ACE inhibitors, beta-blockers, calcium blockers, and diuretics for the control of systolic hypertension. Effect of different antihypertensive drug classes on central aortic pressure. Beta-blocker/thiazide combination for treatment of hypertensive children: a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. A 16-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial to quantify the combined effect of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and a beta-blocker on blood pressure reduction. Beta-blockers versus diuretics in hypertensive men: main results from the HAPPHY trial. Results of combination anti-hypertensive therapy after failure of each of the components. Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study Group on Anti-hypertensive Agents. South African hypertension guideline 2011. Behavioral and physiological effects of a beta blocker and relaxation therapy on mild hypertensives. Influence of diabetes and type of hypertension on response to antihypertensive treatment. Pharmaceutical care program for patients with uncontrolled hypertension. Report of a double-blind clinical trial with ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Beta-blockers versus saluretics in hypertension. Comparison of total mortality, myocardial infarction, and sudden death: study design and early results on blood pressure reduction. Comparison of two calcium blockers on hemodynamics, left ventricular mass, and coronary vasodilatory in advanced hypertension. Combined alpha- and beta-adrenoceptor blockade with labetalol in hypertension. Efficacy of candesartan cilexetil as add-on therapy in hypertensive patients uncontrolled on background therapy: a clinical experience trial. ACTION Study Investigators. Medical treatment of hypertension in Switzerland. The 2009 Swiss Hypertension Survey (SWISSHYPE). Partial regression of vascular structural alterations in hypertensive patients treated with alpha-beta-blocker, labetalol. Crossover design to test antihypertensive drugs with self-recorded blood pressure.
The objective of this study was to determine which of the common groups of antihypertensive drugs is most effective at lowering systolic blood pressure ( SBP ) in elderly patients with previously untreated hypertension and the percentage of patients controlled with single or sequential monotherapy . Subjects were recruited from patients attending other outpatient clinics and entered into the study if their SBP was more than 150 mm Hg after three visits . Patients were given a low and high dose of each of the main classes of drugs or placebo for 1 month each . The study was a balanced , r and omized crossover design with five periods : placebo ; angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors ; beta-blocking drugs ; calcium-blocking drugs ; and thiazide diuretics .  Blood pressure ( BP ) was measured 24 to 26 h after the previous dose . A question naire for side effects was administered at each visit . Seventy-four patients entered the study . beta-Blockers could not be used in 15 patients because of asthma or bronchospasm and these had two placebo periods . There were 9 of 66 patients on P , 9 of 46 on beta-blockers , 4 of 65 on calcium-blocking drugs , 4 of 65 on diuretic , and 1 of 62 patients on ACE inhibitors who did not progress to the higher dose because of side effects . Decreases in SBP compared to r and omized placebo were calcium-blocking drugs 15 mm Hg = diuretic 13 mm Hg > ACE inhibitors 8 mm Hg = beta-blockers 5 mm Hg . Blood pressure decrease correlated with placebo BP ( P < .0005 , r = 0.53 to 0.70 ) . When corrected for placebo , target SBP ( < 140 mm Hg ) was reached in between 6 % to 15 % of patients on monotherapy . Sequential monotherapy achieved target in 29 % . Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors , calcium-blocking drugs , and diuretics had no more side effects than placebo . Patients on beta-blockers had more side effects and the well-being score was reduced . Diuretics and calcium-blocking drugs are more effective in elderly patients at lowering SBP pressure . beta-Blockers were relatively ineffective , were frequently contraindicated , and had more side effects . Monotherapy achieved control in only a small number of patients . In elderly people with essential hypertension , therapy should be instituted with diuretics or calcium-blocking drugs , but combination therapy will usually be required to achieve goal Central aortic systolic blood pressure ( BP ) is an important determinant of cardiac workload and cardiac hypertrophy . The relationship of central aortic systolic BP and brachial BP varies depending on the stiffness of blood vessels . It is not certain whether the different drug classes affect the brachial and aortic systolic BP in a similar manner . In a double-blind crossover study , we measured the effects of the four major drug classes compared with placebo on central aortic pressure . Central aortic pressure and various indices were determined using the Sphygmo Cor apparatus . The study was undertaken in patients aged 65 to 85 years with systolic BP > 150 mm Hg at study entry . Results are reported for 32 patients who had satisfactory applanation tonometry in all five periods .  Calcium channel blockers and diuretics caused a greater fall in brachial artery systolic BP than angiotensin-converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitors or beta-blocking drugs . On placebo , central aorta augmentation pressure and index were 23 mm Hg and 33.3 % ; on ACE inhibitors the values were 18 mm Hg and 30 % ; on beta-blockers , 26 mm Hg and 38.5 % ; on calcium channel blockers , 16 mm Hg and 28 % ; and on diuretics , 17 mm Hg and 28.8 % . The augmentation pressure on beta-blocking drugs was greater than on the other three drug classes ( P < .05 ) , and augmentation pressures on ACE inhibitors , calcium channel blockers , and diuretics were less than on placebo ( P < .05 ) . The lowest central aortic pressures were achieved with calcium blocking drugs and diuretics . Therapy based on brachial artery recordings may thus overestimate the effect of beta-blocking drugs on central aortic systolic BP and underestimate the effectiveness of ACE inhibitors and calcium blocking drugs . The clinical importance of this discrepancy needs to be evaluated Antihypertensive medications are used extensively in children despite a paucity of r and omized , placebo-controlled trials . This study was among the first r and omized , controlled pediatric antihypertensive medication trials , in which the combination drug bisoprolol fumarate/hydrochlorothiazide ( B/HT ) was compared with placebo . The study comprised a 2-week single-blind placebo screening period , a 6-week double-blind dose titration period , a 4-week double-blind dose maintenance period , and a 2-week double-blind dose-tapering period . One hundred and forty subjects were enrolled to achieve 94 r and omized subjects treated either with B/HT ( n=62 ) or placebo ( n=32 ) . B/HT induced significant reductions compared with placebo for average sitting systolic blood pressure ( SiSBP ) ( 9.3 vs. 4.9 mmHg , P<0.05 ) and sitting diastolic blood pressure ( SiDBP ) ( 7.2 vs. 2.7 mmHg , P<0.05 ) . The placebo-subtracted BP reductions were greater in younger children and those with more-severe baseline hypertension . The percentage of subjects with BP less than the 90th percentile at study completion was 45 % for B/HT and 34 % for placebo ( P = NS ) . Although the study demonstrated that B/HT  reduced BP safely compared with placebo , the large placebo effect and failure of most subjects to achieve target BP control make it uncertain whether B/HT is appropriate first-line therapy for pediatric hypertension , particularly in adolescents with mild-to-moderate BP elevation BACKGROUND Although beta-blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitors are often used together , there is a lack of quantitative evidence for the efficacy of this combination in reducing  blood pressure ( BP ) .  OBJECTIVE The aim of this r and omized , double-blind , placebo-controlled , crossover study was to quantify the combined effect of a beta-blocker ( atenolol ) and an ACE inhibitor ( lisinopril ) in lowering BP . METHODS Participants who were > or = 40 years of age and enrolled in the hypertension or anticoagulation clinics at St. Bartholomew 's Hospital , London , United Kingdom , were r and omized to 3 consecutive 4-week treatments consisting of atenolol 25 mg plus placebo , lisinopril 5 mg plus placebo , and atenolol 25 mg plus lisinopril 5 mg , plus a period of 2 placebos . At the end of each period , seated BP was measured in the right arm using electronic monitors . RESULTS The mean  placebo-adjusted peak BP reductions among the 47 participants ( mean age , 62 [ range 42 - 82 ] years ; 75 % male ; 70 % white/30 % Asian ; mean baseline BP , 145/82 mm Hg ) who completed all 4 periods were significantly greater with the combination of both drugs than with either drug alone ( P < 0.001 ) . The systolic reductions were 22.9 mm Hg with combination treatment , 16.1 mm Hg with atenolol treatment , and 12.5 mm Hg with lisinopril treatment , and the diastolic reductions were 13.9 , 9.8 , and 6.8 mm Hg , respectively . The BP-lowering effect of the 2 drugs together was similar to that expected from the sum of each alone , allowing for the reduced effect of 1 drug given the lower pretreatment BP due to the other . The incremental systolic BP reduction from the 2 drugs together compared with 1 alone was 79 % ( 95 % CI , 54%-126 % ) of the expected additive effect , 88 % ( 95 % CI , 58%-130 % ) for diastolic BP , and 84 % ( 95 % CI , 65%-118 % ) for the mean of systolic and diastolic BP . CONCLUSIONS The combination of the beta-blocker atenolol 25 mg plus the ACE inhibitor lisinopril 5 mg was associated with a significantly greater decrease in BP compared with either alone . The BP reduction with the combination treatment was similar to and statistically consistent with the 2 drugs having additive effects . Clinical Trials Identification Number : IS RCT N97280940 Men aged 40 - 64 years with mild to moderate hypertension [ diastolic blood pressure ( DBP ) 100 - 130 mmHg ] were r and omized to treatment with a  diuretic ( n = 3272 ) or a  beta-blocker ( n = 3297 ) , with additional drugs if necessary , to determine whether a beta-blocker based treatment differs from thiazide diuretic based treatment with regard to the prevention of coronary heart disease ( CHD ) events and death .  Patients with previous CHD , stroke or other serious diseases , or with contraindications to diuretics or beta-blockers were excluded . If normotension ( DBP less than 95 mmHg ) was not achieved by monotherapy , other antihypertensive drugs were added , but the two basic drugs were not crossed over . Patients were assessed at 6-monthly intervals . The mean follow-up for end-points was 45.1 months . Blood pressure ( BP ) side effects and end-points were recorded in a st and ardized manner . Entry characteristics and the BP reduction achieved were very similar in both treatment groups . All analyses were made on an intention-to-treat basis . The incidence of CHD did not differ between the two treatment groups . The incidence of fatal stroke tended to be lower in the beta-blocker treated group than in the diuretic treated group . Total mortality and the total number of end-points were similar in both groups . The percentage of patients withdrawn due to side effects was similar , whereas the number of reported symptoms , according to a question naire , was higher for patients on beta-blockers . The incidence of diabetes did not differ between the two groups . Subgroup analyses did not detect a difference in the effect of beta-blockers compared with diuretics in smokers as opposed to non-smokers , and beta-blockers also had the same effects as diuretics in the quartile with the highest predicted risk for CHD . Beta-blockers and thiazide diuretics were approximately equally well tolerated . The two drugs had a similar BP reducing effect although additional drugs had to be given more often in the diuretic group . Antihypertensive treatment based on a beta-blocker or on a thiazide diuretic could not be shown to affect the prevention of hypertensive complications , including CHD , to a different extent We r and omised ambulatory men with diastolic blood pressure ( BP ) 95 - 109 mmHg without anti-hypertensive medication to single drug treatment with either  hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 - 50 mg/day , atenolol 25 - 100 mg/day , captopril 25 - 100 mg/day , clonidine 0.2 - 0.6 mg/day , diltiazem-SR 120 - 360 mg/day , prazosin 4 - 20 mg/day or placebo in a double-blind prospect i ve trial . The assigned drug was titrated to a goal BP of < 90 mm Hg . Patients not achieving goal BP were rer and omised to an alternative single active drug . Non-responders to the second drug received the first drug in combination with the second . Of the 102 non-responders to both drugs who qualified for the combination , 59 ( 57.8 % ) responded . The combination pairs that included a diuretic achieved diastolic goal BP in 69 % and < 140 mm Hg systolic in 77 % compared with 51 % and 46 % , respectively , for those combinations without a diuretic ( P = 0.067 ; P = 0.002 ) . Six of the eight terminations due to adverse drug reactions were in combinations containing prazosin ; three of these six were hypotensive reactions . We conclude that two single drugs of insufficient efficacy to control BP individually have a high probability of achieving goal BP when combined , especially if the combination contains a diuretic 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 & NA ; In this industrial‐based study we compared the blood pressure (BP)‐lowering effectiveness of relaxation , a beta blocker , and the combined use of these two treatments in 47 untreated , mildly hypertensive blue collar steel workers . Using a r and omized two by two factorial design , patients received either nadolol or placebo drug daily , and either a relaxation training or an education program , each lasting 8 weeks . A pre‐intervention and post‐intervention stress test measured response of heart rate and BP to mental and physical tasks . BP assessment s were done at baseline , post‐intervention , 1 month , and 3 month follow‐up . Change in several self‐report measures was determined . Results showed that beta blocker was more effective in lowering BP than placebo , but relaxation was not more effective in lowering BP than health education . The combined effect of beta blocker and relaxation was not superior to beta blocker alone . Compliance with relaxation practice was not superior to compliance with medication . We conclude that pharmacologic treatment is superior to the relaxation therapy tested The aim of our investigation was to determine whether the presence of additional risk factors or type of hypertension ( diastolic or isolated systolic ) influences blood pressure ( BP ) response to treatment . The International Nifedipine GITS Study : Intervention as a Goal in Hypertension Treatment ( INSIGHT ) study is a double-blinded outcome comparison of calcium channel blockade with diuretics in high-risk patients aged 55 to 80 years . Dynamic r and omization between nifedipine once daily and hydrochlorothiazide/amiloride was performed to ensure that approximately equal numbers of patients in the 2 groups had each of the major cardiovascular risk factors . Patients with isolated systolic hypertension were also separately r and omized . Atenolol or enalapril was the m and atory second-line drug . In 5669 patients who completed the 18-week titration , BP fell from 172+/-15/99+/-9 mm Hg ( mean+/-SD ) while receiving placebo to 139+/-12/82+/-7 mm Hg . Twenty-six percent of patients required 2 drugs , and 4 % required 3 drugs . Patients with diabetes were the most resistant to treatment , requiring second and third drugs 40 % and 100 % more frequently than patients without diabetes and achieving marginally the highest final BP , for any risk group , of 141+/-13/82+/-8 mm Hg . Age , smoking , gender , hypercholesterolemia , left ventricular hypertrophy , and existing atherosclerosis had little ( < 1 mm Hg ) or no influence on BP at the end of titration , but all except smoking slightly reduced the initial response of either systolic or diastolic BP . Patients with isolated systolic hypertension were slightly more responsive than average to treatment . Our findings suggest that in patients at high absolute risk of cardiovascular complications from hypertension , the risk factors themselves do not prevent the recommended BP targets from being achieved BACKGROUND Pharmaceutical care programs may be an option to improve blood pressure ( BP ) control in patients with uncontrolled hypertension . The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of pharmaceutical care programs in treating patients with resistant hypertension . METHODS In a double-blind r and omized clinical trial , 71 patients with uncontrolled BP were enrolled in a pharmaceutical care program or in a control group and underwent a series of cognitive tests . The primary outcome was change in ambulatory BP ( ABP ) between the baseline evaluation and the final visit 6 months later . The secondary outcomes were the frequency of drug-related problems and adherence as determined by plasma levels of hydrochlorothiazide . RESULTS The delta-values between the intervention and control groups for ABP in the different daily periods , with the corresponding 95 % confidence limits , adjusted for age and baseline BP were : 3 ( -1 to 5 ) , 2 ( -2 to 4 ) , and 5 ( -1 to 6 ) mm Hg for 24 h , daily and nightly systolic BP , respectively . The corresponding values for diastolic BP were 1 ( -1 to 3 ) , 0 ( -2 to 2 ) , and 3 ( -1 to 4 ) mm Hg , respectively .  Hydrochlorothiazide  was detected in the plasma in 21 of 27 patients in the intervention group that attended to all appointments and 24 of 30 patients in the control group ( P = .904 ) . CONCLUSIONS The pharmaceutical care program tested in this trial was feasible and showed a trend for better BP control in patients with uncontrolled hypertension Abstract Beta-blocking drugs may be more effective than saluretic diuretics in reducing the total mortality and incidence of myocardial infa rct ion , sudden death and stroke in middle-aged men with mild to moderate hypertension . To test this hypothesis , an international multicenter , r and omized study is in progress , and its design and some early results are presented here . It is probable that 4,000–5,000 men will need to be enrolled for five years to show a statistically significant difference between treatments . Identical control of blood pressure in the two treatment groups is m and atory , and has been achieved using a fixed therapeutic schedule . The ongoing study will be completed during 1985–1990 Dihydropyridine and nondihydropyridine calcium channel blockers ( CCB ) differ in pharmacologic characteristics . Few clinical studies distinguish effects of CCB as monotherapy . We conducted a comprehensive comparison of two CCB on patients with moderate to severe hypertension . Thirty patients with pretreatment diastolic blood pressures > or = 100 mm Hg were r and omly assigned to either nifedipine-GITS or verapamil-SR . Dose titration achieved a diastolic blood pressure of < or = 95 mm Hg or a decrease of > or = 15 mm Hg over 4 weeks . Clinic blood pressure ( BP ) , 24-h ambulatory BP , exercise BP , left ventricular mass , systolic and diastolic function by echocardiography , and coronary flow reserve by split-dose thallium-201 imaging  with adenosine were assessed at baseline , end of titration , 3 months and 6 months of treatment . Plasma renin activity , atrial natriuretic peptide , norepinephrine , and epinephrine were assayed . Both drugs caused similar reductions in clinic and 24-h ambulatory BP and similar reductions in left ventricular mass index . Compared to nifedipine-GITS , verapamil-SR produced a significantly lower resting and peak exercise heart rate .  Nifedipine-GITS elicited a lower peak exercise systolic BP . At end titration nifedipine-GITS produced lower plasma atrial natriuretic peptide levels , no longer apparent by 6 months . Plasma norepinephrine was lower with verapamil-SR , also at end titration and at 3 months , but not at 6 months . Plasma epinephrine and plasma renin activity were unchanged by either drug . There was no difference for systolic or diastolic left ventricular function or coronary flow reserve between the two treatments . Once daily nifedipine-GITS and verapamil-SR are equally effective for reduction of arterial pressure in moderate to severe hypertension . Differences in their hemodynamic profiles and neurohormonal responses are consistent with pre clinical pharmacologic characteristics . The clinical implication s of their similarities and differences remain to be fully evaluated in outcome studies The antihypertensive effect of labetalol , a new alpha- and beta-adrenoceptor inhibiting agent , was studied in 20 patients in a double-blind crossover trial . A dose of 300 mg daily reduced blood pressure only moderately in the supine position , though in the sitting and st and ing positions the effect was more pronounced . A dose of 600 mg daily produced statistically significant and clinical ly relevant reductions in blood pressure in all positions studied . The effect on heart rate was small and of significance only in reducing the heart rate increment due to a change in posture . Side effects were mild : only one patient complained of postural dizziness with the higher dose . We conclude that labetalol is useful in the treatment of mild and moderately severe hypertension A large-scale , 8-week , open-label , clinical experience trial evaluated the efficacy of the angiotensin II receptor ( AT1 subtype ) blocker c and esartan cilexetil ( 16 to 32 mg once daily ) either alone or as add-on therapy in 6465 hypertensive patients . The study population was 52 % female and 16 % African American with a mean age of 58 years . It included 5,446 patients who had essential hypertension ( HBP ) and 1,014 patients who had isolated systolic hypertension ( ISH ) . These patients had either untreated or uncontrolled hypertension ( systolic blood pressure [ SBP ] 140 to 179 mm Hg or diastolic blood pressure [ DBP ] 90 to 109 mm Hg inclusive at baseline ) despite a variety of antihypertensive medications including diuretics , calcium antagonists , angiotensin converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitors , and alpha- or beta-blockers , either singly or in combination . The mean baseline blood pressure for the HBP group was 156/97 mm Hg . C and esartan cilexetil as monotherapy ( in 51 % of HBP patients ) reduced mean SBP/DBP by 18.7/ 13.1 mm Hg . As add-on therapy ( in 49 % of HBP patients ) to various background therapies , c and esartan cilexetil consistently reduced mean SBP/DBP further , irrespective of the background therapy : diuretics ( 17.8/11.3 mm Hg ) , calcium antagonists ( 16.6/11.2 mm Hg ) , beta-blockers ( 16.5/ 10.4 mm Hg ) , ACE inhibitors ( 15.3/10.0 mm Hg ) , alpha-blockers ( 16.4/10.4 mm Hg ) . The mean baseline blood pressure for the ISH group was 158/81 mm Hg . C and esartan cilexetil , as monotherapy ( in 34 % of ISH patients ) , reduced SBP/DBP by 17.0/4.4 mm Hg . As add-on therapy ( in 66 % of ISH patients ) to various background therapies , c and esartan cilexetil consistently reduced mean SBP/DBP further , irrespective of the background therapy : diuretics ( 17.4/5.1 mm Hg ) , calcium antagonists ( 15.6/3.6 mm Hg ) , beta-blockers ( 14.0/4.8 mm Hg ) , ACE inhibitors ( 13.4/4.3 mm Hg ) , and alpha-blockers ( 11.6/4.5 mm Hg ) . The further blood pressure lowering effects of c and esartan cilexetil as add-on therapy were seen regardless of age , sex , and race . Overall , 6.8 % of the 6465 patients withdrew because of adverse events , most commonly headache ( 6.3 % ) and dizziness ( 5.0 % ) . Orthostatic hypotension was infrequent ; 0.2 % with c and esartan cilexetil alone , and 0.8 % with c and esartan cilexetil as add-on therapy . Thus , c and esartan cilexetil either alone or as add-on therapy was highly effective for the control of systolic or diastolic hypertension regardless of demographic background when used in typical clinical practice setting OBJECTIVES Despite a broad and efficient pharmacological antihypertensive armamentarium , blood pressure ( BP ) control is suboptimal and heterogeneous throughout Europe . Recent representative data from Switzerl and are limited . The goal of the present survey was therefore to assess the actual control rate of high BP in Switzerl and in accordance with current guidelines . The influence of risk factors , target organ damage and medication on BP levels and control was also evaluated . METHODS A cross-sectional visit-based survey of ambulatory hypertensive patients was performed in 2009 in Switzerl and . 281 r and omly selected physicians provided data on 5 consecutive hypertensive patients attending their practice s for BP follow-up . Data were anonymously collected on demographics , comorbidities and current medication , and BP was recorded . Subsequent modification of pharmacological antihypertensive therapy was assessed . RESULTS Data from 1376 patients were available . Mean age was 65 ± 12 years , 53.9 % were male subjects . 26.4 % had complicated hypertension . Overall , BP control ( < 140/90 mm Hg for uncomplicated and < 130/80 mm Hg for complicated hypertension ) was achieved in 48.9 % . Compared to patients with complicated hypertension , BP control was better in patients with uncomplicated hypertension ( 59.4 % vs. 19.2 % , p < 0.001 ) . As a monotherapy the most prescribed drug class were angiotensin receptor blockers ( ARB , 41 % ) , followed by angiotensin converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitors ( 21.5 % ) , betablockers ( 20.8 % ) and calcium channel blockers ( CCB , 10.8 % ) . The most prescribed drug combinations were ARB + diuretic ( 30.1 % ) and ACE inhibitors + diuretic ( 15.3 % ) . 46 % were receiving a fixed drug combination . In only 32.7 % of patients with uncontrolled hypertension was a change in drug therapy made . CONCLUSION This representative survey on treated adult hypertensive patients shows that , compared to earlier reports , the control rate of hypertension has improved in Switzerl and for uncomplicated but not for complicated , particularly diabetes-associated hypertension . ARBs and ACE inhibitors are the most prescribed antihypertensive drugs for monotherapy , whereas diuretics and ARBs were the most used for combination therapy We studied the structural and functional characteristics of the vascular bed at calf level in 46 middle aged hypertensive patients ( 20 males and 26 females ) treated with different beta-blockers . After one week of placebo , the patients were divided into three groups : group 1 was treated with labetalol , an alpha-beta-blocker ( 200 mg t.t.d . ) ; group 2 was treated with acebutolol , a cardioselective beta-blocker with intrinsic sympathomimetic activity ( ISA ) ( 200 mg t.t.d . ) ; group 2 was treated with acebutolol , a cardioselective beta-blocker with intrinsic sympathomimetic activity ( ISA ) ( 200 mg t.t.d . ) ; group 3 was treated with metoprolol , a cardioselective beta-blocker without ISA ( 100 mg t.t.d . ) . Before and after placebo , and after three months of active drug treatment , we measured blood pressure , and rest and peak flow at the calf level by strain gauge plethysmography . Basal and minimal vascular resistances were calculated as the ratio between mean blood pressure and rest or peak flow , respectively . A significant decrease in blood pressure was observed in each group . However , basal and minimal vascular resistances decreased only in the labetalol-treated group . These observations indicate that antihypertensive agents that have similar effects on blood pressure , may have different effects on minimal vascular resistance . Therefore , maximum vasodilation of arterioles improves , suggesting that long term treatment with labetalol , but not with other beta-blockers is able to induce a partial regression of vascular structural alterations in hypertensive patients In a double-blind , within-patient study , blood pressure was measured at regular intervals at the clinic by the physician and each day at home by the patient . Both methods of blood pressure measurement demonstrated an antihypertensive effect of the diuretics chlorthalidone ( 25 mg ) and triamterene ( 50 mg ) and the beta-blocker oxprenolol ( 160 mg ) and the greater efficacy of the combination of the two therapies . During placebo , as well as during active treatment , blood pressure values were higher at the clinic than at home , except when the patients were taking the beta-blocker , which minimized the arousal response during blood pressure measurements in the clinic . With 2-week treatment periods , separated by 2 weeks of placebo administration , blood pressure returned toward its initial level after each of the three treatments and none of the carryover effects was significant at the 5 % level . This methodology was intended to make it possible to demonstrate in 27 patients at the clinic and in 20 patients with measurements made at home , at the usual statistical risks ( alpha = 5 % , beta = 10 % ) , a fall of 5 mm Hg in diastolic blood pressure in comparison with a placebo . Moreover , at the end of this 3-month follow-up , each patient could continue to receive the treatment that was the most effective and the best tolerated . In conclusion , the use of a within-patient trial design , with a 15-day washout period between active treatments and careful recording of blood pressure values , can minimize the number of patients included in hypertension trials and offer to each patient the possibility of individualization of treatment
Carvedilol , within the recommended dose range , did not show a significant dose response effect for SBP or DBP .
Carvedilol had little or no effect on pulse pressure ( -1 mm Hg ) and did not change BP variability .
Due to the larger sample size from the two unpublished studies , carvedilol provided a better estimate of BP lowering effect than labetalol .
Doses higher than the recommended starting dose did not provide additional BP reduction .
Higher doses of dual receptor blockers caused more bradycardia than lower doses .
Based on indirect comparison with other classes of drugs , the blood pressure lowering effect of dual alpha- and beta-receptor blockers is less than non-selective , beta1 selective and partial agonist beta blockers , as well as thiazides and drugs inhibiting the renin angiotensin system .
Dual blockers also had little or no effect on reducing pulse pressure , which is similar to the other beta-blocker classes , but less than the average reduction of pulse pressure seen with thiazides and drugs inhibiting the renin angiotensin system .
Patients taking dual receptor blockers  were not more likely to withdraw from the study compared to patients taking placebo
BACKGROUND Drugs with combined alpha and beta blocking activity are commonly prescribed to treat hypertension .
However , the blood pressure ( BP ) lowering efficacy of this class of beta blockers has not been systematic ally review ed and quantified .
OBJECTIVES To quantify the dose-related effects of various types of dual alpha and beta adrenergic receptor blockers ( dual receptor blockers ) on systolic and diastolic blood pressure versus placebo in patients with primary hypertension .