PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Vasilios Papademetriou

Publications and source records attributed to Vasilios Papademetriou.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Role of diuretics in the prevention of heart failure: the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension is a major cause of heart failure (HF) and is antecedent in 91% of cases. The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) stipulated assessment of the relative effect of chlorthalidone, lisinopril, and amlodipine in preventing HF. METHODS AND RESULTS: ALLHAT was a double-blind, randomized, clinical trial in 33,357 high-risk hypertensive patients aged > or =55 years. Hospitalized/fatal HF outcomes were examined with proportional-hazards models. Relative risks (95% confidence intervals; P values) of amlodipine or lisinopril versus chlorthalidone were 1.35 (1.21 to 1.50; <0.001) and 1.11 (0.99 to 1.24; 0.09). The proportional hazards assumption of constant relative risk over time was not valid. A more appropriate model showed relative risks of amlodipine or lisinopril versus chlorthalidone during year 1 were 2.22 (1.69 to 2.91; <0.001) and 2.08 (1.58 to 2.74; <0.001), and after year 1, 1.22 (1.08 to 1.38; P=0.001) and 0.96 (0.85 to 1.10; 0.58). There was no significant interaction between prior medication use and treatment. Baseline blood pressures were equivalent (146/84 mm Hg) and at year 1 were 137/79, 139/79, and 140/80 mm Hg in those given chlorthalidone, amlodipine, and lisinopril. At 1 year, use of added open-label atenolol, diuretics, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and calcium channel blockers in the treatment groups was similar. CONCLUSIONS: HF risk decreased with chlorthalidone versus amlodipine or lisinopril use during year 1. Subsequently, risk for those individuals taking chlorthalidone versus amlodipine remained decreased but less so, whereas it was equivalent to those given lisinopril. Prior medication use, follow-up blood pressures, and concomitant medications are unlikely to explain most of the HF differences. Diuretics are superior to calcium channel blockers and, at least in the short term, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in preventing HF in hypertensive individuals.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗
PubMed2006

Association of hemoglobin delivery with left ventricular structure and function in hypertensive patients: Losartan Intervention for End Point Reduction in Hypertension Study.

Several studies have shown associations of high levels of hemoglobin (Hgb) or blood viscosity with cardiac events and with left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy (LVH). To assess the relations of LV mass and function with Hgb delivery (ie, the physiological carrier of oxygen), we calculated the product of Hgb concentration and Doppler-derived cardiac output in 864 hypertensive participants with electrocardiographic LVH (359 women) in the Losartan Intervention for End Point Reduction in Hypertension echocardiography substudy. Among women, Hgb delivery was positively related to internal dimension, septal and posterior wall thicknesses, LV mass, endocardial and midwall fractional shortening, and peak A wave velocity and negatively to total peripheral resistance index, E/A ratio, deceleration time, and the isovolumic relaxation time. Among men, Hgb delivery was positively related to LV internal dimension, LV mass, and A velocity, and negatively to LV midwall shortening, relative wall thickness, peripheral resistance index, and E/A ratio. In multivariable analyses that adjusted for age, diastolic blood pressure, body mass index, and total cholesterol, hemoglobin delivery in women was related positively to LV fractional shortening, midwall shortening, LV mass mitral valve A velocity, and LV internal dimension and negatively to mitral valve deceleration time and isovolumic relaxation time. Among men, Hgb delivery had positive independent relations to mitral valve A velocity, LV internal dimension, midwall shortening, and LV mass and negative relations to the E/A ratio and relative wall thickness. Thus, in hypertensive LVH, higher oxygen delivery capacity is associated with higher LV mass and impaired early diastolic LV filling.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

Factorial antihypertensive study of an extended-release metoprolol and hydrochlorothiazide combination.

BACKGROUND: To attain goal blood pressure (BP), many hypertensive patients require combination antihypertensive therapy. Thiazide diuretic/beta-blocker regimens lower BP, and clinical studies indicate that they reduce the risk for cardiovascular consequences of hypertension. Fixed-dose combination tablets can simplify multidrug treatment regimens. METHODS: This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, unbalanced factorial study (N = 1571) was designed to determine whether hydrochlorothiazide (HCT) and extended release (ER) metoprolol both contribute to an antihypertensive effect. Hypertensive adults with sitting diastolic BP (SiDBP) 95 to 114 mm Hg and systolic BP (SiSBP) <180 mm Hg received one of three hydrochlorothiazide doses (6.25 mg, 12.5 mg, or 25 mg), one of four ER-metoprolol doses (25 mg, 50 mg, 100 mg, 200 mg), or one of nine of the combinations or placebo for 8 weeks. RESULTS: Blood pressure decreased with all combinations (P < .001 v placebo); reductions were dose related, ranging from 8.7 to 15.7 mm Hg (SiDBP) and 9.7 to 18.9 mm Hg (SiSBP) (model-derived values). Reductions with placebo were 5.3 (SiDBP) and 4.2 mm Hg (SiSBP). Both active agents contributed to the combination effect (P = .0015 for SiDBP; P = .0006 for SiSBP). Several low-dose combinations were approximately as effective as high doses of the individual agents (differences within 1 to 2.5 mm Hg). The adverse event discontinuation rate was 2.9%. Serum potassium decreased and uric acid increased with increasing doses of HCT. CONCLUSIONS: Extended-release metoprolol/hydrochlorothiazide is an effective antihypertensive combination that offers additive antihypertensive contributions from both components.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2006

Resistant hypertension: diagnosis and management.

The incidence of resistant hypertension, the failure to reduce blood pressure below 140/90 mm Hg, despite the use of 3 antihypertensive medications at optimal doses including a diuretic, is estimated to be less than 5% of the hypertensive population. Resistant hypertension increases the risk of stroke, myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, and renal failure. Evaluation of the patient with resistant hypertension should include 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring or home measurements and a limited search for secondary causes. Treatment should focus on optimizing the drug regimen in a logical way, based on the patient's comorbidities and tolerability. Long-acting, well-tolerated once-daily medications are preferred, and the regimen should include in sequence a diuretic, beta-blocker, angiotensin-converting enzyme/angiotensin receptor-blocker inhibitors, and a calcium-channel blocker. This article reviews the definitions and causes and provides specific recommendations for the evaluation and management of patients with this life-threatening condition.

Animals↗
PubMed2006

Targeting angiotensin II type I receptors to reduce the risk of stroke in patients with hypertension.

The incidence of stroke is rising among the elderly population. Hypertension is the single most important contributor to stroke, and hypertension treatment and control is the most important intervention to prevent it. Blood pressure reduction by any means will substantially reduce the risk of stroke. However, accumulating evidence indicates that angiotensin receptor blocker-based regimens may provide additional benefits in the prevention of stroke. This effect seems to be particularly prominent in high-risk patients and patients with isolated systolic hypertension. The pathophysiological mechanisms have not been clearly delineated, but favourable remodelling of the left atrium and reduction of the risk of atrial fibrillation has been suggested. In addition, blockade of the central AT1 receptors and stimulation of AT2 receptors and/or preferential reduction of central pressure by angiotensin receptor blockers may account for the beneficial protective effect.

Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers↗
PubMed2005

Relation of microalbuminuria to adiponectin and augmented C-reactive protein levels in men with essential hypertension.

Microalbuminuria, and recently, hypoadiponectinemia, have been associated with progression of atherosclerotic disease and increased cardiovascular risk. We examined the possible associations of urinary albumin excretion, expressed as the ratio of albumin to creatinine (ACR), with plasma adiponectin and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) levels in men who had essential hypertension. The study population consisted of 108 men who did not have diabetes and were newly diagnosed with stage I to II essential hypertension (age 44.6 years, office blood pressure 148/95 mm Hg) and 110 men matched according to age and body mass index as controls. According to ACR values, which were determined as the average of 2 nonconsecutive overnight spot urine samples, subjects who had hypertension were categorized into 2 groups: those who had microalbuminuria (n = 28; mean ACR 30 to 300 mg/g) and those who had normal albuminuria (n = 80; mean ACR <30 mg/g). Subjects who had hypertension compared with controls exhibited higher ACR and log hs-CRP levels and a trend toward lower log adiponectin values (p = 0.062), whereas those who had normal albuminuria compared with controls had similar log adiponectin levels but significantly higher levels of ACR and log hs-CRP. Moreover, subjects who had hypertension and microalbuminuria compared with those who had hypertension and normal albuminuria had higher log hs-CRP and lower log adiponectin concentrations independently of confounding factors. Among those who had hypertension, ACR exhibited an independent positive correlation with log hs-CRP and a negative correlation with log adiponectin. Multiple linear regression analysis showed that age, body mass index, systolic blood pressure, log hs-CRP, and log adiponectin were significant independent predictors of the ACR. In conclusion, microalbuminuria is accompanied by decreased adiponectin and increased hs-CRP levels in the setting of essential hypertension, reflecting a rather diffuse atherosclerotic process.

Adiponectin↗
PubMed2005

Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in hypertensive patients with lower versus higher risk: a LIFE substudy.

We hypothesized that losartan was superior to atenolol in reducing cardiovascular events in a lower-risk group (LRG) versus a higher-risk group (HRG) of patients in a Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction (LIFE) substudy, independently of blood pressure (BP) reduction. In a post hoc analysis, we designated 4282 patients as LRG on the basis of: (1) no previous cardiovascular disease (coronary, cerebral, peripheral vascular disease); (2) no diabetes; (3) no isolated systolic hypertension; and (4) inclusion of the lowest 3 quartiles of electrocardiographically documented left ventricular hypertrophy. The HRG consisted of 4911 remaining patients who did not qualify for the LRG. In the LRG, losartan was superior to atenolol in reducing stroke: hazard ratio (HR), 0.72 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53 to 0.98); new-onset diabetes (HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.58 to 0.93]; and new-onset atrial fibrillation: HR, 0.69 (95% CI, 0.51 to 0.92), all P<0.05 but not composite end points or cardiovascular mortality (both P=NS). In the HRG, losartan was superior to atenolol in reducing composite end points: HR, 0.82 (95% CI, 0.71 to 0.94), P<0.01; cardiovascular mortality: HR, 0.77 (95% CI, 0.62 to 0.95), P<0.05; stroke: HR, 0.75 (95% CI, 0.61 to 0.92), P<0.01; new-onset diabetes: HR, 0.76 (95% CI, 0.60 to 0.96), P<0.05; and new-onset atrial fibrillation: HR, 0.71 (95% CI, 0.58 to 88), P<0.05. Test for interaction of treatment with LRG versus HRG was not significant for composite end point, stroke, or atrial fibrillation, but was for cardiovascular mortality (P=0.018). Achieved systolic BP reduction favored losartan over atenolol by -1.8 mm Hg in LRG (P=NS) and -0.7 mm Hg (P=0.001) in HRG, but no significant differences occurred in diastolic or mean BP in either group. In conclusion, losartan compared with atenolol reduces the risk of stroke, new-onset diabetes, and new-onset atrial fibrillation in the LRG and the HRG.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗
PubMed2005

Outcomes in hypertensive black and nonblack patients treated with chlorthalidone, amlodipine, and lisinopril.

CONTEXT: Few cardiovascular outcome data are available for blacks with hypertension treated with angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or calcium channel blockers (CCBs). OBJECTIVE: To determine whether an ACE inhibitor or CCB is superior to a thiazide-type diuretic in reducing cardiovascular disease (CVD) incidence in racial subgroups. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Prespecified subgroup analysis of ALLHAT, a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, clinical outcome trial conducted between February 1994 and March 2002 in 33,357 hypertensive US and Canadian patients aged 55 years or older (35% black) with at least 1 other cardiovascular risk factor. INTERVENTIONS: Antihypertensive regimens initiated with a CCB (amlodipine) or an ACE inhibitor (lisinopril) vs a thiazide-type diuretic (chlorthalidone). Other medications were added to achieve goal blood pressures (BPs) less than 140/90 mm Hg. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was combined fatal coronary heart disease (CHD) or nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), analyzed by intention-to-treat. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, stroke, combined CVD (CHD death, nonfatal MI, stroke, angina, coronary revascularization, heart failure [HF], or peripheral vascular disease), and end-stage renal disease. RESULTS: No significant difference was found between treatment groups for the primary CHD outcome in either racial subgroup. For amlodipine vs chlorthalidone only, HF was the only prespecified clinical outcome that differed significantly (overall: relative risk [RR], 1.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.24-1.51; blacks: RR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.24-1.73; nonblacks: RR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.17-1.49; P<.001 for each comparison) with no difference in treatment effects by race (P = .38 for interaction). For lisinopril vs chlorthalidone, results differed by race for systolic BP (greater decrease in blacks with chlorthalidone), stroke, and combined CVD outcomes (P<.001, P = .01, and P = .04, respectively, for interactions). In blacks and nonblacks, respectively, the RRs for stroke were 1.40 (95% CI, 1.17-1.68) and 1.00 (95% CI, 0.85-1.17) and for combined CVD were 1.19 (95% CI, 1.09-1.30) and 1.06 (95% CI, 1.00-1.13). For HF, the RRs were 1.30 (95% CI, 1.10-1.54) and 1.13 (95% CI, 1.00-1.28), with no significant interaction by race. Time-dependent BP adjustment did not significantly alter differences in outcome for lisinopril vs chlorthalidone in blacks. CONCLUSIONS: In blacks and nonblack subgroups, rates were not lower in the amlodipine or lisinopril groups than in the chlorthalidone group for either the primary CHD or any other prespecified clinical outcome, and diuretic-based treatment resulted in the lowest risk of heart failure. While the improved outcomes with chlorthalidone were more pronounced for some outcomes in blacks than in nonblacks, thiazide-type diuretics remain the drugs of choice for initial therapy of hypertension in both black and nonblack hypertensive patients.

Aged↗
PubMed2005

Metabolic syndrome and insulin resistance in the TROPHY sub-study: contrasting views in patients with high-normal blood pressure.

BACKGROUND: Although insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome are often used synonymously, concordance is not established. METHODS: Metabolic, hemodynamic, and hormonal data were analyzed on 141 patients in the Trial of Preventing Hypertension (TROPHY) Sub-Study with high-normal blood pressure (BP) (130 to 139/85 to 89 mm Hg [mean +/- SD, 133 +/- 8/85 +/- 6 mm Hg]; age, 48 +/- 9 years; body mass index 30 +/- 5 kg/m(2)). RESULTS: Fifty-three of 141 subjects (37.6%; approximately 3/8) had the metabolic syndrome based on three or more of the five risk factors (BP, waist circumference, fasting triglycerides, HDL-cholesterol, glucose). To maintain consistency in proportions, insulin resistance was defined as the upper 3/8 of the distribution on the homeostatic model assessment (HOMA), which uses fasting glucose and insulin and a modified Matsuda-DeFronzo index, based on fasting, 1- and 2-h glucose and insulin values. Among metabolic syndrome patients, 57% and 55% were in the upper 3/8 of the distribution for insulin resistance by HOMA and Matsuda-DeFronzo, respectively. Among subjects without the metabolic syndrome, 26% and 27% were insulin resistant by HOMA and Matsuda-DeFronzo criteria. The proportion of patients with metabolic syndrome and insulin resistance increased strongly and similarly with increasing body mass index. However, metabolic syndrome and insulin resistance were different compared with their respective controls in the lower 5/8 of the distribution, in waist/hip ratios, fasting and 1-h insulin, HDL-cholesterol, heart rate, and systolic BP responses to exercise and plasma renin, angiotensin, and aldosterone. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that metabolic syndrome and insulin resistance are not synonymous anthropometrically, metabolically, hemodynamically, or hormonally in patients with high-normal BP.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

The Study on COgnition and Prognosis in the Elderly (SCOPE) - major CV events and stroke in subgroups of patients.

The Study on COgnition and Prognosis in the Elderly (SCOPE) assessed the effect of candesartan on cardiovascular outcomes in elderly patients with mild to moderate hypertension. Patients were randomized to candesartan 8-16 mg daily (n = 2477) or placebo (n =2460). Due to extensive add-on therapy, blood pressure reduction was only about 3/2 mmHg greater in the candesartan group than in the control group. Nevertheless, non-fatal stroke was reduced by 28% (p = 0.04) in the candesartan group compared to the control group, and there was a non-significant 11% reduction in major cardiovascular events (p = 0.19). This report provides results in pre-specified subgroups of patients (age, gender, diabetes, history of stroke, smoking and cardiovascular risk at randomization). Reductions in major cardiovascular events and stroke with candesartan-based therapy were indicated in all subgroups. A significant interaction between treatment and subgroups was found for one pair of subgroups only; the reduction in major cardiovascular events with candesartan was greater in patients with a previous stroke (64% reduction, p = 0.004) than in those without (5% reduction, p > 0.20). In conclusion, this analysis indicated consistent favourable effects of candesartan-based therapy on major cardiovascular events and stroke across the different subgroups of patients. However, the benefit was particularly pronounced in patients who entered the study with a previous stroke.

Aged↗
PubMed2005

Aspirin under fire: aspirin use in the primary prevention of coronary heart disease.

The issue of aspirin use in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease is still debated because of conflicting opinions on risks versus benefits. Recently, a United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) panel rejected the approval of aspirin in the setting of primary prevention in moderate-risk patients. However, the United States Preventive Services Task Force recommends that clinicians discuss aspirin therapy with patients at increased risk for having a future coronary event. During the past 15 years, many large randomized trials have specifically addressed this issue and helped shape the decisions of the FDA panel and the Preventive Services Task Force. These trials lend a handful of experiences and results, with no clear recommendations for antiplatelet therapy in the setting of primary prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD). Recently, trial results have been assimilated into practical tools for risk stratification to guide aspirin use in this setting. An overview and critical evaluation of the work performed thus far is provided in order to lend insight into the ongoing debate and, through use of the Framingham CHD risk prediction score sheets, to better equip practitioners faced with the decision of giving aspirin to "relatively" healthy individuals for CHD primary prevention.

Aspirin↗
PubMed2005

Hypertension and cognitive function. Blood pressure regulation and cognitive function: a review of the literature.

High blood pressure raises the risks of vascular dementia and cognitive dysfunction in older adults, by acting on the cerebral vasculature and directly on the brain itself. Clinical trials and observational studies have shown that treating hypertension to target (<140/90 mm Hg) not only lessens morbidity and mortality, but also improves quality of life and preserves cognitive function. Yet, only 34% of hypertensive Americans currently have their hypertension under control, despite widespread treatment. Although single drug therapy is effective in treating hypertension, most patients will require combination drug treatment. Combination therapy--typically a diuretic with an ACE inhibitor, an ARB, or a beta blocker--is appropriate for treatment of older patients, is well tolerated, and can effectively preserve cognitive function.

Aged↗
PubMed2004

Prognostic significance of left ventricular mass change during treatment of hypertension.

CONTEXT: Increased baseline left ventricular (LV) mass predicts cardiovascular (CV) complications of hypertension, but the relation between lower LV mass and outcome during treatment for hypertension is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether reduction of LV mass during antihypertensive treatment modifies risk of major CV events independent of blood pressure change. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective cohort substudy of the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint Reduction in Hypertension (LIFE) randomized clinical trial, conducted from 1995 to 2001. A total of 941 prospectively identified patients aged 55 to 80 years with essential hypertension and electrocardiographic LV hypertrophy had LV mass measured by echocardiography at enrollment in the LIFE trial and thereafter were followed up annually for a mean (SD) of 4.8 (1.0) years for CV events. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Composite end point of CV death, fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction, and fatal or nonfatal stroke. RESULTS: The composite end point occurred in 104 patients (11%). The multivariable Cox regression model showed a strong association between lower in-treatment LV mass index and reduced rate of the composite CV end point (hazard ratio [HR], 0.78 per 1-SD (25.3) decrease in LV mass index; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65-0.94; P = .009) over and above that predicted by reduction in blood pressure. There were parallel associations between lower in-treatment LV mass index and lower CV mortality (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.47-0.82; P = .001), stroke (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.60-0.96; P = .02), myocardial infarction (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.62-1.17, P = .33), and all-cause mortality (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.59-0.88, P = .002), independent of systolic blood pressure and assigned treatment. Results were confirmed in analyses adjusting for additional CV risk factors, electrocardiographic changes, or when only considering events after the first year of study treatment. CONCLUSION: In patients with essential hypertension and baseline electrocardiographic LV hypertrophy, lower LV mass during antihypertensive treatment is associated with lower rates of clinical end points, additional to effects of blood pressure lowering and treatment modality.

Aged↗
PubMed2004

Stroke prevention with the angiotensin II type 1-receptor blocker candesartan in elderly patients with isolated systolic hypertension: the Study on Cognition and Prognosis in the Elderly (SCOPE).

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that the angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker (ARB) candesartan can reduce the risk of stroke in elderly patients with isolated systolic hypertension (ISH). BACKGROUND: Isolated systolic hypertension is the predominant form of hypertension in the elderly, and stroke is the most common cardiovascular (CV) complication. METHODS: In the Study on Cognition and Prognosis in the Elderly (SCOPE), 4,964 patients age 70 to 89 years were randomly assigned to double-blind candesartan or placebo with open-label antihypertensive therapy (mostly thiazide diuretics) added as needed to control blood pressure. Of the 4,964 patients, 1,518 had ISH (systolic blood pressure >160 mm Hg and diastolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg). The present study is a predefined subgroup analysis of outcome results in the ISH patients. RESULTS: Of the ISH patients, 754 were randomized to the candesartan group and 764 to the control group. Over the study period, blood pressure was reduced by 22/6 mm Hg in the candesartan group and by 20/5 mm Hg in the control group (difference between treatments 2/1 mm Hg; p = 0.101 and 0.064). A total of 20 fatal/non-fatal strokes occurred in the candesartan group (7.2/1,000 patient-years) and 35 in the control group (12.5/1,000 patient-years); relative risk (RR) was 0.58 (95% confidence interval 0.33 to 1.00), that is, a RR reduction of 42% (p = 0.050 unadjusted, p = 0.049 adjusted for baseline risk). There were no marked or statistically significant differences between the treatment groups in other CV end points or all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In elderly patients with ISH, antihypertensive treatment based on the ARB candesartan resulted in a significant 42% RR reduction in stroke in comparison with other antihypertensive treatment, despite little difference in blood pressure reduction.

Aged↗
PubMed2004

Regression of hypertensive left ventricular hypertrophy by losartan compared with atenolol: the Losartan Intervention for Endpoint Reduction in Hypertension (LIFE) trial.

BACKGROUND: An echocardiographic substudy of the Losartan Intervention for Endpoint Reduction in Hypertension (LIFE) trial was designed to test the ability of losartan to reduce left ventricular (LV) mass more than atenolol. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 960 patients with essential hypertension and LV hypertrophy (LVH) on screening ECG were enrolled at centers in 7 countries and studied by echocardiography at baseline and after 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 years' randomized therapy. Clinical examination and blinded readings of echocardiograms in 457 losartan-treated and 459 atenolol-treated participants with > or =1 follow-up measurement of LV mass index (LVMI) were used in an intention-to-treat analysis. Losartan-based therapy induced greater reduction in LVMI from baseline to the last available study than atenolol with adjustment for baseline LVMI and blood pressure and in-treatment pressure (-21.7+/-21.8 versus -17.7+/-19.6 g/m2; P=0.021). Greater LVMI reduction with losartan was observed in women and men, participants >65 or <65 years of age, and with mild or more severe baseline hypertrophy. The difference between treatment arms in LVH regression was due mainly to reduced concentricity of LV geometry in both groups and lesser increase in LV internal diameter in losartan-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Antihypertensive treatment with losartan, plus hydrochlorothiazide and other medications when needed for pressure control, resulted in greater LVH regression in patients with ECG LVH than conventional atenolol-based treatment. Thus, angiotensin receptor antagonism by losartan has superior efficacy for reversing LVH, a cardinal manifestation of hypertensive target organ damage.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗