-
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 -
Journal of Clinical Hypertension... May 2022Dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (DHPCCBs) are widely used to treat hypertension and chronic coronary artery disease. One common adverse effect of DHPCCBs is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (DHPCCBs) are widely used to treat hypertension and chronic coronary artery disease. One common adverse effect of DHPCCBs is peripheral edema, particularly of the lower limbs. The side effect could lead to dose reduction or discontinuation of the medication. The combination of DHPCCBs and renin-angiotensin system blockers has shown to reduce the risk of DHPCCBs-associated peripheral edema compared with DHPCCBs monotherapy. We performed the current systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to estimate the rate of peripheral edema with DHPCCBs as a class and with individual DHPCCBs and the ranking of the reduction of peripheral edema. The effects of renin-angiotensin system blockers on DHPCCBs network meta-analysis were created to analyze the ranking of the reduction of peripheral edema. A total of 3312 publications were identified and 71 studies with 56,283 patients were included. Nifedipine ranked highest in inducing peripheral edema (SUCRA 81.8%) and lacidipine (SUCRA 12.8%) ranked the least. All DHPCCBs except lacidipine resulted in higher relative risk (RR) of peripheral edema compared with placebo. Nifedipine plus angiotensin receptor blocker (SUCRA: 92.3%) did not mitigate peripheral edema and amlodipine plus angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (SUCRA: 16%) reduced peripheral edema the most. Nifedipine ranked the highest and lacidipine ranked the lowest amongst DHPCCBs for developing peripheral edema when used for cardiovascular indications. The second or higher generation of DHPCCBs combination with ACEIs or ARBs or diuretics lowered the chance of peripheral edema development compared to single DHPCCB treatment.
Topics: Antihypertensive Agents; Calcium Channel Blockers; Dihydropyridines; Edema; Humans; Hypertension; Network Meta-Analysis; Nifedipine
PubMed: 35234349
DOI: 10.1111/jch.14436 -
Patient Preference and Adherence 2020Medication-induced oral hyperpigmentation is an oral condition that impacts patients' quality of life and has been linked to many systemic therapeutic agents. The exact... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Medication-induced oral hyperpigmentation is an oral condition that impacts patients' quality of life and has been linked to many systemic therapeutic agents. The exact pathogenesis of tissue pigmentation varies greatly and is not completely known. This systematic review aimed to present data on the causal association between medications and the development of oral/mucosal pigmentation as an adverse drug reaction.
METHODS
A systematic review and analysis of literature were conducted using the following databases: PubMed, Science Direct, ProQuest, Web of Science, and Scopus. The systematic review included original articles written in English and published between January 1982 and June 2020. Following the PRISMA statement, eligible articles were systematically reviewed, and data were extracted from eligible studies and analyzed.
RESULTS
A total of 235 articles were identified, of which 57 met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. The mean age of included patients was 46.2±16.38 years (range: 10-90 years) with a male to female ratio of 1:1.45. Oral mucosal hyperpigmentation was reported following the use of several classes of medications such as antiviral (eg, zidovudine), antibiotic (eg, minocycline), antimalarial (eg, chloroquine), anti-fungal (eg, ketoconazole), antileprotic (eg, clofazimine), antihypertensive (eg, amlodipine), chemotherapeutic, and antineoplastic drugs. The risk of developing oral pigmentation was significantly higher with antimalarial medications, antibiotics, antineoplastic and chemotherapeutic agents. Medication-induced oral hyperpigmentation was most frequent among women and in the hard palate.
CONCLUSION
Future research is warranted to better understand the pathogenesis and risk factors for medication-induced oral hyperpigmentation in order to reassure patients during prescription and management.
PubMed: 33116439
DOI: 10.2147/PPA.S275783 -
Cardiology and Therapy Dec 2021Hypertension is a progressive cardiovascular condition arising from complex aetiologies. Progression is strongly associated with functional and structural abnormalities... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Hypertension is a progressive cardiovascular condition arising from complex aetiologies. Progression is strongly associated with functional and structural abnormalities that lead to multi-organ dysfunction. Stroke and myocardial infarction are two of the major complications of hypertension in India. Various anti-hypertensive drugs, such as calcium channel blockers (CCBs), beta-blockers, diuretics, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers, have been the medications of choice for disease management and are known to be effective in reducing the complications of hypertension. CCBs, such as amlodipine, are also currently being used and proven to be effective, although their beneficial effects in the management of complications of hypertension like stroke and myocardial infarction (MI) have yet to be proven. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effect of amlodipine on stroke and MI in hypertensive patients.
METHODS
A systematic search of English electronic databases was performed for studies with sufficient statistical power that were published between 2000 andl 30 August 2020, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria. A total of 676 papers were screened, and 13 were found eligible to be included in the meta-analysis. Studies that included patients who suffered from MI or stroke and were under amlodipine treatment were included in the analysis. The odds ratio and the risk ratio of amlodipine compared to active control/placebo were noted from the studies and statistically analyzed.
RESULTS
Amlodipine had a significant effect in reducing stroke and MI in hypertensive patients. Similar to results published in reports, this systematic review proved that the hazard ratio for amlodipine was < 1 for stroke (0.69-1.04) and MI (0.77-0.98), showing that amlodipine accounted for better prevention of stroke and MI.
CONCLUSION
In the pooled analysis of data from 12 randomised controlled trials and one double-blinded cohort study measuring the effect of CCBs, we found that the CCB amlodipine reduced the risk of stroke and MI in hypertensive patients. Superior results for amlodipine were found in ten of the 13 studies included in this meta-analysis.
PubMed: 34480745
DOI: 10.1007/s40119-021-00239-1 -
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Aug 2022To update our previously reported systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies on cardiovascular drug exposure and COVID-19 clinical outcomes by focusing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIMS
To update our previously reported systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies on cardiovascular drug exposure and COVID-19 clinical outcomes by focusing on newly published randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
METHODS
More than 500 databases were searched between 1 November 2020 and 2 October 2021 to identify RCTs that were published after our baseline review. One reviewer extracted data with other reviewers verifying the extracted data for accuracy and completeness.
RESULTS
After screening 22 414 records, we included 24 and 21 RCTs in the qualitative and quantitative syntheses, respectively. The most investigated drug classes were angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARBs) and anticoagulants, investigated by 10 and 11 studies respectively. In meta-analyses, ACEI/ARBs did not affect hospitalization length (mean difference -0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.83; 0.98 d, n = 1183), COVID-19 severity (risk ratio/RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.71; 1.15, n = 1661) or mortality (risk ratio [RR] 0.92, 95% CI 0.58; 1.47, n = 1646). Therapeutic anticoagulation also had no effect (hospitalization length mean difference -0.29, 95% CI -1.13 to 0.56 d, n = 1449; severity RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.70; 1.04, n = 2696; and, mortality RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.77; 1.13, n = 5689). Other investigated drug classes were antiplatelets (aspirin, 2 trials), antithrombotics (sulodexide, 1 trial), calcium channel blockers (amlodipine, 1 trial) and lipid-modifying drugs (atorvastatin, 1 trial).
CONCLUSION
Moderate- to high-certainty RCT evidence suggests that cardiovascular drugs such as ACEIs/ARBs are not associated with poor COVID-19 outcomes, and should therefore not be discontinued. These cardiovascular drugs should also not be initiated to treat or prevent COVID-19 unless they are needed for an underlying currently approved therapeutic indication.
Topics: Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; Cardiovascular Agents; Humans; Observational Studies as Topic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; COVID-19 Drug Treatment
PubMed: 35322889
DOI: 10.1111/bcp.15331 -
Annals of Palliative Medicine Oct 2021Left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy predicts worse cardiac outcomes. Blood pressure lowering is associated with the reduction of LV hypertrophy. This study evaluated the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy predicts worse cardiac outcomes. Blood pressure lowering is associated with the reduction of LV hypertrophy. This study evaluated the effect of a calcium channel blocker, amlodipine, on LV hypertrophy in patients with hypertension.
METHODS
Studies were identified by conducting a literature survey in electronic databases, and study selection was carried out according to precise eligibility criteria. Meta-analyses of mean change between the follow-up and baseline values of systolic/diastolic blood pressure (SBP/DBP) and LV hypertrophy indices were performed. Meta-regression analyses were performed to examine the factors affecting changes in these indices.
RESULTS
Twenty-three studies [involving 737 patients; age 56.4 years, 95% confidence interval (CI): 53.5-59.2; females 34%, 95% CI: 25-44%; body mass index 26.4 kg/m2, 95% CI: 24.6-28.1] were included. Amlodipine treatment led to a significant reduction in SBP (-24.9 mmHg; 95% CI: -28.3 to -21.6; P<0.0001) and DBP (-14.8; 95% CI: -16.4 to -13.3; P<0.0001), without affecting the heart rate. Amlodipine treatment also significantly reduced the LV mass index. The mean difference (MD) between the follow-up and baseline LV mass index was -12.9; 95% CI: -15.4 to -10.4 (P<0.001). This decrease in LV mass index was positively associated with the follow-up duration [meta-regression coefficient (MC): 0.392; 95% CI: 0.050-0.733; P=0.026] and baseline LV mass index (MC: 0.139; 95% CI: 0.007-0.271; P=0.040). Amlodipine treatment significantly reduced the LV posterior wall thickness, which was also positively associated with the follow-up duration. There was no significant decrease in the LV end-diastolic diameter following amlodipine treatment.
DISCUSSION
Amlodipine treatment in patients with hypertension significantly reduced the LV mass index and LV posterior wall thickness, without notably affecting the LV end-diastolic diameter. Since many of the included studies were non-randomized, open-label, or lacking appropriate comparability, we therefore performed pooled analyses of the changes from baseline, and a comparative account could not be carried out.
Topics: Amlodipine; Blood Pressure; Calcium Channel Blockers; Female; Humans; Hypertension; Hypertrophy, Left Ventricular; Middle Aged
PubMed: 34763438
DOI: 10.21037/apm-21-2455 -
Open Heart Jan 2023Coronary artery vasospasm is an abnormal spasm of coronary arteries that cause transient or complete occlusion without exertion. It causes stable angina to ACS. However,...
BACKGROUND
Coronary artery vasospasm is an abnormal spasm of coronary arteries that cause transient or complete occlusion without exertion. It causes stable angina to ACS. However, this can be prevented by calcium channel blockers (CCBs) which suppress Ca influx into the vascular muscle cells. Nevertheless, several CCBs adverse effects are harmful for these patients. Selecting the right CCBs would give the best clinical practice.
METHOD
The studies were obtained from four major medical databases by various keywords. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were implemented as adult >18 years, observational study, English language and drug of interest. Duplicates were eliminated, and the remaining studies were reviewed. Final full-texts assessment was conducted independently by Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Revised Cochrane.
RESULTS
The search found 1378 articles. However, six studies were selected after implementing the study criteria. Diltiazem was found to decrease angina and increase quality of life until 12th week of treatment; however, some adverse effects include atrioventricular block and recurrent angina up till 4th week were found. Meanwhile, nifedipine was found to decrease vasospastic angina (VSA) by the fourth and eighth weeks of treatment. Nevertheless, it caused excessive drop in BP and increase heart rate by eighth week. In addition, slow-release preparation of both CCBs were found to increase efficacy and compliance. Lastly amlodipine was also found to decrease VSA by 17%±140% and 33% after 6 weeks, but further studies needed.
CONCLUSION
Diltiazem, nifedipine and amlodipine are potent in decreasing VSA, however, tailoring specific CCBs adverse reactions to patient condition and the drug preparation would be substantially beneficial for the outcome.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Calcium Channel Blockers; Diltiazem; Coronary Vasospasm; Nifedipine; Calcium; Quality of Life; Amlodipine; Observational Studies as Topic
PubMed: 36634997
DOI: 10.1136/openhrt-2022-002179 -
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 -
Topics in Companion Animal Medicine 2022Systemic arterial hypertension is a health condition causing target organ damage (TOD) in dogs. Early and effective treatment is essential to prevent hypertensive...
Systemic arterial hypertension is a health condition causing target organ damage (TOD) in dogs. Early and effective treatment is essential to prevent hypertensive emergencies and to reduce the risk of TOD. This study investigated the diseases underlying hypertension and compared the short-term efficacy of antihypertensive drugs in dogs. We evaluated the medical records of client-owned dogs treated with antihypertensive drugs between 2017 and 2018. The study included 75 dogs diagnosed with systemic arterial hypertension (systolic blood pressure ≥150 mmHg). The dogs were classified based on treatment with the following antihypertensive drugs: calcium channel blocker amlodipine, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor ramipril, and angiotensin receptor blocker telmisartan, either as monotherapy or combination therapy (telmisartan + amlodipine or ramipril + amlodipine). Systolic blood pressure was measured using an indirect Doppler method over 4 weeks. Naturally acquired hyperadrenocorticism was the most common disorder to be diagnosed in conjunction with systemic hypertension. In the telmisartan group, the systolic blood pressure decreased more rapidly for 3 weeks compared to ramipril. The combination of telmisartan and amlodipine showed the greatest decrease in systolic blood pressure throughout the 4-week treatment period. This study is meaningful as it suggests guidelines for the use of various antihypertensive drugs in dogs.
Topics: Amlodipine; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Animals; Antihypertensive Agents; Calcium Channel Blockers; Dog Diseases; Dogs; Hypertension; Ramipril; Telmisartan; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35640871
DOI: 10.1016/j.tcam.2022.100674 -
International Journal of Hypertension 2019Hypertension (HTN) is the leading risk factor for cardiovascular mortality globally. The WHO estimates a 60% increase in Asian HTN patients between 2000 and 2025....
Systematic Review with Network Meta-Analysis: Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Combination Therapy with Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers and Amlodipine in Asian Hypertensive Patients.
BACKGROUND
Hypertension (HTN) is the leading risk factor for cardiovascular mortality globally. The WHO estimates a 60% increase in Asian HTN patients between 2000 and 2025. Numerous studies have compared safety and efficacy between antihypertensive classes, but in-class comparisons of angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) in combination therapy (CT) (fixed-dose combination or dual combination) with a calcium channel blocker (CCB) are lacking in Asia.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the efficacy and safety of the various ARB-amlodipine CTs and amlodipine (AML) monotherapy for treatment of HTN in Asian population.
METHODS
A systematic literature review sourced Asian randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from PubMed and Cochrane Libraries to inform a network meta-analysis (NMA). We considered the ARB-AML CT. The primary efficacy and safety endpoints were short-term (8-12 weeks) treatment response and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), respectively. AML monotherapy was used as a comparator to allow for indirect treatment effect estimation in the absence of direct RCTs evidence comparing the different ARB-AML CTs.
RESULTS
The analysis included 1198 Asian HTN patients from seven studies involving six ARB-AML CTs: azilsartan (AZL), candesartan (CAN), fimasartan (FIM), losartan (LOS), olmesartan (OLM), and telmisartan (TEL). Compared to AML monotherapy, CT of AZL-AML had five times greater odds of prompting a treatment response (OR 5.2, 95% CI: 2.5, 11.2), while CAN-AML had 3.9 (95% CI: 2.5, 6.4), FIM-AML had 3.4 (95% CI: 1.4, 8.5), TEL-AML had 3.3 (95% CI: 1.6, 7.1), OLM-AML had 2.7 (95% CI: 1.6, 5.0), and LOS-AML had 2.0 (95% CI: 0.6, 7.3). All ARB-AML CTs had safety profiles comparable to AML monotherapy except TEL-AML, which had significantly lower odds of TEAEs (0.26 (95% CI: 0.087, 0.70)).
CONCLUSION
This study suggests that all ARB-AML CTs compared favorably to AML monotherapy regarding short-term treatment response in uncomplicated HTN patients of Asian origin. AZL-AML prompted the most favorable treatment response. Safety profiles among the ARB-AML CTs were largely comparable. Due to the limited study size and small number of trials (direct evidence), our findings should best be interpreted as an exploratory effort importance to inform future research direction.
PubMed: 31827918
DOI: 10.1155/2019/9516279