Reversal of pathophysiologic changes with long-term lisinopril treatment in isolated systolic hypertension.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate in a prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled study the effect of long-term (2-year) lisinopril treatment on cardiovascular end-organ damage in patients with previously untreated isolated systolic hypertension (ISH). All patients with ISH were derived from a population screening program. End-organ damage measurements, done initially and after 6 and 24 months of treatment, included measurements of aortic distensibility and echocardiographic left ventricular mass index (LVMI) and diastolic function. Blood pressure was measured by office and ambulatory measurements. Of the 97 subjects with ISH selected from the screening, 62 (30 lisinopril) completed the study according to protocol. Office blood pressure decreased in both groups, but ambulatory results significantly decreased with lisinopril-treatment only. Aortic distensibility increased significantly with lisinopril, as opposed to a decrease in placebo-treated subjects. The main effect of increased distensibility occurred between 6 and 24 months, whereas ambulatory blood pressure changed mainly in the first 6 months of treatment. LVMI decreased in both treatment groups, with a significantly higher reduction in lisinopril-treated subjects. Left ventricular diastolic function showed no significant changes in either group. The vascular pathophysiologic alterations of ISH-a decreased aortic distensibility-can be improved with long-term lisinopril treatment, whereas values deteriorate further in placebo-treated subjects. These results, in one of the first studies including subjects with previously untreated ISH only, indicate that lisinopril treatment might favorably influence the cardiovascular risk of ISH.

Long-term effects of amlodipine and lisinopril on left ventricular mass and diastolic function in elderly, previously untreated hypertensive patients: the ELVERA trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of a calcium antagonist (amlodipine) and an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (lisinopril) on left ventricular mass and diastolic function in elderly, previously untreated hypertensives. DESIGN: A double-blind randomized parallel group trial. Effects of amlodipine and lisinopril on left ventricular mass and diastolic function (E/A Ratio) (The ELVERA trial). SETTING: Rural northern Netherlands: population screening new diagnosed hypertensive subjects. PATIENTS: The study population comprised 166 newly diagnosed hypertensive (aged 60-75) with diastolic blood pressure between 95-115 mmHg and/or systolic blood pressure between 160-220 mmHg. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly allocated to receive 5-10 mg amlodipine or 10-20 mg lisinopril for 2 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prior and after 1 and 2 years of treatment left ventricular mass, indexed by body surface (LVMI) was estimated by 2-D mode echocardiography according to Devereux with use of Penn convention. Early to atrial filling ratio (E/A) was assessed by transmitral flow. Change from baseline of LVMI and E/A ratio was evaluated by repeated measurement analysis of the treatment effect in an intention-to-treat analysis. RESULTS: Both amlodipine and lisinopril led to equivalent reduction in systolic and diastolic blood pressure. At the end of the study the amlodipine group led to LVMI decrease by 21.8 g/m < or = [95% confidence interval (CI), 18.3-25.3] and E/A ratio increased by 0.08 (95% CI, 0.05-0.11). In the lisinopril group LVMI decreased by 22.4 g/m < or = (95%, CI, 19.0-25.8) and E/A ratio increased by 0.07 (95% CI, 0.04-0.10). No statistically significant differences were found in changes in LVMI and E/A ratio between amlodipine and lisinopril. CONCLUSION: A long-term study, the ELVERA trial proves that amlodipine and lisinopril reduce left ventricular mass and improve diastolic function to a similar extent in elderly newly diagnosed hypertensive patients.

Two-year follow-up study to evaluate the reduction of left ventricular mass and diastolic function in mild to moderate diastolic hypertensive patients.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of two antihypertensive agents, amlodipine and lisinopril, on left ventricular mass and diastolic filling in patients from primary care centers with mild to moderate diastolic hypertension. STUDY DESIGN: A second-year, open follow-up of a prospective, double-blind, randomized, parallel group, comparative study. METHODS: Male and female patients between 25 and 75 years-of-age with elevated diastolic blood pressure (four measurements > or = 95 mmHg from multiple measurements taken on three occasions and average diastolic blood pressure < 115 mmHg) were recruited from a population survey. After 4 weeks' placebo run-in, 71 patients were included of whom 60 finished the first study year and 51 finished the second study year. Patients were randomly assigned to receive doses of 5-10 mg amlodipine or 10-20 mg lisinopril, which were titrated on the basis of the effects on blood pressure. Primary endpoints were left ventricular mass index (LVMI) and early to atrial peak filling velocity. Office and ambulatory blood pressure were considered secondary endpoints. RESULTS: The decrease in blood pressure was equal for both treatment regimens in the first year. A statistically significant (P< 0.001) decrease in LVMI in both treatment groups was observed in the first year [-11.0 g/m2 (95% Cl -6.0 to -16.1) in the amlodipine group and -12.6 g/m2 (95% Cl -8.2 to -17.0) in the lisinopril group]. Early to atrial peak filling velocity did not change significantly within the treatment groups in the first year [+0.07 (95% CI -0.01 to +0.15) in the amlodipine group and +0.01 (95%9 Cl -0.06 to +0.08) in the lisinopril group. Blood pressure, LVMI and early to atrial peak filling velocity did not change in the second year of treatment. No significant differences in primary and secondary endpoints between treatment groups were found in the first or second year. CONCLUSION: The effects of amlodipine and lisinopril on left ventricular mass and early to atrial filling peak velocity after 2 years of treatment were similar and these effects were already observed after 1 year of treatment. Additional studies of longer duration (> or = 4 years) and with a larger sample size are recommended.

Effects of amlodipine and lisinopril on left ventricular mass and diastolic function in previously untreated patients with mild to moderate diastolic hypertension.

The aim of the study was to compare the effects of two long-acting antihypertensive agents, the calcium-antagonist amlodipine and the ACE inhibitor lisinopril, on left ventricular mass and diastolic filling in patients with mild to moderate diastolic hypertension from primary care centres. It is a 1-year prospective, double-blind, randomized, parallel group, comparative study. Patients between 25 and 75 years of age with untreated hypertension with elevated diastolic blood pressure (> or = 95 mmHg) on three occasions (twice on the first visit and once only on the second and third visits) were recruited from a population survey. After 4 weeks placebo run-in 71 patients were randomized to dosages of amlodipine 5-10 mg or lisinopril 10-20 mg, which were titrated on the basis of the effects on blood pressure. Fifty-nine patients completed the study period. Primary endpoints were left ventricular mass index and early to atrial peak filling velocity. Office and ambulatory blood pressure and other echocardiographic measurements were considered secondary. Decrease in blood pressure was equal for both treatment regimens. A statistically significant decrease in left ventricular mass index in both treatment groups was observed: -11.0 g/m2 (95% CI: -6.0, -16.1) in the amlodipine group and -12.6 g/m2 (95% CI: -8.2, -17.0) in the lisinopril group. The higher the baseline value of left ventricular mass before treatment, the more the decrease after treatment. Early to atrial peak filling velocity did not change significantly within the treatment groups: +0.07 (95% CI: -0.01, +0.15) in the amlodipine group and +0.01 (95% CI: -0.06, +0.08) in the lisinopril group. However, analysis of time measurements of the early peak showed significant changes for both treatment groups. No significant differences in primary and secondary endpoints between treatment groups were found. Twelve patients did not complete the study, seven in amlodipine and five in lisinopril, basically due to adverse events. The effects of amlodipine and lisinopril on left ventricular mass and early to atrial filling peak velocity after 1 year of treatment in patients with previously untreated mild to moderate hypertension are similar. Further studies are recommended, particularly with a larger sample size and a follow-up of longer duration.

Effect of quinapril and triamterene/hydrochlorothiazide on cardiac and vascular end-organ damage in isolated systolic hypertension.

We compared, in a prospective double-blind randomized study, the effect of the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor quinapril (QUI) with that of triamterene/hydrochlorothiazide (THCT) treatment on cardiovascular end-organ damage in subjects with untreated isolated systolic hypertension (ISH). End-organ damage measurements, performed initially and after 6 and 26 weeks of treatment, included echocardiographic determination of left ventricular mass index (LVMI) and of diastolic function and measurement of aortic distensibility and peripheral vascular resistance. Blood pressure was significantly reduced in the 44 subjects (21 QUI, 23 THCT) completing the study. Both LVMI and aortic distensibility had changed at 6 weeks, with comparable improvements in both groups. LV diastolic function showed overall no significant changes, although patterns of early filling did differ between the two drug groups. Peripheral vascular resistance appeared to increase between 6 and 26 weeks in THCT subjects only, along with a decreased aortic distensibility. Blood pressure and LV mass were rapidly and markedly reduced in both treatment groups of ISH subjects, paralleled by an improvement of aortic distensibility. In interpreting these results, the pathophysiologic alterations in ISH need to be taken into account, because these differ strongly from those in diastolic hypertension. Results of LV diastolic function and peripheral vascular resistance were less clear but appear to show less favorable changes in the THCT subjects treatment group.

Asylum applications in the European Union: patterns and trends and the effects of policy measures.

"Statistics on asylum applications have been used in a highly selective way in the debates on refugees and asylum policies in Western Europe, to justify restrictive measures. This paper provides a more systematic analysis of these statistics. It focuses on the pattern of origins and destinations for asylum seekers in the European Union in the period 1985-1994.... When the patterns of origin and destinations are compared for separate years, it becomes clear that the destinations of asylum movements have been constantly changing. Though some of the more remarkable shifts were clearly related to policy measures in the relevant countries, many measures produced only limited effects or failed to have any effect at all."

High prevalence of concentric remodeling in elderly individuals with isolated systolic hypertension from a population survey.

Echocardiographic determination of left ventricular mass index (LVMI) is shown to be valuable in the assessment of cardiovascular risk. Determination of left ventricular geometry, including concentric remodeling, provides additional prognostic information. In isolated systolic hypertension (ISH), the few echocardiographic studies available show an increased LVMI, but criteria and patient populations differ. No comparison with diastolic hypertension (DH) has been made, nor has left ventricular geometry (with concentric remodeling) been evaluated. We compared both LVMI and left ventricular geometry of newly diagnosed ISH subjects with normotensive and DH subjects, all previously untreated and from the same population. The echocardiographic LVMI of 97 previously untreated ISH subjects (4 x systolic pressure > or = 160 mm Hg, diastolic pressure < 95 mm Hg) was clearly elevated compared with values in age- and sex-matched normotensive subjects (98 and 71 g/m2, respectively; P < .001). The geometric pattern was abnormal in most ISH subjects, with a high prevalence (43%) of concentric remodeling. Both LVMI and left ventricular geometry of ISH subjects did not differ significantly from values in DH subjects (LVMI, 92 g/m2; concentric remodeling, 56%). Sex differences in LV geometry in ISH were present only with the Framingham criteria, not with the Koren criteria. This study shows a high prevalence of concentric remodeling in elderly individuals with previously untreated ISH. The increase of LVMI and abnormality in left ventricular geometry are comparable with those in DH subjects, further defining the place of ISH as a cardiovascular risk factor in the elderly. Whether there are sex differences in cardiac adaptation in ISH and whether the geometric classification can be used to adjust treatment remain to be investigated.

Predictive value of ambulatory blood pressure shortly after withdrawal of antihypertensive drugs in primary care patients.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether ambulatory blood pressure eight weeks after withdrawal of antihypertensive medication is a more sensitive measure than seated blood pressure to predict blood pressure in the long term. DESIGN: Patients with previously untreated diastolic hypertension were treated with antihypertensive drugs for one year; these were withdrawn in patients with well controlled blood pressure, who were then followed for one year. SETTING: Primary care. SUBJECTS: 29 patients fulfilling the criteria for withdrawal of antihypertensive drugs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value of seated and ambulatory blood pressure eight weeks after withdrawal of antihypertensive drugs. RESULTS: Eight weeks after withdrawal of medication, mean diastolic blood pressure returned to the pretreatment level on ambulatory measurements but not on seated measurements. One year after withdrawal of medication, mean diastolic blood pressure had returned to the pretreatment level both for seated and ambulatory blood pressure. For ambulatory blood pressure, the sensitivity and the positive predictive value eight weeks after withdrawal of medication were superior to those for seated blood pressure; specificity and negative predictive value were comparable for both types of measurement. Receiver operating characteristic curves showed that the results were not dependent on the cut off values that were used. CONCLUSION: Ambulatory blood pressure eight weeks after withdrawal of antihypertensive drugs predicts long term blood pressure better than measurements made when the patient is seated.

Comparative effects of diltiazem and lisinopril on left ventricular structure and filling in mild-to-moderate hypertension.

The comparative effects on echocardiographically determined left ventricular (LV) mass and pulsed Doppler derived indexes of LV diastolic filling were studied in previously untreated hypertensive patients after 6 months of treatment with diltiazem 300 mg once daily (o.d.) (n = 16), and lisinopril 20 mg o.d. (n = 20). LV mass index decreased in the lisinopril group (from 98 to 96 g/m2; mean difference after 6 months of treatment with diltiazem-lisinopril was 13.7 g/m2 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.8 to 26.6, p < 0.05]. In both groups diastolic filling parameters improved, but there was no statistically significant difference between the groups. Both treatment regimens showed a similar decrease in office and maximal exercise systolic blood pressure (SPB). Ambulatory daytime BP was lower after lisinopril treatment (from 147/96 to 126/83 mm Hg) than after diltiazem treatment (from 142/93 to 135/87 mm Hg); mean difference between diltiazem and lisinopril after 6 months of treatment was 9.7 (95% CI 3.4 to 16.0, p < 0.05)/9.4 (95% CI 2.5 to 16.3, p < 0.05) mm Hg. Nighttime BP decreased from 129/81 to 113/70 mm Hg in the lisinopril group, but not in the diltiazem group (from 125/79 to 122/77 mm Hg); mean difference between diltiazem and lisinopril after 6 months of treatment was 4.4 (95% CI - 0.2 to 8.9)/6.6 (95% CI 1.1 to 12.0) mm Hg. Changes in diastolic filling parameters were significantly correlated with changes in LV mass index in the lisinopril group, suggesting that the improvements in diastolic filling in the diltazem group may be partly due to an effect on factors other than LV mass.

Characterization of hypertensive subjects who become normotensive during three months of office BP follow-up: comparison with subjects with sustained hypertension and normotensives, and follow-up after two years.

After an observation period of three months, 83% of new hypertensives (n = 84), identified in a population survey, became normotensive. Those with sustained hypertension (n = 14) were compared with 14 initially hypertensives who became normotensive and 14 normotensives, matched for age and sex, using ambulatory and exercise BP and echocardiography (both M-mode and Doppler). The initially hypertensive group (n = 11) was re-examined after two years follow-up. The 24h mean ambulatory and submaximal systolic exercise BP did not differ between sustained (139/92 and 210 mmHg) and initially hypertensives (143/95 and 217 mmHg), being significantly lower in the normotensive group (129/85 and 198 mmHg). Left ventricular mass did not differ between the initially hypertensive and the normotensive groups, being significantly higher in the sustained hypertensives. In both hypertensive groups, as compared with normotensives, the ratio between flow velocity in early and late diastole (E/A ratio) tended to be lower and the early diastolic deceleration time (DT) was significantly shorter. After two years, in the untreated initially hypertensives, office DBP had increased to hypertensive values, without change in ambulatory BP, left ventricular mass or early diastolic deceleration time. The E/A ratio had decreased to a level < 1. We conclude that the subjects who became normotensive after three months office BP follow-up have a BP load and signs of compromised left ventricular diastolic function similar to that of the sustained hypertensives, but without increased left ventricular mass.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Captopril compared to atenolol in mild to moderate hypertension in a randomized double-blind controlled trial.

After screening a local population in the northern part of The Netherlands for hypertension, 125 patients (116 of whom had not previously used antihypertensive drugs) with a five times elevated diastolic pressure (DP) of between 95 and 130 mmHg were randomized and treated daily either with atenolol 50 mg o.d. (n = 62) or with captopril 25 mg b.i.d. (n = 63) for 2 months under double-blind conditions. During this period the DP fell by 9 mm under atenolol (from 107 +/- 8 to 98 +/- 8) and by 8 mm under captopril (from 107 +/- 7 to 99 +/- 9). The number of responders with a DP = less than 90 mmHg was 21% and 20%, respectively. After 2 months the double-blind period was ended and the patients were submitted to a medication protocol for another 4 months in which an increased dose and additional nifedipine were given to non-responders. The response rate rose to 76% (atenolol/nifedipine combination) and to 60% (captopril/nifedipine combination) - NS. It is concluded that low doses of atenolol and captopril are equally effective in lowering blood pressure in uncomplicated mild to moderate hypertension.

Groningen Hypertension Service: ten years experience in detecting and treating hypertension in a population of 23,340 persons in rural and urban districts in Holland with a special hypertension service.

The Groningen Hypertension Service (GHS) has demonstrated that provision of training for volunteers, technical assistance and the services of the General Practitioner Laboratory (a private foundation offering laboratory and diagnostic facilities) have enabled large rural and urban districts to be screened for hypertension within a short period of time at low cost. The GHS trained volunteers and paramedics, who assisted with the treatment for six months. The General Practitioner Laboratory evaluated treatment in nearly 600 hypertensive patients, leading to the institution of low-dose therapy and careful investigation of side-effects.

Quality of life on antihypertensive therapy: a randomized double-blind controlled trial of captopril and atenolol.

A randomized double-blind study lasting 2 months was performed with either 25 mg captopril twice a day or 50 mg atenolol once a day in 125 patients with established diastolic hypertension (diastolic blood pressure greater than 95 mmHg) identified during a population screening programme of subjects aged less than 65 years. Quality of life was assessed from self-completed questionnaires. A significant fall in diastolic blood pressure occurred with both captopril (106.7 +/- 7.0 to 98.6 +/- 8.6 mmHg) and atenolol (107.4 +/- 7.5 to 98.2 +/- 8.1 mmHg) but there was no difference between the two drugs in the size of the fall. A measure of the number of symptomatic complaints, the symptom complaint rate, decreased with both drugs, by 1.3% for captopril and 3.1% for atenolol, but the difference between the drugs was not significant [1.8%; 95% confidence interval (Cl) - 1.3%, 4.9%]. There was a significant increase in the reporting of cough and runny nose in those on captopril compared with atenolol. A health index increased by 1.1% with captopril in comparison with no change on atenolol (difference 1.1%; 95% Cl - 2.0%, 4.2%). Psychological well-being was measured using the Symptom Rating Test. The improvement in total score was 1.4% with captopril and 2.3% with atenolol. The difference of 0.9% was not statistically significant (95% Cl - 1.2%, 3.0%).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)