Search

Background: Thiazide-type diuretics are associated with an increased incidence of diabetes compared with other antihypertensive medications. In this study, we determined the long-term cardiovascular disease (CVD) consequences of incident diuretic-associated diabetes compared with the effects of incident diabetes associated with calcium channel blocker and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor use.Methods and Results: A total of 22 418 participants from the ALLHAT (Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial) with baseline diabetes, incident diabetes (7.5% with chlorthalidone, 5.6% with amlodipine, and 4.3% with lisinopril), or no diabetes at 2 years of in-trial follow-up were followed for a mean total of 6.9 years (2.9 years in-trial and 4 additional years posttrial) through the use of national databases. The primary outcome was CVD mortality (death from coronary heart disease [CHD], stroke, heart failure, or other CVD). Among other outcomes were all-cause mortality, non-CVD mortality, and CHD (nonfatal myocardial infarction or fatal CHD). Participants on chlorthalidone with incident diabetes versus no diabetes had consistently lower, nonsignificant risk for CVD mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.04; 95% CI, 0.74-1.47), all-cause mortality (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.82-1.30), and non-CVD mortality (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.77-1.42) than participants on amlodipine or lisinopril with incident diabetes (HR range, 1.22-1.53). Participants with incident diabetes had elevated CHD risk compared with those with no diabetes (HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.09-1.96), but those on chlorthalidone had significantly lower risk than those on lisinopril (HR, 1.18 versus 2.57; P=0.04 for interaction).Conclusions: The findings suggest that thiazide-related incident diabetes has less adverse long-term CVD impact than incident diabetes that develops while on other antihypertensive medications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Transient ischemic attack (TIA) is currently defined as a transient episode of neurologic dysfunction caused by focal brain, spinal cord, or retinal ischemia without infarction. TIA is an important risk factor for stroke and other major vascular events. Risk factors for TIA or stroke need to be addressed effectively to reduce the risk for stroke in patients who have had a TIA. Aspirin (ASA) significantly reduces the risk for stroke when given after a TIA, stroke, or myocardial infarction in a dose of 50 mg/d to 325 mg/d. The role of ASA in the primary prevention of TIA or stroke, however, is less well-substantiated. Clopidogrel may be used in the secondary prevention of TIA or stroke, but its antiplatelet effect may be reduced in poor metabolizers of the drug. The combination of ASA and extended-release dipyridamole is effective in reducing risk for TIA and stroke, and may confer additional risk-lowering without an increased risk of bleeding compared with ASA alone. ASA monotherapy, clopidogrel alone, or the combination of ASA and extended-release dypiridamole are all acceptable options for initial therapy in patients with a TIA and stroke, and the combination of ASA plus extended-release dypiridamole is recommended over ASA alone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cardiovascular and chronic kidney disease are epidemic throughout industrialized societies. Diabetes leads to premature cardiovascular disease and is regarded by many as the most common etiological factor for chronic kidney disease. Because most studies of blood-pressure lowering agents in people with diabetes and hypertension have been conducted in individuals who already have some target organ damage, it is unclear whether earlier intervention could prevent or delay the onset of renal or systemic vascular disease. In early disease there is only a low possibility of observing cardiovascular or renal events; thus intervention trials in this population must rely on disease markers such as microalbuminuria. Accordingly, the authors review the evidence to support the use of microalbuminuria as a disease marker in diabetic patients based on its strong association with renal and cardiovascular events, and discuss recent trials that examine the impact of preventing or delaying the onset of microalbuminuria. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The efficacy and safety of an olmesartan medoxomil (OM)-based treatment algorithm was tested in a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled titration study in 276 patients with stage 1 or 2 hypertension. After placebo run-in, patients were randomized to placebo (12 weeks) or OM 20 mg/d (weeks 1-3). OM was up-titrated to 40 mg/d (weeks 4-6), then OM/hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 40/12.5 mg/d (weeks 7-9) and OM/HCTZ 40/25 mg/d (weeks 10-12) were started if blood pressure (BP) remained > or =120/80 mm Hg at each time interval. End points were change from baseline in mean systolic BP (primary) and mean diastolic BP (secondary). OM-based treatment was well tolerated and changed BP by -22.3/-12.1 mm Hg from baseline vs -0.1/+0.8 mm Hg for placebo (P<.0001). Cumulative goal BP (<140/90 mm Hg) was achieved in 74.1% and 30.7% of OM- compared with placebo-treated patients, respectively (P<.0001). BP normalized (<120/80 mm Hg) in 44.8% of OM- vs 1.4% of placebo-treated patients with stage 1 hypertension (P<.0001). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: To compare blood pressure response and antihypertensive medication use visit-by-visit from baseline in patients receiving losartan-based or atenolol-based therapy in the LIFE study. RESEARCH DESIGN: LIFE was a randomized, double-blind trial comparing losartan-based and atenolol-based treatment regimens on the primary composite endpoint of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke in 9193 patients aged 55-80 years with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy. Systolic and diastolic, pulse, and mean arterial pressures, blood pressure responder rates, distribution of open-label antihypertensive agents utilized, and the proportion of patients on randomized treatment were determined for each group at each clinic visit over a follow-up period of at least 4 years. RESULTS: Overall blood pressure reductions were comparable in the losartan-based and atenolol-based treatment groups. The mean reductions in sitting trough systolic and diastolic blood pressures from baseline to the end of follow-up (or last visit before a primary endpoint event) were 30.2/16.6 mmHg in the losartan group and 29.1/16.8 mmHg in the atenolol group. The time-averaged difference in overall mean arterial pressure was similar between groups. The proportion of patients on individual dose combinations varied visit by visit but was generally comparable between groups. During the entire study, 56% (2579/4605) of losartan-treated patients received at least one dose of the combination of losartan 100 mg plus hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg and 51% of atenolol-treated patients received 100 mg of atenolol plus hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg at some time during the study. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in blood pressure or distribution of add-on medications between treatment groups were not evident in the LIFE trial and, thus, cannot account for the observed outcome difference in the primary endpoint of risk reduction of the composite of cardiovascular death, stroke and MI favoring losartan. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We discuss combination therapy with angiotensin receptor antagonists (angiotensin receptor blockers; ARBs) and thiazide diuretics in light of the independent actions of both types of agents, and the adverse effects of both agents independently and in the context of the physiologic synergy achieved in using these agents together. ARBs counteract many of the adverse events associated with the use of thiazide diuretics and have been shown to reduce the occurrence of new-onset diabetes mellitus. We also review outcome trials in patients with hypertension (such as LIFE [Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension], VALUE [Valsartan Antihypertensive Long-term Use Evaluation], and SCOPE [Study on COgnition and Prognosis in the Elderly]), in which losartan, valsartan, and candesartan cilexetil were used in combination with hydrochlorothiazide. Fixed combination ARB/hydrochlorothiazide agents make sense as initial therapy for patients in whom BP is >20/10 mm Hg above goal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of monotherapy with the selective aldosterone blocker eplerenone in both black and white patients with hypertension.Background: Essential hypertension and cardiovascular-renal-target organ damage is more prevalent in black than white adults in the U.S.Methods: Black (n = 348) and white (n = 203) patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension were randomized to double-blind treatment with eplerenone 50 mg, the angiotensin II receptor antagonist losartan 50 mg, or placebo once daily. Doses were increased if blood pressure remained uncontrolled. The primary end point was change in mean diastolic blood pressure (DBP) after 16 weeks of therapy.Results: Adjusted mean changes from baseline in DBP were -5.3 +/- 0.7, -10.3 +/- 0.7, and -6.9 +/- 0.6 mm Hg in the placebo, eplerenone-treated, and losartan-treated groups, respectively (mean +/- SE, p < 0.001 eplerenone vs. placebo, p < 0.001 eplerenone vs. losartan). In black patients, DBP decreased by -4.8 +/- 1.0, -10.2 +/- 0.9, and -6.0 +/- 0.9 mm Hg for the placebo, eplerenone-treated, and losartan-treated groups, respectively (mean +/- SE, p < 0.001 eplerenone vs. placebo, p < 0.001 eplerenone vs. losartan), whereas in white patients, DBP decreased by -6.4 +/- 1.0, -11.1 +/- 1.1, and -8.4 +/- 1.0 mm Hg, respectively (p = 0.001 eplerenone vs. placebo, p = 0.068 for eplerenone vs. losartan). For reduction of systolic blood pressure (SBP), eplerenone was superior to placebo and losartan in all patients combined and in black patients, and was superior to placebo in white patients. Eplerenone was as effective as losartan in reducing SBP and DBP in the high renin patient, but more effective than losartan in the low renin patient. Similarly, eplerenone was at least as effective as losartan in patients with differing baseline levels of aldosterone. Both eplerenone and losartan were well tolerated.Conclusions: The antihypertensive effect of eplerenone was equal in black and white patients and was superior to losartan in black patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]