» Articles » PMID: 8512762

A Comparison of Amlodipine with Enalapril in the Treatment of Isolated Systolic Hypertension

Overview
Specialty Pharmacology
Date 1993 May 1
PMID 8512762
Citations 4
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

1. The safety and efficacy of amlodipine and enalapril were compared in patients with isolated systolic hypertension (supine DBP < 95 mm Hg and supine SBP 160-200 mm Hg). 2. After 2 weeks treatment with placebo 31 patients were randomised by the technique of minimisation in an observer-blind study to receive once daily treatment with either amlodipine (16 patients) or enalapril (15 patients) for 8 weeks. The study design concluded with 2 weeks placebo treatment. In addition to clinic measurements, home blood pressure monitoring (Copal UA-251) was performed during the study. 3. Mean supine systolic blood pressure was reduced from 185 to 164 mm Hg (amlodipine) and 183 to 159 mm Hg (enalapril) (95% CI for the difference between the drugs -10.5, 15.3) after 8 weeks treatment. 4. Mean supine diastolic blood pressure was reduced from 86 to 80 mm Hg (amlodipine) and 88 to 80 mm Hg (enalapril) (95% CI for the difference between the drugs -4.9, 7.6) after 8 weeks treatment. 5. Home blood pressure recordings confirmed these reductions in blood pressure, although there was no significant difference between treatments for the reductions in blood pressure. 6. Both drugs were reasonably well tolerated. The adverse events occurring most frequently in the amlodipine group were headache (2), peripheral oedema (5) and palpitations (2). The adverse events occurring most frequently in the enalapril group were headache (2), peripheral oedema (2), palpitations (2) and dizziness (3).

Citing Articles

Antihypertensive efficacy and safety of manidipine versus amlodipine in elderly subjects with isolated systolic hypertension: MAISH study.

Coca Payeras A, Sladek K, Lembo G, Alberici M Clin Drug Investig. 2007; 27(9):623-32.

PMID: 17705571 DOI: 10.2165/00044011-200727090-00004.


Optimal dosage of ACE inhibitors in older patients.

Tomlinson B Drugs Aging. 1996; 9(4):262-73.

PMID: 8894524 DOI: 10.2165/00002512-199609040-00004.


Management of isolated systolic hypertension.

Tonkin A, Wing L Drugs. 1996; 51(5):738-49.

PMID: 8861544 DOI: 10.2165/00003495-199651050-00003.


ACE inhibitors. Differential use in elderly patients with hypertension.

Israili Z, Hall W Drugs Aging. 1995; 7(5):355-71.

PMID: 8573991 DOI: 10.2165/00002512-199507050-00004.

References
1.
Burges R, Gardiner D, Gwilt M, Higgins A, Blackburn K, Campbell S . Calcium channel blocking properties of amlodipine in vascular smooth muscle and cardiac muscle in vitro: evidence for voltage modulation of vascular dihydropyridine receptors. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 1987; 9(1):110-9. View

2.
Safar M, Laurent S, Bouthier J, London G . Comparative effects of captopril and isosorbide dinitrate on the arterial wall of hypertensive human brachial arteries. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 1986; 8(6):1257-61. DOI: 10.1097/00005344-198611000-00024. View

3.
Webster J, Robb O, Jeffers T, Scott A, Petrie J, Towler H . Once daily amlodipine in the treatment of mild to moderate hypertension. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1987; 24(6):713-9. PMC: 1386394. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.1987.tb03236.x. View

4.
Levy B, Michel J, Salzmann J, Azizi M, POITEVIN P, Safar M . Effects of chronic inhibition of converting enzyme on mechanical and structural properties of arteries in rat renovascular hypertension. Circ Res. 1988; 63(1):227-39. DOI: 10.1161/01.res.63.1.227. View

5.
Wilking S, Belanger A, Kannel W, DAgostino R, Steel K . Determinants of isolated systolic hypertension. JAMA. 1988; 260(23):3451-5. View