Luigi Corea

Valsartan, a new angiotensin II antagonist for the treatment of essential hypertension: A comparative study of the efficacy and safety against amlodipine

To compare the antihypertensive efficacy of a new angiotensin II antagonist, valsartan, with a reference therapy, amlodipine.

C-reactive protein as a marker for cardiac ischemic events in the year after a first, uncomplicated myocardial infarction

The prognostic role of C-reactive protein levels in patients with a first acute myocardial infarction, an uncomplicated in-hospital course, and the absence of residual ischemia on a predischarge ergometer test and with an echocardiographic ejection fraction > or = 50% has not been described. C-reactive protein was determined during hospitalization in 64 patients (55 men, mean age 64.6 +/- 10.4 years). The patients were followed up for 13 +/- 4 months and the following cardiac events were recorded: cardiac death, new-onset angina pectoris, and recurrent myocardial infarction. Patients who developed cardiac events during the follow-up period had significantly higher C-reactive protein values than patients without events (3.61 +/- 2.83 vs 1.48 +/- 2.07 mg/dl, p <0.001). The probability of cumulative end points was: 6%, 12%, 31%, and 56% (p = 0.006; RR 3.55; confidence interval 1.56 to 8.04), respectively, in patients stratified by quartiles of C-reactive protein (< 0.45, 0.45 to 0.93, 0.93 to 2.55 and > 2.55 mg/dl). In the Cox regression model, only increased C-reactive protein levels were independently related to the incidence of subsequent cardiac events (chi-square 9.8, p = 0.001). Thus, increased C-reactive protein levels are associated with a worse outcome among patients with a first acute myocardial infarction, an uncomplicated in-hospital course without residual ischemia on the ergometer test, and with normal left ventricular function.

Antihypertensive and humoral effects of verapamil and nifedipine in essential hypertension.

The aim of this study was to investigate and compare the effects of two calcium antagonist drugs, verapamil (VER) and nifedipine (NIF), on blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR), plasma catecholamines (pCA), renin (PRA), plasma aldosterone (pALD), and plasma volume (PV) in a group of patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension. In 12 hypertensive patients on a fixed normal sodium and potassium intake, VER (80 mg t.i.d., per os) first and then NIF (10 mg, t.i.d. per os), or vice versa according to a random sequence, were each given for 8 days, with an interval of 5 days between the two treatments. Both NIF and VER significantly reduced BP (p less than 0.001); this reduction was quantitatively similar in both treatment schedules. Supine and standing PRA, pALD, and PV were not significantly affected by VER or NIF. HR and pCA were unchanged after VER, whereas they were significantly increased (p less than 0.05, at least) mainly in standing position after NIF treatment. The antihypertensive and metabolic effects of VER (80 mg t.i.d.) and NIF (10 mg t.i.d.) were maintained after chronic treatment (4 months with VER in 10 patients and 2 months with NIF in 12 patients). After 2 months of treatment with VER (160 mg t.i.d.) in 18 patients, BP was further reduced, while pCA were slightly increased. In conclusion, VER and NIF are effective and equipotent antihypertensive agents that do not induce significant renin stimulation or fluid retention; adrenergic stimulation seems to be greater with NIF, which should be taken into account in the clinical use of these drugs.

Usefulness of the severity and extent of wall motion abnormalities as prognostic markers of an adverse outcome after a first myocardial infarction treated with thrombolytic therapy

The prognostic value of wall motion score index (WMSI), assessed at predischarge after a first acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in the thrombolytic era, is still not well known. One-hundred forty-four consecutive patients with a first AMI treated with thrombolytic therapy underwent exercise testing and echocardiography at rest before discharge and were followed-up for a mean period of 18 months. During follow-up, there were 32 cardiac events (12 patients had cardiac deaths, 8 had unstable angina pectoris, 1 had nonfatal reinfarction, and 11 patients had congestive heart failure). The patients who experienced any cardiac event had a higher WMSI (1.67+/-0.15 vs. 1.30+/-0.16, p<0.0001), a higher end-systolic volume (75.1+/-34 vs. 59.5+/-22 ml, p<0.01), and a lower ejection fraction (47+/-16% vs. 55+/-10%, p<0.001) at predischarge than patients without events. The incidence of a positive predischarge exercise testing did not differ between patients with and without cardiac events (22% vs. 24%, p = NS). Multivariate Cox regression analysis, including clinical, exercise results, and echocardiographic parameters, showed that the most powerful predictor of a subsequent event was a resting WMSI > or =1.50 before discharge (chi-square 17.8, p<0.0001). Thus, in patients with a first AMI who underwent thrombolysis, the severity and extent of echocardiographically detected wall motion abnormalities are important independent predictors of cardiac events.

Plasma norepinephrine and left ventricular hypertrophy in systemic hypertension

The relations between some pressure and humoral factors, and some echocardiographic indexes of left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy were studied in 64 patients with essential hypertension. Fifty-seven percent of these patients showed echocardiographic evidence of LV hypertrophy (LV mass greater than 215 g). Multivariate stepwise regression analysis showed that only mean blood pressure (BP) and circulating norepinephrine (NE) levels were significantly related to LV mass index in the group of patients with LV hypertrophy. However, mean BP was the only factor related to LV mass index in the subgroup of patients with LV hypertrophy and plasma NE within the normal laboratory range, whereas NE was the sole factor related to LV mass index in the subgroup with LV hypertrophy and abnormally elevated NE levels (greater than mean + 2 standard deviations of the normal laboratory range). Correlation of LV mass index vs NE was -0.35 (not significant) in the former group of patients and 0.89 (p less than 0.01) in the latter group. NE showed no relation with the echocardiographic variables in the hypertensive patients without LV hypertrophy; in this group, diastolic BP was the only factor related to LV mass index. Circulating NE levels were slightly higher in patients with LV hypertrophy (213 +/- 68 ng/liter) than in those without LV hypertrophy (187 +/- 46 ng/liter), but differences were not significant when adjusting NE for age. Plasma renin activity was not dissimilar in the absence or presence of hypertrophy. In conclusion, our findings suggest that NE might be associated with pressure factors in regulating LV hypertrophy development only in a subgroup of hypertensive patients characterized by echocardiographic LV hypertrophy and abnormally elevated circulating NE levels.

Prognostic value of left ventricular hypertrophy and geometry in patients with a first, uncomplicated myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND The prognostic impact of left ventricular (LV) geometry on cardiovascular risk for patients with a first, uncomplicated acute myocardial infarction (AMI), and echocardiographic ejection fraction > or =50% has not been well described. METHODS AND RESULTS Accordingly, 111 AMI consecutive patients (mean age 59.3+/-10 years) performed echocardiographic examination at predischarge. LV mass was calculated by means of Devereuxs formula and subsequently indexed by body surface area. Fifty-three patients had LV hypertrophy and 58 patients had normal LV mass. The two groups were homogeneous for demographic, clinical and angiographic variables as well as for the incidence of residual ischemia on predischarge stress testing. During follow-up period there were 24 cardiac events (cardiac death, unstable angina and non-fatal reinfarction) in the 53 patients with LV hypertrophy and only four events in the remaining 58 patients without LV hypertrophy (RR=2.45; CI=1.76-3.41; P<0.0001). The patients with concentric LV hypertrophy showed a higher incidence of events (64%) than patients with eccentric LV hypertrophy (32%, P<0. 05) and patients with normal geometry and mass (6%, P<0.0001). Multivariate Cox regression model identified concentric geometry as the most powerful predictor of combined end-points (chi(2)=32.7, P<0. 0001). CONCLUSIONS An increased LV mass and concentric geometry resulted important independent markers of an adverse outcome in patients with a first, uncomplicated myocardial infarction and good LV function.

Similarities and differences in the antihypertensive effect of two calcium antagonist drugs, verapamil and nifedipine

The short- and long-term effects of two calcium channel blocking drugs, verapamil and nifedipine, on blood pressure, heart rate, plasma catecholamines, plasma renin activity, plasma volume and cardiac performance (echocardiography) were studied in essential hypertensive patients and in normal subjects. Verapamil, 160 mg orally, reduced blood pressure within 60 minutes in 22 hypertensive patients, but not in 12 normotensive subjects. Nifedipine, 10 mg sublingually, reduced blood pressure within 15 minutes in 19 hypertensive patients, but not in 7 normotensive subjects. Plasma noradrenaline was significantly increased both in normal subjects and in hypertensive patients only after nifedipine was administered. Verapamil (80 mg three times a day) first, and nifedipine (10 mg three times a day) thereafter, or vice versa, were given to 12 hospitalized hypertensive patients on a fixed sodium and potassium intake; the drugs produced similar blood pressure reductions, but heart rate and plasma catecholamines were increased only after nifedipine (p less than 0.05). Neither drug affected plasma volume, aldosterone or plasma renin activity. Long-term ambulatory treatment with verapamil (80 or 160 mg three times a day for 2 to 4 months) or nifedipine (10 mg three times a day for 2 months) produced changes in all variables that were similar to those observed in the hospital (controlled) study. Shortening fraction was significantly increased after nifedipine (p less than 0.05) but no change was observed after verapamil. In conclusion, blood pressure is effectively reduced by both verapamil and nifedipine; an appreciable adrenergic stimulation may be caused by nifedipine, but usually not by verapamil, and fluid retention, renin release or myocardial depression is not observed during verapamil or nifedipine treatment.

Low-dose dipyridamole infusion acutely increases exercise capacity in angina pectoris: a double-blind, placebo controlled crossover stress echocardiographic study.

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to assess whether endogenous accumulation of adenosine, induced by low-dose dipyridamole infusion, protects from exercise-induced ischemia. BACKGROUND Adenosine is a recognized mediator of ischemic preconditioning in experimental settings. METHODS Ten patients (all men: mean age 63.4 +/- 7.3 years) with chronic stable angina, angiographically assessed coronary artery disease (n = 7) or previous myocardial infarction (n = 3) and exercise-induced ischemia underwent on different days two exercise-stress echo tests after premedication with placebo or dipyridamole (15 mg in 30 min, stopped 5 min before testing) in a double-blind, placebo controlled, randomized crossover design. RESULTS In comparison with placebo, dipyridamole less frequently induced chest pain (20% vs. 100%, p = 0.001) and >0.1 mV ST segment depression (50% vs. 100%, p < 0.05). Wall motion abnormalities during exercise-stress test were less frequent (placebo = 100% vs. dipyridamole = 70%, p = ns) and significantly less severe (wall motion score index at peak stress: placebo = 1.55 +/- 0.17 vs. dipyridamole = 1.27 +/- 0.2, p < 0.01) following dipyridamole, which also determined an increase in exercise time up to echocardiographic positivity (placebo = 385.9 +/- 51.4 vs. dipyridamole = 594.4 +/- 156.9 s, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS Low-dose dipyridamole infusion increases exercise tolerance in chronic stable angina, possibly by endogenous adenosine accumulation acting on high affinity A1 myocardial receptors involved in preconditioning or positively modulating coronary flow through collaterals.

Combined Therapy with Benazepril and Amlodipine in the Treatment of Hypertension Inadequately Controlled by an ACE Inhibitor Alone

In a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, we evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of the combination of benazepril, 10 mg, and amlodipine, 2.5 or 5 mg once daily, compared with benazepril, 10 mg, monotherapy in patients with hypertension inadequately controlled with angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE)-inhibitor monotherapy. After a 2-week placebo and 4-week single-blind benazepril, 10 mg once daily, run-in period, 448 patients, 213 men and 235 women, aged 24-73 years (mean, 55 years), with mean diastolic blood pressure (DBP) > or =95 and < or =120 mm Hg at the end of the benazepril run-in period, were randomized to receive one of the following treatments once daily for 8 weeks: (a) benazepril, 10 mg, plus placebo (BZ10); (b) benazepril, 10 mg, plus amlodipine, 2.5 mg (BZ10/AML2.5); or (c) benazepril, 10 mg, plus amlodipine, 5 mg (BZ10/AML5). Before the patients were admitted to the trial, at the end of the placebo run-in and the benazepril run-in period and at the end of weeks 4 and 8 of the treatment period, sitting and standing blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR), and body weight were measured 22-26 h after the intake of the trial medication. Both BZ10/AML2.5 and BZ10/AML5 combinations showed better antihypertensive activity than did BZ10 monotherapy at the terminal visit as demonstrated by (a) the 24-h postdosing sitting and standing systolic BP (SBP) and DBP values, which were statistically lower with combination therapy than with BZ10; (b) the success rate, which was statistically higher with both the combinations (69.2% in the BZ10/AML2.5 and 65.8% in the BZ10/AML5 group) compared with the BZ10 group (40.5%). The tolerability was good in the three treatment groups. No significant abnormal laboratory data were detected. There was no difference in efficacy and safety/tolerability between the BZ10/AML2.5 and BZ10/AML5 groups.

Noninvasive assessment of chronotropic and inotropic response to preferential beta-1 and beta-2 adrenoceptor stimulation

The relative chronotropic and inotropic activity of preferential β1‐ and β2‐ adrenoceptor Stimulation was investigated in seven healthy male subjects in a randomized within‐subject, single‐blind study. Two doses of β1selective agonist prenalterol (1 mg/hr or 2 mg/hr) and of β2‐selective agonist salbutamol (300 µg/hr or 600 µg/hr) were infused intravenously in four separate sessions, with intervals of at least 48 hr between sessions. At each session cuff blood pressure and heart rate (HR) were measured and some hemodynamic information on the inotropic state were derived by echocardiography. Both prenalterol and salbutamol induced increases in HR, but tachycardia was greater after salbutamol, whereas the positive inotropic response to β‐stimulation was greater after prenalterol. At comparable HR rises (prenalterol, from 66.0 ± 5.5 to 72.2 ± 4 bpm; salbutamol, from 64.6 ± 6 to 70.0 ± 7 bpm), inotropic response seemed to be greater after prenalterol than after salbutamol (systolic blood pressure [SBP]: 133.5 ± 8 and 120.7 ± 8 mm Hg; mean velocity of circumferential fiber shortening [Vcf]: 1.54 ± 0.13 and 1.31 ± 0.12 c/s; ejection fraction [EF]: 72.4% ± 5% and 69.5% ± 4%; stroke index: 47.4 ± 4 and 41.7 ± 3 ml/m2). In presence of a chronotropic effect (HR from 64.6 ± 6 to 70.0 ± 7 bpm), the low salbutamol dose did not induce any changes in the indices of inotropism (SBP: from 119.2 ± 6 to 120.7 ± 8 mm Hg; mean Vcf: from 1.28 ± 0.11 to 1.31 ± 0.12 e/s; EF: from 68.1% ± 5% to 69.5% ± 4%; stroke index: from 40.2 ± 3 to 41.7 ± 3 ml/m2. On prenalterol, HR increases were accompanied by changes in all the indices of inotropism. Results would appear consistent with animal data in suggesting some heterogeneity of cardiac β‐adrenergic receptors. Inotropic response to β‐stimulation would appear to be mediated mostly by β1‐ adrenoceptors, whereas β1‐ and perhaps β2‐ adrenoceptors share a mediating action on chronotropic response to cardiac β‐adrenoceptor stimulation.