Search

beta-Adrenoceptor blocking drugs are generally recognized as being effective in the treatment of hypertension. The mechanisms whereby these drugs reduce blood pressure are, however, not fully understood. In a double-blind, randomized study either metoprolol, 100--300 mg/day, or pindolol, 5--15 mg/day, was given for 6 months and the effects on blood pressure, heart rate and vascular resistance in the calf and forearm were investigated. Measurements were made at rest, during and after physical exercise, and during postischaemic hyperaemia. Both drugs reduced blood pressure to the same extent both at rest and during and after exercise. Metoprolol reduced heart rate to a greater extent than pindolol at rest and after exercise, whereas no difference was seen during physical exercise. Pindolol reduced the vascular resistance in the calf at rest by 14% (p less than 0.05), whereas metoprolol tended to increase vascular resistance, the difference in effect being highly significant (p less than 0.005). During and after leg exercise, there was no difference in forearm vascular resistance between the two drugs. It may be concluded that pindolol reduced resting blood pressure partly through peripheral vasodilatation. This was probably an effect of beta 2-adrenoceptor stimulation linked to the pronounced intrinsic sympathomimetic activity (ISA) of pindolol. Metoprolol on the other hand, acted mainly through cardiac mechanisms, as suggested by its pronounced reduction of heart rate.

1 In a double-blind study, 36 patients with essential hypertension were randomly allocated to treatment with either metoprolol, 100--300 mg/day, or pindolol, 5--15 mg/day for 6 months. Haemodynamic investigations were made on three separate occasions. Blood flow in the calves and in the forearm was determined by venous occlusion plethysmography after 6 weeks of placebo, after 6 weeks and again after 6 months of active therapy. 2 Both drugs reduced blood pressure significantly, by 17.1/11.8 mm Hg with metoprolol and 21.9/10.9 mm Hg with pindolol after 6 weeks (P less than 0.005). No further changes were seen after 6 months. 3 Heart rate after 6 weeks was significantly reduced by metoprolol (10.7 +/- 2.4 beats/min, P less than 0.001) but not by pindolol (4.4 +/- 2.3 beats/min, NS). After 6 months a significant reduction was seen also in the pindolol group (5.2 +/- 2.1 beats/min, P less than 0.05). 4 The vascular resistance in the calves at rest was reduced by pindolol (P less than 0.05), whereas resistance tended to increase with metoprolol. 5 Resting vascular resistance in the forearm after 6 months was significantly reduced in the metoprolol group (P less than 0.001) as well as in the pindolol group (P less than 0.02). The increase in forearm vascular resistance seen during leg exercise was not influenced by either drug. 6 Vascular resistance at maximal vasodilatation was unchanged in the calves, but a significant reduction (-17.4 +/- 5.7%, P less than 0.01) in the forearm vascular bed was seen after 6 months of pindolol. No change was observed with metoprolol. 7 It is concluded that pindolol reduces elevated blood pressure partly through peripheral vascular mechanism. Metoprolol, on the other hand, probably acts mainly via central cardiac mechanisms.

1. Thirty-six patients with essential hypertension, were randomly allocated to double-blind treatment with either metoprolol (100--200 mg/day) or pindolol (5--10 mg/day). The effects upon blood pressure and peripheral blood flow were determined. Both drugs reduced blood pressure significantly. 2. Heart rate was significantly reduced by metoprolol but not by pindolol. 3. Vascular resistance at maximal dilatation was not changed by either pindolol. 4. At rest, pindolol reduced vascular resistance in the calf by 14% (P less than 0.05) but metoprolol tended to increase the resistance slightly. The difference in effect was also significant (P less than 0.005). 5. During leg muscle work there were no changes in vascular resistance in the forearm with either compound. 6. We conclude that pindolol appears to reduce blood pressure at least partly through vascular mechanisms, in contrast to metoprolol. The response to sympathetic stimulation induced by physical exercise does not differ between metoprolol- and pindolol-treated patients.