The prevalence of prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis in acute hospital trusts.

OBJECTIVE: The effectiveness of activities to promote routine prophylaxis to prevent thromboembolism is difficult to assess because information about the prevalence of prophylaxis is sparse. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) prophylaxis for patients at risk in general medicine, general surgery, orthopaedics and gynaecology in Scotland and the North of England. DESIGN: Retrospective case note review of a random sample of episodes of care in a stratified random sample of directorates in Scotland and a convenience sample in England. SETTING: Twenty acute hospital directorates in Scotland and eight in the North of England. PARTICIPANTS: Case notes of patients at risk of thrombosis and discharged from the selected directorates in a 12-month period (n = 742). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The proportion of patients receiving prophylaxis in each directorate. RESULTS: Overall, 469/526 (89%) of patients in Scotland and 199/216 (92%) in England received prophylaxis. The proportion varied from 71% in general medicine to 100% in orthopaedics. The frequency of use of different forms of prophylaxis varied between directorates. Approximately 60% of the patients who received prophylaxis received more than one form. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylaxis for DVT is well established for procedures and conditions that are known to increase the risk of thrombosis and for which there are no contraindications. Additional efforts to promote prophylaxis for these conditions are unlikely to be cost effective. Further research is needed to establish whether rates are equally high in other conditions, and whether the high prophylaxis rates are due to clinical effectiveness initiatives.

Calcium channel blockade and cardiovascular prognosis in the European trial on isolated systolic hypertension.

In the double-blind Systolic Hypertension in Europe (Syst-Eur) Trial, active treatment was initiated with nitrendipine (10 to 40 mg/d) with the possible addition of enalapril (5 to 20 mg/d) and/or hydrochlorothiazide (12.5 to 25 mg/d) titrated or combined to reduce sitting systolic blood pressure by at least 20 mm Hg to <150 mm Hg. In the control group, matching placebos were used similarly. In view of persistent concerns about the use of calcium channel blockers as first-line antihypertensive drugs, this report explored to what extent nitrendipine, administered alone, prevented cardiovascular complications. Age at randomization averaged 70.2 years and systolic/diastolic blood pressure 173.8/85.5 mm Hg. Of 2398 actively treated patients, 1327 took only nitrendipine (average dose, 23.4 mg/d), and 1042 progressed to other treatments including nitrendipine (n=757; 35.7 mg/d), enalapril (n=783; 13.4 mg/d), and/or hydrochlorothiazide (n=294; 21.0 mg/d). Compared with the whole placebo group (n=2297), patients receiving monotherapy with nitrendipine had 25% (P=0.05) fewer cardiovascular end points, and those progressing to other active treatments showed decreases (P

Subgroup and per-protocol analysis of the randomized European Trial on Isolated Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly.

BACKGROUND: In 1989, the European Working Party on High Blood Pressure in the Elderly started the double-blind, placebo-controlled, Systolic Hypertension in Europe Trial to test the hypothesis that antihypertensive drug treatment would reduce the incidence of fatal and nonfatal stroke in older patients with isolated systolic hypertension. This report addresses whether the benefit of antihypertensive treatment varied according to sex, previous cardiovascular complications, age, initial blood pressure (BP), and smoking or drinking habits in an intention-to-treat analysis and explores whether the morbidity and mortality results were consistent in a per-protocol analysis. METHODS: After stratification for center, sex, and cardiovascular complications, 4695 patients 60 years of age or older with a systolic BP of 160 to 219 mm Hg and diastolic BP less than 95 mm Hg were randomized. Active treatment consisted of nitrendipine (10-40 mg/d), with the possible addition of enalapril maleate (5-20 mg/d) and/or hydrochlorothiazide (12.5-25 mg/d), titrated or combined to reduce the sitting systolic BP by at least 20 mm Hg, to below 150 mm Hg. In the control group, matching placebo tablets were employed similarly. RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat analysis, male sex, previous cardiovascular complications, older age, higher systolic BP, and smoking at randomization were positively and independently correlated with cardiovascular risk. Furthermore, for total (P = .009) and cardiovascular (P = .09) mortality, the benefit of antihypertensive drug treatment weakened with advancing age; for total mortality (P = .05), the benefit increased with higher systolic BP at entry, while for fatal and nonfatal stroke (P = .01), it was most evident in nonsmokers (92.5% of all patients). In the perprotocol analysis, active treatment reduced total mortality by 24% (P = .05), reduced all fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular end points by 32% (P<.001), reduced all strokes by 44% (P = .004), reduced nonfatal strokes by 48% (P = .005), and reduced all cardiac end points, including sudden death, by 26% (P = .05). CONCLUSIONS: In elderly patients with isolated systolic hypertension, stepwise antihypertensive drug treatment, starting with the dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker nitrendipine, improves prognosis. The per-protocol analysis suggested that treating 1000 patients for 5 years would prevent 24 deaths, 54 major cardiovascular end points, 29 strokes, or 25 cardiac end points. The effects of antihypertensive drug treatment on total and cardiovascular mortality may be attenuated in very old patients.

Differences between amlodipine and lisinopril in control of clinic and twenty-four hour ambulatory blood pressures.

The anti-hypertensive efficacy of once-daily amlodipine (up to 10 mg) and lisinopril (up to 20 mg) were compared in terms of clinic and ambulatory blood pressure (BP) control, in an observer-blind, two-period crossover study. Following a 4-week placebo run-in period, patients underwent two active treatment phases each lasting 12 weeks and separated by a 4-week washout period. Sixty patients with a supine diastolic BP between 90 and 120 mm Hg were included, irrespective of whether or not they had received previous anti-hypertensive medication. Amlodipine reduced supine systolic and diastolic clinic BP significantly more than lisinopril (-20+/-2/-14+/-1 vs -11 3/-7+/-1 mm Hg; P=0.02/ P=0.001) 24 h post-dose. Clinic standing diastolic BP was also significantly reduced with amlodipine compared with lisinopril (P=0.05). Both drugs produced control of mean ambulatory BP relative to baseline over 24 h. Amlodipine showed more consistent control of BP over the 24-h period in contrast to lisinopril which exerted its greatest effect during the daytime.

Do trandolapril and indomethacin influence renal function and renal functional reserve in hypertensive patients?

AIMS: To assess the effect of trandolapril (2 mg once daily) and indomethacin (25 mg three times daily), alone and in combination, on renal function and renal functional reserve in hypertensive patients (DBP 95-115 mmHg) requiring regular non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). METHODS: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, four way crossover design. After 3 weeks treatment renal plasma flow (RPF) and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) were measured using the p-aminohippurate (PAH) and inulin methods. Renal functional reserve was estimated by measuring RPF and GFR at the end of an intravenous infusion of dopamine 2 microg kg(-1) and 10% amino acid solution. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in RPF between treatments: -22.79 ml min(-1) (95% CI -54.82, 9.24) for placebo and trandolapril, -10.37 ml min(-1) (95% CI -30.7, 9.96) for placebo and indomethacin, -14.78 ml min(-1) (95% CI -50.33, 20.77) for placebo and trandolapril with indomethacin. There was no significant difference in functional reserve RPF between treatments: -34.96 ml min(-1) (95% CI -119.8, 49.88) for placebo and trandolapril, 29.78 ml min(-1), -15.18, 74.74) for placebo and indomethacin, and -25.84 ml min(-1) (95% CI -87.62, 35.94) for placebo and trandolapril with indomethacin. There was no significant difference in GFR between treatments: -1.01 ml min(-1) (95% CI -7.45, 5.42) for placebo and trandolapril, -7.88 ml min(-1) (95% CI -15.08, -0.68) for placebo and indomethacin, and -0.36 ml min(-1) (95% CI -7.58, 6.86) for placebo and trandolapril with indomethacin. There was no significant difference in functional reserve GFR between treatments: 5.13 ml min(-1) (95% CI -4.97, 15.23) for placebo and trandolapril, 6.31 ml min(-1) (95% CI -1.88, 14.5) for placebo and indomethacin, 7.21 ml min(-1) (95% CI 1.26, 13.16) for placebo and trandolapril with indomethacin. CONCLUSION: In hypertensives chronic treatment with NSAIDs or ACEI alone or in combination did not change RPF or GFR and did not change renal functional reserve capacity of RPF or GFR.

Calcium channel blockers and cardiac mortality in the treatment of hypertension: a report from the Department of Health Hypertension Care Computing Project (DHCCP).

OBJECTIVE: A case control study has reported a 60% higher risk of myocardial infarction in hypertensives treated with a calcium channel blocker (CCB). We examined the Department of Health Hypertension Care Computing Project (DHCCP) data to see if we could confirm or refute this suggestion. DESIGN: Two case control studies, matched and unmatched, plus two longitudinal studies from 1 year of presentation, one for all subjects given a CCB for more than 1 year compared with those not given this drug, and the second comparing survival on the different drugs initially given between 3 and 12 months of follow-up. SUBJECTS: A total of 9328 subjects were included in the analyses and 2154 died. Of these, 6406 received one or more of the following index drugs: 26% a calcium channel blocker (CCB); 84% a diuretic; 29% alpha methyldopa; 12% a beta-blocker (BB); and 11% an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor. The CCBs were nifedipine, diltiazem or verapamil. RESULTS: In the case control studies a group given diuretics +/- other treatments (but not including one of the index drugs) provided a reference group with a relative risk (RR) of 1.0. In the matched case control study the adjusted RR for a CCB without a diuretic was 1.32 (95% CI 0.64-2.70) for IHD mortality and 1.05 (95% CI 0.60-1.84) for cardiovascular mortality. Similar results were observed for methyldopa, BBs and ACE inhibitors. The results in the unmatched case control analysis were also similar. The longitudinal study comparing all those treated for over 1 year with a CCB with all other treatments showed a RR for total mortality of 1.03 (95% CI 0.85-1.25). The longitudinal study of total mortality according to treatment initiated at 3-12 months found results of a similar magnitude for CCBs, methyldopa and BBs. CONCLUSIONS: The reference diuretic group had less severe cardiovascular disease than other groups. Treatment with a CCB, BB or methyldopa was associated with an excess mortality in comparison with this reference group. The excess was similar in the different drug groups.

Indomethacin does not attenuate the hypotensive effect of trandolapril.

This is a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, four-way crossover study to determine if indomethacin attenuates the hypotensive effect of trandolapril. Twenty-three hypertensive patients (diastolic blood pressure (DBP) 95-115) requiring NSAID were recruited. Seventeen completed the study. Three week treatment periods: trandolapril 2 mg od and indomethacin 25 mg tds, trandolapril 2 mg and placebo, indomethacin and placebo, placebo and placebo. Clinic and ambulatory BP after 3 weeks of each treatment. Study had 85% power to detect a 5 mm Hg difference in BP (s.d. 7 mm Hg). End of treatment clinic BPs were: 152.9/98 mm Hg (95% CI 147.2, 158.6/95.8, 101.4) with placebo and placebo; 150.4/94.9 mm Hg (95% CI 144.7, 156.1/92.1, 97.7) with trandolapril and indomethacin; 148.2/96.5 mm Hg (95% CI 142.5, 153.9/93.7, 99.3) with trandolapril and placebo; and 156.6/97.4 mm Hg (95% CI 150.9, 162.3/94.6, 100.2) with indomethacin and placebo. There were no significant interactions between trandolapril and indomethacin for clinic systolic BP (SBP) (P = 0.79) or clinic DBP (P = 0.87). When trandolapril treatments (placebo or with indomethacin) were compared to treatments without trandolapril (placebo or indomethacin), trandolapril lowered clinic SBP by 5.4 mm Hg (P = 0.047) and DBP by 2.3 mm Hg (P = 0.08). Mean ambulatory BP was: 140.6/88.2 mm Hg (trandolapril and placebo); 142.8/89.7 mm Hg (trandolapril and indomethacin); 149.6/95.0 mm Hg, (indomethacin and placebo); 147.7/94.0 mm Hg (placebo and placebo). Compared with placebo, trandolapril and placebo lowered BP by 6.5/7.5 mm Hg (P < 0.001, SBP; P < 0.001, DBP). Compared with indomethacin, trandolapril and indomethacin lowered BP by 5.0/5.5 mm Hg (P = 0.001, SBP; P < 0.001, DBP). In the present study trandolapril 2 mg lowered clinic SBP and ambulatory BP, but indomethacin did not attenuate this. Indomethacin had no significant effect on either clinic or ambulatory BP. The antihypertensive effects of trandolapril in this study were modest. Patient selection factors may have contributed to the observed responses, but it seems unlikely from these data that a clinically important drug interaction has occurred.

Alcohol intake and cardiovascular mortality in hypertensive patients: report from the Department of Health Hypertension Care Computing Project.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the benefits and risks of drinking alcohol in treated hypertensives. DESIGN: A prospective study of 6,369 hypertensives (3,161 men) attending primarily hospital clinics in the UK. METHODS: Relative risks both for drinkers compared with non-drinkers and for level of alcohol consumption were calculated for mortality from ischaemic heart disease, stroke, non-circulatory and all causes. RESULTS: At presentation 76% of the men and 48% of the women reported recent alcohol consumption. Compared with drinkers, non-drinkers were older, less likely to smoke and had a higher untreated blood pressure. After adjustment for confounding factors, male drinkers had a reduced risk of stroke mortality and possibly of ischaemic heart disease mortality. Similar results were observed in women for stroke mortality but not for ischaemic heart disease mortality. The trend remained after adjustment for previous cardiovascular disease. In men the lowest risk of ischaemic heart disease mortality occurred at intakes of > 21 units per week and stroke mortality was lowest at 1-10 units per week. Men consuming > 21 units per week had a twofold higher non-circulatory mortality. Total mortality was lowest in men who drank 1-10 units per week. Similar effects of alcohol on cardiovascular mortality were observed in women. CONCLUSIONS: Alcohol intake may reduce stroke mortality in treated hypertensives. Ischaemic heart disease mortality in men may also be reduced, especially at higher intakes ( > 21 units per week). The beneficial effects were offset by increasing incidence of non-circulatory causes of death. Alcohol consumption of 1-10 units per week was associated with the lowest mortality in men.

Optimal blood pressure control in treated hypertensive patients. Report from the Department of Health Hypertension Care Computing Project (DHCCP).

BACKGROUND: We wished to determine the range of treated systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) associated with the best survival in hypertensive patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a cohort study of patients enrolled in the DoH Hypertension Care Computer Project. Five specialist hypertension clinics (95% of patients) and general practitioners (5%) followed 6214 patients (3070 men and 3144 women) with an average age of 52 years for a mean of 107 months. Total, cardiovascular, ischemic heart disease, (IHD) and stroke mortality were the outcome measures. Age-adjusted relative hazard rates were calculated giving the effect on mortality of systolic or diastolic pressure being higher by 1 mm Hg. In men the optimal level of SBP for all four measures of mortality was the lowest pressure range observed, 92 to 133 mm Hg (median 127). For women the treated SBP range of 96 to 148 mm Hg (median 137) was associated with a low total mortality and also with low to moderate rates for IHD and stroke mortality. Relative hazard rates (P < .001) for IHD mortality were 1.010 for men and 1.013 for women and for stroke mortality were 1.018 and 1.021, respectively. The results were similar in men under and over the age of 60. SBP and DBP tended to be more important in younger than older women. For treated DBP in men, a pressure of 55 to 94 mm Hg (median 87) was associated with a low total mortality. The lowest stroke mortality in men was observed for a DBP range of 55 to 83 mm Hg (median 80) but with a tendency for an increase in IHD mortality. For women DBP < 95 mm Hg (range 55 to 94, median 87) also was associated with a low total mortality. IHD mortality in women was not closely related to treated DBP, relative hazard rate = 1.003, [95% confidence index (CI); 0.990,1.017] but the relative hazard rate for men was 1.011, (95% CI; 1.000, 1.022). The relative hazard rates for treated DBP and stroke were high at 1.035 and 1.028 for men and women, respectively (P < .001). IHD mortality increased in the one third of patients with the greatest fall in DBP on treatment, provided they were not initially in the one-third group with highest untreated DBP. CONCLUSIONS: The best overall survival was associated with a treated SBP of < 134 mm Hg in men and < 149 mm Hg in women and a treated DBP of < 95 mm Hg.

Drug treatment: present and future.

The objectives of drug therapy--present and future--for the treatment of raised blood pressure are to prevent the morbid and fatal events which arise in individual patients as a consequence of poorly controlled levels of elevated systolic and/or diastolic blood pressure. The target levels of blood pressure require to be achieved without adverse effects at an affordable cost, over a prolonged period of years. The factors affecting the choice of drugs in such patients include the 'profiling' of the blood pressure to assess the severity of the hypertension, associated diseases and risk factors, concurrent therapy, inter-individual variations in response between patients and cost-effectiveness.

An assessment of lacidipine and atenolol in mild to moderate hypertension.

1. The aim of this randomised, double-blind four way crossover study was to assess the interaction between the new calcium antagonist, lacidipine and atenolol, in patients with mild to moderate hypertension. 2. Sitting blood pressure at 4 h post-dosing with lacidipine (4 mg) and atenolol (100 mg) alone was significantly lower compared with placebo (137/89 +/- 3/3 mmHg; 142/89 +/- 5/3 mmHg; and 154/98 +/- 5/3 mmHg respectively; P < 0.001). Co-administration of both drugs produced a significant additive effect compared with atenolol and lacidipine alone (124/80 +/- 4/2 mmHg; P < 0.002). 3. Heart rate on treatment with lacidipine alone was significantly greater at 4 h compared with placebo (86 +/- 1 beats min-1 and 74 +/- 2 beats min-1 respectively; P < 0.001). When both drugs were used in combination, there was a significant decrease in pulse rate compared with lacidipine alone (58 +/- 1 beats min-1 and 86 +/- 1 beats min-1 respectively; P < 0.001). 4. Home blood pressure recordings confirmed the statistically significant reduction in blood pressure on co-dosing (120/82 +/- 10/2 mmHg) compared with lacidipine (140/92 +/- 5/3 mmHg) and atenolol (146/90 +/- 6/3 mmHg) given alone (P < 0.05). 5. Lacidipine alone produced a significant exercise tachycardia compared with atenolol alone and the atenolol/lacidipine combination (97 +/- 8 beats min-1; 65 +/- 4 beats min-1 and 75 +/- 7 beats min-1 respectively; P < 0.001). Exercise tolerance was not adversely affected by the co-administration of both lacidipine and atenolol.

Colestipol at varying dosage intervals in the treatment of moderate hypercholesterolaemia.

1. Bile acid sequestrants such as colestipol are effective lipid lowering agents but have a poor reputation for tolerability particularly when administered at the originally recommended doses. We have investigated a low dosage regimen with varying dosage intervals in order to assess efficacy and tolerability. 2. This double-blind, placebo controlled, parallel group study was conducted to investigate the effect of varying administration schedules of colestipol (10 g daily), against placebo in reducing LDL cholesterol levels in patients with moderate hypercholesterolaemia on the American Heart Association step 1 diet. 3. Colestipol or matched placebo, was administered as 5 g twice daily (COL am/pm) or 10 g once daily in the morning (COL am) or evening (COL pm) at fixed times with meals. 4. All 98 patients who entered the initial 16 week dietary phase, subsequently entered the 12 week active treatment phase and were randomised to placebo or active treatment and to one of the three treatment schedules. Fasting lipid profiles were performed every 4 weeks during both phases. 5. All active treatments significantly reduced LDL and total cholesterol compared with placebo (COL am: 17% and 10%, COL pm: 18% and 10%, COL am/pm: 19% and 12% (P = 0.0001)). HDL cholesterol rose significantly with COL am (5% (P = 0.021)) and COL am/pm (7% (P = 0.002)) when compared with placebo while a marginal increase was seen with COL pm (4% (P = 0.063)). Colestipol tended to increase serum triglyceride concentrations but the changes were not significant.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Cryopreservation of human adult hepatocytes for use in drug metabolism and toxicity studies.

1. Human hepatocytes were cryopreserved for up to 14 days at -80 degrees C and the cryoprotection offered by different media investigated in terms of post-thaw cell viability and function. 2. Optimal cryoprotection was offered by a solution containing dimethylsulphoxide, propylene glycol, acetamide and polyethylene glycol 8000 in Leibowitz L15 medium. 3. The cytochrome P450 content and activities of the microsomal P450 dependent mixed function oxidase system were well maintained at above 70% of fresh cell values throughout the cryopreservation period. However, the activities of the cytosolic enzymes studied, glutathione S-transferase and glutathione reductase, were not well maintained; they declined to < 40% of fresh cell values after storage of cells for 14 days at -80 degrees C. The membrane environment may protect microsomal enzymes from denaturation by freeze-thaw damage. 4. After cryopreservation, viability of human hepatocytes was higher than that of rat hepatocytes preserved under identical conditions. For human cells maximum post-cryopreservation viability was 67% after 24 h at -80 degrees C; this declined to 49% after 14 days storage at -80 degrees C. In addition post-cryopreservation human hepatocytes remained > 70% viable when incubated at 37 degrees C in suspension compared with only 46% of rat hepatocytes. This indicates that human hepatocytes can withstand freeze-thaw damage better than those from rat. 5. The results of this study define optimal conditions for cryopreserving human hepatocytes. Although microsomal enzyme activities are retained post-cryopreservation, the decrease in viability of thawed cells upon incubation at 37 degrees C suggests that caution should be exercized when using cryopreserved cells to study integrated drug metabolizing pathways in man in vitro.

The haemodynamic effects of GR 32191, a thromboxane A2 receptor antagonist, in patients with renal artery stenosis and hypertension.

This study was designed to determine if GR 32191 a thromboxane A2 receptor antagonist, would lower blood pressure in patients with hypertension and renal artery stenosis. Eight patients with unilateral atheromatous renal artery stenosis and hypertension were studied in a double-blind, single dose, placebo controlled, crossover study. The results show that, GR 32191, given orally, in doses of 20 mg and 40 mg, does not reduce the blood pressure to any clinically important degree.

Accelerated hypertension--patterns of mortality and clinical factors affecting outcome in treated patients.

We evaluated the outcome of patients presenting with accelerated hypertension, as part of an audit of the Aberdeen Hypertension Clinic database. Of 3928 patients (2005 male, 1923 female) referred for assessment of hypertension, 128 (77 male, 51 female) presented with accelerated hypertension. The main outcome measures were systolic and diastolic pressure, length of time from referral to death or censor date, and cause of death. Accelerated hypertensives had a higher death rate than other hypertensives. Using life-table analysis, age and serum creatinine at referral were sufficient to predict survival. Almost 50% (15/31) of the deceased accelerated hypertensives died of acute myocardial infarction. Mean survival after referral was estimated as 18 years for accelerated hypertensives (mean referral age 52 years) and 21 years for other hypertensives (mean referral age 48 years). Blood pressure fell most during the first year of treatment, and declined steadily thereafter. Systolic blood pressure fell by a mean of 50 mmHg and diastolic pressure by 30 mmHg in the first year, and at about 2 (diastolic) and 1 (systolic) mmHg/year for the next 10 years. Thus although the prognosis for accelerated hypertensives is not quite as good as for other hypertensives, with suitable care they can survive for a considerable period.