RESULTS The global antihypertensive activity of ARB differs from that observed with amlodipine in the sense that the magnitude of the reduction in the BP values does not essentially depend on the initial BP values nor on the dose used .
When only ARB were considered , the drug used was a determinant for systolic BP reduction , whereas for diastolic BP the influence was on the BP reduction and the duration of the antihypertensive activity .
The dose used had a particular influence on the duration of the antihypertensive activity for both systolic and diastolic BP .
CONCLUSION Among the ARB , the influence is on duration more than on the magnitude of BP reduction .
Dose , therefore , is an important factor in the duration of antihypertensive activity
OBJECTIVE To perform a systematic review of the antihypertensive activity of the angiotensin II AT1 receptor antagonists ( ARB ) .
Assessment of drug effects on blood pressure and pulse pressure using clinic, home and ambulatory measurements
This study investigated the differences in the effect of an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor ( ACEI ) compared with an angiotensin receptor blocker ( ARB ) on blood pressure ( BP ) and pulse pressure ( PP ) measured in the clinic ( CBP and CPP , respectively ) , at home ( HBP , HPP ) and with ambulatory monitoring ( ABP , APP ) . Twenty-seven hypertensive patients were r and omised to receive lisinopril ( 20 mg ) or losartan ( 50 mg ) for 5 weeks , and were subsequently crossed-over to the alternative treatment for a second 5-week period . Measurements of CBP , 24-h ABP and 5-days HBP were performed before r and omisation and at the end of each treatment period . All measurement methods showed that lisinopril was more effective than losartan in reducing BP . However , the difference between the two drugs was demonstrated with greater precision using HBP ( P<0.001 ) than 24-h ABP ( P<0.01 ) , whereas the poorest precision for demonstrating this difference was provided by CBP ( P<0.05 ) . Lisinopril was also found more effective than losartan in reducing HPP ( P=0.01 ) and 24-h APP ( P=0.03 ) whereas no such a difference was detected using measurements of CPP . It was concluded that the antihypertensive drugs may differ in their effects not only on BP , but also on PP . HBP monitoring appears to be as reliable as 24-h ABP monitoring in detecting differences in the effect of drugs on both BP and PP . Clinic measurements seem to be the least reliable method , particularly in the detection of differences in PP
RESULTS The global antihypertensive activity of ARB differs from that observed with amlodipine in the sense that the magnitude of the reduction in the BP values does not essentially depend on the initial BP values nor on the dose used .
When only ARB were considered , the drug used was a determinant for systolic BP reduction , whereas for diastolic BP the influence was on the BP reduction and the duration of the antihypertensive activity .
The dose used had a particular influence on the duration of the antihypertensive activity for both systolic and diastolic BP .
CONCLUSION Among the ARB , the influence is on duration more than on the magnitude of BP reduction .
Dose , therefore , is an important factor in the duration of antihypertensive activity
OBJECTIVE To perform a systematic review of the antihypertensive activity of the angiotensin II AT1 receptor antagonists ( ARB ) .