South African hypertension guideline 2011. Hypertension and Its Treatment in Postmenopausal Women: Baseline Data from the Women’s Health Initiative Efficacy of various antihypertensive agents as evaluated by indices of vascular stiffness in elderly hypertensive patients. Combinations of olmesartan and a calcium channel blocker or a diuretic in elderly hypertensive patients: a randomized, controlled trial1 Use of calcium channel blockers is associated with better cognitive performance in older hypertensive patients with subjective memory complaints Effects of β blockers and calcium-channel blockers on within-individual variability in blood pressure and risk of stroke Calcium-channel blockers and cognitive function in elderly people: results from the Canadian Study of Health and Aging. A prospective evaluation of persistence on antihypertensive treatment with different antihypertensive drugs in clinical practice Baseline characteristics of the diabetic participants in the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT). Genome-wide response to antihypertensive medication using home blood pressure measurements: a pilot study nested within the HOMED-BP study. Should hypertension be treated after acute stroke? A randomized controlled trial using single photon emission computed tomography. The Valsartan Antihypertensive Long-term Use Evaluation (VALUE) trial of cardiovascular events in hypertension. Rationale and design. Outcomes in hypertensive black and nonblack patients treated with chlorthalidone, amlodipine, and lisinopril. The 2001 Canadian recommendations for the management of hypertension: Part two--Therapy. Effects of calcium-channel blockade in older patients with diabetes and systolic hypertension. Systolic Hypertension in Europe Trial Investigators. Clinical Events in High-Risk Hypertensive Patients Randomly Assigned to Calcium Channel Blocker Versus Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor in the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial Efficacy of Combination Antihypertensive Therapy with Low-Dose Indapamide: Assessment by Blood Pressure Self-Monitoring at Home Renoprotective Effect and Cost-Effectiveness of Using Benidipine, a Calcium Channel Blocker, to Lower the Dose of Angiotensin Receptor Blocker in Hypertensive Patients with Albumiuria Relationship of Antihypertensive Treatment Regimens and Change in Blood Pressure to Risk for Heart Failure in Hypertensive Patients Randomly Assigned to Doxazosin or Chlorthalidone: Further Analyses from the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering treatment to prevent Heart Attack Trial Angiotensin-II receptor antagonist combined with calcium channel blocker or diuretic for essential hypertension Subgroup and per-protocol analysis of the randomized European Trial on Isolated Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly. Preferable effects of olmesartan/calcium channel blocker to olmesartan/diuretic on blood pressure variability in very elderly hypertension: COLM study subanalysis Major outcomes in high-risk hypertensive patients randomized to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or calcium channel blocker vs diuretic: The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT).
OUTCOMES Extensive data from r and omised controlled trials have shown the benefit of treating hypertension . The target blood pressure ( BP ) for antihypertensive management is systolic < 140 mmHg and diastolic < 90 mmHg with minimal or no drug side-effects ; however , stricter BP control is required for patients with end-organ damage , co-existing risk factors and co-morbidity , e.g. diabetes mellitus . The reduction of BP in the elderly and in those with severe hypertension should be achieved gradually over 1 month . Co-existent risk factors should also be controlled . BENEFITS Benefits of management include reduced risks of stroke , cardiac failure , chronic kidney disease and coronary heart disease . RECOMMENDATIONS The correct BP measurement procedure is described , and evaluation of cardiovascular risk factors and recommendations for antihypertensive therapy are stipulated . The total cardiovascular disease risk profile should be determined for all patients to inform management strategies . Lifestyle modification and patient education are cornerstones in the management of every patient . Major indications , pre caution s and contra-indications to each recommended antihypertensive drug are listed . Combination therapy should be considered ab initio if the BP is ≥ 20/10 mmHg . First-line drug therapy for uncomplicated hypertension includes low-dose thiazide-like diuretics , calcium channel blockers ( CCBs ) or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors ( ACE-Is ) ( or ARBs - angiotensin II receptor blockers ) . If the target BP is not obtained , a second antihypertensive should be added from the aforementioned list . If the target BP is still not met , the third remaining antihypertensive agent should be used . In black patients  either thiazide-like diuretics or CCBs can be used initially , because response rates are better than with ACE-Is or β-blockers . In treating resistant hypertension , a central ly acting drug , vasodilator , α-blocker , spironolactone or β-locker should be added . This guideline includes management of specific situations , i.e. hypertensive emergency and urgency , severe hypertension with target organ damage , hypertension in diabetes mellitus , resistant hypertension , fixed drug combinations , new trials in hypertension , and interactions of antihypertensive agents with other drugs . VALIDITY The guideline was developed by the Southern African Hypertension Society Little is known about the patterns of treatment and adequacy of blood pressure control in older women . The Women ’s Health Initiative , a 40-center national study of risk factors and prevention of heart disease , breast and colorectal cancer , and osteoporosis in postmenopausal women , provides a unique opportunity to examine these issues in the largest , multiethnic , best-characterized such cohort . Baseline data from the initial 98 705 women , aged 50 to 79 years , enrolled were analyzed to relate prevalence , treatment , and control of hypertension to demographic , clinical , and risk-factor covariates , and logistic regression analyses were performed to estimate odds ratios after adjusting for multiple potential confounders . Overall , 37.8 % of the women had hypertension , which is defined as systolic blood pressure ≥140 mm Hg and /or diastolic blood pressure ≥90 mm Hg or being on medication for high blood pressure ; 64.3 % were treated with drugs , and blood pressure was controlled in only 36.1 % of the hypertensive women , with lower rates of control in the oldest group . After adjustment for multiple covariates , current hormone users had higher prevalence than did nonusers ( odds ratio 1.25 ) . Hypertensive women had more comorbid conditions than did nonhypertensive women , and women with comorbidities were more likely to be treated pharmacologically . Diuretics were used by 44.3 % of hypertensives either as monotherapy or in combination with other drug classes . As monotherapy ,  calcium channel blockers were used in 16 % , angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in 14 % , & bgr;-blockers in 9 % , and diuretics in 14 % of the hypertensive women . Diuretics as monotherapy were associated with better blood pressure control than any of the other drug classes as monotherapy . In conclusion , hypertension in older women is not being treated aggressively enough because a large proportion , especially those most at risk for stroke and heart disease by virtue of age , does not have sufficient blood pressure control When observed in elderly hypertensive patients , increased pulse pressure ( PP ) and arterial stiffness are known to be independent risk factors for cardiovascular diseases . Increased systolic blood pressure ( SBP ) leads to left ventricular hypertrophy , while decreased diastolic blood pressure ( DBP ) results in decreased coronary circulation . It is known that increased arterial stiffness is the major cause of increased PP . Thus basic morbid states of cardiac failure or ischemic heart diseases are more likely to develop in elderly hypertensive patients with increased PP and arterial stiffness , and there is need of antihypertensive drugs that decrease these effects in elderly hypertensives . In this study , we compared the effects of an angiotensin-receptor blocker ( ARB : valsartan ) , an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor ( ACE-I : temocapril ) , and long-acting Ca antagonists ( L- and N-type Ca channel blocker : cilnidipine ; and L-type Ca channel blocker : nifedipine CR ) on PP and arterial stiffness measured by pulse wave velocity in elderly hypertensive patients for 3 months . The ARB yielded the largest reductions in PP and brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity ( baPWV ) , followed by the ACE-I and L- and N-type Ca channel blocker , while the L-type Ca channel blocker yielded no improvement . The effects on arterial stiffness and PP thus varied among the drug characteristics . Although ARB achieved the largest reduction in baPWV , this decrease was not associated with any reductions in PP , SBP , DBP , or mean blood pressure , as were the baPWV-decreases achieved by the other drugs , suggesting that ARB may further reduce the risk of arteriosclerosis in elderly hypertensive patients by decreasing arterial stiffness in addition to its antihypertensive effect Objective : The aim of the present study was to compare the cardiovascular effects of olmesartan , an angiotensin II receptor blocker , combined with a calcium channel blocker ( CCB ) or a diuretic , in a prospect i ve , r and omized , open-label , blinded endpoint trial . Methods : Japanese hypertensive patients aged at least 65 to less than 85 years with SBP at least 140 mmHg and /or DBP at least 90 mmHg with antihypertensive treatment , or SBP at least 160 mmHg and /or DBP at least 100 mmHg without antihypertensive treatment were r and omized to receive olmesartan with either a dihydropyridine CCB or a low-dose diuretic . If SBP and /or DBP remained at least 140 and /or at least 90 mmHg , the other antihypertensive drug was added . The primary endpoint was a composite of fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular events . The median follow-up time was 3.3 years . Results : Blood pressure decreased similarly in both groups . The primary endpoint occurred in 116/2568 patients ( 4.5 % ) in the olmesartan plus CCB group and in 135/2573 patients ( 5.3 % ) in the olmesartan plus diuretic group [ hazard ratio 0.83 , 95 % confidence interval ( CI ) 0.65–1.07 , P = 0.16 ] . Rates of all-cause death and cardiovascular deaths were similar . Among patients aged at least 75 years , the incidence of stroke tended to be lower in the olmesartan plus CCB group than in the olmesartan plus diuretic group ( hazard ratio 0.63 , 95 % CI 0.38–1.02 , P = 0.059 , interaction P = 0.019 ) . Fewer patients in the olmesartan plus CCB group ( 8.2 % , 211/2568 ) than in the olmesartan plus diuretic group ( 9.8 % , 253/2573 ; P = 0.046 ) experienced serious adverse events . Conclusion : Despite no significant difference in cardiovascular events , the different safety profiles suggest that the combination of olmesartan and CCB may be preferable to that of olmesartan and diuretic Background Hypertension is strongly associated with cognitive decline and a promising target for dementia prevention . Our aim was to investigate the association between different antihypertensive treatments and cognitive performance in elderly hypertensive patients presenting with subjective memory complaints . Patients and methods Three hundred and seventy-eight elderly hypertensive patients more than 60 years ( mean age 70.4 ± 6.3 years ) treated with at least one antihypertensive agent and presenting with subjective memory complaints but without dementia were prospect ively recruited and underwent a combination of neuropsychological tests , brain magnetic resonance imaging with semiquantification of white matter hyperintensities , carotid echotracking , brachial endothelial function , and ambulatory blood pressure assessment s. Results None of the three composite scores ( memory score , verbal fluency , and visual memory capacity ) was found associated with blood pressure levels . On the other h and , age-adjusted and sex-adjusted analyses showed a significant and positive association between memory score and use of calcium channel blockers ( CCBs ) ( users : + 0.14 ± 0.09 versus nonusers : −0.12 ± 0.06 ; P = 0.016 ) . Multivariate analyses also revealed that CCB use was significantly associated with a better memory score , independently of age , male sex , white matter hyperintensities , and carotid wall cross-sectional area , all of which were associated with worse memory scores . Conclusion In elderly hypertensive treated patients with subjective memory complaints  , CCB use was associated with better memory performance independently of blood pressure level and macrovascular and microvascular alterations , suggesting a specific neuroprotective effect of this pharmacological class . Interventional controlled trials are required to confirm the specific protective effect of CCBs on cognitive decline BACKGROUND Analyses of some r and omised trials show that calcium-channel blockers reduce the risk of stroke more than expected on the basis of mean blood pressure alone and that beta blockers are less effective than expected . We aim ed to investigate whether the effects of these drugs on variability in blood pressure might explain these disparities in effect on stroke risk . METHODS The Anglo-Sc and inavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial Blood Pressure Lowering Arm ( ASCOT-BPLA ) compared amlodipine-based regimens with atenolol-based regimens in 19 257 patients with hypertension and other vascular risk factors and the Medical Research Council ( MRC ) trial compared atenolol-based and diuretic-based regimens versus placebo in 4396 hypertensive patients aged 65 - 74 years . We expressed visit-to-visit variability of blood pressure during follow-up in the two trials as st and ard deviation ( SD ) and as transformations uncorrelated with mean blood pressure . For ASCOT-BPLA , we also studied within-visit variability and variability on 24 h ambulatory blood-pressure monitoring ( ABPM ) . RESULTS In ASCOT-BPLA , group systolic blood pressure ( SBP ) SD was lower in the amlodipine group than in the atenolol group at all follow-up visits ( p<0.0001 ) , mainly because of lower within-individual visit-to-visit variability . Within-visit and ABPM variability in SBP were also lower in the amlodipine group than in the atenolol group ( all p<0.0001 ) . Analysis of changes from baseline showed that variability decreased over time in the amlodipine group and increased in the atenolol group . The lower risk of stroke in the amlodipine group ( hazard ratio 0.78 , 95 % CI 0.67 - 0.90 ) was partly attenuated by adjusting for mean SBP during follow-up ( 0.84 , 0.72 - 0.98 ) , but was abolished by also adjusting for within-individual SD of clinic SBP ( 0.99 , 0.85 - 1.16 ) . Findings were similar for coronary events . In the ABPM sub study , reduced variability in daytime SBP in the amlodipine group ( p<0.0001 ) partly accounted for the reduced risk of vascular events , but reduced visit-to-visit variability in clinic SBP had a greater effect . In the MRC trial , group SD SBP and all measures of within-individual visit-to-visit variability in SBP were increased in the atenolol group compared with both the placebo group and the diuretic group during initial follow-up ( all p<0.0001 ) . Subsequent temporal trends in variability in blood pressure during follow-up in the atenolol group correlated with trends in stroke risk . INTERPRETATION The opposite effects of calcium-channel blockers and beta blockers on variability of blood pressure account for the disparity in observed effects on risk of stroke and expected effects based on mean blood pressure . To prevent stroke most effectively , blood-pressure-lowering drugs should reduce mean blood pressure without increasing variability ; ideally they should reduce both BACKGROUND Concern has been raised about the potential for adverse cognitive effects associated with the use of calcium-channel blockers ( CCBs ) in older people . This study was undertaken to examine prospect ively the association between the use of these and other antihypertensive drugs and cognitive function . METHODS The authors examined data from the Canadian Study of Health and Aging ( CSHA ) , a population -based , prospect i ve 5-year investigation of the epidemiology of dementia and other health problems in Canadians 65 years of age and older . The risk of cognitive decline , as indicated by a decline in performance on the Modified Mini-Mental State ( 3MS ) examination over the 5-year period , was assessed in relation to the use of antihypertensive and diuretic drugs by 205 subjects with a history of hypertension and no evidence of dementia at baseline . RESULTS The proportion of subjects whose cognitive performance declined over the study period was significantly higher in the group using CCBs than in the group using other antihypertensive agents ( 75 % v. 59 % ) . The adjusted odds ratio ( OR ) for a significant decline in cognitive performance ( defined as a decrease in 3MS score of 10 points or more ) was 2.28 ( 95 % confidence interval [ CI ] 1.12 - 4.66 ) for subjects using CCBs . The adjusted ORs ( and 95 % CIs ) for cognitive decline in subjects using selected antihypertensive agents or diuretics relative to those exposed to beta-blockers were as follows : angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor , OR 1.36 ( 95 % CI 0.41 - 4.55 ) ; diuretic or other antihypertensive drug , OR 1.45 ( 95 % CI 0.51 - 4.14 ) ; dihydropyridine CCB ( nifedipine ) , OR 1.94 ( 95 % CI 0.52 - 7.27 ) and non-dihydropyridine CCB ( diltiazem or verapamil ) , OR 3.72 ( 95 % CI 1.22 - 11.36 ) . INTERPRETATION Older people taking CCBs were significantly more likely than those using other agents to experience cognitive decline . These findings are consistent with the results of previous cross-sectional research and emphasize the need for further trials to examine the associations between CCB use , blood pressure and cognitive impairment in elderly patients Persistence on treatment affects the efficacy of antihypertensive treatment . We prospect ively investigated the persistence on therapy and the extent of  blood pressure ( BP ) control  in 347 hypertensive patients ( age 59.4 ± 6 years ) r and omly allocated to a first-line treatment with : angiotensin-converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitors , calcium-channel blockers ( CCBs ) , ß-blockers , angiotensin-II receptor blockers ( ARBs ) , or diuretics and followed-up for 24-months . Persistence on treatment was higher in patients treated with ARBs ( 68.5 % ) and ACE inhibitors ( 64.5 % ) vs CCBs ( 51.6 % ; p < 0.05 ) , β-blockers ( 44.8 % , p < 0.05 ) , and diuretics ( 34.4 % , p < 0.01 ) . No ARB , ACE inhibitor , β-blocker , or diuretic was associated with a higher persistence in therapy compared with the other molecules used in each therapeutic class . The rate of persistence was significantly higher in patients treated with lercanidipine vs others CCBs ( 59.3 % vs 46.6 % , p < 0.05 ) . Systolic and diastolic BP was decreased more successfully in patients treated with ARBs ( −11.2/−5.8 mmHg ) , ACE inhibitors ( −10.5/−5.1 mmHg ) , and CCBs ( −8.5/−4.6 mmHg ) compared with ß-blockers ( −4.0/−2.3 mmHg p < 0.05 ) and diuretics ( −2.3/−2.1 mmHg , p < 0.05 ) . No ARB , ACE inhibitor , β-blocker , or diuretic was associated with a higher BP control compared with the other molecules used in each therapeutic class . A trend toward a better BP control was observed in response to lercanidipine vs other CCBs ( p = 0.059 ) . The present results confirm the importance of persistence on treatment for the management of hypertension in clinical practice OBJECTIVE  Hypertension ( HTN ) is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease ( CVD ) in the setting of diabetes . There is no consensus on how best to treat hypertension among those with diabetes . Here we describe the characteristics of a cohort of hypertensive adults with diabetes who are part of a large prospect i ve blood pressure study . This study will help clarify the treatment of HTN in the setting of diabetes . RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering high-risk hypertensive participants , ages > or = 55 years , design ed to determine whether the incidence of fatal and nonfatal coronary heart disease ( CHD ) and combined cardiovascular events ( fatal and nonfatal CHD , revascularization surgery , angina pectoris , congestive heart failure , and stroke ) differs between diuretic ( chlorthalidone ) treatment and three alternative antihypertensive therapies : a calcium channel blocker ( amlodipine ) , an ACE inhibitor ( lisinopril ) , and an alpha-adrenergic blocker ( doxazosin ) . The planned follow-up is an average of 6 years , to be completed March 2002 . RESULTS There are 15,297 diabetic individuals in the ALLHAT study ( 36.0 % of the entire cohort ) . Of these individuals , 50.2 % are male , 39.4 % are African-American , and 17.7 % are Hispanic . Demographic and laboratory characteristics of the cohort are similar to those of other studies of the U.S. elderly population with HTN . The sample size has 42 and 93 % confidence , treatments for the two study outcomes . CONCLUSIONS The diabetic cohort in ALLHAT wil be able to provide valuable information about the treatment of hypertension in older diabetic patients at risk for incident CVD BACKGROUND Patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension in the HOMED-BP trial were r and omly allocated to first-line treatment with a calcium channel blocker ( CCB ) , angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor ( ACEI ) or angiotensin II receptor blocker ( ARB ) . METHODS We recruited 265 ( 93 for CCB , 71 for ACEI and 101 for ARB ) patients who completed the genomic study .  Home blood pressure was measured for 5 days off-treatment before r and omization and for 5 days after 2 - 4 weeks of r and omized drug treatment . Genotyping was performed by 500 K DNA microarray chips . The blood pressure responses to the three drugs were analyzed separately as a quantitative trait . For replication of SNPs with p < 10(-4 ) , we used the multicenter GEANE study , in which patients were r and omized to valsartan or amlodipine . RESULTS SNPs in PICALM , TANC2 , NUMA1 and APCDD1 were found to be associated with CCB responses and those in ABCC9 and YIPF1 were found to be associated with ARB response with replication . CONCLUSION Our approach , the first based on high-fidelity phenotyping by home blood pressure measurement , might be a step in moving towards the personalized treatment of hypertension OBJECTIVE To determine if previously hypertensive patients with acute ischemic stroke should be treated with antihypertensive medication in the immediate poststroke period . DESIGN R and omized double-blind , placebo-controlled trial . SETTING Sixteen consecutive hypertensive patients ( four men and 12 women ; mean age , 66 years [ age range , 46 to 83 years ] ) with middle cerebral artery infa rct ion within 72 hours of onset and blood pressure between 170 and 220 mm Hg(systolic ) and 95 and 120 mm Hg ( diastolic ) . INTERVENTION Placebo ( n = 6 ) , nicardipine hydrochloride ( 20 mg [ n = 5 ] ) , captopril ( 12.5 mg [ n = 3 ] ) , or clonidine hydrochloride ( 0.1 mg [ n = 2 ] ) given every 8 hours for 3 days . MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Decline in blood pressure , change in cerebral blood flow as measured by single photon emission computed tomography , and clinical change as determined by the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale . RESULTS Blood pressure fell significantly in both the drug-treated group as a whole and in those patients receiving placebo ( P < .001 ) . There was no difference in blood pressure levels between these two groups throughout the study period . Patients receiving nicardipine had a consistently lower pressure than the other groups . A significant negative relationship was noted between the maximum blood pressure fall and improvement in cerebral blood flow . There were four patients whose blood pressure dropped by more than 16 % of the baseline value on any 24 hours in the first 3 days . All either failed to increase or actually decreased their cerebral blood flow to the affected area . Three of these patients were treated with nicardipine . There was no significant difference in clinical course between the placebo- and drug-treated groups as a whole . CONCLUSIONS Hypertensive ischemic stroke patients with a moderate elevation of blood pressure in the first few days may not require antihypertensive therapy . Nicardipine and possibly other calcium channel blockers may cause an excessive fall in blood pressure and impair cerebral blood flow in these patients and should therefore be used with caution Essential hypertension is a major Public Health issue . Although the number of treated hypertensive patients has increased , only 25 % of treated patients have their blood pressure levels under control . The benefit of treating hypertension has been proven , but cardiovascular morbidity and mortality rates remain high . The ideal antihypertensive drug should not only normalize blood pressure levels , but also reduce the associated cardiovascular morbidity and mortality rates . The role of angiotensin II in systemic hypertension and its complications has been recently redefined . The potent trophic effects of angiotensin II on blood vessels and on cardiac cells have been well demonstrated , especially the role of angiotensin II in left ventricular hypertrophy , vascular hypertrophy , endothelial dysfunction , and congestive heart failure . Of all ongoing mortality and morbidity trials in systemic hypertension , VALUE ( Valsartan Antihypertensive Long-term Use Evaluation ) is the only one comparing an angiotensin II antagonist ( valsartan ) with a third-generation calcium channel blocker ( amlodipine ) . The main hypothesis of the VALUE trial is that , for an equivalent decrease in blood pressure , valsartan will be more effective than amlodipine in decreasing cardiac mortality and morbidity . VALUE is a prospect i ve , multinational , multicentre , double-blind , r and omized , active-controlled , 2-arm parallel group comparison with a response-dependent dose titration scheme . VALUE involves 14,400 patients in over 30 countries , who will be followed for 4 years or until 1450 patients experience a primary endpoint . The population to be included in VALUE consists of hypertensive men and women , aged 50 years or older , and at a relatively high risk of sustaining a cardiovascular event . The high risk profile is defined taking into account age , gender , and a list of cardiovascular risk factors and disease factors . Risk factors are cigarette smoking , hypercholesterolaemia , diabetes mellitus , uncomplicated left ventricular hypertrophy , proteinuria , and high serum creatinine . Disease factors include documented history of myocardial infa rct ion , peripheral vascular disease , stroke or transient ischaemic attack , or the presence of left ventricular hypertrophy with strain on the ECG . A unique feature of VALUE is the assessment of the predictive power of this cardiovascular risk factor scale in a large population of treated hypertensive patients . The trial started on 10 September 1997 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 r and omized , 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 infa rct ion ( 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 result ed 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 OBJECTIVE To provide up date d , evidence -based recommendations for the therapy of hypertension in adults . OPTIONS For patients with hypertension , a number of antihypertensive agents may control blood pressure . R and omized trials evaluating first-line therapy with thiazides , beta-adrenergic antagonists , angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors , calcium channel blockers , alpha-blockers , central ly acting agents or angiotensin II receptor antagonists were review ed . OUTCOMES The health outcomes that were considered were changes in blood pressure , cardiovascular morbidity , and cardiovascular and /or all-cause mortality rates . Economic outcomes were not considered due to insufficient evidence . EVIDENCE MEDLINE was search ed for the period March 1999 to October 2001 to identify studies not included in the 2000 revision of the Canadian Recommendations for the Management of Hypertension . Reference lists were scanned , experts were polled , and the personal files of the subgroup members and authors were used to identify other published studies . All relevant articles were review ed and appraised , using prespecified levels of evidence , by content experts and method ological experts . VALUES A high value was placed on the avoidance of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality . BENEFITS , HARMS AND COSTS Various antihypertensive agents reduce the blood pressure of patients with sustained hypertension . In certain setting s , and for specific classes of drugs , blood-pressure lowering has been associated with reduced cardiovascular morbidity and /or mortality . RECOMMENDATIONS The present document contains detailed recommendations pertaining to treatment thresholds , target blood pressures , and choice of agents in various setting s in patients with hypertension . The main changes from the 2000 Recommendations are the addition of a section on the treatment of hypertension in patients with diabetes mellitus , the amalgamation of the previous sections on treatment of hypertension in the young and old into one section , increased emphasis on the role of combination therapies over repeated trials of single agents and expansion of the section on the treatment of hypertension after stroke . Implicit in the recommendations for therapy is the principle that treatment for an individual patient should take into consideration global cardiovascular risk , the presence and /or absence of target organ damage , and comorbidities . VALIDATION All recommendations were grade d according to strength of the evidence and voted on by the Canadian Hypertension Recommendations Working Group . Individuals with potential conflicts of interest relative to any specific recommendation were excluded from voting on that recommendation . Only those recommendations achieving high levels of consensus are reported here . These guidelines will continue to be up date d annually BACKGROUND Recent reports suggest that calcium-channel blockers may be harmful in patients with diabetes and hypertension . We previously reported that antihypertensive treatment with the calcium-channel blocker nitrendipine reduced the risk of cardiovascular events . In this post hoc analysis , we compared the outcome of treatment with nitrendipine in diabetic and nondiabetic patients . METHODS After stratification according to center , sex , and presence or absence of previous cardiovascular complications , 4695 patients ( age , > or = 60 years ) with systolic blood pressure of 160 to 219 mm Hg and diastolic pressure below 95 mm Hg were r and omly assigned to receive active treatment or placebo . Active treatment consisted of nitrendipine ( 10 to 40 mg per day ) with the possible addition or substitution of enalapril ( 5 to 20 mg per day ) or hydrochlorothiazide ( 12.5 to 25 mg per day ) or both , titrated to reduce the systolic blood pressure by at least 20 mm Hg and to less than 150 mm Hg . In the control group , matching placebo tablets were administered similarly . RESULTS At r and omization , 492 patients ( 10.5 percent ) had diabetes . After a median follow-up of two years , the systolic and diastolic blood pressures in the placebo and active-treatment groups differed by 8.6 and 3.9 mm Hg , respectively , among the diabetic patients . Among the 4203 patients without diabetes , systolic and diastolic pressures differed by 10.3 and 4.5 mm Hg , respectively , in the two groups . After adjustment for possible confounders , active treatment was found to have reduced overall mortality by 55 percent ( from 45.1 deaths per 1000 patients to 26.4 deaths per 1000 patients ) , mortality from cardiovascular disease by 76 percent , all cardiovascular events combined by 69 percent , fatal and nonfatal strokes by 73 percent , and all cardiac events combined by 63 percent in the group of patients with diabetes . Among the nondiabetic patients , active treatment decreased all cardiovascular events combined by 26 percent and fatal and nonfatal strokes by 38 percent . In the group of patients receiving active treatment , reductions in overall mortality , mortality from cardiovascular disease , and all cardiovascular events were significantly larger among the diabetic patients than among the nondiabetic patients ( P=0.04 , P=0.02 , and P=0.01 , respectively ) . CONCLUSIONS Nitrendipine-based antihypertensive therapy is particularly beneficial in older patients with diabetes and isolated systolic hypertension . Thus , our findings do not support the hypothesis that the use of long-acting calcium-channel blockers may be harmful in diabetic patients The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering treatment to prevent Heart Attack Trial ( ALLHAT ) provides a unique opportunity to compare the long-term relative safety and efficacy of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and calcium channel blocker – initiated therapy in older hypertensive individuals . Patients were r and omized to amlodipine ( n=9048 ) or lisinopril ( n=9054 ) . The primary outcome was combined fatal coronary heart disease or nonfatal myocardial infa rct ion , analyzed by intention-to-treat . Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality , stroke , combined cardiovascular disease ( CVD ) , end-stage renal disease ( ESRD ) , cancer , and gastrointestinal bleeding . Mean follow-up was 4.9 years .  Blood pressure control was similar in nonblacks , but not in blacks . No significant differences were found between treatment groups for the primary outcome , all-cause mortality , ESRD , or cancer . Stroke rates were higher on lisinopril in blacks ( RR=1.51 , 95 % CI 1.22 to 1.86 ) but not in nonblacks ( RR=1.07 , 95 % CI 0.89 to 1.28 ) , and in women ( RR=1.45 , 95 % CI 1.17 to 1.79 ) , but not in men ( RR=1.10 , 95 % CI 0.92 to 1.31 ) . Rates of combined CVD were higher ( RR=1.06 , 95 % CI 1.00 to 1.12 ) because of higher rates for strokes , peripheral arterial disease , and angina , which were partly offset by lower rates for heart failure ( RR=0.87 , 95 % CI 0.78 to 0.96 ) on lisinopril compared with amlodipine .  Gastrointestinal bleeds and angioedema were higher on lisinopril . Patients with and without baseline coronary heart disease showed similar outcome patterns . We conclude that in hypertensive patients , the risks for coronary events are similar , but for stroke , combined CVD , gastrointestinal bleeding , and angioedema are higher and for heart failure are lower for lisinopril-based compared with amlodipine-based therapy . Some , but not all , of these differences may be explained by less effective blood pressure control in the lisinopril arm We examined the effects of the addition of low-dose indapamide to antihypertensive drugs of other classes , as well as its duration of action , using blood pressure ( BP ) self-monitoring at home . Seventy-six patients undergoing monotherapy with a calcium channel blocker ( CCB ) , angiotensin converting-enzyme inhibitor ( ACEI ) , or angiotensin AT1-receptor blocker ( ARB ) , but had an average morning home systolic BP ( SBP ) ≥ 135 mmHg or diastolic BP ( DBP ) ≥ 85 mmHg , were studied .  Indapamide ( 1 mg ) was added to their existing treatment once daily for 4 weeks . The additional hypotensive effects  of indapamide were evaluated by casual and home BPs , and the results were compared among the three groups of subjects classified according to their initial drug treatment classes . The morning/evening ( M/E ) ratio of BP reduction was calculated to assess the duration of the effect . Overall , indapamide significantly ( P < 0.001 ) lowered morning home BP ( 147 ± 12/87 ± 9 mmHg to 135 ± 12/81 ± 9 mmHg ) , evening home BP ( 138 ± 15/79 ± 10 mmHg to 126 ± 12/73 ± 9 mmHg ) , and casual BP ( 145 ± 21/86 ± 14 mmHg to 136 ± 17/81 ± 13 mmHg ) . All groupsshowed significant indapamide-induced home SBP/DBP decreases , whereas only the ACEI and ARB groups , but not the CCB group , showed a home pulse pressure ( PP ) reduction . Evening SBP and PP decreases were significantly greater in the ARB group than in the CCB group . The mean M/E ratio with indapamide was 0.95 for SBP and 0.85 for DBP . Low-dose indapamide used in combination can provide additional anti-hypertensive efficacy lasting for 24 h. The added effect of indapamide may be more prominent on ARBs than on CCBs In hypertensive patients with chronic renal disease ,  angiotensin receptor blockers ( ARBs ) are among the first-line drugs , and calcium channel blockers ( CCBs ) are recommended as a second line . We examined the effects of two therapeutic strategies using ARBs and benidipine , a CCB , on blood pressure ( BP ) , urinary albumin excretion ( UAE ) , and cost-effectiveness in hypertensive patients with albuminuria . Patients whose BP was 140/90 mmHg or higher despite treatment with low- or medium-dose ARBs were assigned r and omly to two groups . In Group A ( n=14 ) , the ARB dose was maximized and then benidipine was added until BP targets were reached ( < 130/85 mmHg ) . In Group B ( n=18 ) , benidipine was administered first and then the ARB dose was increased until BP targets were reached . The BP targets were achieved by ARB alone in 36 % of Group A patients and by the addition of benidipine in 83 % of Group B patients . Finally , BP decreased in each group , reaching the targets in 93 % of Group A patients and 94 % of Group B patients after a 4-month therapeutic period . UAE was decreased in both groups after a 4-month therapeutic period compared to the allocation period ( −33±6 % in Group A , −31±6 % in Group B ; p<0.001 , respectively ) . The monthly drug cost was higher ( 11,426±880 vs. 8,955±410 yen , p=0.012 ) and the cost-effectiveness of antihypertensive treatment was lower ( p=0.003 ) in Group A than in Group B. We conclude that the addition of benidipine to low- or medium-dose ARB is , in light of the renal protection and the cost-effectiveness of this approach , a useful therapeutic strategy for controlling BP in hypertensive patients with albuminuria Context Previously published results of this r and omized , double-blind trial showed that hypertensive patients treated with doxazosin rather than chlorthalidone more often developed heart failure . Did differences in blood pressure control or treatment with other drugs explain these findings ? Contribution This analysis shows that the slightly worse blood pressure control achieved with doxazosin did not explain higher risks for heart failure . Risks with doxazosin versus chlorthalidone were highest among patients who received monotherapy ( relative risk , 3.10 ) and lowest among patients who received stepped care with additional drugs ( relative risk , 1.42 ) . Implication s Increased risks for heart failure with doxazosin versus chlorthalidone are attenuated but not eliminated when additional antihypertensive drugs are used . The Editors The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering treatment to prevent Heart Attack Trial ( ALLHAT ) , a r and omized , double-blind , multicenter clinical trial including 42 418 participants at 623 clinical sites , is design ed to determine whether treatment begun with a calcium-channel blocker ( amlodipine ) , an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor ( lisinopril ) , or an -adrenergic blocker ( doxazosin ) compared to treatment with a diuretic ( chlorthalidone ) reduces the incidence of fatal coronary heart disease or nonfatal myocardial infa rct ion in high-risk patients with hypertension ( 1 ) . Secondary end points are all-cause mortality , stroke , and other cardiovascular events . A lipid-lowering trial in a subset of 10 356 participants is design ed to determine whether decreasing cholesterol levels with a hydroxymethyl glutamyl coenzyme A reductase inhibitor ( pravastatin ) compared with usual care reduces all-cause mortality in older , moderately hypercholesterolemic patients . In January 2000 , the doxazosin arm of the trial was discontinued ( 2 ) because major cardiovascular disease ( relative risk , 1.25 [ 95 % CI , 1.17 to 1.33 ] ; P < 0.001 ) , especially heart failure ( relative risk , 2.04 [ 95 % CI , 1.79 to 2.32 ] ; P < 0.001 ) , was significantly increased compared with the chlorthalidone arm . Equally important , a low probability existed that doxazosin would show benefit over chlorthalidone for the primary end point by the scheduled study end , given the lack of difference ( relative risk , 1.02 [ 95 % CI , 0.90 to 1.17 ] ; P > 0.2 ] at that time . These intention-to-treat analyses compared patients assigned to chlorthalidone with patients assigned to doxazosin . In this article , we analyze how treatment changes may have affected the comparison of doxazosin with chlorthalidone in terms of heart failure . Our major objectives are to ascertain to what extent the relative risk with doxazosin versus chlorthalidone depends on 1 ) whether the assigned drugs were used as monotherapy or in combination with other agents and 2 ) the difference in decreases in systolic and diastolic blood pressure . Methods Study Design The rationale and design of ALLHAT are described in detail elsewhere ( 1 ) . In brief , eligible participants were men and women 55 years of age or older who had systolic or diastolic hypertension ( 140/90 mm Hg or hypertension controlled with medication ) plus at least one additional risk factor for coronary heart disease events . The risk factors included previous ( > 6 months ) myocardial infa rct ion or stroke , left ventricular hypertrophy on electrocardiography or echocardiography , history of type 2 diabetes , current cigarette smoking , and a low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol level . Persons with a history of hospitalized or treated symptomatic heart failure or a known ejection fraction less than 0.35 were excluded . Unless the drug regimen required tapering for safety , participants who had been taking antihypertensive medications continued to do so until the day of r and omization , at which point they stopped taking all previous medications . On the day after r and omization , treatment with the study drug was initiated . Enrollment occurred from February 1994 through January 1998 . The original reported number of 42 448 participants and 625 sites changed because 30 patients with poor documentation of informed consent were excluded ( 2 ) . Participants were assigned by a computer-generated r and omization schedule in a ratio of 1.7:1 to receive chlorthalidone or doxazosin . R and omization was stratified by center and blocked over time to maintain the ratio . All participants gave written informed consent , and all centers obtained institutional review board approval . Ascertainment of Outcomes At each clinic visit , occurrence of study end points was assessed by the clinical investigator . A hospital discharge summary was required for each hospitalized study outcome , and a death certificate was required for each death . ALLHAT defined symptomatic heart failure as clear-cut signs or symptoms of left or right ventricular dysfunction that can not be attributed to other causes . A patient had to have at least one symptom ( paroxysmal nocturnal dyspnea , dyspnea at rest , New York Heart Association class III dyspnea or other symptoms [ on less than ordinary exertion ] , or orthopnea ) and one sign ( rales , ankle edema , tachycardia , cardiomegaly or characteristic pulmonary pattern on chest radiography , S3 gallop , or jugular venous distention ) ( 3 ) . Symptoms and signs were determined by the clinic investigator through patient history , chart review , or consultation with the treating physician , but such data were not collected central ly . A one-time sample of 24 hospitalized or fatal heart failure events was review ed in a blinded manner by the ALLHAT Endpoints Subcommittee ; 20 of 24 ( 83 % ) were deemed to have complete data for a definitive diagnosis . Of the 20 cases , the agreement rate between the subcommittee and the clinic investigators was 90 % ( 18 of 20 ) and similar in both treatment groups . Details on the validity of diagnosis of heart failure will be provided in a future report . Measurement and Treatment of Blood Pressure The ALLHAT protocol specified a stepped-care treatment program for hypertension . Trained observers using st and ardized techniques measured blood pressures during the trial ( 1 , 2 ) . All blood pressures were calculated as the average of two measurements obtained with a 30-second interval between them . The blood pressure goal in all four study arms was less than 140/90 mm Hg . This level was to be achieved with the lowest possible dose of blinded first-line drug , with addition of second- and third-line open-label therapy as needed after reaching the maximal dose of first-line drug . Chlorthalidone and doxazosin were to be taken once daily in the morning . By design , doses were selected to achieve equivalent blood pressure control in the treatment groups . The first , second , and third dosage levels were 12.5 mg/d , 12.5 mg/d ( sham titration ) , and 25 mg/d , respectively , for chlorthalidone and 2 mg/d , 4 mg/d , and 8 mg/d for doxazosin . Double-blinded 1-mg and 12.5-mg doses of doxazosin and chlorthalidone , respectively , were used for the first week to minimize the frequency of postural hypotension associated with doxazosin . The identity of drugs was masked at each dosage level , but dosage level was not . After r and omization , patients were seen for dose titration as needed at 1 and 3 months per the protocol , but they could return more often until target blood pressure was reached . Subsequently , required visits occurred at 3-month intervals during the first year and at 4-month intervals thereafter . Open-label second-step drugs were added as needed and tolerated . These agents were reserpine ( 0.05 to 0.2 mg/d ) , clonidine ( 0.1 to 0.3 mg twice daily ) , and atenolol ( 25 to 100 mg/d ) . The choice of second-step drug was at the discretion of the treating clinician-investigator . The third-step agent was hydralazine ( 25 to 100 mg twice daily ) . Details of these therapies are provided elsewhere ( 1 ) . Investigators could choose to prescribe open-label antihypertensive drugs other than those provided by the study . However , use of the drug classes under study thiazide diuretics , calcium antagonists , angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors , and -adrenergic blockerswas strongly discouraged to avoid dilution of treatment comparisons . When clinical conditions other than uncontrolled hypertension ( for example , angina or heart failure ) were present , drugs from any study class could be used . If a step 1 drug was specifically required for blood pressure control while blinded drug treatment was continued , the step 1 drug could be added as open-label therapy but the dose could not exceed one half the maximum recommended by the Fifth Joint National Committee ( 4 ) . In most such cases , unblinding the patient or the investigator to treatment assignment was not necessary . ( Overall , < 1 % of drug identities were provided to either participant or investigator . ) Any of nine possible open-label drug typesdiuretic , calcium-channel blocker , angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor , -adrenergic blocker , atenolol , reserpine , clonidine , hydralazine , and other antihypertensive drug ( which could include nonatenolol -blockers , although drug name was not logged)could be recorded at each visit . Because diuretics , angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors , and -blockers are beneficial in preventing or treating heart failure , we call these antihypertensive heart failure drugs . Data on  antihypertensive drug use before study enrollment were collected , but not by drug class . Statistical Analysis Data were analyzed for use of additional drugs according to participants ' r and omized treatment assignments and regardless of continuation of blinded study treatment . The outcomes all heart failure ( treated outside hospital , hospitalized , or fatal ) and hospitalized or fatal heart failure were examined by treatment group for the entire cohort . The time to event for the previously published as-r and omized analyses was the interval from r and omization to first diagnosis of heart failure for patients who had an outcome , or from r and omization to To achieve the target blood pressure recommended by the latest guidelines , multiple antihypertensive drugs are needed in most patients . In this study , the efficacy of treatment using an angiotensin II receptor antagonist ( ARB ) combined with a calcium channel blocker ( CCB ) or a diuretic was compared from multiple perspectives in patients with hypertension . Twenty-nine patients with essential hypertension , who had failed to achieve their target blood pressure ( < 130/85 mm Hg for patients < 65 years old and < 140/90 mm Hg for those ⩾65 years ) when treated with the ARB olmesartan at 20 mg day−1 , were additionally given 8–16 mg day−1 of the CCB azelnidipine or 1–2 mg day−1 of trichlormethiazide ( a thiazide diuretic ) in a r and omized crossover manner for 4 months each . At the end of each combination therapy period , blood and urine sample s were collected and arterial stiffness was evaluated by measuring the cardio-ankle pulse wave velocity . Compared with monotherapy , the blood pressure was reduced similarly by adding azelnidipine ( −12/−10 mm Hg ) or trichlormethiazide ( −14/−9 mm Hg ) . The heart rate was decreased with the CCB by 4 b.p.m . ( P<0.05 ) , whereas it was unchanged with the thiazide . Serum K , lipids and blood glucose were not significantly changed with either combination , whereas serum uric acid was increased with the thiazide ( P<0.01 ) but was unchanged with azelnidipine  . Plasma levels of renin , angiotensin II and aldosterone were also increased with the thiazide period , whereas high-sensitivity C-reactive protein and oxidized low-density lipoprotein were decreased with azelnidipine . In addition , the cardio-ankle vascular index , a parameter of arterial stiffness , was decreased with the azelnidipine period but was unchanged with the thiazide period ( P<0.01 ) . It is suggested that the combination of olmesartan and azelnidipine has advantages over the combination of olmesartan and a thiazide with respect to avoiding hyperuricemia , sympathetic activation , renin – angiotensin-aldosterone system stimulation , inflammation , oxidative stress , and increased arterial stiffness in patients with moderate hypertension . These properties may provide cardiovascular protection in addition to the hypotensive effect BACKGROUND In 1989 , the European Working Party on High Blood Pressure in the Elderly started the double-blind , placebo-controlled , Systolic Hypertension in Europe Trial to test the hypothesis that antihypertensive drug treatment would reduce the incidence of fatal and nonfatal stroke in older patients with isolated systolic hypertension . This report addresses whether the benefit of antihypertensive treatment varied according to sex , previous cardiovascular complications , age , initial blood pressure ( BP ) , and smoking or drinking habits in an intention-to-treat analysis and explores whether the morbidity and mortality results were consistent in a per- protocol analysis . METHODS After stratification for center , sex , and cardiovascular complications , 4695 patients 60 years of age or older with a systolic BP of 160 to 219 mm Hg and diastolic BP less than 95 mm Hg were r and omized . Active treatment consisted of nitrendipine ( 10 - 40 mg/d ) , with the possible addition of enalapril maleate ( 5 - 20 mg/d ) and /or hydrochlorothiazide ( 12.5 - 25 mg/d ) , titrated or combined to reduce the sitting systolic BP by at least 20 mm Hg , to below 150 mm Hg . In the control group , matching placebo tablets were employed similarly . RESULTS In the intention-to-treat analysis , male sex , previous cardiovascular complications , older age , higher systolic BP , and smoking at r and omization were positively and independently correlated with cardiovascular risk . Furthermore , for total ( P = .009 ) and cardiovascular ( P = .09 ) mortality , the benefit of antihypertensive drug treatment weakened with advancing age ; for total mortality ( P = .05 ) , the benefit increased with higher systolic BP at entry , while for fatal and nonfatal stroke ( P = .01 ) , it was most evident in nonsmokers ( 92.5 % of all patients ) . In the per protocol analysis , active treatment reduced total mortality by 24 % ( P = .05 ) , reduced all fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular end points by 32 % ( P<.001 ) , reduced all strokes by 44 % ( P = .004 ) , reduced nonfatal strokes by 48 % ( P = .005 ) , and reduced all cardiac end points , including sudden death , by 26 % ( P = .05 ) . CONCLUSIONS In elderly patients with isolated systolic hypertension , stepwise antihypertensive drug treatment , starting with the dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker nitrendipine , improves prognosis . The per- protocol analysis suggested that treating 1000 patients for 5 years would prevent 24 deaths , 54 major cardiovascular end points , 29 strokes , or 25 cardiac end points . The effects of antihypertensive drug treatment on total and cardiovascular mortality may be attenuated in very old patients Objective : The aims of this sub analysis of the COLM trial [ NCT00454662 ] were to compare visit-to-visit variability ( VVV ) of blood pressure ( BP ) between age groups and between two treatment combinations , that is , the angiotensin II receptor blocker , olmesartan combined with a calcium channel blocker ( CCB ) , or a diuretic and to investigate the effect of VVV of BP on cardiovascular events in elderly hypertensive patients . Methods : Hypertensive patients ages 65–84 years with a history of and /or risk factors for cardiovascular disease were r and omized to receive treatment with olmesartan along with either a CCB or a diuretic  for at least 3 years . This sub analysis comprised 4876 patients who had their office BP measured at least three occasions ( median nine occasions ) during the follow-up period .  VVV of BP was defined by several metrics including the within-individual st and ard deviation of every visit during the follow-up period . Results : VVV of SBP was larger in the very elderly group ( 75–84 years ) than in the elderly group ( 65–74 years ) . VVV of SBP was smaller in the olmesartan along with CCB group than in the olmesartan along with diuretic group , especially in very elderly patients and also isolated systolic hypertensive patients . The incidence rate of primary endpoint increased along with an increment in the SD of SBP in all of the age and treatment groups . Conclusion : VVV of SBP may mediate the preferable effect of combination of angiotensin II receptor blocker along with CCB on cardiovascular events in the very elderly and also isolated systolic hypertensive patients CONTEXT Antihypertensive therapy is well established to reduce hypertension-related morbidity and mortality , but the optimal first-step therapy is unknown . OBJECTIVE To determine whether treatment with a calcium channel blocker or an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor lowers the incidence of coronary heart disease ( CHD ) or other cardiovascular disease ( CVD ) events vs treatment with a diuretic . DESIGN The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial ( ALLHAT ) , a r and omized , double-blind , active-controlled clinical trial conducted from February 1994 through March 2002 . SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS A total of 33 357 participants aged 55 years or older with hypertension and at least 1 other CHD risk factor from 623 North American centers . INTERVENTIONS Participants were r and omly assigned to receive chlorthalidone , 12.5 to 25 mg/d ( n = 15 255 ) ; amlodipine , 2.5 to 10 mg/d ( n = 9048 ) ; or lisinopril , 10 to 40 mg/d ( n = 9054 ) for planned follow-up of approximately 4 to 8 years . MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary outcome was combined fatal CHD or nonfatal myocardial infa rct ion , analyzed by intent-to-treat . Secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality , stroke , combined CHD ( primary outcome , coronary revascularization , or angina with hospitalization ) , and combined CVD ( combined CHD , stroke , treated angina without hospitalization , heart failure [ HF ] , and peripheral arterial disease ) . RESULTS Mean follow-up was 4.9 years . The primary outcome occurred in 2956 participants , with no difference between treatments . Compared with chlorthalidone ( 6-year rate , 11.5 % ) , the relative risks ( RRs ) were 0.98 ( 95 % CI , 0.90 - 1.07 ) for amlodipine ( 6-year rate , 11.3 % ) and 0.99 ( 95 % CI , 0.91 - 1.08 ) for lisinopril ( 6-year rate , 11.4 % ) . Likewise , all-cause mortality did not differ between groups . Five-year systolic blood pressures were significantly higher in the amlodipine ( 0.8 mm Hg , P = .03 ) and lisinopril ( 2 mm Hg , P<.001 ) groups compared with chlorthalidone , and 5-year diastolic blood pressure was significantly lower with amlodipine ( 0.8 mm Hg , P<.001 ) . For amlodipine vs chlorthalidone , secondary outcomes were similar except for a higher 6-year rate of HF with amlodipine ( 10.2 % vs 7.7 % ; RR , 1.38 ; 95 % CI , 1.25 - 1.52 ) . For lisinopril vs chlorthalidone , lisinopril had higher 6-year rates of combined CVD ( 33.3 % vs 30.9 % ; RR , 1.10 ; 95 % CI , 1.05 - 1.16 ) ; stroke ( 6.3 % vs 5.6 % ; RR , 1.15 ; 95 % CI , 1.02 - 1.30 ) ; and HF ( 8.7 % vs 7.7 % ; RR , 1.19 ; 95 % CI , 1.07 - 1.31 ) . CONCLUSION Thiazide-type diuretics are superior in preventing 1 or more major forms of CVD and are less expensive . They should be preferred for first-step antihypertensive therapy
In a pooled analysis of data of 31 RCTs measuring the effect of CCBs  on stroke  , CCBs  reduced stroke more than placebo and β-adrenergic blockers , but were not different than ACEIs and diuretics .
BACKGROUND Hypertension is a major risk factor for the development of stroke .
It is well known that lowering blood pressure decreases the risk of stroke in people with moderate to severe hypertension .
However , the specific effects of calcium channel blockers ( CCBs ) against stroke in patients with hypertension as compared to no treatment and other antihypertensive drug classes are not known .