R. Giovannetti

Microalbuminuria and renal haemodynamics in essential hypertension

The present study was designed to evaluate the renal haemodynamic pattern of never‐treated microalbuminuric and normoalbuminuric patients with essential hypertension. A total of 19 never‐treated essential hypertensive patients with microalbuminuria were selected and, as control subjects, 24 never‐treated essential hypertensive patients without microalbuminuria (determined on three 24‐h urine collections) were recruited. In the two groups, we compared blood pressure values, standing plasma noradrenaline, plasma renin activity, plasma aldosterone, urinary aldosterone, lipid profile, serum glucose and uric acid, glomerular filtration rate and renal plasma flow. In comparison with normoalbuminuric patients, microalbuminuric patients showed significantly higher systolic blood pressure values (P < 0.05), higher renal vascular resistances (P < 0.05) and lower plasma renin activity values (P < 0.01). Urinary albumin excretion showed a significant positive correlation with systolic (r = 0.46, P < 0.005) and mean blood pressure (r = 0.38, P < 0.05), serum uric acid (r = 0.43, P < 0.005) and triglyceride values (r = 0.36, P < 0.005), and a significant negative correlation with plasma renin activity (r =  − 0.34, P < 0.05). The present data are consistent with the occurrence of renal vasoconstriction in microalbuminuric never‐treated essential hypertensive patients.

Indirect evidence for vascular uptake of circulating renin in hypertensive patients.

To evaluate whether, in the forearm of hypertensive patients with different circulating renin profiles, local beta-adrenergic receptor-induced production of active renin, plasma renin activity, angiotensin I (Ang I), and angiotensin II (Ang II) was or was not related to the renin profile, we studied four groups of patients: 1) hypertensive patients with primary aldosteronism and suppressed circulating plasma renin activity values (0.15 +/- 0.1 ng Ang I/mL per hour; n = 7), 2) essential hypertensive patients with low (0.47 +/- 0.1 ng Ang I/mL per hour; n = 8) circulating plasma renin activity values, 3) essential hypertensive patients with normal (2.48 +/- 0.52 ng Ang I/mL per hour; n = 8) circulating plasma renin activity value, and 4) renovascular hypertensive patients with high circulating plasma renin activity values (4.16 +/- 2.1 ng Ang I/mL per hour; n = 10). Isoproterenol was infused into the brachial artery, and active renin, plasma renin activity, and Ang I and Ang II forearm balance (venous-arterial differences corrected for forearm blood flow by strain-gauge plethysmography) were measured. Despite a comparable vasodilation, beta-adrenergic stimulation failed to release active renin, plasma renin activity, and Ang I and Ang II in primary aldosteronism. It slightly increased them (except for Ang I) in low renin patients but determined a local production in normal renin and renovascular hypertensive patients. The individual increments in plasma renin activity and Ang II release induced by isoproterenol showed a correlation with the renin profile.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Combination of lisinopril and nifedipine GITS Increases Blood Pressure Control Compared with Single Drugs in Essential Hypertensive Patients

The present study was designed to evaluate the effect of combination therapy using the angiotensin-converting enzyme-inhibitor lisinopril and the dihydropyridine calcium antagonist nifedipine GITS on the degree and homogeneity of 24-hour blood pressure reduction in essential hypertensive patients. After a 4-week placebo run-in period, 51 patients (mean age, 54.4 ± 9.4 years) with essential hypertension and clinic diastolic blood pressure between 105 and 115 mm Hg were randomized to 4-week treatment with lisinopril (20 mg), nifedipine GITS (30 mg), or their combination according to a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, crossover study. Trough clinic blood pressure and 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure were measured at the end of the run-in period and after 4 weeks of treatment. In addition to clinic and 24-hour average blood pressure reduction, the trough-to-peak ratio and the smoothness index, a new measure for the homogeneity of blood pressure reduction, were also calculated. Although both lisinopril and nifedipine GITS produced a significant reduction in clinic and 24-hour average blood pressure values, the reduction obtained with the combination was significantly (P < 0.001) greater. Moreover, the combination therapy increased (P < 0.01) the smoothness index as compared with each single drug for both systolic (lisinopril, 1.02; nifedipine GITS, 1.1; combination, 1.76) and diastolic (lisinopril, 0.98; nifedipine GITS, 0.87; combination, 1.54) blood pressure values, whereas trough-to-peak ratio values (expressed as median) for systolic (lisinopril, 0.41; nifedipine GITS, 0.52; combination, 0.55) and diastolic (lisinopril, 0.35; nifedipine GITS, 0.40; combination, 0.49) blood pressure values were not significantly increased by the combination therapy. Thus, antihypertensive treatment with the combination of lisinopril and nifedipine GITS is more effective and balanced over the 24 hours than the combination components administered alone, confirming that the smoothness index is superior to the trough-to-peak ratio in assessing homogeneity of pharmacologic blood pressure reduction.

Lack of effect of percutaneous transluminal renal angioplasty on nocturnal hypotension in renovascular hypertensive patients

Objective To investigate whether nocturnal blood pressure fall is blunted in renovascular hypertension and can therefore be used as a diagnostic criterion for this condition. Methods In 14 renovascular hypertensive patients (age 43.8±2.1 years, mean±SEM, clinic blood pressure 173.6±3.7mmHg systolic and 109.0±2.0mmHg diastolic) and in 14 age- and blood pressure-matched essential hypertensive controls 24 h ambulatory blood pressure was measured after washout from drug treatment, during angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor treatment and, in renovascular hypertension, also after percutaneous transluminal renal angioplasty. Results The 24 h average systolic and diastolic blood pressures were 146.4±5.7 and 97.5±3.6mmHg in renovascular and 144.3±1.2 and 98.0±2.2mmHg in essential hypertensive patients. The angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor treatment reduced 24 h average systolic and diastolic blood pressures by 8.5% and 9.7% in the renovascular and by 8.3% and 10.8% in the essential hypertensive group. Greater systolic and diastolic blood pressure reductions (-18.2% and −18.1%) were observed in renovascular hypertensive patients after percutaneous transluminal renal angioplasty. Blood pressure fell by about 10% during the night and the fall was similar in renovascular and in essential hypertensive patients. In the former group, nocturnal hypotension was similar after washout, during angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor treatment and after percutaneous transluminal renal angioplasty. Similar results were obtained for nocturnal bradycardla. Conclusions Nocturnal blood pressure fall is equally manifest in renovascular and essential hypertension. The removal of the renal artery stenosis and blood pressure normalization do not enhance this phenomenon. Nocturnal hypotension seems therefore to be unaffected by renovascular hypertension.

Nifedipine Interactions in Hypertensive Patients

SummaryNifedipine interactions in hypertensive patients have been evaluated, taking into account both the possibility that the inhibition of prostaglandin (PG) synthesis induced by non-steroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) can reduce the antihypertensive effect of nifedipine and the interactions of nifedipine with other antihypertensive drugs. While the inhibition of systemic and renal PG synthesis induced by indomethacin reduces the hypertensive effect of many drugs, it does not change the antihypertensive effect of nifedipine.The combination of two antihypertensive drugs with different mechanisms of action is often needed in the treatment of hypertensives, since it is well known that monotherapy is able to normalize BP in no more than 50% of mild to moderate hypertensives, and the rationale to combine two antihypertensive agents is based on the knowledge that their combination exerts an additive antihypertensive effect when compared with single-drug treatment. While it is well established that nifedipine can be usefully combined with beta blockers. ACE inhibitors, and clonidine, it is still controversial whether the combination of nifedipine with a thiazide diuretic exerts an additional antihypertensive effect.We have previously shown that the acute hypotensive effect of nifedipine in patients with chronic renal failure is greater during sodium repletion than during sodium depletion, and that chlorthalidone, compared with placebo, does not increase the hypotensive effect of nifedipine in essential hypertensives. To evaluate further whether the combination of nifedipine with chlorthalidone exerts an additive antihypertensive effect, 66 uncomplicated essential hypertensives (36 males, age range 33–68 years), whose diastolic BP was >100 and<115 mmHg at the end of 1 month washout placebo period, received, according to a randomized double-blind cross-over design, nifedipine (20 mg bid), chlorthalidone (25 mg od), both drugs combined at the same dosage, and the corresponding placebo, each treatment being given for 1 month. When compared with placebo, the three active treatmonth. When compared with placebo, the three active treatments significantly reduced blood pressure; however, BP values during nifedipine therapy and nifedipine plus chlorthalidone were similarly reduced and were significantly lower than those during chlorthalidone alone. Taken together these findings indicate that the combination of nifedipine with a thiazide diuretic does not exert any additive antihypertensive effect when compared with nifedipine alone. Finally, using a similar Latin square design, we observed that the combination of nifedipine with ketanserin does not exert any additive antihypertensive effect when compared with nifedipine alone.

What Effect Does Blood Pressure Control Have on the Progression Toward Renal Failure

Since hypertension is associated with nephrosclerosis and an increased progression toward end-stage renal failure, the therapeutic approach to the treatment of hypertension should aim to protect the kidney against damage or to halt the progression toward end-stage renal failure. It appears that compared with systolic and mean blood pressure, the level of diastolic blood pressure is particularly associated with renal damage. In the presence of kidney failure the choice of antihypertensive drug should be made according to pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties. From the pharmacokinetic point of view, drugs that are eliminated via the biliary route are preferable since no dosage adjustment is required, and those with a favorable trough to peak effect can achieve better blood pressure control by reducing blood pressure variability. Pharmacodynamic properties should include efficacy in lowering blood pressure, beneficial renal effects, and good tolerability. Hence, the dihydropyridine calcium antagonists, which are effective during volume repletion and which counteract vasoconstrictor mechanisms, seem to be particularly effective. There is some suggestion, but no definitive proof, that blood pressure should be lowered well below 140/90 mm Hg; to achieve this, combination therapy frequently must be used. The rationale for combining two or more antihypertensive drugs is based on the knowledge that this combination can exert an additive antihypertensive action while reducing side effects. The combination of an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor with a dihydropyridine calcium antagonist may well fulfill these criteria since this combination could enhance both antihypertensive and renal hemodynamic effects in comparison to single-drug treatment and could reduce the side effects of both drugs.

K-Rich/Na-Poor Salt Reduces Blood Pressure in Hospitalized Patients

It is still controversial whether the reduction of Na as well as the increase of K intake in hypertensive patients can reduce blood pressure (1,2,3,4), and the mechanisms which account for blood pressure decrease following a low Na intake are still debated. Aim of the study was to assess the efficacy of a K-rich/Na-poor salt (NaCl 50%, KCl 25%, K3C6H5O6 15%) in lowering blood pressure levels.