ABSTRACT
We enrolled 196 patients with hypertension who were already being treated with free-drug combinations of angiotensin-II receptor blocker (ARB) and amlodipine. The free-drug combinations of ARB and amlodipine were replaced with the same dose of the fixed-dose combinations. The average home blood pressure (BP) in all patients receiving fixed-dose combinations was significantly lower than those receiving free-drug combinations (131 ± 10/75 ± 8 vs. 136 ± 11/77 ± 9 mm Hg, P < .01) accompanied with increasing drug adherence. After lowering BP by fixed-dose combinations, the costs for medications decreased by 31% over the 3 months.
Subject(s)
Amlodipine/therapeutic use , Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/therapeutic use , Calcium Channel Blockers/therapeutic use , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Hypertension/drug therapy , Hypertension/economics , Medication Adherence , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Amlodipine/economics , Amlodipine/pharmacology , Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/economics , Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/pharmacology , Benzimidazoles/economics , Benzimidazoles/pharmacology , Benzimidazoles/therapeutic use , Benzoates/economics , Benzoates/pharmacology , Benzoates/therapeutic use , Biphenyl Compounds , Blood Pressure/drug effects , Blood Pressure/physiology , Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory , Calcium Channel Blockers/economics , Calcium Channel Blockers/pharmacology , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Drug Therapy, Combination , Female , Humans , Hypertension/physiopathology , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Retrospective Studies , Telmisartan , Tetrazoles/economics , Tetrazoles/pharmacology , Tetrazoles/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome , Valine/analogs & derivatives , Valine/economics , Valine/pharmacology , Valine/therapeutic use , ValsartanABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the feasibility, effectiveness and complications of the retrievable vena cava filter [Güther tulip vena cava filter(GTF)] for the prevention of pulmonary thromboembolism in patients with deep vein thrombosis. METHODS: Seventeen patients, 3 males and 14 females, aged 21 to 82 years (mean age 59 +/- 19 years), underwent implantation of GTFs between December 2000 and February 2002 at Mie University Hospital. All patients were treated under diagnoses of deep vein thrombosis with or without pulmonary thromboembolism based on venous ultrasonography, venography or computed tomography. Eleven patients were treated with thrombolysis. RESULTS: Significant thromboembolus was trapped within the filter in 3 of 12 patients. No acute pulmonary thromboembolism occurred during implantation or at retrieval of the GTF. Retrieval of the GTF was attempted in 9 patients, and 8 GTFs were retrieved successfully. Mean interval of the filter implantation was 13.4 +/- 6.3 days and the mean retrieval time was 4.8 +/- 3.2 min. No complications occurred except for one case of minor hemorrhage at the puncture site. CONCLUSIONS: The placement and retrieval of the retrievable vena cava filter was feasible and safe. This filter was also effective for the prevention of pulmonary thromboembolism. This retrievable vena cava filter may be a good first-choice filter for both permanent and temporary use.
