-
Clinical Cardiology Aug 2023This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of single-pill combination (SPC) antihypertensive drugs in patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension. Through Searching... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of single-pill combination (SPC) antihypertensive drugs in patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension. Through Searching Pubmed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science collected only randomized controlled trials on the efficacy of single-pill combination antihypertensive drugs in people with uncontrolled essential hypertension. The search period is from the establishment of the database to July 2022. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment, and statistical analyses were performed using Review Manage 5.3 and Stata 15.1 software. This review ultimately included 32 references involving 16 273 patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension. The results of the network meta-analysis showed that a total of 11 single-pill combination antihypertensive drugs were included, namely: Amlodipine/valsartan, Telmisartan/amlodipine, Losartan/HCTZ, Candesartan/HCTZ, Amlodipine/benazepril, Telmisartan/HCTZ, Valsartan/HCTZ, Irbesartan/amlodipine, Amlodipine/losartan, Irbesartan/HCTZ, and Perindopril/amlodipine. According to SUCRA, Irbesartan/amlodipine may rank first in reducing systolic blood pressure (SUCRA: 92.2%); Amlodipine/losartan may rank first in reducing diastolic blood pressure (SUCRA: 95.1%); Telmisartan/amlodipine may rank first in blood pressure control rates (SUCRA: 83.5%); Amlodipine/losartan probably ranks first in diastolic response rate (SUCRA: 84.5%). Based on Ranking Plot of the Network, we can conclude that single-pill combination antihypertensive drugs are superior to monotherapy, and ARB/CCB combination has better advantages than other SPC in terms of systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, blood pressure control rate, and diastolic response rate. However, due to the small number of some drug studies, the lack of relevant studies has led to not being included in this study, which may impact the results, and readers should interpret the results with caution.
Topics: Humans; Antihypertensive Agents; Losartan; Hypertension; Telmisartan; Irbesartan; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Network Meta-Analysis; Hydrochlorothiazide; Valine; Drug Therapy, Combination; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Amlodipine; Valsartan; Tetrazoles; Blood Pressure; Essential Hypertension
PubMed: 37432701
DOI: 10.1002/clc.24082 -
Expert Opinion on Drug Safety Feb 2018Controlling blood pressure is a global health priority; single-pill antihypertensive combinations may improve adherence, persistence, and outcomes. Areas covered: A... (Review)
Review
Controlling blood pressure is a global health priority; single-pill antihypertensive combinations may improve adherence, persistence, and outcomes. Areas covered: A novel combination of perindopril arginine and amlodipine besylate was recently approved. A systematic review of the literature revealed its most common adverse effects as: peripheral edema (depending on the dose of amlodipine, but attenuated by perindopril), cough, dizziness and hypotension. Dose-dependent hyperkalemia, impairment of renal function (especially in renovascular hypertension), angioedema, and teratogenicity were derived from experience with other ACE-inhibitors. Expert opinion: Substantial clinical trial experience with amlodipine or perindopril suggests that these two agents effectively lower blood pressure, and can reduce the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, as in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial. The incidence of adverse effects reported in clinical trials is lower than expected, likely due to exclusion of subjects previously exposed to its components; the nature of open-label, uncontrolled observational studies; and difficulty in recognizing and measuring cough and pedal edema. This new formulation of perindopril arginine protects its ethyl ester, without requiring physical separation from amlodipine in a single tablet, and is less hygroscopic than perindopril erbumine. These and other attributes may make this combination an attractive addition to the antihypertensive armamentarium.
Topics: Amlodipine; Antihypertensive Agents; Blood Pressure; Cough; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Drug Combinations; Edema; Humans; Hypertension; Perindopril
PubMed: 29065722
DOI: 10.1080/14740338.2018.1397129 -
Journal of Clinical Hypertension... Aug 2023Studies have shown that angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) are superior in primary and secondary prevention for cardiac mortality and morbidity to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Studies have shown that angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) are superior in primary and secondary prevention for cardiac mortality and morbidity to angiotensin receptor blocker (ARBs). One of the common side effects from ACEI is dry cough. The aims of this systematic review, and network meta-analysis are to rank the risk of cough induced by different ACEIs and between ACEI and placebo, ARB or calcium channel blockers (CCB). We performed a systematic review, and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to rank the risk of cough induced by each ACEI and between ACEI and placebo, ARB or CCB. A total of 135 RCTs with 45,420 patients treated with eleven ACEIs were included in the analyses. The pooled estimated relative risk (RR) between ACEI and placebo was 2.21 (95% CI: 2.05-2.39). ACEI had more incidences of cough than ARB (RR 3.2; 95% CI: 2.91, 3.51), and pooled estimated of RR between ACEI and CCB was 5.30 (95% CI: 4.32-6.50) Moexipril ranked as number one for inducing cough (SUCRA 80.4%) and spirapril ranked the least (SUCRA 12.3%). The order for the rest of the ACEIs are as follows: ramipril (SUCRA 76.4%), fosinopril (SUCRA 72.5%), lisinopril (SUCRA 64.7%), benazepril (SUCRA 58.6%), quinapril (SUCRA 56.5%), perindopril (SUCRA 54.1%), enalapril (SUCRA 49.7%), trandolapril (SUCRA 44.6%) and, captopril (SUCRA 13.7%). All ACEI has the similar risk of developing a cough. ACEI should be avoided in patients who have risk of developing cough, and an ARB or CCB is an alternative based on the patient's comorbidity.
Topics: Humans; Antihypertensive Agents; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Network Meta-Analysis; Cough; Hypertension; Calcium Channel Blockers
PubMed: 37417783
DOI: 10.1111/jch.14695 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2023Uncontrolled blood pressure is a major risk factor for cardiovascular diseases. Fixed-dose combination (FDC) therapy offers a promising approach to addressing this... (Review)
Review
Uncontrolled blood pressure is a major risk factor for cardiovascular diseases. Fixed-dose combination (FDC) therapy offers a promising approach to addressing this challenge by providing a convenient single-tablet solution that enhances the effectiveness of blood pressure control. In our systematic review, we assess the effectiveness of perindopril/amlodipine FDC in managing blood pressure. We conducted a comprehensive search across four primary electronic databases, namely, PubMed, Virtual Health Library (VHL), Global Health Library (GHL), and Google Scholar, as of 8 February 2022. Additionally, we performed a manual search to find relevant articles. The quality of the selected articles was evaluated using the Study Quality Assessment Tools (SQAT) checklist from the National Institute of Health and the ROB2 tool from Cochrane. Our systematic review included 17 eligible articles. The findings show that the use of perindopril/amlodipine FDC significantly lowers blood pressure and enhances the quality of blood pressure control. Compared to the comparison group, the perindopril/amlodipine combination tablet resulted in a higher rate of blood pressure response and normalization. Importantly, perindopril/amlodipine FDC contributes to improved patient adherence with minimal side effects. However, studies conducted to date have not provided assessments of the cost-effectiveness of perindopril/amlodipine FDC. In summary, our analysis confirms the effectiveness of perindopril/amlodipine FDC in lowering blood pressure, with combination therapy outperforming monotherapy and placebo. Although mild adverse reactions were observed in a small subset of participants, cost-effectiveness assessments for this treatment remain lacking in the literature.
PubMed: 38410524
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1156655 -
High Blood Pressure & Cardiovascular... Nov 2022Hypertension represent the commonest cause of death in 2017. Hypertension is classified into two types which are primary or essential hypertension and secondary... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Hypertension represent the commonest cause of death in 2017. Hypertension is classified into two types which are primary or essential hypertension and secondary hypertension. The perindopril-amlodipine combination showed a significant effect in reduction of the elevated BP and the cardiovascular complications.
AIM
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a fixed-dose single-pill combination of perindopril-amlodipine in hypertensive patients.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Medline, SCOPUS, and Web of Science for relevant clinical trials. Quality appraisal was evaluated according to GRADE and we assessed the risk of bias using Cochrane's risk of bias tool. We included the following outcomes: systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, pulse pressure, mean blood pressure, heart rate, cough, dizziness, headache, and peripheral edema. We performed the analysis of homogeneous data under the fixed-effects model, while analysis of heterogeneous data was analyzed under the random-effects model. We conducted a meta-regression according to the dose.
RESULTS
We included ten clinical trials. The pooled analysis showed that there was a significant reduction of the systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, pulse plessure, mean blood pressure, and heart rate after the the perindopril-amlodipine combination (MD = 18.96 [14.32, 23.60], P < 0.0001), (MD = 11.90 [8.45, 15.35], P < 0.0001), (MD = 8.44 [6.91, 9.97], P = 0.0001), (MD = 13.07 [5.86, 20.29], P = 0.0004), and (MD = 2.93 [0.89, 4.96], P = 0.005), respectively. The results of the meta-regression revealed that the efficacy is increased by increasing the dose (P < 0.001) CONCLUSION: The use of the perindopril-amlodipine combination had a significant effect on the reduction of SBP, DBP, mean blood pressure, pulse pressure, and HR.
Topics: Humans; Perindopril; Amlodipine; Antihypertensive Agents; Drug Combinations; Hypertension; Blood Pressure; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36287359
DOI: 10.1007/s40292-022-00544-3 -
Ochsner Journal 2014Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors are highly effective at improving prognosis in a variety of disease states such as hypertension, cardiovascular disease,...
BACKGROUND
Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors are highly effective at improving prognosis in a variety of disease states such as hypertension, cardiovascular disease, systolic heart failure, and acute coronary syndrome. Although these medications have been used in clinical practice for decades, not all ACE inhibitors are equal, as agents within this class vary in lipophilicity, tissue-ACE binding, antioxidant properties, antiinflammatory properties, bradykinin site selectivity, and duration of action. The objective of this systematic review and metaanalysis was to evaluate the effects of perindopril vs enalapril on left ventricular function in patients with systolic heart failure.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and metaanalysis of trials comparing perindopril and enalapril in systolic heart failure. Relevant studies were identified through searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar.
RESULTS
Three trials comparing enalapril with perindopril in 116 patients with systolic heart failure were identified. Compared to enalapril, perindopril significantly improved cardiac sympathetic nerve activity: the pooled mean net change in heart to mediastinum ratio was 0.12 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.08, 0.16) and the pooled mean net change in washout rate was -3.51% (95% CI: -4.17, -2.85). Other variables also showed improvement. The pooled mean net change in New York Heart Association functional class was -0.44 (95% CI: -0.86, -0.03) and the change in brain natriuretic peptide was -64.1 [95% CI: -80.8, -47.4]. The change in left ventricular ejection fraction was not significantly greater with perindopril than enalapril: 1.15% (95% CI: -2.74, 5.04). However, in the 2 trials that switched patients from enalapril to perindopril, left ventricular ejection fraction at 6 months was significantly greater in the perindopril group: 2.41% (95% CI: 1.26, 3.55; P<0.0001).
CONCLUSION
In patients with systolic heart failure, perindopril significantly improves cardiac sympathetic nerve activity, brain natriuretic peptide, and New York Heart Association functional class compared to enalapril. Additionally, when patients were switched from enalapril to perindopril, left ventricular ejection fraction at 6 months was significantly greater.
PubMed: 25249801
DOI: No ID Found -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2023Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a long-term condition that occurs as a result of damage to the kidneys. Early recognition of CKD is becoming increasingly common due to... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a long-term condition that occurs as a result of damage to the kidneys. Early recognition of CKD is becoming increasingly common due to widespread laboratory estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) reporting, raised clinical awareness, and international adoption of the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) classifications. Early recognition and management of CKD affords the opportunity to prepare for progressive kidney impairment and impending kidney replacement therapy and for intervention to reduce the risk of progression and cardiovascular disease. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) are two classes of antihypertensive drugs that act on the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system. Beneficial effects of ACEi and ARB on kidney outcomes and survival in people with a wide range of severity of kidney impairment have been reported; however, their effectiveness in the subgroup of people with early CKD (stage 1 to 3) is less certain. This is an update of a review that was last published in 2011.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the benefits and harms of ACEi and ARB or both in the management of people with early (stage 1 to 3) CKD who do not have diabetes mellitus (DM).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 6 July 2023 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the effect of ACEi or ARB in people with early (stage 1 to 3) CKD who did not have DM were selected for inclusion. Only studies of at least four weeks duration were selected. Authors independently assessed the retrieved titles and abstracts and, where necessary, the full text to determine which satisfied the inclusion criteria.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Data extraction was carried out by two authors independently, using a standard data extraction form. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Data entry was carried out by one author and cross-checked by another. When more than one study reported similar outcomes, data were pooled using the random-effects model. Heterogeneity was analysed using a Chi² test and the I² test. Results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach MAIN RESULTS: Six studies randomising 9379 participants with CKD stages 1 to 3 (without DM) met our inclusion criteria. Participants were adults with hypertension; 79% were male from China, Europe, Japan, and the USA. Treatment periods ranged from 12 weeks to three years. Overall, studies were judged to be at unclear or high risk of bias across all domains, and the quality of the evidence was poor, with GRADE rated as low or very low certainty. In low certainty evidence, ACEi (benazepril 10 mg or trandolapril 2 mg) compared to placebo may make little or no difference to death (any cause) (2 studies, 8873 participants): RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.26 to 15.37; I² = 76%), total cardiovascular events (2 studies, 8873 participants): RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.05; I² = 0%), cardiovascular-related death (2 studies, 8873 participants): RR 1.73, 95% CI 0.26 to 11.66; I² = 54%), stroke (2 studies, 8873 participants): RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.03; I² = 0%), myocardial infarction (2 studies, 8873 participants): RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.20; I² = 0%), and adverse events (2 studies, 8873 participants): RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.26 to 1.41; I² = 0%). It is uncertain whether ACEi (benazepril 10 mg or trandolapril 2 mg) compared to placebo reduces congestive heart failure (1 study, 8290 participants): RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.95) or transient ischaemic attack (1 study, 583 participants): RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.01; I² = 0%) because the certainty of the evidence is very low. It is uncertain whether ARB (losartan 50 mg) compared to placebo (1 study, 226 participants) reduces: death (any-cause) (no events), adverse events (RR 19.34, 95% CI 1.14 to 328.30), eGFR rate of decline (MD 5.00 mL/min/1.73 m, 95% CI 3.03 to 6.97), presence of proteinuria (MD -0.65 g/24 hours, 95% CI -0.78 to -0.52), systolic blood pressure (MD -0.80 mm Hg, 95% CI -3.89 to 2.29), or diastolic blood pressure (MD -1.10 mm Hg, 95% CI -3.29 to 1.09) because the certainty of the evidence is very low. It is uncertain whether ACEi (enalapril 20 mg, perindopril 2 mg or trandolapril 1 mg) compared to ARB (olmesartan 20 mg, losartan 25 mg or candesartan 4 mg) (1 study, 26 participants) reduces: proteinuria (MD -0.40, 95% CI -0.60 to -0.20), systolic blood pressure (MD -3.00 mm Hg, 95% CI -6.08 to 0.08) or diastolic blood pressure (MD -1.00 mm Hg, 95% CI -3.31 to 1.31) because the certainty of the evidence is very low.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is currently insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of ACEi or ARB in patients with stage 1 to 3 CKD who do not have DM. The available evidence is overall of very low certainty and high risk of bias. We have identified an area of large uncertainty for a group of patients who account for most of those diagnosed as having CKD.
Topics: Male; Adult; Humans; Female; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Losartan; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Diabetes Mellitus; Proteinuria; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists
PubMed: 37466151
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007751.pub3 -
CNS Drugs Feb 2015Chronic hypertension, particularly midlife high blood pressure, has been associated with an increased risk for cognitive decline and dementia. In this context,... (Review)
Review
Antihypertensive drugs, prevention of cognitive decline and dementia: a systematic review of observational studies, randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses, with discussion of potential mechanisms.
BACKGROUND
Chronic hypertension, particularly midlife high blood pressure, has been associated with an increased risk for cognitive decline and dementia. In this context, antihypertensive drugs might have a preventive effect, but the association remains poorly understood.
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this systematic review was to examine all published findings that investigated this relationship and discuss the mechanisms underlying the potential benefits of antihypertensive medication use.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for publications from 1990 onwards mentioning hypertension, antihypertensive drugs, cognitive decline, and dementia.
RESULTS
A total of 38 relevant publications, corresponding to 18 longitudinal studies, 11 randomized controlled trials, and nine meta-analyses were identified from the 10,251 articles retrieved in the literature search. In total, 1,346,176 subjects were included in these studies; the average age was 74 years. In the seven longitudinal studies assessing the effect of antihypertensive medication on cognitive impairment or cognitive decline, antihypertensive drugs appeared to be beneficial. Of the 11 longitudinal studies that assessed the effect of antihypertensive medication on incidence of dementia, only three did not find a significant protective effect. Antihypertensive medication could decrease the risk of not only vascular dementia but also Alzheimer's disease. Four randomized controlled trials showed a potentially preventive effect of antihypertensive drugs on the incidence of dementia or cognitive decline: SYST-EUR (Systolic Hypertension in Europe Study) I and II, with a 55% reduction in dementia risk (3.3 vs. 7.4 cases per 1,000 patient years; p<0.001); HOPE (Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation), with a 41% reduction in cognitive decline associated with stroke (95% confidence interval [CI] 6-63); and PROGRESS (Perindopril Protection against Recurrent Stroke Study), with a 19% reduction in cognitive decline (95% CI 4-32; p=0.01). Meta-analyses have sometimes produced conflicting results, but this may be due to methodological considerations. The lack of homogeneity across study designs, patient populations, exposition, outcomes, and duration of follow-up are the most important methodological limitations that might explain the discrepancies between some of these studies.
CONCLUSION
Antihypertensive drugs, particularly calcium channel blockers and renin-angiotensin system blockers, may be beneficial in preventing cognitive decline and dementia. However, further randomized controlled trials with longer periods of follow-up and cognition as the primary outcome are needed to confirm these findings.
Topics: Antihypertensive Agents; Cognition Disorders; Dementia; Humans; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Nootropic Agents; Observational Studies as Topic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 25700645
DOI: 10.1007/s40263-015-0230-6 -
High Blood Pressure & Cardiovascular... May 2022Systemic arterial hypertension is the most common preventable risk factor for all causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide with a prevalence of 35-40% of the adults.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Systemic arterial hypertension is the most common preventable risk factor for all causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide with a prevalence of 35-40% of the adults. Despite the wide variety of effective antihypertensive medications, most hypertensive patients remain uncontrolled. However, the combination of ACE inhibitor, diuretics, and calcium antagonist for the triple therapy in a single Pill Combination (SPC) is an efficient regimen in hypertension management. It is recommended by the ESH 2018 guideline, which offers better efficacy and compliance to treatment.
AIM
To evaluate the efficacy of perindopril/indapamide/amlodipine single-pill combination in patients with uncontrolled hypertension.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL for relevant clinical trials. We conducted the risk of bias assessment using Cochrane's risk of bias tool. We performed the analysis of continuous data using mean difference (MD) and relative 95% confidence interval (CI), while dichotomous data were analyzed using risk ratio (RR) and relative 95% CI. We included the analysis of the following outcomes: systolic blood pressure (SBP), Diastolic blood pressure (DBP), Heart rate (HR), 24 h Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) for SBP, and 24 h ABPM for DBP.
RESULTS
We included six clinical trials. We found that the triple therapy significantly reduces SBP by 24 mmHg (MD = - 24.65 [22.41, 26.89], (P < 0.01)), DBP by 12 mmHg (MD = 12.41 [11.53, 13.29], (P < 0.01)), 24-h ABPM for SBP by 14 mmHg (MD = 14.08 [9.10, 19.05], (P < 0.01)), and ABPM 24 h DBP by 7 mmHg (MD = 7.01 [5.37, 8.65], (P < 0.01)). We noted no significant difference of the single pill on heart rate (MD = 0.81 [- 0.04, 1.67], (P = 0.06).
CONCLUSION
perindopril/indapamide/amlodipine is effective in reducing systolic and diastolic blood pressures by 24 and 12 mmHg respectively. Over 24 h, the combination reduced systolic and diastolic blood pressures by 14 and 7 mmHg respectively.
Topics: Adult; Amlodipine; Antihypertensive Agents; Blood Pressure; Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory; Drug Combinations; Humans; Hypertension; Indapamide; Perindopril
PubMed: 35325410
DOI: 10.1007/s40292-022-00511-y -
Journal of the American Society of... Apr 2015A systematic review identified 86 outcome-based clinical trials involving perindopril, amlodipine, or other antihypertensive drugs. In fixed-effects meta-analyses of 11... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
A systematic review identified 86 outcome-based clinical trials involving perindopril, amlodipine, or other antihypertensive drugs. In fixed-effects meta-analyses of 11 clinical trials (90,208 subjects), amlodipine was associated with a significant 24% increase in heart failure, but a significant decrease in death, cardiovascular death, stroke, coronary heart disease, and first major cardiovascular adverse event. In five clinical trials (52,565 subjects), perindopril was associated with a significant reduction in all six cardiovascular endpoints. Network and Bayesian meta-analyses suggested that (with the exception of amlodipine and heart failure), each agent was at least as effective as an initial diuretic to prevent these events. Short-term trials have demonstrated that the combination of perindopril and amlodipine is safe and effective, with statistically greater lowering of blood pressure than either agent alone and a potential synergistic effect on pedal edema. The single-pill combination of perindopril and amlodipine may be a useful addition to the antihypertensive armamentarium.
Topics: Amlodipine; Antihypertensive Agents; Cardiovascular Diseases; Clinical Trials as Topic; Drug Combinations; Humans; Perindopril
PubMed: 25817217
DOI: 10.1016/j.jash.2014.12.012