduction was more than twice as large in the T+R group (−5.3 mm Hg), which showed a lower on-treatment 24-hour BP also in additional patients (n=408) in whom ambulatory BP was performed only on-treatment. Twenty-four-hour systolic BP was ≈14 mm Hg lower than clinic systolic BP at baseline, whereas during treatment the 2 values became progressively closer as clinic systolic BP was more tightly controlled and superimposable when clinic systolic BP was <120 mm Hg. Similar results were obtained for diastolic BP. These findings provide evidence on the relationship of clinic and ambulatory BP target drug treatment. They also show that in the Ongoing Telmisartan Alone and in Combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial, failure of the R+T combination to enhance cardiovascular and renal protection was not because of inability to more effectively control daily life BP.

Anti-hypertensive Effect of Chunghyul-dan (Qingxue-dan) on Stroke Patients with Essential Hypertension

Hypertension is one of the modifiable risk factors for stroke. Lowering blood pressure is helpful for primary and secondary prevention of stroke. This study is aimed to assess the efficacy of Chunghyul-dan on stroke patients with stage 1 hypertension using 24 hours ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (24ABPM). Forty hospitalized stroke patients with stage 1 hypertension were included in the study and they were randomly assigned into two groups: group A was treated with Chunghyul-dan 1200 mg once a day for 2 weeks, while group B was not. Twelve subjects were dropped out because of unexpected early discharge or data errors, thus the remaining 28 subjects were included in the final analysis (15 in group A and 13 in group B). Blood pressure was monitored every 30 minutes for 24 hours at baseline and 2 weeks after medication. Blood pressure, pulse rate, trough/peak ratio (TPR) [the value calculated by dividing the blood pressure change at trough (22 to 24 hours after drug intake) by the change at peak (2 adjacent hours with a maximal blood pressure reduction between the second and eighth hour after drug intake)] and smoothness index (SI) (the value calculated as the ratio between the average of the 24 hours, treatment-induced blood pressure changes and its standard deviation) were compared to assess the efficacy of Chunghyul-dan. To assess the safety of Chunghyul-dan, any adverse effects during medication period were monitored. There was no significant difference in the baseline assessment between the two groups. Systolic blood pressure was lower in group A than in group B (141.37 ± 8.96 mmHg versus 132.28 ± 9.46 mmHg , P = 0.03), while diastolic blood pressure and pulse rate had no significant difference between the two groups. Systolic TPR and SI was 0.87 and 1.04 in group A, respectively. This suggests that Chunghyul-dan have anti-hypertensive effect on stroke patients with stage 1 hypertension.

Efficacy and safety of a fixed-dose combination of lercanidipine and enalapril in daily practice. A comparison of office, self-measured and ambulatory blood pressure

BACKGROUND

A fixed-dose combination (FDC) of enalapril and lercanidipine has been shown to be effective and safe in reducing blood pressure in randomized clinical trials. This study aims to determine effectiveness and safety in daily practice.

METHODS

This was a prospective, open-label, uncontrolled multicenter study, with a 3-month follow-up at general practitioners and internists. Patients were treated with an FDC of 20 mg enalapril maleate and 10 mg lercanidipine hydrochloride, and blood pressure was determined in the office (OBPM) and by discretionary self- (SBPM) and ambulatory- (ABPM) measurements.

RESULTS

Out of 622 patients (mean age 61.3 ± 13.3 years, 54.2% male): blood pressure was reduced by -29.2/-14.2 mmHg (OBPM) from baseline (164.4/95.2 mmHg). Pulse pressure was reduced by -15.0 ± 16.4 mmHg. Prevalence of microalbuminuria was reduced from 14.6% at baseline to 6.5% (p < 0.001). SBPM data were available for 71% of patients and ABPM for 12%. In the latter patients, blood pressure variability index was significantly reduced compared with baseline over 24 h (14.2 ± 4.2 vs 16.3 ± 4.0; p < 0.001) and with nighttime ABPM (13.7 ± 4.9 vs 15.2 ± 4.4; p = 0.022). Treatment was associated with a low incidence of adverse events (3.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

The FDC of 20 mg enalapril-maleate and 10 mg lercanidipine-hydrochloride seems to be effective and well tolerated in clinical practice. It improved vascular surrogate end points, including pulse pressure, blood pressure variability and microalbuminuria.

Evaluating 24-h antihypertensive efficacy by the smoothness index: a meta-analysis of an ambulatory blood pressure monitoring database

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the 24-h antihypertensive efficacy of different treatments using the smoothness index.

METHODS

Data were taken from the telmisartan ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) clinical programme. Eleven clinical trials that randomized mild-to-moderate hypertensive patients to treatment with telmisartan 40/80 mg, losartan 50 mg, valsartan 80/160 mg, ramipril 10 mg, amlodipine 5 mg monotherapy, or with an angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) and hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 12.5/25 mg, were included. Treatment duration ranged from 4 to 14 weeks. The smoothness index was calculated according to the published formula.

RESULTS

Altogether, 5188 patients were included (65% men; 52% were using telmisartan as monotherapy or in combination with HCTZ). Telmisartan 80 mg had a higher smoothness index than losartan, valsartan or ramipril (P < 0.05), and was comparable with amlodipine. All combination therapies had a higher smoothness index than monotherapy; the largest value was observed with telmisartan 80 mg and HCTZ 12.5 mg. Overall, the smoothness index was lower in men, older patients, black patients, smokers and in those with lower baseline blood pressure (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The smoothness index was affected by age, race, sex, behavioural and haemodynamic factors. It was also able to differentiate the 24-h blood pressure effects of antihypertensive drugs, with telmisartan and amlodipine achieving the highest values, possibly because of their long plasma half-lives. All combination therapies had a higher smoothness index than monotherapy. An understanding of the relative effects of different antihypertensives on the smoothness index may help to differentiate their effectiveness in reducing blood pressure-related cardiovascular risk.

Ambulatory monitoring of systolic hypertension in the elderly: Eprosartan/hydrochlorothiazide compared with losartan/hydrochlorothiazide (INSIST trial)

INTRODUCTION

Systolic hypertension is very common in the elderly and is strongly associated with the risk of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events. The control of systolic hypertension is difficult and most patients require combination antihypertensive therapy. Few data are available regarding the efficacy of angiotensin II receptor antagonists on systolic hypertension of the elderly. The aim of this double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, parallel-group, multicenter study was to assess the efficacy of eprosartan 600 mg in combination with hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 12.5 mg in comparison with losartan 50 mg in combination with HCTZ 12.5 mg, in reducing blood pressure in elderly patients with grade 2 systolic hypertension who did not optimally respond to eprosartan or losartan monotherapy.

METHODS

After a 3-week placebo wash-out, 155 patients with an Office trough sitting systolic blood pressure (Office sitSBP) >or=160 mmHg and <180 mmHg were randomized to eprosartan 600 mg (n=78) or losartan 50 mg (n=77) once daily for 6 weeks. In patients not optimally responding to monotherapy (Office sitSBP>or=130 mmHg) 12.5 mg HCTZ was added as fixed combination once daily for 6 weeks. A 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) was performed at the end of wash-out and at the end of the fixed-combination period.

RESULTS

No statistically significant difference was found between eprosartan/HCTZ and losartan/HCTZ on the primary endpoint (24-hour ABPM SBP) with an adjusted mean difference between treatments of 3.1 mmHg (95% CI: -0.32-6.59). However, the mean 24-hour ABPM SBP significantly decreased by 16.7 mmHg with eprosartan/HCTZ and 20.3 mmHg with losartan/HCTZ (P<0.001 vs. baseline). The mean Office sitSBP significantly decreased by 28.7 mmHg and 29.6 mmHg respectively, with eprosartan/HCTZ and losartan/HCTZ (P<0.001 vs.baseline and vs. monotherapy).

CONCLUSION

In this study, eprosartan/HCTZ did not demonstrate to be superior to losartan/HCTZ in reducing ABPM systolic hypertension in the elderly.

Clinical utility and applicability of smoothness index, normalized smoothness index and individualized RDH index during treatment of essential hypertension

The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical utility of the smoothness index (SI) and normalized SI (SIn), measures of duration and homogeneity of blood pressure (BP) reduction, during an observation period without antihypertensive therapy followed by a treatment period using dihydropyridines (DHP) in 54 newly diagnosed and previously untreated subjects (age 46.9 +/- 9.1 years) with essential hypertension. In addition, we aimed to describe the reduction-duration-homogeneity (RDH) index for statistical assessment of the BP reduction in the individual patient. Twenty-four-hour BP was lowered during treatment (139.2 +/- 13.9/ 91.0 +/- 7.6 mmHg vs 130.9 +/- 11.3/85.2 +/- 5.2 mmHg, p < 0.001/p = 0.001). SI showed great interindividual variation, and increased from zero to 0.9 +/- 0.8 (systolic BP) and 0.8 +/- 0.7 (diastolic BP) after treatment (p < 0.001 for both), similar results were obtained for SI(n). The RDH index revealed BP reduction in agreement with the change in individual 24-h, daytime and night-time BP. Although SI and SI(n) may add important information regarding the homogeneity of the antihypertensive effect in a group of patients, and the RDH index for the individual patient, conclusions regarding antihypertensive efficacy can be obtained from assessment of the 24-h, daytime and night-time BP changes and ambulatory BP profiles. Based on our findings, we do not recommend the use of SI or RDH index in the clinical practice.

24-hour powerful blood pressure-lowering: is there a clinical need?

Attenuation of 24-hour blood pressure (BP) fluctuation, and control of the early morning BP surge, may help to improve cardiovascular outcomes in hypertensive patients. However, studies show that early morning BP is generally poorly controlled even in patients with well-controlled clinic BP. Few antihypertensives are sufficiently long-acting to sustain adequate BP-lowering for the full 24 hours between once-daily doses, and indeed many are at their lowest efficacy during the risky early morning period. The angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) telmisartan has the longest plasma half-life, highest lipophilicity, highest receptor binding affinity, and slowest dissociation of any ARB, making it particularly suitable for sustained 24-hour BP control. In clinical studies, telmisartan provides 24-hour BP control superior to that of the ARBs losartan and valsartan, the calcium-channel blocker amlodipine, and the angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor ramipril. This agent is particularly effective during the last 6 hours of the dosing interval when the other antihypertensives tend to go down in effectiveness. Telmisartan is, therefore, a highly appropriate antihypertensive for sustained 24-hour BP control, especially during the risky early morning hours.

From treatment to organ damage; a 5-year follow-up study of ambulatory blood pressure in essential hypertension. Diversity between development of left ventricular hypertrophy and urinary albumin excretion

This study aimed to assess blood pressure (BP) profile, BP control, left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) and albumin/creatinine ratio (ACR) in urine after 5 years of antihypertensive treatment in subjects with newly diagnosed essential hypertension. Fifty-four subjects were included and prescribed calcium-channel blocker in monotherapy during an 8-week period, and later 46 subjects (34 men, 12 women, 53.1+/-8.6 years) attended a 5-year follow-up visit at the hypertension clinic. They underwent 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM), ECG and ACR at baseline and after 5 years. Echocardiography performed after 5 years revealed LVH in 54% of the subjects, while there was no change in Cornell product, an ECG criterion for LVH. BP control assessed by office BP was 33%, and only 20% using 24-h ABP. Night-time fall in BP was significantly attenuated from 13.2+/-5.9% to 10.7+/-6.0%, p = 0.01 for systolic BP and from 13.3+/-6.9% to 9.8+/-6.8%, p = 0.004 for diastolic BP. The number of dippers decreased after 5 years, but this did not reach statistical significance. In contrast to the lack of change in Cornell product, there was a significant decrease in ACR, and 93% of the subjects had ACR<1.5 mg/mmol after 5 years compared with 57% at baseline (p<0.001). Thus, ABPM should be encouraged in the follow-up of all hypertensive subjects as it reveals better inadequate BP control than office BP and gives information about night-time fall, as this may explain the high prevalence of LVH. The diversity in development of LVH and ACR during antihypertensive treatment needs to be verified.

The individual RDH index: a novel vector index for statistical assessment of antihypertensive treatment reduction, duration, and homogeneity

We propose a new vector index for the statistical assessment of antihypertensive treatment duration and homogeneity from ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. We termed this approach for evaluating and comparing blood pressure coverage offered by antihypertensive drugs over 24 h as the reduction-duration-homogeneity index. The reduction-duration-homogeneity index is a three-component vector index that incorporates information about the reduction, duration, and homogeneity of antihypertensive treatment, as well as their statistical significance. The advantages of the reduction-duration-homogeneity index are demonstrated by several comparative examples.

Fixed combination of manidipine and delapril in the treatment of mild to moderate essential hypertension: evaluation by 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring

This present study assessed the antihypertensive efficacy of the fixed combination of manidipine and delapril by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in patients with hypertension inadequately controlled by monotherapy with either component. After a 2-week placebo period, 55 mild to moderate hypertensive patients were randomized to manidipine 20 mg o.d. or delapril 30 mg b.i.d. for 4 weeks. After this period, 30 patients, aged 30-76 years (18 males and 12 females) whose diastolic blood pressure was not adequately controlled (> or = 90 mmHg) by monotherapy were treated with the fixed combination of manidipine 10 mg plus delapril 30 mg o.d. for 8 weeks. A 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring recording was performed at the end of the placebo washout, of the monotherapy and of the combination therapy. Blood pressure control over the 24 h was quantified by the trough-to-peak ratio and the smoothness index. As compared to placebo, the fixed combination of manidipine and delapril produced a statistically significant (p<0.01) decrease in sitting clinic (18 +/- 9/14 +/- 5 mmHg) and 24-h blood pressure (12 +/- 7/10 +/- 5 mmHg) without affecting heart rate. This reduction was greater than that observed with single components. At the end of the 8-week combination treatment period, the rate of normalilized patients was 73%. Treatment with the fixed combination was associated with a positively high smoothness index (1.2 +/- 0.7/13.8 +/- 0.8) and with a relatively good trough-to-peak ratio (0.46/0.60). The combination of manidipine and delapril produced significant and smooth reductions in blood pressure values, which persisted over the 24-h dosing interval. These results support the use of fixed manidipine-delapril combination in the treatment of mild to moderate hypertensive patients inadequately controlled by monotherapy.

Blood pressure variability: its measurement and significance in hypertension

The occurrence of blood pressure fluctuations over time has been documented since the 18th century, but the clinical importance of this phenomenon is only now being recognized. The introduction of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in the late 1960s represented a major step forward in the study of blood pressure behaviour and helped to characterize the relationship between blood pressure variability and cardiovascular disease. In hypertension, blood pressure variability increases with increasing blood pressure and correlates closely with target-organ damage, independently of absolute blood pressure values. This has important consequences for treatment, which in the past has focused on reducing mean blood pressure values as the main goal. Experimental evidence suggests that drugs capable of buffering or reducing blood pressure variability may confer additional benefits on target-organ protection. Effective target-organ protection could best be afforded by antihypertensive agents that provide efficient 24-h blood pressure control and also stabilize blood pressure variability. Mathematical indices, such as the trough:peak ratio and the smoothness index, provide useful measures of the homogeneity of the antihypertensive effect over 24 h; optimum control is provided by drugs with a trough:peak ratio close to 1 and a smoothness index > 1, as is observed with long-acting drugs such as telmisartan or amlodipine. Recently, a direct relationship was demonstrated between homogeneous blood pressure control and treatment-induced regression of left ventricular hypertrophy, emphasizing the importance of smooth 24-h blood pressure control. In conclusion, the goals of antihypertensive treatment should consider the reduction of both 24-h mean blood pressure and its variability. Long-lasting drugs or drug combinations are preferable to ensure a homogeneous and smooth 24-h blood pressure profile.

The role of blood pressure variability in end-organ damage

The ultimate goal when treating high blood pressure is to reduce the incidence of end-organ damage and prevent cardiovascular disease, and thus reduce the incidence of premature death. Cuff blood pressure measurements have some prognostic value and have traditionally been used to predict the risk of end-organ damage. Such measurements, however, do not reflect accurately the 24-h mean blood pressure and hourly variations. For any value of cuff blood pressure, a lower 24-h mean blood pressure was associated with a lower prevalence and severity of end-organ damage. In the Pressioni Arteriose Monitorate E Loro Associazioni (PAMELA) study, data from 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) were more strongly associated with prognosis than other blood pressure data. Longitudinal evidence of the clinical relevance of 24-h ABPM data in predicting cardiovascular risk is less extensive. However, results from the Study on Ambulatory Monitoring of Pressure and Lisinopril Evaluation (SAMPLE) trial show the superiority of mean 24-h, daytime and night-time blood pressures over clinic readings in predicting the regression of left ventricular mass index in treated hypertensive patients. Furthermore, a direct, positive relationship has been established between 24-h blood pressure variability and the severity and rate of progression of end-organ damage. In addition, ABPM data demonstrate that hypertensive patients who do not exhibit a nocturnal reduction in blood pressure have a higher incidence of end-organ damage. Future directions for research and treatment of hypertension will need to consider the circadian cycle of blood pressure, the effect of treatment on blood pressure variability, and the magnitude of blood pressure changes in daily life.

Effects of the Combination of Low-Dose Nifedipine GITS 20 mg and Losartan 50 mg in Patients with Mild to Moderate Hypertension

Most hypertensive patients require more than one medication to effectively control elevated blood pressure (BP) values. This multicenter, randomized, double-blind study was aimed at testing the efficacy and safety of the combination of low-dose nifedipine GITS 20 mg/ losartan 50 mg compared with either monotherapy in patients with grade 1 to 3 hypertension over an eight-week period. Of 352 patients enrolled in the study, 300 were randomized. All the three treatments lowered elevated BP without clinically relevant changes in heart rate. All the three treatments lowered mean 24-hour diastolic BP: nifedipine GITS/losartan -10.6 mm Hg, losartan -5.4 mm Hg, nifedipine GITS 20 mg -8.0 mm Hg. There was a statistically significant difference of diastolic BP change between patients receiving losartan compared with those receiving combination treatment (P < 0.05). Diastolic BP trough-to-peak ratio and smoothness index were highest in the patient group receiving combination therapy (70%). Nifedipine GITS monotherapy had the highest systolic BP trough-to-peak ratio of all treatment arms (78%) and higher diastolic BP trough-to-peak ratio and smoothness index than losartan monotherapy. All treatments were safe. These data provide evidence that in hypertensive patients combination of nifedipine GITS 20 mg and losartan 50 mg improves control of systolic and diastolic BP compared with either monotherapy.

Once-daily fixed-combination irbesartan 300 mg/ hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg and circadian blood pressure profile in patients with essential hypertension

BACKGROUND

More than 60% of patients with hypertension included in morbidity and mortality trials needed >or=2 drugs to achieve a substantial, sustained reduction in blood pressure. Tolerable combinations using higher doses of antihypertensive drugs are frequently required to control blood pressure.

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to assess the effect of a once-daily fixed combination of irbesartan 300 mg/hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 25 mg on the circadian blood pressure profile in patients with essential hypertension that was not controlled with full-dose single therapy or low-dose combined therapy.

METHODS

Study patients were recruited consecutively from the outpatient hypertension clinics of 3 university hospitals in Spain. After a 1-week washout period, patients with a mean daytime blood pressure >135/85 mm Hg were treated with irbesartan 300 mg/HCTZ 25 mg once daily for 12 weeks. Twenty-four-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring was performed at the end of the washout period and during the last week of treatment.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven patients with essential hypertension (28 men, 29 women) were enrolled; their mean (SD) age was 60.4 (7.2) years (range, 45-78 years). After treatment, a significant reduction in both clinic and ambulatory mean (SD) blood pressure values was observed in the whole group of 57 patients (from 146.0 [11.0] mm Hg to 123.3 [13.3] mm Hg, P < 0.001 for 24-hour systolic blood pressure [SBP]; from 89.9 [8.2] mm Hg to 76.5 [9.4] mm Hg, P < 0.001 for 24-hour diastolic blood pressure [DBP]. The mean lowering of ambulatory SBP and DBP at peak was 25.2 (14.5) mm Hg and 14.7 (9.5) mm Hg, respectively, and at trough, 22.3 (18.3) mm Hg and 12.3 (10.9) mm Hg. The trough-to-peak ratio of the group was 0.92 for SBP (0.97 in responders) and 0.84 for DBP (0.89 in responders). The smoothness index, calculated as the mean of all individual values, was 1.7 (1.0) for SBP (1.8 [0.9] in responders) and 1.3 (0.8) for DBP (1.5 [0.6] in responders). Seven side effects in 6 patients were reported. No metabolic changes were observed, and no patient discontinued the study because of treatment-related adverse effects.

CONCLUSIONS

The fixed combination of irbesartan 300 mg/HCTZ 25 administered once daily produced a crude meaningful effect in reducing 24-hour blood pressure and was well tolerated. The circadian profile was preserved, as shown by trough-to-peak ratios and smoothness index values for both SBP and DBP.

Combination of lisinopril and nifedipine GITS increases blood pressure control compared with single drugs in essential hypertensive patients

The present study was designed to evaluate the effect of combination therapy using the angiotensin-converting enzyme-inhibitor lisinopril and the dihydropyridine calcium antagonist nifedipine GITS on the degree and homogeneity of 24-hour blood pressure reduction in essential hypertensive patients. After a 4-week placebo run-in period, 51 patients (mean age, 54.4 +/- 9.4 years) with essential hypertension and clinic diastolic blood pressure between 105 and 115 mm Hg were randomized to 4-week treatment with lisinopril (20 mg), nifedipine GITS (30 mg), or their combination according to a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, crossover study. Trough clinic blood pressure and 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure were measured at the end of the run-in period and after 4 weeks of treatment. In addition to clinic and 24-hour average blood pressure reduction, the trough-to-peak ratio and the smoothness index, a new measure for the homogeneity of blood pressure reduction, were also calculated. Although both lisinopril and nifedipine GITS produced a significant reduction in clinic and 24-hour average blood pressure values, the reduction obtained with the combination was significantly (P < 0.001) greater. Moreover, the combination therapy increased (P < 0.01) the smoothness index as compared with each single drug for both systolic (lisinopril, 1.02; nifedipine GITS, 1.1; combination, 1.76) and diastolic (lisinopril, 0.98; nifedipine GITS, 0.87; combination, 1.54) blood pressure values, whereas trough-to-peak ratio values (expressed as median) for systolic (lisinopril, 0.41; nifedipine GITS, 0.52; combination, 0.55) and diastolic (lisinopril, 0.35; nifedipine GITS, 0.40; combination, 0.49) blood pressure values were not significantly increased by the combination therapy. Thus, antihypertensive treatment with the combination of lisinopril and nifedipine GITS is more effective and balanced over the 24 hours than the combination components administered alone, confirming that the smoothness index is superior to the trough-to-peak ratio in assessing homogeneity of pharmacologic blood pressure reduction.

Time-effect profile of antihypertensive agents assessed with trough/peak ratio, smoothness index and dose omission: an ambulatory blood pressure monitoring study with trandolapril vs. quinapril

The duration of action of antihypertensive drugs may be assessed by several methods using ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). The aim of this double-blind, randomized study was to compare the time-effect profile of once daily Trandolapril (Tra) 2 mg vs. Quinapril (Qui) 20 mg in 92 patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension. All patients received placebo during a 30-day run-in period followed by 2 months of active therapy and 1-day medication omission. ABPM was conducted on each period. 24 h antihypertensive coverage was assessed by trough:peak ratio (T/P) and smoothness index (SI) methods. Residual lowering of blood pressure after single-blind, 1 day medication omission was investigated as the SBP/DBP 48-h trough effect. There were no statistically significant differences between treatment groups in the mean SBP/DBP peak or trough effect. Individual T/P were not normally distributed and had very large variations explained by BP random- and activity-related fluctuations. Group T/P were 0.85 for Tra and 0.62 for Qui. The SI values were normally distributed and not statistically different between the two treatment groups. After dose omission, Qui was ineffective at 48-h trough while Tra retained a significant effect (SBP/DBP = -3.4/-4.3 mmHg) and this difference was even greater in ABPM-responders. Comparison of the trough:peak ratios and smoothness indexes of Tra and Qui failed to show any statistically significant difference on 24-h antihypertensive coverage. Nevertheless, residual lowering of blood pressure at 48-h trough suggests that Tra had a longer duration of action than Qui.

Trough-to-peak ratio, smoothness index, and circadian blood pressure profile after treatment with once-daily fixed combination of losartan 100 and hydrochlorothiazide 25 in essential hypertension

The once-daily fixed combination of losartan 100 mg/hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg was evaluated for safety and efficacy in a multicenter open study by using 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in untreated patients with moderate-to-severe essential hypertension or patients with uncontrolled hypertension despite treatment with monotherapy or low-dose combination. After a 2-week washout period, 41 patients (22 men, 19 women) aged 34-74 years, showing a mean daytime blood pressure > 135/85 mm Hg, were treated with losartan 100 mg/hydrochlorothiazide 25 for 8 weeks. Ambulatory blood pressure was monitored at the end of the washout period and during the last week of treatment. A significant reduction in the average values of clinic blood pressure (from 169.9 +/- 13.5 mm Hg to 139.5 +/- 15.6 mm Hg, p < 0.001 for systolic blood pressure [SBP]; and from 102.2 +/- 7.1 mm Hg to 85.1 +/- 9.5 mm Hg, p < 0.001 for diastolic blood pressure [DBP]) was observed after treatment in the whole group of 41 patients. Likewise, average values of both 24-h SBP and 24-h DBP were significantly reduced (from 145.7 +/- 13.1 mm Hg to 128.3 +/- 14.6 mm Hg, p < 0.001 for 24-h SBP; and from 90.3 +/- 7.3 mm Hg to 79.2 +/- 8.6 mm Hg, p < 0.001 for 24-h DBP). The average lowering at peak was 20.2 +/- 11.8 mm Hg for 24-h SBP and 12.1 +/- 7.4 mm Hg for 24-h DBP, whereas the lowering at trough was 17.8 +/- 12.0 mm Hg and 10.4 +/- 8.1 mm Hg, respectively. The trough-to-peak ratio (T/P) was 0.88 for SBP and 0.86 for DBP, and the smoothness index was 7.36 for SBP and 6.37 for DBP. The response rate was 87.8% (blood pressure lowering > 5 mm Hg of either 24-h SBP or 24-h DBP average values). Among responders, T/P ratio was 0.89 for SBP and 0.87 for DBP, and the smoothness index was 8.09 for SBP and 7.15 for DBP. No side effects or changes in metabolic parameters were observed. The fixed combination of losartan 100 mg/hydrochlorothiazide 25 was very effective and well tolerated.