Hydrochlorothiazide and potassium chloride in comparison with hydrochlorothiazide and amiloride in the treatment of mild hypertension

Blood pressure lowering efficacy of potassium-sparing diuretics (that block the epithelial sodium channel) for primary hypertension

BACKGROUND

Potassium-sparing diuretics, which block the epithelial sodium channel (ENaC), are widely prescribed for hypertension as a second-line drug in patients taking other diuretics (e.g. thiazide diuretics) and much less commonly prescribed as monotherapy. Therefore, it is essential to determine the effects of ENaC blockers on blood pressure (BP), heart rate and withdrawals due to adverse effects (WDAEs) when given as a first-line or second-line therapy.

OBJECTIVES

To quantify the dose-related reduction in systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) of ENaC blocker therapy as a first-line or second-line drug in patients with primary hypertension.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2012), MEDLINE (1950 to August 2012), EMBASE (1980 to August 2012) and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Double-blind, randomized, controlled trials in patients with primary hypertension that evaluate, for a duration of 3 to 12 weeks, the BP lowering efficacy of: 1) fixed-dose monotherapy with an ENaC blocker compared with placebo; or 2) an ENaC blocker in combination with another class of anti-hypertensive drugs compared with the respective monotherapy (without an ENaC blocker).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias and extracted data. Study authors were contacted for additional information. WDAE information was also collected from the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

No trials evaluating the BP lowering efficacy of ENaC blockers as monotherapy in patients with primary hypertension were identified. Only 6 trials evaluated the BP lowering efficacy of low doses of amiloride and triamterene as a second drug in 496 participants with a baseline BP of 151/102 mm Hg. The additional BP reduction caused by the ENaC blocker as a second drug was estimated by comparing the difference in BP reduction between the combination and monotherapy groups. The addition of low doses of amiloride and triamterene in these trials did not reduce BP. An estimate of the dose-related BP lowering efficacy for ENaC blockers was not possible because of a lack of trial data at higher doses.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

ENaC blockers do not have a statistically or clinically significant BP lowering effect at low doses but trials at higher doses are not available. The review did not provide a good estimate of the incidence of harms associated with ENaC blockers.

Blood pressure lowering efficacy of potassium-sparing diuretics (that block the epithelial sodium channel) for primary hypertension

BACKGROUND

Potassium-sparing diuretics, which block the epithelial sodium channel (ENaC), are widely prescribed for hypertension as a second-line drug in patients taking other diuretics (e.g. thiazide diuretics) and much less commonly prescribed as monotherapy. Therefore, it is essential to determine the effects of ENaC blockers on blood pressure (BP), heart rate and withdrawals due to adverse effects (WDAEs) when given as a first-line or second-line therapy.

OBJECTIVES

To quantify the dose-related reduction in systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) of ENaC blocker therapy as a first-line or second-line drug in patients with primary hypertension.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2009, Issue 3), MEDLINE (1950 to August 2009), EMBASE (1980 to August 2009) and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Double-blind, randomized, controlled trials in patients with primary hypertension that evaluate, for a duration of 3 to 12 weeks, the BP lowering efficacy of: 1) fixed-dose monotherapy with an ENaC blocker compared with placebo; or 2) an ENaC blocker in combination with another class of anti-hypertensive drugs compared with the respective monotherapy (without an ENaC blocker).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias and extracted data. Study authors were contacted for additional information. WDAE information was also collected from the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

No trials evaluating the BP lowering efficacy of ENaC blockers as monotherapy in patients with primary hypertension were identified. Only 6 trials evaluated the BP lowering efficacy of low doses of amiloride and triamterene as a second drug in 496 participants with a baseline BP of 151/102 mm Hg. The additional BP reduction caused by the ENaC blocker as a second drug was estimated by comparing the difference in BP reduction between the combination and monotherapy groups. The addition of low doses of amiloride and triamterene in these trials did not reduce BP. An estimate of the dose-related BP lowering efficacy for ENaC blockers was not possible because of a lack of trial data at higher doses.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

ENaC blockers do not have a statistically or clinically significant BP lowering effect at low doses but trials at higher doses are not available. The review did not provide a good estimate of the incidence of harms associated with ENaC blockers.

A comparison of blood lipid and blood pressure responses during the treatment of systemic hypertension with indapamide and with thiazides

Thiazide diuretics in high dosage adversely affect the lipid profile. The non-thiazide indoline, indapamide, appears to be free of this effect, but it is unclear whether this apparent metabolic advantage of indapamide is superior to thiazides used in low dose. Since there are no large direct comparative studies to test this distinction, I surveyed the literature and pooled the findings of all published reports giving data on lipid and blood pressure effects of thiazides in various doses and of both indapamide, 2.5 mg daily, used as monotherapy of hypertension. I found 31 reports of thiazides; 12 of them examined low-dose regimens, i.e., < or = 25 mg/day of hydrochlorothiazide or its equivalent in other thiazides. Larger doses of thiazides were tested in 19 studies (median daily dose of 50 mg, maximum dose of 112.5 mg). There were 430 subjects in the low-dose studies and 559 subjects in the high-dose regimens. There were 13 studies of indapamide, comprising 558 subjects. Regarding lipids, total cholesterol increased from baseline by 1.4% on indapamide, 3.8% on low-dose thiazides, and 6.3% on high-dose thiazides, The change from baseline was significantly greater for high-dose thiazides than for indapamide (p<0.01). Changes in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol did not differ among groups. The change in triglycerides differed among regimens, -0.5%, 10.8%, and 19.5% for indapamide, low-dose thiazides, and high-dose thiazides, respectively (p<0.01). Systolic blood pressure (SBP) decreased by 13 and 18 mm Hg on low-dose and high-dose thiazides, respectively (p<0.05 between doses). Indapamide lowered SBP by 16 mm Hg, not different from either thiazide dose. Diastolic blood pressure did not differ among groups. From these noncomparative studies, I conclude that (1) indapamide has no adverse lipid effect and lowers blood pressure equally to thiazides; (2) thiazide effects on lipids and SBP are dose-dependent; and (3) thiazides adversely affect the lipid profile even in low dose.

Diuretic-related hypokalaemia: the role of diuretics, potassium supplements, glucocorticoids and beta 2-adrenoceptor agonists. Results from the comprehensive hospital drug monitoring programme, berne (CHDM)

All 5,047 consecutive inpatients admitted to the Internal Medicine Division of a teaching hospital (Zieglerspital, Berne) between 1982 and 1985 were registered in accordance with the CHDM (Comprehensive Hospital Drug Monitoring) questionnaire of adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Of them, 2,439 were treated with at least one potassium losing diuretic. The hospital records of the patients were reviewed with particular regard to serum potassium levels, and on the basis of this evaluation, the patients were assigned to four different diuretic treatment groups, and the incidence of hypokalaemia related to diuretic treatment was estimated. The overall rate of occurrence of hypokalaemia was 21.1% at a serum potassium level < 3.5 mmol.l-1, and 3.8% < 3.0 mmol.l-1. Hypokalaemia of less than 3.5 mml.l-1 developed 24.9% (217/870) of patients treated with potassium losing diuretics alone; in 19.7% (101/513) treated with potassium losing diuretics in conjunction with potassium substitution, in 15.1% (66/438) treated with a combination of diuretics (potassium losing with potassium sparing), and in 20.0% (12/60) treated with combined diuretics and potassium substitution. Only the differences between the first and the two subsequent groups were statistically significant. The overall incidence of hypokalaemia below 3.0 + mmol.l-1 was significantly lower in the patients on combined diuretics without potassium substitution than in the patients on potassium losing diuretics with potassium substitution. Oral or parenteral administration of glucocorticoids (prednisone 5 to 2,000 mg/d) was a significant risk factor for hypokalaemic events. beta 2-Adrenoceptor agonists had not effect. The patient's age, sex, renal function and numbers of drugs received were evaluated in a multivariate analysis, in order to take into account their influence on the risk of developing hypokalaemia. The number of drugs above 12 (and, less importantly, female sex) was the main risk factor for this ADR. The comparison between hypokalaemia and hyperkalaemia in this group of inpatients showed the significance of reduced renal function in the occurrence of hyperkalaemia.