A prospective evaluation of persistence on antihypertensive treatment with different antihypertensive drugs in clinical practice The 2007 Canadian Hypertension Education Program recommendations for the management of hypertension: part 2 - therapy. Efficacy of Eplerenone Added to Renin-Angiotensin Blockade in Hypertensive Patients Beneficial effect of lisinopril plus telmisartan in patients with type 2 diabetes, microalbuminuria and hypertension. Combination is better than monotherapy with ACE inhibitor or angiotensin receptor antagonist at recommended doses South African hypertension guideline 2011. Efficacy of various antihypertensive agents as evaluated by indices of vascular stiffness in elderly hypertensive patients. Cardiovascular events in elderly patients with isolated systolic hypertension. A subgroup analysis of treatment strategies in STOP‐Hypertension‐2 Effect of angiotensin receptor blockade on central haemodynamics in essential hypertension: results of a randomised trial Medical treatment of hypertension in Switzerland. The 2009 Swiss Hypertension Survey (SWISSHYPE). Progress Report on the Hypertension Objective Treatment Based on Measurement by Electrical Devices of Blood Pressure (HOMED-BP) Study: Status at February 2004 Effect of candesartan and lisinopril alone and in combination on blood pressure and microalbuminuria Hypertensive emergencies in old age: effects of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibition. The effect of valsartan, captopril, or both on atherosclerotic events after acute myocardial infarction: an analysis of the Valsartan in Acute Myocardial Infarction Trial (VALIANT). Comparison of the Effects of Quinapril and Losartan on Carotid Artery Intima-Media Thickness in Patients with Mild-to-Moderate Arterial Hypertension Rationale, design, and baseline characteristics of 2 large, simple, randomized trials evaluating telmisartan, ramipril, and their combination in high-risk patients: the Ongoing Telmisartan Alone and in Combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial/Telmisartan Randomized Assessment Study in ACE Int Renoprotective Effect of the Addition of Losartan to Ongoing Treatment with an Angiotensin Converting Enzyme Inhibitor in Type-2 Diabetic Patients with Nephropathy Long-term effects of addition of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist to angiotensin II receptor blocker in patients with diabetic nephropathy: a randomized clinical trial. Reduction of morbidity and mortality by statins, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and angiotensin receptor blockers in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Distinct time courses of renal protective action of angiotensin receptor antagonists and ACE inhibitors in chronic renal disease Population-based study of statins, angiotensin II receptor blockers, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors on pneumonia-related outcomes. Nifedipine retard was as effective as angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors in preventing cardiac events in high-risk hypertensive patients with diabetes and coronary artery disease: the Japan Multicenter Investigation for Cardiovascular Diseases-B (JMIC-B) subgroup analysis. The impact of ACE inhibitors or angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers on the development of new-onset type 2 diabetes. Associations of anti-hypertensive treatments with Alzheimer's disease, vascular dementia, and other dementias. A five-year comparison of the renal protective effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers in patients with non-diabetic nephropathy. Dual blockade of the renin-angiotensin system versus maximal recommended dose of ACE inhibition in diabetic nephropathy. Practitioner's Trial on the Efficacy of Antihypertensive Treatment in the Elderly Hypertension (The PATE-Hypertension Study) in Japan. Comparison of antihypertensive treatments in preventing cardiovascular events in elderly diabetic patients: results from the Swedish Trial in Old Patients with Hypertension–2 Antihypertensive medications and C-reactive protein in the multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis.
Persistence on treatment affects the efficacy of antihypertensive treatment . We prospect ively investigated the persistence on therapy and the extent of  blood pressure ( BP ) control  in 347 hypertensive patients ( age 59.4 ± 6 years ) r and omly allocated to a first-line treatment with : angiotensin-converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitors , calcium-channel blockers ( CCBs ) , ß-blockers , angiotensin-II receptor blockers ( ARBs ) , or diuretics and followed-up for 24-months . Persistence on treatment was higher in patients treated with ARBs ( 68.5 % ) and ACE inhibitors ( 64.5 % ) vs CCBs ( 51.6 % ; p < 0.05 ) , β-blockers ( 44.8 % , p < 0.05 ) , and diuretics ( 34.4 % , p < 0.01 ) . No ARB , ACE inhibitor , β-blocker , or diuretic was associated with a higher persistence in therapy compared with the other molecules used in each therapeutic class . The rate of persistence was significantly higher in patients treated with lercanidipine vs others CCBs ( 59.3 % vs 46.6 % , p < 0.05 ) . Systolic and diastolic BP was decreased more successfully in patients treated with ARBs ( −11.2/−5.8 mmHg ) , ACE inhibitors ( −10.5/−5.1 mmHg ) , and CCBs ( −8.5/−4.6 mmHg ) compared with ß-blockers ( −4.0/−2.3 mmHg p < 0.05 ) and diuretics ( −2.3/−2.1 mmHg , p < 0.05 ) . No ARB , ACE inhibitor , β-blocker , or diuretic was associated with a higher BP control compared with the other molecules used in each therapeutic class . A trend toward a better BP control was observed in response to lercanidipine vs other CCBs ( p = 0.059 ) . The present results confirm the importance of persistence on treatment for the management of hypertension in clinical practice OBJECTIVE To provide up date d , evidence -based recommendations for the prevention and management of hypertension in adults . OPTIONS AND OUTCOMES For lifestyle and pharmacological interventions , evidence was review ed from r and omized controlled trials and systematic review s of trials . Changes in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality were the primary outcomes of interest . However , for lifestyle interventions , blood pressure lowering was accepted as a primary outcome given the lack of long-term morbidity and mortality data in this field . For treatment of patients with kidney disease , the progression of kidney dysfunction was also accepted as a clinical ly relevant primary outcome . EVIDENCE A Cochrane collaboration librarian conducted an independent MEDLINE search from 2005 to August 2006 to up date the 2006 Canadian Hypertension Education Program recommendations . In addition , reference lists were scanned and experts were contacted to identify additional published studies . All relevant articles were review ed and appraised independently by both content and method ological experts using prespecified levels of evidence . RECOMMENDATIONS Dietary lifestyle modifications for prevention of hypertension , in addition to a well-balanced diet , include a dietary sodium intake of less than 100 mmol/day . In hypertensive patients , the dietary sodium intake should be limited to 65 mmol/day to 100 mmol/day . Other lifestyle modifications for both normotensive and hypertensive patients include : performing 30 min to 60 min of aerobic exercise four to seven days per week ; maintaining a healthy body weight ( body mass index of 18.5 kg/m2 to 24.9 kg/m2 ) and waist circumference ( less than 102 cm in men and less than 88 cm in women ) ; limiting alcohol consumption to no more than 14 units per week in men or nine units per week in women ; following a diet reduced in saturated fat and cholesterol , and one that emphasizes fruits , vegetables and low-fat dairy products , dietary and soluble fibre , whole grains and protein from plant sources ; and considering stress management in selected individuals with hypertension . For the pharmacological management of hypertension , treatment thresholds and targets should take into account each individual 's global atherosclerotic risk , target organ damage and any comorbid conditions : blood pressure should be lowered to lower than 140/90 mmHg in all patients and lower than 130/80 mmHg in those with diabetes mellitus or chronic kidney disease . Most patients require more than one agent to achieve these blood pressure targets . In adults without compelling indications for other agents , initial therapy should include thiazide diuretics ; other agents appropriate for first-line therapy for diastolic and /or systolic hypertension include angiotensin-converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitors ( except in black patients ) , long-acting calcium channel blockers ( CCBs ) , angiotensin receptor blockers ( ARBs ) or beta-blockers ( in those younger than 60 years of age ) . First-line therapy for isolated systolic hypertension includes long-acting dihydropyridine CCBs or ARBs . Certain comorbid conditions provide compelling indications for first-line use of other agents : in patients with angina , recent myocardial infa rct ion , or heart failure , beta-blockers and ACE inhibitors are recommended as first-line therapy ; in patients with cerebrovascular disease , an ACE inhibitor plus diuretic combination is preferred ; in patients with nondiabetic chronic kidney disease , ACE inhibitors are recommended ; and in patients with diabetes mellitus , ACE inhibitors or ARBs ( or , in patients without albuminuria , thiazides or dihydropyridine CCBs ) are appropriate first-line therapies . All hypertensive patients with dyslipidemia should be treated using the thresholds , targets and agents outlined in the Canadian Cardiovascular Society position statement ( recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of dyslipidemia and prevention of cardiovascular disease ) . Selected high-risk patients with hypertension who do not achieve thresholds for statin therapy according to the position paper should nonetheless receive statin therapy . Once blood pressure is controlled , acetylsalicylic acid therapy should be considered . VALIDATION All recommendations were grade d according to strength of the evidence and voted on by the 57 members of the Canadian Hypertension Education Program Evidence -Based Recommendations Task Force . All recommendations reported here achieved at least 95 % consensus . These guidelines will continue to be up date d annually The  efficacy and tolerability of eplerenone , a selective aldosterone blocker , was assessed when added to existing antihypertensive therapy with an ACE inhibitor or an angiotensin II receptor blocker ( ARB ) . Hypertensive patients ( n=341 ) whose blood pressure ( BP ) was not controlled despite ACE inhibitor or ARB  were r and omized ( double-blind ) to receive 50 mg eplerenone ( increasing to 100 mg if required ) once daily or placebo for 8 weeks . Diastolic and systolic BP and adverse events were recorded . By study end ( week 8) , mean seated diastolic BP was significantly reduced from week 0 among patients receiving eplerenone/ARB ( −12.7±0.81 mm Hg ) compared with those receiving placebo/ARB ( −9.3±0.83 mm Hg ) . The change in mean seated diastolic BP was −9.9±0.88 mm Hg in eplerenone/ACE inhibitor patients and −8.0±0.86 mm Hg in placebo/ACE inhibitor patients ( P = NS ) . Systolic BP levels were also significantly lower at week 8 for eplerenone/ACE inhibitor ( −13.4±1.35 mm Hg ) and eplerenone/ARB ( −16.0±1.37 mm Hg ) patients , respectively , compared with placebo/ACE inhibitor ( −7.5±1.31 mm Hg ) and placebo/ARB patients ( −9.2±1.41 mm Hg ) . Adverse events were generally nonsevere and not significantly different between eplerenone and placebo . This study demonstrated that in patients whose BP was not controlled with an ACE inhibitor or ARB , the addition of eplerenone over an 8-week period significantly lowered systolic BP in both groups and diastolic BP in ARB patients . Selective aldosterone blockade with eplerenone , therefore , may be useful add-on therapy in hypertensive patients inadequately controlled on ACE inhibitor or ARB alone Angiotensin-converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitors have favourable effects on hypertension and diabetic nephropathy , but persistent use may result in incomplete blockade of the renin-angiotensin system . Long-term effects of dual blockade using the ACE inhibitor lisinopril and the long-acting angiotensin II receptor blocker ( ARB ) telmisartan on blood pressure and albumin excretion rate ( AER ) were evaluated . Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus , hypertension ( systolic blood pressure [ SBP ] > or=140 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure [ DBP ] > or=90 mmHg ) and microalbuminuria ( AER 30 - 300 mg/24h ) received 20 mg of lisinopril or 80 mg of telmisartan once a day for 24 weeks . Patients were then r and omised to continuing treatment with the respective monotherapy or with lisinopril plus telmisartan for a further 28 weeks . Significant ( P<0.001 ) declines in SBP ( 11.1 mmHg versus 10.0 mmHg ) , DBP ( 5.6 mmHg versus 5.3 mmHg ) and AER ( 98 mg/24 h versus 80 mg/24 h ) were achieved with lisinopril ( n=95 ) or telmisartan ( n=97 ) , respectively , after 24 weeks . Subsequent treatment with lisinopril plus telmisartan for 28 weeks result ed in further significant reductions ( P<0.001 ) in SBP , DBP and AER compared with either monotherapy . All treatments were well tolerated . Lisinopril plus telmisartan thus provides superior blood pressure and AER control than either monotherapy . We conclude that use of dual blockade may provide a new approach to prevention of diabetic nephropathy in patients with type 2 diabetes , hypertension and microalbuminuria Objective The combination of an angiotensin-converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitor and an angiotensin II ( Ang II ) receptor antagonist ( ARB ) could provide a higher degree of blockade of the renin-angiotensin system(RAS ) than either agent alone . The primary aim of this study was to look at the effect of three therapeutic regimens ( titrated ACE inhibitor ( ACE-I ) versus titrated ARB versus the combination of an ACE-I and an ARB ) on the attainment of adequate blood pressure ( BP ) control and antiproteinuric effect . Both ACE-I and ARB were titrated as monotherapy up to the maximal recommended dose . Methods A pilot r and omised , parallel group open-label study was conducted in 36 patients with primary renal disease , proteinuria above 1.5 g/day and BP > 140/90 mmHg while on therapy with an ACE-I.  Patients were r and omly assigned to ( 1 ) benazepril , n=12 ; ( 2 ) valsartan , n=12 ; or ( 3 ) benazepril plus valsartan , n=12 . Other antihypertensive therapies could also be added to attain goal BP ( < 140/90 mmHg ) . The primary endpoint was the change in proteinuria during six months of follow-up . Results In the presence of similar BP decreases and stable creatinine clearance values , mean proteinuria decreases were 0.5±1.7 , 1.2±2.0 and 2.5±1.8 g/day in groups 1 , 2 and 3 , respectively . When compared with baseline values , only the fall induced by the combination of ARB and ACE-I attained statistical significance ( p<0.05 ) . Conclusion The antiproteinuric capacity of monotherapy at recommended doses with either an ACE-I or an ARB is lower than that obtained with the combination of the two drugs OUTCOMES Extensive data from r and omised controlled trials have shown the benefit of treating hypertension . The target blood pressure ( BP ) for antihypertensive management is systolic < 140 mmHg and diastolic < 90 mmHg with minimal or no drug side-effects ; however , stricter BP control is required for patients with end-organ damage , co-existing risk factors and co-morbidity , e.g. diabetes mellitus . The reduction of BP in the elderly and in those with severe hypertension should be achieved gradually over 1 month . Co-existent risk factors should also be controlled . BENEFITS Benefits of management include reduced risks of stroke , cardiac failure , chronic kidney disease and coronary heart disease . RECOMMENDATIONS The correct BP measurement procedure is described , and evaluation of cardiovascular risk factors and recommendations for antihypertensive therapy are stipulated . The total cardiovascular disease risk profile should be determined for all patients to inform management strategies . Lifestyle modification and patient education are cornerstones in the management of every patient . Major indications , pre caution s and contra-indications to each recommended antihypertensive drug are listed . Combination therapy should be considered ab initio if the BP is ≥ 20/10 mmHg . First-line drug therapy for uncomplicated hypertension includes low-dose thiazide-like diuretics , calcium channel blockers ( CCBs ) or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors ( ACE-Is ) ( or ARBs - angiotensin II receptor blockers ) . If the target BP is not obtained , a second antihypertensive should be added from the aforementioned list . If the target BP is still not met , the third remaining antihypertensive agent should be used . In black patients  either thiazide-like diuretics or CCBs can be used initially , because response rates are better than with ACE-Is or β-blockers . In treating resistant hypertension , a central ly acting drug , vasodilator , α-blocker , spironolactone or β-locker should be added . This guideline includes management of specific situations , i.e. hypertensive emergency and urgency , severe hypertension with target organ damage , hypertension in diabetes mellitus , resistant hypertension , fixed drug combinations , new trials in hypertension , and interactions of antihypertensive agents with other drugs . VALIDITY The guideline was developed by the Southern African Hypertension Society When observed in elderly hypertensive patients , increased pulse pressure ( PP ) and arterial stiffness are known to be independent risk factors for cardiovascular diseases . Increased systolic blood pressure ( SBP ) leads to left ventricular hypertrophy , while decreased diastolic blood pressure ( DBP ) results in decreased coronary circulation . It is known that increased arterial stiffness is the major cause of increased PP . Thus basic morbid states of cardiac failure or ischemic heart diseases are more likely to develop in elderly hypertensive patients with increased PP and arterial stiffness , and there is need of antihypertensive drugs that decrease these effects in elderly hypertensives . In this study , we compared the effects of an angiotensin-receptor blocker ( ARB : valsartan ) , an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor ( ACE-I : temocapril ) , and long-acting Ca antagonists ( L- and N-type Ca channel blocker : cilnidipine ; and L-type Ca channel blocker : nifedipine CR ) on PP and arterial stiffness measured by pulse wave velocity in elderly hypertensive patients for 3 months . The ARB yielded the largest reductions in PP and brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity ( baPWV ) , followed by the ACE-I and L- and N-type Ca channel blocker , while the L-type Ca channel blocker yielded no improvement . The effects on arterial stiffness and PP thus varied among the drug characteristics . Although ARB achieved the largest reduction in baPWV , this decrease was not associated with any reductions in PP , SBP , DBP , or mean blood pressure , as were the baPWV-decreases achieved by the other drugs , suggesting that ARB may further reduce the risk of arteriosclerosis in elderly hypertensive patients by decreasing arterial stiffness in addition to its antihypertensive effect Objective : To perform a subgroup analysis on those patients in STOP‐Hypertension‐2 who had isolated systolic hypertension . Design and methods : The STOP‐Hypertension‐2 study evaluated cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in elderly hypertensives comparing treatment with conventional drugs ( diuretics , beta‐blockers ) with that of newer ones [ angiotensin‐converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitors , calcium antagonists ] . In all , 6614 elderly patients with hypertension ( mean age 76.0 years , range 70–84 years at baseline ) were included in STOP‐Hypertension‐2 . In the present subgroup analysis of STOP‐Hypertension‐2 , isolated systolic hypertension was defined as systolic blood pressure at least 160 mmHg and diastolic blood pressure below 95 mmHg , in accordance with the Syst‐Eur and Syst‐China study criteria . In total , 2280 patients in STOP‐Hypertension‐2 met these criteria . In the study , patients were r and omized to one of three treatment groups : “ conventional ” antihypertensive therapy with beta‐blockers or diuretics ( atenolol 50 mg , metoprolol 100 mg , pindolol 5 mg , or fixed‐ratio hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg plus amiloride 2.5 mg daily ) ; ACE inhibitors ( enalapril 10 mg or lisinopril 10 mg daily ) ; or calcium antagonists ( felodipine 2.5 mg or isradipine 2.5 mg daily ) . Analysis was by intention to treat . Results : The blood pressure lowering effect in patients with systolic hypertension was similar with all three therapeutic regimens : 35/13 mmHg in the conventional group ( n = 717 ) , 34/12 mmHg in the ACE inhibitor group ( n = 724 ) , and 35/13 mmHg in the calcium antagonist group ( n = 708 ) . Prevention of cardiovascular mortality , the primary endpoint of the study , did not differ between the three treatment groups . All stroke events , i.e. fatal and non‐fatal stroke together , were significantly reduced by 25 % in the newer‐drugs group compared with the conventional group ( 95 % CI 0.58–0.97 ; p = 0.027 ) . This difference was attributable to reduction of non‐fatal stroke while fatal stroke events did not differ between groups . New cases of atrial fibrillation were significantly increased by 43 % ( 95 % CI 1.02–1.99 ; p = 0.037 ) on “ newer ” drugs compared with “ conventional ” therapy , mainly attributable to the calcium antagonists . There were no significant differences between the three treatment groups with respect to the risks of myocardial infa rct ion , sudden death or congestive heart failure . Conclusions : The analysis demonstrated that “ newer ” therapy ( ACE inhibitors/calcium antagonists ) was significantly better ( 25 % ) than “ conventional ” ( diuretics/beta‐blockers ) in preventing all stroke in elderly patients with isolated systolic hypertension Objective . Angiotensin-converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitors have been shown to lower central augmentation index ( cAI ) , an index of arterial wave reflection , more than β-blockers . We tested whether this is also true for long-term treatment with an angiotensin receptor blocker ( ARB ) . Methods . One-hundred and fifty-six subjects with essential hypertension were r and omised to treatment with either irbesartan or atenolol .  cAI and central blood pressure ( BP ) were determined by pulse wave analysis from the radial and the carotid artery after six and after 18 months treatment . Results . Peripheral and central systolic and diastolic BP were reduced to a similar extent A in the two groups . cAI was reduced with irbesartan , but increased with atenolol ( derived from the carotid artery : -6±10 vs. -4±12 % after six months , p<0.001 ; —4±12 vs. + 1±11 % after 18 months ; p=0.011 ) . Furthermore , central to peripheral pulse pressure ( PP ) amplification was unaffected by treatment with irbesartan , but decreased with atenolol . Conclusions . Although treatment with irbesartan and atenolol  similarly decreased peripheral and central BP , only treatment with irbesartan had beneficial effects on arterial wave reflection and preserved PP amplification . These haemodynamic effects may at least partly explain the reported differential effects of ARB versus β-blocker treatment on cardiovascular mortality in patients with essential hypertension OBJECTIVES Despite a broad and efficient pharmacological antihypertensive armamentarium , blood pressure ( BP ) control is suboptimal and heterogeneous throughout Europe . Recent representative data from Switzerl and are limited . The goal of the present survey was therefore to assess the actual control rate of high BP in Switzerl and in accordance with current guidelines . The influence of risk factors , target organ damage and medication on BP levels and control was also evaluated . METHODS A cross-sectional visit-based survey of ambulatory hypertensive patients was performed in 2009 in Switzerl and . 281 r and omly selected physicians provided data on 5 consecutive hypertensive patients attending their practice s for BP follow-up . Data were anonymously collected on demographics , comorbidities and current medication , and BP was recorded . Subsequent modification of pharmacological antihypertensive therapy was assessed . RESULTS Data from 1376 patients were available . Mean age was 65 ± 12 years , 53.9 % were male subjects . 26.4 % had complicated hypertension . Overall , BP control ( < 140/90 mm Hg for uncomplicated and < 130/80 mm Hg for complicated hypertension ) was achieved in 48.9 % . Compared to patients with complicated hypertension , BP control was better in patients with uncomplicated hypertension ( 59.4 % vs. 19.2 % , p < 0.001 ) . As a monotherapy the most prescribed drug class were angiotensin receptor blockers ( ARB , 41 % ) , followed by angiotensin converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitors ( 21.5 % ) , betablockers ( 20.8 % ) and calcium channel blockers ( CCB , 10.8 % ) . The most prescribed drug combinations were ARB + diuretic ( 30.1 % ) and ACE inhibitors + diuretic ( 15.3 % ) . 46 % were receiving a fixed drug combination . In only 32.7 % of patients with uncontrolled hypertension was a change in drug therapy made . CONCLUSION This representative survey on treated adult hypertensive patients shows that , compared to earlier reports , the control rate of hypertension has improved in Switzerl and for uncomplicated but not for complicated , particularly diabetes-associated hypertension . ARBs and ACE inhibitors are the most prescribed antihypertensive drugs for monotherapy , whereas diuretics and ARBs were the most used for combination therapy The Hypertension Objective Treatment Based on Measurement by Electrical Devices of Blood Pressure ( HOMED-BP ) Study is the first large-scale intervention trial in Japan using a PROBE design to determine an optimal target blood pressure ( BP ) level on the basis of self-measured BP at home and optimal initial antihypertensive medication . The registered patients are r and omized to one of two different BP levels and to initial antihypertensive regimens ( i.e.  ,  calcium antagonist [ Ca-A ] , angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor [ ACE-I ] , or angiotensin II receptor antagonist [ ARB ] ) . At the end of February 2004 , 2729 , 1687 , and 971 patients were recruited , r and omized , and followed-up for 12 months or more . Among the 971 patients , mean systolic/diastolic BP levels at r and omization in the Ca-A , ACE-I , and ARB groups were 150/90 , 152/89 , and 151/89 mmHg , respectively . These values reduced after six months of Ca-A- , ACE-I- , and ARB-based treatment ( 133/81 mmHg , 135/80 mmHg , and 134/79 mmHg , respectively ) and further reduced after 12 months ( 131/80 mmHg , 134/79 mmHg , and 132/79 mmHg , respectively ) without any significant differences among groups . In more intensive and less intensive BP-lowering groups , mean systolic/diastolic BP levels at r and omization were 151/90 and 150/89 mmHg , respectively . Although BP levels reduced after 6-month ( 135/80 mmHg and 133/80 mmHg , respectively ) and 12-month treatment ( 133/79 mmHg and 132/80 mmHg , respectively ) in each target group , no significant difference in BP values was observed between groups . These results indicate the necessity of additional interventional strategies to improve the achievement of target BP levels , especially in the more intensive BP-lowering group Background Angiotensin-converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blocking drugs ( ARB ) block the effect of angiotensin II by different mechanisms . It has been suggested that combined therapy may be more effective at reducing blood pressure ( BP ) than higher doses of either drug . Methods Twenty-three elderly patients with systolic hypertension completed a double-blind crossover study comparing placebo , c and esartan ( C ) 16 mg , C32 mg , lisinopril ( L ) 20 mg , L40 mg and C16 mg + L20 mg . Treatment periods were one month and ambulatory BP measurements were performed at the end of each period . The effects on albumin excretion in eight patients with microalbuminuria  were determined . Results All treatments lowered BP . The falls in systolic and diastolic BP with C16 , C32 , L20 and L40 were similar . Plasma renin rose to a similar extent . A plateau effect was reached with C16 and L20 . Systolic BP on the combination of C16 + L20 was lower than on each monotherapy ( C16 , 3.8 mmHg [ p=0.002 ] ; C32 , 6.4 [ 0.0003 ] ; L20 , 2.9 [ 0.05 ] ; L40 , 3.3 [ 0.003 ] ) . The additional fall in BP with the combination appeared to be due to recruitment of non-responders , rather than to an additive effect in most patients . All treatments reduced microalbuminuria to a similar extent . The combination was well tolerated and there was no deterioration in renal function . Conclusion When patients are on a plateau dose of an ACE inhibitor or an ARB , addition of the other drug class has a small but significant incremental effect on BP in the overall group . However , some patients respond better to one drug class than to the other and this may explain the results . This study lends no support to the use of these two drugs in combination to treat hypertension Hypertensive emergencies , and to a certain extent their treatment , contribute to morbidity and mortality in elderly patients . We studied 22 hospitalized patients , aged 70 - 90 years , all of whom had moderate essential hypertensive . During acute hypertension , mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure rose to 230 + /- 24 and 120 + /- 22 mmHg , respectively . Symptoms of reduced tissue perfusion/oxygenation and /or organ failure occurred , forcing us to begin antihypertensive therapy . We administered 50 mg of the angiotensin converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitor captopril sublingually , and within 15 min , systolic blood pressure decreased by an average 60 + /- 16 mmHg and diastolic blood pressure by an average 25 + /- 14 mmHg . There was no significant change in the heart rate . In addition , we treated 22 comparable patients with 10 mg nifedipine sublingually and observed , in four cases , a greater fall in blood pressure ( up to 90 mmHg ) together with tachycardia . These results show the beneficial effects of captopril in the treatment of hypertensive emergencies in elderly patients . The absence of dangerous side effects indicates that ACE inhibitors can be used as first-choice drugs for the treatment of acute hypertensive crises , even in old age OBJECTIVES We attempted to compare the effect of an angiotensin-converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker ( ARB ) on  atherosclerotic events . BACKGROUND Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and ARBs interrupt the renin-angiotensin system by distinct mechanisms . It is not clear whether ARBs reduce atherosclerotic events such as myocardial infa rct ion ( MI ) like ACE inhibitors . This evidence gap may reflect the nature of the studies conducted , to date . Placebo-controlled studies enrolled cohorts at low risk of atherosclerotic events ( e.g. , patients with chronic heart failure , most treated with an ACE inhibitor ) . One of the main active controlled trials was confounded by a blood pressure difference between treatments . METHODS We compared the effects of captopril , valsartan , and their combination on atherosclerotic events in 14,703 patients r and omized in the Valsartan in Acute Myocardial Infa rct ion Trial ( VALIANT ) . RESULTS The number of individuals adjudicated as having a fatal or non-fatal MI in the captopril group was 559 ( total investigator reported events 798 ) , 587 ( 796 ) in the valsartan group , and 554 ( 756 ) in the combination group ; valsartan versus captopril , p = 0.651 ( 0.965 ) ; combination versus captopril , p = 0.187 ( 0.350 ) . Overall , all atherosclerotic events examined occurred at a similar frequency in the captopril and valsartan groups . CONCLUSIONS Angiotensin receptor blockers appear to be as effective as ACE inhibitors in reducing atherosclerotic events , even when used in addition to other secondary preventive treatments . These data , although not conclusive , also support the hypothesis that adding an ARB to an ACE inhibitor may have a small additional anti-infa rct ion effect , a possibility that needs to be prospect ively tested Background : Ultrasonographic evidence of increased carotid intima-media thickness ( IMT ) is known to be associated with generalized atherosclerosis . Therapeutic blockade of the renin-angiotensin system ( RAS ) with angiotensin-converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitors reportedly reduces carotid IMT in humans . However , there has been no head-to-head comparison of the effects of ACE inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker ( ARB ) , a newer type of RAS inhibitor , on carotid IMT . Methods : 57 hypertensive patients were r and omly assigned to treatment with one of two antihypertensive drugs : ACE inhibitor ( quinapril ; n = 25 , group Q ) or ARB ( losartan ; n = 18 , group L ) . Results : After 1 year of treatment , a similar decrease in mean blood pressure was observed in all groups . Carotid IMT was decreased significantly in group Q ( 10 % decrease , p < 0.05 ) but did not change in group L. There were no significant changes in other atherosclerotic factors between these two groups . Conclusion : Our findings suggest that the antiatherosclerotic effect of quinapril is more potent than that of losartan in hypertensive patients . This effect appears unrelated to the drug ’s antihypertensive action or to traditional atherosclerotic factors BACKGROUND Angiotensin-converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitors reduce mortality , myocardial infa rct ion , stroke , heart failure , need for revascularization , nephropathy , and diabetes and its complications . Although angiotensin-II receptor blockers ( ARBs ) have been less extensively evaluated , theoretically they may have " protective " effects similar to those of ACE inhibitors , but with better tolerability . Currently , there is uncertainty about the role of ARBs when used alone or in combination with an ACE inhibitor in high-risk population s with controlled hypertension . OBJECTIVES Primary objectives of the ONgoing Telmisartan Alone and in Combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial ( ONTARGET ) are to determine if the combination of the ARB telmisartan and the ACE inhibitor ramipril is more effective than ramipril alone , and if telmisartan is at least as effective as ramipril . The Telmisartan R and omized AssessmeNt Study in aCE iNtolerant subjects with cardiovascular Disease ( TRANSCEND ) will determine if telmisartan is superior to placebo in patients who are intolerant of ACE inhibitors . The primary outcome for both trials is the composite of cardiovascular death , myocardial infa rct ion , stroke , or hospitalization for heart failure . METHOD High-risk patients with coronary , peripheral , or cerebrovascular disease or diabetes with end-organ damage are being recruited and followed for 3.5 to 5.5 years in 2 parallel , r and omized , double-blind clinical trials . PROGRESS Recruitment from 730 centers in 40 countries for ONTARGET ( n = 25,620 ) was completed in July 2003 . For TRANSCEND , 5776 patients ( out of a projected total of 6000 ) have been recruited ( by May 10 , 2004 ) . Baseline patient characteristics are comparable to the Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation ( HOPE ) trial , the basis of the design of the current study , confirming that patients are at high-risk Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors ( ACE-Is ) and angiotensin II receptor blockers ( ARBs ) are frequently used for the treatment for glomerulonephritis and diabetic nephropathy because of their albuminuria- or proteinuria-reducing effects . To many patients who are nonresponsive to monotherapy with these agents , combination therapy appears to be a good treatment option . In the present study , we examined the effects of the addition of an ARB ( losartan ) followed by titration upon addition and at 3 and 6 months ( n=14 ) and the addition of an ACE-I followed by titration upon addition and at 3 and 6 months ( n=20 ) to the drug regimen treatment protocol in type 2 diabetic patients with nephropathy for whom more than 3-month administration of an ACE-I or the combination of an ACE-I plus a conventional antihypertensive was ineffective to achieve a blood pressure ( BP ) of 130/80 mmHg and to reduce urinary albumin to < 30 mg/day . During the 12-month treatment , addition of losartan or addition of an ACE-I to the treatment protocol reduced systolic blood pressure ( SBP ) by 10 % and 12 % , diastolic blood pressure ( DBP ) by 7 % and 4 % , and urinary albumin excretion by 38 % and 20 % of the baseline value , respectively . However , the effects on both BP and urinary albumin were not significantly different between the two therapies . In conclusion , addition of losartan or an ACE-I to an ongoing treatment with an ACE-I , or addition of an ACE-I to ongoing treatment with a conventional antihypertensive were equally effective at reducing the urinary albumin excretion and BP , and provided renal protection in patients with type-2 diabetic nephropathy BACKGROUND Addition of spironolactone ( SPR ) to angiotensin-converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers ( ARBs ) might provide antiproteinuric effects beyond what is gained by either medication alone . This study was design ed to assess the long-term efficacy of SPR/ARB combination in comparison with the st and ard ACE/ARB regimen in diabetic nephropathy . METHODS In an open-label , parallel-group , single-center , r and omized clinical trial ( NCT01667614 ) , 136 patients with diabetes and proteinuria , already treated with enalapril and losartan , were included . In 74 patients , ACE inhibitors  were discontinued . After a wash-out period of 2 weeks , 25 mg SPR daily was initiated . The remainder of the patients ( n = 62 ) received ACE inhibitors and ARBs as before . Patients were followed every 3 months for 18 months . During each visit , systolic and diastolic blood pressure ( BP ) , urinary albumin excretion ( UAE ) , serum creatinine , estimated glomerular filtration rate ( eGFR ) and serum potassium concentrations were determined . RESULTS After 18 months , three patients in the SPR/ARB group developed asymptomatic hyperkalemia .  SPR/ARB significantly reduced both systolic and diastolic BP ( P < 0.001 and 0.001 , respectively ) . SPR/ARB  decreased UAE by 46 , 72 and 59 % after 3 , 12 and 18 months , respectively . Compared with the continuation regimen , SPR/ARB was superior in UAE reduction ( P = 0.017 after 18 months ) , independent of BP change . In both groups , eGFR declined significantly over the trial course and the decline rate did not differ significantly between the two groups . CONCLUSIONS Addition of SPR to ARB provides added benefits with respect to BP control and proteinuria diminution . These antiproteinuric effects are not accompanied by prevention of eGFR loss compared with conventional therapy with ACE/ARB OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to determine if statins ( hydroxymethylglutaryl CoA reductase inhibitors [ HMG-CoA ] ) , angiotensin-converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitors , and angiotensin receptor blockers ( ARBs ) reduce cardiovascular ( CV ) events and pulmonary morbidity in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease ( COPD ) patients . BACKGROUND Few current COPD therapies alter prognosis . Although statins , ACE inhibitors , and ARBs improve outcomes in CV population s , their benefits in COPD patients both with and without concomitant heart disease has not previously been studied . METHODS A time-matched nested case-control study of two population -based retrospective cohorts was undertaken : 1 ) COPD patients having undergone coronary revascularization ( high CV risk cohort ) ; and 2 ) COPD patients without previous myocardial infa rct ion ( MI ) and newly treated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs ( low CV risk cohort ) . Prespecified outcomes were COPD hospitalization , MI , and total mortality . RESULTS These drugs reduced both CV and pulmonary outcomes , with the largest benefits occurring with the combination of statins and either ACE inhibitors or ARBs . This combination was associated with a reduction in COPD hospitalization ( risk ratio [ RR ] 0.66 , 95 % confidence interval [ CI ] 0.51 to 0.85 ) and total mortality ( RR 0.42 , 95 % CI 0.33 to 0.52 ) not only in the high CV risk cohort but also in the low CV risk cohort ( RR 0.77 , 95 % CI 0.67 to 0.87 , and RR 0.36 , 95 % CI 0.28 to 0.45 , respectively ) . The combination also reduced MI in the high CV risk cohort ( RR 0.39 , 95 % CI 0.31 to 0.49 ) . Benefits were similar when steroid users were included . CONCLUSIONS These agents may have dual cardiopulmonary protective properties , thereby substantially altering prognosis of patients with COPD . These findings need confirmation in r and omized clinical trials Although the angiotensin receptor antagonist ( ARB ) shares the angiotensin-II-blocking activity with the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor ( ACE-I ) , pharmacological mechanisms of action of these agents differ . We evaluated the temporal profiles of action of ACE-I and ARB on urinary protein excretion and nitrate/nitrate ( NOx ) excretion in hypertensive ( 140 and /or 90 mmHg ) patients with chronic renal disease ( serum creatinine<265 ( range , 44–265 ) μmol/l or creatinine clearance>30 ( range , 30–121 ) ml/min ) . Patients with mild ( < 1 g/day ; range , 0.4–1.0 ) and moderate proteinuria ( > 1 g/day ; range , 1.1–6.9 ) were r and omly assigned to ACE-I- and ARB-treated groups , and were treated with ACE-I ( tr and olapril or perindopril ) or ARB(losartan or c and esartan ) for 48 weeks . In all groups , treatment with ACE-I or ARB  decreased blood pressure to the same level , but had no effect on creatinine clearance . In patients with mild proteinuria  , neither ACE-I nor ARB altered urinary protein excretion . In patients with moderate proteinuria , ACE-I caused 44±6 % reduction in proteinuria ( from 2.7±0.5 to 1.5±0.4 g/day , n=14 ) at 12 weeks , and this beneficial effect persisted throughout the protocol ( 48 weeks , 1.2±0.2 g/day ) . In contrast , ARB did not produce a significant decrease in proteinuria at 12 weeks ( 23±8 % , n=13 ) , but a 41±6 % reduction in proteinuria was observed at 48 weeks . Similarly , although early ( 12 weeks ) increases in urinary NOx excretion were observed with ACE-I ( from 257±70 to 1111±160 μmol/day ) and ARB ( from 280±82 to 723±86 μmol/day ) , the ARB-induced increase in NOx excretion was smaller than that by ACE-I ( P<0.05 ) . In conclusion , although both ACE-I and ARB reduce blood pressure similarly , the effect of these agents on proteinuria differs in chronic renal disease with moderate proteinuria . Relatively early onset of the proteinuria-reducing effect was observed with ACE-I , which paralleled the increase in urinary NOx excretion .  Conversely , ARB decreased proteinuria and increased urinary NOx excretion gradually . These time course-dependent changes in proteinuria and urinary NOx may reflect the pharmacological property of ACE-I and ARB , with regard to the action on bradykinin BACKGROUND Studies suggest that statins and angiotensin-converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitors might be beneficial for the treatment of infections . Our purpose was to examine the association of statin , ACE inhibitor , and angiotensin II receptor blocker ( ARB ) use with  pneumonia-related outcomes . METHODS We conducted a retrospective cohort study using Department of Veterans Affairs data of patients aged ≥ 65 years hospitalized with pneumonia . We performed propensity-score matching for 3 medication classes simultaneously . RESULTS Of 50119 potentially eligible patients , we matched 11498 cases with 11498 controls . Mortality at 30 days was 13 % ; 34 % used statins , 30 % ACE inhibitors , and 4 % ARBs . In adjusted models , prior statin use was associated with decreased mortality ( odds ratio [ OR ] , 0.74 ; 95 % confidence interval [ CI ] , .68-.82 ) and mechanical ventilation ( OR , 0.81 ; 95 % CI , .70-.94 ) , and inpatient use with decreased mortality ( OR , 0.68 ; 95 % CI , .59-.78 ) and mechanical ventilation ( OR , 0.68 ; 95 % CI , .60-.90 ) . Prior ( OR , 0.88 ; 95 % CI , .80-.97 ) and inpatient ( OR , 0.58 ; 95 % CI , .48-.69 ) ACE inhibitor use was associated with decreased mortality . Prior ( OR , 0.73 ; 95 % CI , .58-.92 ) and inpatient ARB use ( OR , 0.47 ; 95 % CI , .30-.72 ) was only associated with decreased mortality . Use of all 3 medications was associated with reduced length of stay . CONCLUSIONS Statins , and to a lesser extent ACE inhibitors and ARBs , are associated with improved pneumonia-related outcomes . Prospect i ve cohort and r and omized controlled trials are needed to examine potential mechanisms of action and whether acute initiation at the time of presentation with these infections is beneficial We stratified findings from the Japan Multicenter Investigation for Cardiovascular Diseases-B according to whether or not the patients had diabetes and compared the incidence of cardiac events occurring over a 3-year period between treatment with nifedipine retard and angiotensin converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitor . The primary endpoint was the overall incidence of cardiac events ( cardiac death or sudden death , myocardial infa rct ion , hospitalization for angina pectoris or heart failure , serious arrhythmia , and coronary interventions ) , and the secondary endpoints were a composite of other events ( cerebrovascular accidents , worsening of renal dysfunction , non-cardiovascular events , and total mortality ) . The results showed no significant difference in the incidence of the primary endpoint between the nifedipine group ( n=199 ) and the ACE inhibitor group ( n=173 ) in diabetic patients : 15.08 % vs. 15.03 % , relative risk 1.06 , p=0.838 . Also in nondiabetic patients , no significant difference was observed between the former ( n=629 ) and the latter ( n=649 ) : 13.67 % vs. 12.33 % , relative risk 1.04 , p=0.792 . Similar results were obtained for the incidence of the secondary endpoints : in diabetic patients , 5.03 % vs. 5.20 % , relative risk 0.89 , p=0.799 ; in nondiabetic patients , 2.70 % vs. 2.47 % , relative risk 1.07 , p=0.842 . Achieved blood pressure levels were 138/76 and 136/77 mmHg in the nifedipine group and 140/78 and 138/79 mmHg in the ACE inhibitor group in diabetic and nondiabetic patients , respectively . This study showed that nifedipine retard was as effective as ACE inhibitors in reducing the incidence of cardiac events in extremely high-risk hypertensive patients with complications of diabetes and coronary artery disease OBJECTIVE Angiotensin II has been shown to increase hepatic glucose production and decrease insulin sensitivity . Patients who utilize either an ACE inhibitor ( ACEI ) or angiotensin receptor blocker ( ARB )  may experience a decreased incidence of new-onset type 2 diabetes . RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Three review ers conducted a systematic literature search of Medline , EMBASE , CINAHL , and the Cochrane Library ( 1966 to present ) to extract a consensus of trial data involving an ACEI or ARB with an end point of new-onset type 2 diabetes . Studies were included if they were r and omized controlled trials verses placebo/routine therapy . A r and om-effects model was utilized . Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were conducted . RESULTS Eleven trials were identified , including 66,608 patients . An ACEI or ARB prevented new-onset type 2 diabetes ( odds ratio 0.78 [ 95 % CI 0.73 - 0.83 ] ) . The influence of either an ACEI ( six trials ) or an ARB ( five trials ) alone on new-onset type 2 diabetes was similar ( 0.79 [ 0.71 - 0.89 ] and 0.76 [ 0.70 - 0.82 ] , respectively ) . Regardless of indication for use , hypertension ( seven trials ) , coronary artery disease ( two trials ) , or heart failure ( two trials ) , reductions in new-onset type 2 diabetes were maintained ( 0.79 [ 0.72 - 0.85 ] , 0.76 [ 0.60 - 0.95 ] , and 0.70 [ 0.50 - 0.96 ] , respectively ) . No statistical heterogeneity was observed for any evaluation ( P > 0.1 for all comparisons ) . ACEIs and ARBs did not reduce the odds of mortality , cardiovascular , or cerebrovascular events versus control therapy among all of these studies combined or the hypertension trials . ACEIs and ARBs did reduce the odds of these outcomes among the coronary artery disease studies versus control therapy . CONCLUSIONS ACEIs or ARBs may decrease patients ' odds of developing new-onset type 2 diabetes but does not reduce the odds of mortality , cardiovascular , or cerebrovascular outcomes over the study follow-up periods among patients with hypertension We investigated whether angiotensin II receptor blockers ( ARBs ) and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors ( ACE-Is ) are more strongly associated with Alzheimer 's disease ( AD ) , vascular dementia ( VaD ) , and other dementias , than other anti-hypertensive drugs . We conducted a nested case-control analysis within the UK general practice research data base , with prospect ively recorded anti-hypertensive prescribing data . We sample d cases aged ≥60 years and diagnosed between 1997 - 2008 ( 5,797 with AD , 2,186 with VaD , 1,214 with unspecified/other dementia ) which were matched to up to four controls by age , general practice and gender . We computed odds-ratios and dose response effects for AD , vascular and unspecified/other dementia , comparing those prescribed ARBs or ACE-Is for at least six months with patients prescribed other anti-hypertensives . We controlled for matching factors , co-morbidities , smoking status , an area measure of socioeconomic status , consultation rate and blood pressure and accounted for reverse causality by introducing time-lags of up to eight years prior to diagnosis/index date . Patients diagnosed with AD , vascular and unspecified/other dementia had fewer prescriptions for ARBs and ACE-Is . Inverse associations with AD were strongest for ARBs ( odds-ratio ; 0.47 , 95%CI , 0.37 - 0.58 ) compared with ACE-Is ( odds-ratio ; 0.76 , 95%CI , 0.69 - 0.84 ) ( p(difference ) < 0.001 ) . Associations of ARBs with AD were stronger than for vascular dementia ( p(difference ) = 0.01 ) and unspecified/other dementia ( p(difference ) = 0.23 ) . There were inverse dose-response relationships between ARBs and ACE-Is with AD ( both p(trend ) < 0.01 ) . The inverse association of ACE-Is with AD diminished when using longer time lags but the ARB-AD association persisted . Patients with AD were around half as likely to be prescribed ARBs . Further r and omized controlled trial evidence is required to rigorously test these findings OBJECTIVE Evidence suggests that the effectiveness of angiotensin-converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibition diminishes with time , result ing in increasing angiotensin II levels , the action of which can be inhibited by the addition of an angiotensin receptor blocker ( ARB ) . In the present study , the renal protective effects of ACE inhibitors and ARBs were compared over a five-year period in a prospect i ve , r and omized , open-blind study in 68 nondiabetic Japanese patients with elevated serum creatinine levels . PATIENTS AND METHODS Japanese patients with renal insufficiency were r and omly assigned to receive either an  ACE inhibitor ( benazepril 1.25 to 5 mg daily or tr and olapril 0.5 to 4 mg daily ) or ARB ( c and esartan 2 to 8 mg daily or losartan 25 to 100 mg daily )  at the Kidney Disease Center at Saitama Medical School Hospital . The primary study endpoint was a change in glomerular filtration rate ( GFR ) between the baseline value and the last available value obtained during the five-year treatment period , as estimated by the Cockcraft-Gault equation . Secondary endpoints included the annual changes in GFR , serum creatinine level , urinary protein excretion , and blood pressure , as well as the rate of development of endstage renal disease . RESULTS There were no significant differences in the primary endpoint between the two groups . However , after 4 years , the decline in GFR in patients treated with ARBs was significantly greater than that seen in patients treated with an ACE inhibitor ( p<0.05 ) . Furthermore , the rate of introduction of dialysis therapy was also significantly greater in the ARB-treated patients ( 52.7 % in ACE inhibitor and 81.2 % in ARB group at year 5 . p<0.01 ) . CONCLUSION While our data suggested that ARB , like ACE , treatment might slow the progression of renal dysfunction , it also pointed to the necessity to be alerted to the progression to endstage renal disease with longterm medication BACKGROUND Albuminuria and hypertension are predictors of poor renal and cardiovascular outcome in diabetic patients . We tested whether dual blockade of the renin-angiotensin system ( RAS ) with both an angiotensin-converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitor and an angiotensin II receptor blocker ( ARB ) is superior to maximal recommended dose of ACE inhibitor in type 1 diabetic patients with diabetic nephropathy ( DN ) . METHODS We performed a r and omized , double-blind , crossover trial with 8 weeks treatment with placebo and irbesartan 300 mg ( once daily ) , added on top of enalapril 40 mg ( once daily ) . We included 24 type 1 patients with DN . At the end of each treatment period , albuminuria , 24-hour blood pressure , and glomerular filtration rate ( GFR ) were measured . RESULTS Values on ACE inhibitors + placebo were : albuminuria [ mean ( 95 % CI ) ] , 519 ( 342 to 789 ) mg/24 hours ; blood pressure [ mean ( SEM ) ] , 131 (3)/74 ( 1 ) mm Hg , and GFR [ mean ( SEM ) ] , 65 ( 5 ) mL/min/1.73 m2 . Dual blockade of the RAS induced a reduction in albuminuria [ mean ( 95 % CI ) ] of 25 % ( 15 , 34 ) ( P < 0.001 ) , a reduction in systolic blood pressure of 8 mm Hg ( 4 , 12 ) ( P = 0.002 ) , and a reduction of 4 mm Hg ( 2 , 7 ) ( P = 0.003 ) in diastolic blood pressure . GFR and plasma potassium remained unchanged during both treatment regimes . Dual blockade was safe and well tolerated . CONCLUSION Dual blockade of the RAS is superior to maximal recommended dose of ACE inhibitors with regard to lowering of albuminuria and blood pressure in type 1 patients with DN . Long-term trials are needed to further establish the role of dual blockade of the RAS in renal and cardiovascular protection Patients aged 60 years and older with essential hypertension were treated with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor ( ACE-I ) , delapril ( Adecut ) or a long-acting calcium (Ca)-antagonist , manidipine ( Calslot ) for 3 years . The incidences of cardiovascular events as well as drug-related side effects were compared between the two groups to investigate whether both classes of antihypertensive drugs are beneficial in elderly hypertensive patients . There were no significant differences in characteristics of patients between the two intervention groups , except for slightly lower blood pressure ( P = .08 ) in the Ca-antagonist group at the initiation of the study . There were no significant differences in total death between the two groups . Cardiovascular events ( both fatal and nonfatal ) were noted in 34 of 699 patients ( 22.5/1000 patient-years ) in the ACE-I group and 50 of 1049 patients ( 19.7/1000 patient-years ) in the Ca-antagonist group , with no significant difference found between the two groups . The correlation between cardiovascular incidence and the blood pressure attained during treatment showed a J-shaped phenomenon and suggests that an excessive reduction less than 120 mm Hg in systolic blood pressure ( SBP ) is unnecessary and may be harmful in certain cases . Side effects were more frequent in the ACE-I group than in the Ca-antagonist group ( P = .01 ) . Cough was the major adverse event , occurring in 5.0 % of patients in the ACE-I group . In conclusion , the study indicates that both ACE-I ( delapril ) and Ca-antagonist ( manidipine ) were equally beneficial for reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in elderly hypertensive patients . However , tolerability of ACE-I was lower due to the adverse event of coughing Background The benefits of treating hypertension in elderly diabetic patients , in terms of achieving reductions in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality , have been documented in several recent prospect i ve trials . There has , however , been some controversy regarding the effect of different antihypertensive drugs on the frequency of myocardial infa rct ion in this group of patients . Design STOP Hypertension-2 was a prospect i ve , r and omized , open trial with blinded endpoint evaluation . Methods We studied 6614 elderly patients aged 70–84 years ; 719 of them had diabetes mellitus at the start of the study ( mean age 75.8 years ) . Patients were r and omly assigned to one of three treatment strategies : conventional antihypertensive drugs ( diuretics or β-blockers ) , calcium antagonists , or angiotensin converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitors . Results Reduction in blood pressure was similar in the three treatment groups of diabetics . The prevention of cardiovascular mortality was also similar ; the frequency of this primary endpoint did not differ significantly between the three groups . There were , however , significantly fewer ( P = 0.025 ) myocardial infa rct ions during ACE inhibitor treatment ( n = 17 ) than during calcium antagonist treatment ( n = 32 ; relative risk 0.51 , 95 % confidence interval 0.28–0.92 ) ; but a ( non-significant ) tendency to more strokes during ACE inhibitor treatment ( n = 34 compared with n = 29 ; relative risk 1.16 , 95 % confidence interval 0.71–1.91 ) . Conclusion Treatment of hypertensive diabetic patients with conventional antihypertensive drugs ( diuretics , β-blockers , or both ) seemed to be as effective as treatment with newer drugs such as calcium antagonists or ACE inhibitors BACKGROUND The effects of different antihypertensive medication classes on C-reactive protein ( CRP ) levels are still not well characterized , and might be of relevance to treatment choices . METHODS We studied the association between antihypertensive medication class and CRP levels among participants with treated hypertension in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis . We performed a cross-sectional study of hypertensive participants free of clinical cardiovascular disease who were taking one or more of the following medication classes : beta-blockers , calcium channel blockers , diuretics , and angiotensin-converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitors , or angiotensin II type I receptor blockers ( ARB ) .  RESULTS Among 2340 participants taking one or more antihypertensive medications , the mean serum CRP level was lower among participants taking a beta-blocker than among those not taking a beta-blocker ( 2.13 v 2.54 mg/L , P = .002 ) . This difference persisted after multivariate adjustment ( P = .021 ) . There were no other statistically significant differences in multivariate models . Among 1314 participants receiving monotherapy , the multivariate adjusted mean CRP level among participants taking a beta-blocker was lower ( 1.97 mg/L ) than those taking a diuretic ( 2.72 mg/L , P < .001 ) . In this monotherapy group , participants taking an ACE inhibitor or ARB also had a lower adjusted mean CRP ( 2.25 mg/L ) than those taking a diuretic ( P = .046 ) . African-American race/ethnicity did not modify any of those relationships . CONCLUSIONS The beta-blocker use was associated with lower CRP levels overall and among participants on monotherapy , whereas ACE inhibitor and ARB use was associated with lower CRP levels among participants on monotherapy . These findings warrant further evaluation in r and omized trials
Our analyses found no evidence of a difference in total mortality or cardiovascular outcomes for ARBs as compared with ACE inhibitors , while ARBs caused slightly fewer WDAEs than ACE inhibitors .
Although ACE inhibitors have shown efficacy in these outcomes over placebo , our results can not be used to extrapolate the same conclusion for ARBs directly , which have not been studied in placebo-controlled trials for hypertension .
BACKGROUND Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors ( ACE inhibitors ) and angiotensin receptor blockers ( ARBs ) are widely prescribed for primary hypertension ( systolic blood pressure > 140 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure > 90 mmHg ) .
However , while ACE inhibitors have been shown to reduce mortality and morbidity in placebo-controlled trials , ARBs have not .
Therefore , a comparison of the efficacies of these two drug classes in primary hypertension for preventing total mortality and cardiovascular events is important .
OBJECTIVES To compare the effects of ACE inhibitors and ARBs on total mortality and cardiovascular events , and their rates of withdrawals due to adverse effects ( WDAEs ) , in people with primary hypertension .