1990The Japanese Journal of PharmacologyOpen access

Comparison of Sublingual Captopril and Sublingual Nifedipine in Hypertensive Emergencies

Berrin Ceyhan, Yaşar Karaaslan, Oğuz Caymaz, Ali Oto, Erdem Oram, Aysel Oram, Şevket Uǧurlu

Open full text 5 citations

Abstract

Hypertensive crises require immediate therapy, usually by parenteral drug administration. Sublingual nifedipine has been shown to be highly effective. However, the blood pressure fall following nifedipine is frequently associated with side-effects. The use of sublingual captopril has recently been indicated in hypertensive crisis, assuming that by this route, there would be a faster absorption and thus a more rapid effect on blood pressure than with the oral route. To verify this hypothesis, we have compared the hypotensive effects of sublingual nifedipine and sublingual captopril in 52 patients with hypertensive emergencies: 25-mg captopril and 10-mg nifedipine were administered sublingually to 28 and 24 patients, respectively. Blood pressures and heart rates were continuously measured up to 240 min postdose. A significant (P<0.001) hypotensive effect of both sublingual captopril and nifedipine therapy occured at 5 min and persisted for 240 min. Heart rates increased with nifedipine, but decreased with captopril. We observed no side-effects in the captopril group, but flushing, tachycardia and headache were observed in 6 patients in the nifedipine group. We conclude that sublingual captopril is effective in patients with hypertensive emergencies and that captopril may be an excellent alternative to sublingual nifedipine in the urgent treatment of hypertensive crisis.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Hypertensive crises require immediate therapy, usually by parenteral drug administration. Sublingual nifedipine has been shown to be highly effective. However, the blood pressure fall following nifedipine is frequently associated with side-effects. The use of sublingual captopril has recently been indicated in hypertensive crisis, assuming that by this route, there would be a faster absorption and thus a more rapid effect on blood pressure than with the oral route. To verify this hypothesis, we have compared the hypotensive effects of sublingual nifedipine and sublingual captopril in 52 patients with hypertensive emergencies: 25-mg captopril and 10-mg nifedipine were administered sublingually to 28 and 24 patients, respectively. Blood pressures and heart rates were continuously measured up to 240 min postdose. A significant (P<0.001) hypotensive effect of both sublingual captopril and nifedipine therapy occured at 5 min and persisted for 240 min. Heart rates increased with nifedipine, but decreased with captopril. We observed no side-effects in the captopril group, but flushing, tachycardia and headache were observed in 6 patients in the nifedipine group. We conclude that sublingual captopril is effective in patients with hypertensive emergencies and that captopril may be an excellent alternative to sublingual nifedipine in the urgent treatment of hypertensive crisis.

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

Hypertensive crises require immediate therapy, usually by parenteral drug administration. Sublingual nifedipine has been shown to be highly effective. However, the blood pressure fall following nifedipine is frequently associated with side-effects. The use of sublingual captopril has recently been indicated in hypertensive crisis, assuming that by this route, there would be a faster absorption and thus a more rapid effect on blood pressure than with the oral route. To verify this hypothesis, we have compared the hypotensive effects of sublingual nifedipine and sublingual captopril in 52 patients with hypertensive emergencies: 25-mg captopril and 10-mg nifedipine were administered sublingually to 28 and 24 patients, respectively. Blood pressures and heart rates were continuously measured up to 240 min postdose. A significant (P<0.001) hypotensive effect of both sublingual captopril and nifedipine therapy occured at 5 min and persisted for 240 min. Heart rates increased with nifedipine, but decreased with captopril. We observed no side-effects in the captopril group, but flushing, tachycardia and headache were observed in 6 patients in the nifedipine group. We conclude that sublingual captopril is effective in patients with hypertensive emergencies and that captopril may be an excellent alternative to sublingual nifedipine in the urgent treatment of hypertensive crisis.

Key concepts: Nifedipine, Captopril, Sublingual administration, Medicine, Blood pressure, Anesthesia, Pharmacology, Internal medicine

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparison of Sublingual Captopril and Sublingual Nifedipine in Hypertensive Emergencies — Research Paper | ScholarLens