PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

L M Prisant

Publications and source records attributed to L M Prisant.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1995

Low-dose drug combination therapy: an alternative first-line approach to hypertension treatment.

To investigate the concept that the initial treatment of hypertension with low doses of two antihypertensives that have different modes of action and additive effects may achieve control of blood pressure and minimize the dose-dependent adverse effects seen with conventional monotherapy, a randomized, double-blind parallel group dose-escalation study was conducted. After a 4 to 5 week placebo washout period, 218 men and women with diastolic blood pressure between 95 and 114 mm Hg were randomly allocated to take: amlodipine (2.5 to 10 mg), enalapril (5 to 20 mg), and the low-dose combination of bisoprolol (2.5 to 10 mg) with 6.25 mg of hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ). All drugs were administered once daily, titrated to optimal response, and taken for a total of 12 weeks. Blood pressure was measured 24 hours after dose. The response rates (either a diastolic blood pressure < or = 90 mm Hg or a decrease of diastolic pressure > or = 10 mm Hg) were 71% for bisoprolol-6.25 mg HCTZ, 69% for amlodipine, and 45% for enalapril. The mean decreases in systolic/diastolic blood pressure from baseline were 13.4/10.7, 12.8/10.2, and 7.3/6.6 mm Hg for bisoprolol-6.25 mg HCTZ, amlodipine, and enalapril, respectively. The mean change with enalapril was less than the other drugs (p < 0.01), although the once-daily dosing of enalapril and the maximum dose of 20 mg might not have been optimal for this agent.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Adult↗
PubMed1995

American National Standard for nonautomated sphygmomanometers. Summary report.

The Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation develops voluntary standards for medical devices so that manufacturers might provide information on their product and basic safety and performance criteria that should be considered in qualifying the instrument for clinical use. American National Standards are generated through a consensus process by committees of experts in research, development, and design from user, industry, and government communities. Draft standards are made available for public review and become American National Standards after review by the American National Standards Institute. This report is a summary of the American National Standard that establishes both the safety and performance requirements of pneumatic and other nonautomated sphygmomanometers (especially mercury gravity and aneroid sphygmomanometers) used in the indirect measurement of blood pressure. This standard was developed by a consensus panel from academia, industry, and government; it updates the previous standard approved by the American National Standards Institute in 1986. This summary report does not cover all of the provisions of the revised 1994 American National Standard, thus users, researchers, and instrument designers should refer to the standard for detailed requirements.

Blood Pressure Determination↗
PubMed1995

Magnetic resonance imaging compared to echocardiography to assess left ventricular mass in the hypertensive patient.

Echocardiography (ECHO) is useful to document changes in left ventricular mass (LVM) in groups of patients, but may be too variable for use in the individual patient. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may be a more precise and reliable method to quantify the mass of the left ventricule. This study reports the accuracy, precision, and reliability of LVM estimates by MRI as compared to data obtained by ECHO in hypertensive patients. Accuracy referred to the comparison of LVM by MRI to anatomical LVM determined by autopsy. Precision was examined using 34 duplicate MRI images and by blindly reading 24 duplicate M-mode strips. Reliability was assessed by MRI in four subjects over 2 months, and by ECHO in 22 hypertensive patients over 2 weeks. Agreement between MRI and ECHO estimates of LVM was determined in the same 17 hypertensive patients using linear regression. MRI LVM estimates were within 17.5 g (95% CI) of the true LVM. The linear agreement between MRI and ECHO estimates of LVM could be described by the equation MRI = 0.61 x ECHO + 49.57 (r = 0.63, P < .01). The precision of LVM by MRI (11 g) was over twice that observed with ECHO (26 g). The reliability of MRI LVM estimates was more consistent (+/- 8 g) than that for ECHO (+/- 49 g). MRI appears to be a more precise and reliable method for measuring LVM, and would be more suitable than ECHO for the clinical evaluation of the individual patient.

Adult↗
PubMed1992

Novel drug-delivery systems for hypertension.

Although novel controlled-release drug-delivery systems have been used in other areas of medicine, their application in the treatment of hypertension has been relatively recent. Biotechnical use of chemical-dispensing systems has been applied to propranolol, clonidine (the transdermal therapeutic system), nifedipine (the gastrointestinal therapeutic system), verapamil (the sodium alginate and spheroidal oral-delivery absorption system), felodipine (the hydrophilic gel principle), metoprolol succinate (the multiple-unit pellet system), and diltiazem (one system comprising sustained-release beads and the other utilizing the patented Geomatrix extended-release system). Oral drug-delivery systems allow antihypertensive agents that previously had to be administered two to four times daily to be administered once each day. Potential disadvantages of the oral controlled-release products include delayed attainment of pharmacodynamic effect, unpredictable or reduced bioavailability, enhanced first-pass hepatic metabolism, dose dumping, sustained toxicity, dosing inflexibility, and increased cost. Potential advantages include reduced dosing frequency, enhanced compliance and convenience, reduced toxicity, stable drug levels, uniform drug effect, and decreased total dose. Although skin reactions are common, the transdermal drug delivery of clonidine provides another innovative approach to supplying transcutaneous, controlled, continuous delivery of drug for 7 days. It is possible that future research will prove that the agents that provide complete 24-hour control may reduce the cardiovascular events associated with the early-morning blood pressure surge. This evolution in antihypertensive therapy to achieve once-daily dosing may prove to be of great value to both physicians and patients in the 1990s.

Administration, Cutaneous↗
PubMed1992

Effectiveness of once-daily monotherapy with a new nifedipine sustained release calcium antagonist.

Data from 2 separate multicenter, double-blind clinical studies following the same protocol, except for the selection of doses, were pooled to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of fixed doses of a new sustained-release (SR) formulation of nifedipine compared with placebo in 388 patients with mild to moderate uncomplicated essential hypertension. After a 3-6 week placebo washout period, the patients were randomized to receive either placebo or nifedipine SR-20 mg (study I only), 50 mg, 100 mg, or 150 mg (study II only). Among the 278 patients who completed 6 weeks of active therapy, mean supine diastolic blood pressure reductions from pretreatment baseline were 5.9, 9.3, 9.2, 11.1, and 13.2 mm Hg in the placebo, 20-, 50-, 100-, and 150-mg groups, respectively. The reductions achieved in each of the nifedipine SR groups were statistically significant versus baseline values (p less than 0.001). All nifedipine-SR doses reduced supine systolic blood pressure significantly more than placebo (p less than 0.001). In addition, there was a significant linear relationship between the log of the dose and the blood pressure reduction (p less than 0.05). Automated ambulatory blood pressure recordings performed in 221 of the patients showed that the blood pressure was lowered evenly through the entire 24-hour dosing period. The doses that were effective and associated with the fewest adverse reactions were 20 mg and 50 mg once daily.

Adult↗
PubMed1992

Morphologic, hemodynamic and coronary perfusion characteristics in severe left ventricular hypertrophy secondary to systemic hypertension and evidence for nonatherosclerotic myocardial ischemia.

Patients with the clinical diagnosis of ischemic heart disease who were found to be free of significant coronary artery atherosclerotic disease (n = 150) underwent coronary vasodilator reserve testing, 2-dimensional echocardiography, and dipyridamole limited-stress thallium testing. After exclusions (predominantly for technically poor coronary artery Doppler signals or suboptimal echocardiography), 100 patients formed the study population. The purpose was to characterize typical cardiac and coronary artery findings in hypertensive patients with severe left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy (n = 15) and to investigate the evidence for myocardial ischemia unrelated to coronary atherosclerosis in early and advanced hypertensive heart disease. Normotensive and hypertensive control groups without LV hypertrophy (n = 12 and 34, respectively) were used for comparison. Severe LV hypertrophy was defined as LV mass index greater than or equal to 50% above established gender specific norms using 2-dimensional-directed M-mode echocardiography and the cube equation corrected to agree with necropsy estimates of mass. Clinical characteristics more often associated with severe LV hypertrophy were black race (67%), diabetes mellitus (33%), proteinuria (47%) and elevated creatinine (1.5 +/- 0.9 mg/dl). Baseline electrocardiograms and dipyridamole limited-stress thallium scans were highly likely to be abnormal (94 and 73%, respectively). Both eccentric and concentric cardiac hypertrophies were found in the severe group. Ejection fraction was significantly lower (0.51 vs 0.68, p = 0.002) and basal coronary flow velocity higher (12.0 vs 5.0 cm/s, p = 0.0004) among these patients when compared with normotensive control patients. Coronary flow reserve did not differ between control groups but was significantly depressed in patients with severe LV hypertrophy (2.5 vs 3.9, p = 0.001).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Adult↗
PubMed1992

Pharmacotherapy of unstable angina.

All patients with unstable angina should be admitted to a coronary or an intensive care unit. There should be an attempt to classify the patient according to the proposed Braunwald nomenclature. If the patient has a secondary cause for unstable angina (e.g., tachyarrhythmia, heart failure, fever, thyrotoxicosis, severe hypertension, hypoxia, unusual emotional stress, or anemia), this condition should be treated initially with therapy specific for that etiology. If the patient does not have a secondary etiology, therapy should be initiated with nitrates, preferably intravenous nitroglycerin. Heparin should be concomitantly administered. If the patient cannot receive heparin, aspirin should be initiated. All patients should receive beta-blockers. If the patient cannot take a beta-blocker, a calcium antagonist (probably diltiazem) should be initiated. However, if the patient is refractory to beta-blockers, the dihydropyridine nifedipine should be added. Failure to all pharmacologic interventions necessitates a progressive invasive approach dictated by the potential surgical risk of the patient. Long-term aspirin and beta-blockers should be strongly considered.

Angina, Unstable↗
PubMed1992

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring for evaluation and management of hypertensives: effect on outcome and cost effectiveness.

Blood pressure monitoring of hypertensives in the ambulatory state by automated portable devices (ABPM) as compared with casual office readings (COBPM) may predict outcome with greater precision and at an overall lower cost. Prospective trials that in random fashion require evaluation and management decisions on the basis of ABPM compared with COBPM are required to determine whether the above is true. End points such as death, stroke, or myocardial infarction occur at a low frequency rate. This would require thousands of patients to be followed 5 or more years to determine if evaluation and management by ABPM compared with COBPM results in a different outcome. A much smaller population can be used if end points are changes in left ventricular mass and left ventricular ischemia, arterial wall stiffness and thickness, endogenous creatinine clearance, renal albumin excretion, antihypertensive drug requirements, and adverse reactions. Until results from such a prospective trial are available, COBPM is the method of choice for evaluation and management of hypertensives. Automated blood pressure measurement can provide useful information in special circumstances and is of value for research purposes.

Ambulatory Care↗
PubMed1992

Variability and similarity of manual office and automated blood pressures.

The evaluation and management of hypertension is based on indirect blood pressures obtained in the office (COBPs) using the mercury sphygmomanometer. The usefulness of COBPs is limited by factors such as observer bias, which confound the ability to discern the true blood pressure value. Automated portable monitors have been marketed, which also measure blood pressure (ABP) indirectly throughout 24 hours, but without human intervention. Acceptance of a new device that indirectly records blood pressure depends largely on its the agreement with the established method of blood pressure measurement. This review compares the variability of blood pressures collected indirectly by standard mercury sphygmomanometer and by an auscultatory automated portable blood pressure monitor. The results indicate that blood pressure, when measured indirectly in a hypertensive patient, is quite variable. Automated blood pressures were lower and demonstrated less within-subject variability during repeated measures than COBPs. The agreement between ABPs and COBPs was better than the agreement between COBPs alone on successive visits. In addition, the mean hourly blood pressure profiles recorded throughout 24 hours by automated and manual methods from ten hypertensive patients were nearly identical. These data suggest that blood pressures measured by auscultatory automated methods are similar to and representative of those obtained manually.

Blood Pressure↗
PubMed1992

Clinical utility of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in target organ complications and equipment choices.

Although population studies have demonstrated a relationship between casual office blood pressures and target organ events, the variability of these blood pressure measurements for individual patients has generated an interest in the role of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring for defining the presence of hypertension and assessing the response to therapy. Noninvasive devices provide fewer data than intra-arterial ambulatory blood pressure monitoring devices, but are safer. No current noninvasive device performs well during ambulation. Rigorous evaluation of these rapid proliferating electronic devices is important, as would be the case with any new antihypertensive agent. Although ambulatory blood pressure measurements correlate better with target organ damage for groups of patients than do casual office measurements, the predictability and limited data on reproducibility for individual patients does not support widespread application for routine testing for hypertensive patients. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring should be viewed as a standard research tool for the evaluation of new cardiovascular drugs.

Ambulatory Care↗
PubMed1992

Congestive heart failure with normal ejection fraction. A different mechanism requiring different therapy.

Clinicians must remain undaunted when history, physical examination, and chest radiography suggest congestive heart failure but left ventricular systolic function is normal. Many of these patients have diastolic dysfunction, and standard therapy for left ventricular systolic dysfunction is often ineffectual or detrimental. Noninvasive testing is subject to many pitfalls but may confirm a clinical suspicion and provide indications to treat or to proceed with invasive testing. In the absence of clinical signs and symptoms of congestive failure, however, abnormal diastolic indexes should not be interpreted as diagnostic of diastolic dysfunction and are not an indication to treat.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗
PubMed1992

A negative thallium (+/- dipyridamole) stress test excludes significant obstructive epicardial coronary artery disease in hypertensive patients.

The operating characteristics of thallium stress testing for detection of significant epicardial coronary artery disease (CAD) in hypertensive subjects with chest pain or electrocardiographic (ECG) ischemia have not been previously defined. This becomes important because of the high prevalence of both hypertensive heart disease and CAD. Ninety-two hypertensives with a history of typical or atypical chest pain or ECG myocardial ischemia underwent coronary arteriography, 2D-guided echocardiography, and thallium-201 stress testing, combined with intravenous dipyridamole if the rate-pressure product was less than 20,000. Patients with myocardial infarction, prior revascularization procedure, valvular heart disease, and chronic ethanol abuse were excluded. The mean age was 54.8 +/- 9.9 years with 55% blacks and 46% women. Eighteen patients (19.6%) had significant (greater than or equal to 50% luminal diameter narrowing) epicardial CAD at catheterization, of whom 17 had positive thallium scans. Overall, there were 17 true positives, 47 true negatives, 27 false positives, and one false negative resulting in 94.4 +/- 5.4% sensitivity (95% confidence limits [95% CL] 71 to 100%), 63.5 +/- 5.6% specificity (95% CL 51 to 74%), 38.6 +/- 7.3% positive predictive value (95% CL 25 to 54%), 97.9 +/- 2.1% negative predictive value (95% CL 88 to 100%), and 69.6 +/- 4.8% overall accuracy (95% CL 59 to 79%). For hypertensive patients with chest pain or ECG myocardial ischemia, the high sensitivity and negative predictive value and low false negative rate support the role of thallium stress testing +/- dipyridamole as an exclusion test for significant CAD.

Adult↗
PubMed1992

Repeatability of automated ambulatory blood pressure measurements.

BACKGROUND: The repeatability of 24-hour automatic ambulatory blood pressure measurements recorded by noninvasive equipment (Del Mar Pressurometer IV) was assessed to determine the intrapatient variability of this test. METHODS: The usual antihypertensive medications of 73 patients with documented essential hypertension (supine diastolic blood pressure of 95 to 119 mm Hg) were withdrawn, and the patients were treated with placebo medication for 6 weeks. At the end of the placebo period, ambulatory blood pressure measurements of each patient were recorded every 15 minutes for 24 hours on two separate occasions 1 week apart. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in either the 24-hour systolic or diastolic blood pressure for the entire group between weeks. A mean difference for individual patients between the first and second recording within 5 mm Hg was observed in 49.3% and 52.1% of patients for 24-hour systolic and diastolic blood pressure, respectively. The correlation coefficient for 24-hour systolic blood pressure was greater than 24-hour diastolic blood pressure (r = .87 vs r = .67). A difference greater than 18.1/14.9 mm Hg for systolic/diastolic blood pressure would be required to assign a significant (P less than .05) change in blood pressure between two recordings in the same patient. CONCLUSIONS: These data quantify the usefulness of 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure measurements for a group of subjects. However, mean 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure varies significantly for individuals. Intrapatient variability may limit the usefulness of a single 24-hour ambulatory recording for an individual patient and suggests the need for more than one measurement to establish a level of blood pressure.

Adult↗
PubMed1992

Doppler echocardiographic assessment of filling and emptying parameters and ambulatory blood pressure measurements in normotensives and hypertensives.

To evaluate the relationship between office and ambulatory BP measurements and filling and emptying parameters, 15 hypertensive and 15 control subjects underwent both 24 hour ambulatory BP monitoring and Doppler echocardiography. No patient received antihypertensive medication for 3-4 weeks, had echocardiographic left ventricular hypertrophy (greater than or equal to 12 mm) or a diastolic BP greater than 100 mm Hg. The time from R wave on the electrocardiogram to onset of ejection was prolonged in hypertensives (P less than 0.05). There were no differences between the hypertensives and normotensives for diastolic filling abnormalities. Finally, neither office nor ambulatory BP correlated with either Doppler filling or emptying parameters.

Adult↗
PubMed1992

Variability of indirect methods used to determine blood pressure. Office vs mean 24-hour automated blood pressures.

Blood pressure is a cardiovascular measurement with dynamic characteristics that can be influenced by a number of internal and external factors. The preferred blood pressure determination method would be one that reduces variability between measurements and that reflects the true blood pressure level. In this article, we present the variability of, and agreement between, the blood pressures collected by two indirect methods on the same patients during a hypertensive research project. Data obtained on patients in a typical clinical setting are also provided. Twenty-four-hour diastolic pressures obtained by the automated method demonstrated no regression to a lower mean, while blood pressures obtained casually in the office exhibited such regression. The 95% confidence interval of repeated measures for casual office blood pressure on a patient in a research setting (35/17 mm Hg) or in typical clinic practice (26/19 mm Hg) were similar, while the range of the mean 24-hour automated blood pressure monitoring (21/11 mm Hg) was smaller and demonstrated less variability. The magnitudes of the differences in blood pressures obtained on separate occasions in the same subjects were significantly lower with automated vs casual blood pressure determination methods (7.9/4.6 vs 13.7/7.4 mm Hg for both systolic and diastolic pressures). The agreement (95% confidence interval) between blood pressures obtained by the two methods (19/12 mm Hg) was found to be similar to the repeatability of automated blood pressure monitoring alone, and superior to that for data recorded casually in the office (35/17 mm Hg). Thus, the variability in mean 24-hour automated blood pressures is less than that for casual office blood pressures. The clinician should understand that the variability of blood pressures measured on an individual may be much greater than that reported for populations of hypertensive patients, and must be considered when applying epidemiologic group data to a specific patient. Moreover, any methodology of indirect blood pressure measurement that may reduce the variability and improve repeatability of casual office blood pressures deserves further consideration.

Ambulatory Care↗