Search

Objective: Of the study was to compare the leg oedema-forming potential of two different dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers in postmenopausal women., Design: A total of 92 postmenopausal hypertensive patients [systolic blood pressure (SBP) 150-179 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure (DBP) 95-109 mmHg were randomized to receive a 4-week treatment with either 10 mg/day lercanidipine (n = 48) or 5 mg/day amlodipine (n = 44), with force-titration to 20 and 10 mg/day, respectively for an additional 4 weeks., Methods: Leg volume was measured by water displacement volumetry, patients were questioned for symptoms and a physical examination was performed to detect the presence of oedema., Results: A total of 77 patients completed the study, without a major protocol violation and were included in the primary analysis. Leg volume increase from baseline was significantly higher in the amlodipine than in the lercanidipine group (60.4 +/- 8.6 versus 5.3 +/- 8.1 ml; P < 0.001). The percentage of patients with evidence of oedema on physical examination (33.3 versus 9.8%, P = 0.011) and with symptoms of leg swelling (63.9 versus 22%, P < 0.001) and leg heaviness (47.2 versus 12.2%, P < 0.001) was also greater with amlodipine compared with lercanidipine. A positive correlation was found between leg volume and sign or symptoms of oedema (P < 0.001). Both drugs reduced SBP and DBP, with no significant differences between treatments. No correlation was found between leg volume changes from baseline and the antihypertensive effect of either drug., Conclusions: In postmenopausal females with mild to moderate hypertension the oedema formation of Lercanidipine was significantly less than that of Amlodipine, despite no significant differences in the antihypertensive effect.