1998•PubMedRequires access

Benazepril versus felodipine as supplement to bendroflumethiazide: evaluation by office and ambulatory blood pressure.

Kjeld Kristensen, Niels Wiinberg, Asbjørn Høegholm, Kornerup Hj, Tage Lysbo Svendsen, L Mølby, Torben Pindborg, Nielsen Pe

Open publisher page 5 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare a combination of a thiazide diuretic and an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor with a thiazide diuretic and a calcium antagonist. DESIGN: A double-blind randomized trial with subjects in two parallel groups administered either 10-20 mg benazepril once daily or 5-10 mg extended-release felodipine once daily, both titrated according to diastolic office blood pressure. During run-in and all 12 weeks of the study members of both groups were administered 2.5 mg bendroflumethiazide once daily. We measured 24 h ambulatory blood pressure with thiazide alone and after 12 weeks of combination therapy. SETTING: General practices. PATIENTS: We studied 96 hypertensive patients (50 women and 46 men), aged 25-75 years, whose blood pressures were insufficiently regulated (i.e. office diastolic blood pressure >/= 95 mmHg) despite treatment with a thiazide diuretic for at least 3 months. RESULTS: The responses of office blood pressure after 12 weeks of treatment did not differ between the groups and neither did the proportions of responders. The ambulatory recordings revealed, after 12 weeks of treatment, a fall in daytime blood pressure of 16.3/10.3 mmHg in members of the benazepril group compared with a fall of 8.5/5.2 mmHg in members of the felodipine group (P < 0.001/<0.001). Analysis of variance showed that the systolic but not the diastolic office blood pressure in members of the benazepril group was significantly lower during the 12-week study period. When evaluating rising single quote, left (low)white-coat-positive' patients separately, there was a tendency for there to be a more pronounced reduction of their (normal) blood pressure with benazepril therapy. There was a significant reduction in weight of patients in the benazepril group (by 0.9 kg), but not of patients in the felodipine group. We observed no difference in side effects between the two treatment groups.CONCLUSION: Add-on therapies both with benazepril and with felodipine are effective and both drug regimens are well tolerated, but ambulatory blood pressure monitoring yielded differing results.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVE: To compare a combination of a thiazide diuretic and an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor with a thiazide diuretic and a calcium antagonist. DESIGN: A double-blind randomized trial with subjects in two parallel groups administered either 10-20 mg benazepril once daily or 5-10 mg extended-release felodipine once daily, both titrated according to diastolic office blood pressure. During run-in and all 12 weeks of the study members of both groups were administered 2.5 mg bendroflumethiazide once daily. We measured 24 h ambulatory blood pressure with thiazide alone and after 12 weeks of combination therapy. SETTING: General practices. PATIENTS: We studied 96 hypertensive patients (50 women and 46 men), aged 25-75 years, whose blood pressures were insufficiently regulated (i.e. office diastolic blood pressure >/= 95 mmHg) despite treatment with a thiazide diuretic for at least 3 months. RESULTS: The responses of office blood pressure after 12 weeks of treatment did not differ between the groups and neither did the proportions of responders. The ambulatory recordings revealed, after 12 weeks of treatment, a fall in daytime blood pressure of 16.3/10.3 mmHg in members of the benazepril group compared with a fall of 8.5/5.2 mmHg in members of the felodipine group (P < 0.001/<0.001). Analysis of variance showed that the systolic but not the diastolic office blood pressure in members of the benazepril group was significantly lower during the 12-week study period. When evaluating rising single quote, left (low)white-coat-positive' patients separately, there was a tendency for there to be a more pronounced reduction of their (normal) blood pressure with benazepril therapy. There was a significant reduction in weight of patients in the benazepril group (by 0.9 kg), but not of patients in the felodipine group. We observed no difference in side effects between the two treatment groups.CONCLUSION: Add-on therapies both with benazepril and with felodipine are effective and both drug regimens are well tolerated, but ambulatory blood pressure monitoring yielded differing results.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 5 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare a combination of a thiazide diuretic and an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor with a thiazide diuretic and a calcium antagonist. DESIGN: A double-blind randomized trial with subjects in two parallel groups administered either 10-20 mg benazepril once daily or 5-10 mg extended-release felodipine once daily, both titrated according to diastolic office blood pressure. During run-in and all 12 weeks of the study members of both groups were administered 2.5 mg bendroflumethiazide once daily. We measured 24 h ambulatory blood pressure with thiazide alone and after 12 weeks of combination therapy. SETTING: General practices. PATIENTS: We studied 96 hypertensive patients (50 women and 46 men), aged 25-75 years, whose blood pressures were insufficiently regulated (i.e. office diastolic blood pressure >/= 95 mmHg) despite treatment with a thiazide diuretic for at least 3 months. RESULTS: The responses of office blood pressure after 12 weeks of treatment did not differ between the groups and neither did the proportions of responders. The ambulatory recordings revealed, after 12 weeks of treatment, a fall in daytime blood pressure of 16.3/10.3 mmHg in members of the benazepril group compared with a fall of 8.5/5.2 mmHg in members of the felodipine group (P < 0.001/<0.001). Analysis of variance showed that the systolic but not the diastolic office blood pressure in members of the benazepril group was significantly lower during the 12-week study period. When evaluating rising single quote, left (low)white-coat-positive' patients separately, there was a tendency for there to be a more pronounced reduction of their (normal) blood pressure with benazepril therapy. There was a significant reduction in weight of patients in the benazepril group (by 0.9 kg), but not of patients in the felodipine group. We observed no difference in side effects between the two treatment groups.CONCLUSION: Add-on therapies both with benazepril and with felodipine are effective and both drug regimens are well tolerated, but ambulatory blood pressure monitoring yielded differing results.

Key concepts: Medicine, Felodipine, Benazepril, Blood pressure, Ambulatory blood pressure, Thiazide, Diuretic, Ambulatory

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Benazepril versus felodipine as supplement to bendroflumethiazide: evaluation by office and ambulatory blood pressure. — Research Paper | ScholarLens