Major Outcomes in High-Risk Hypertensive Patients Randomized to or Calcium Channel Blocker vs Diuretic

  • Antihypertensive T
  • Treatment L
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
464Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

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 dis- ease (CHD) or other cardiovascular disease (CVD) events vs treatment with a diuretic. Design The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart At- tack Trial (ALLHAT), a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled clinical trial con- ducted from February 1994 through March 2002. Setting and Participants A total of 33357 participants aged 55 years or olderwith hypertension and at least 1 other CHD risk factor from 623 North American centers. Interventions Participants were randomly assigned to receive chlorthalidone, 12.5 to 25 mg/d (n=15255); 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 non- fatal myocardial infarction, 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 an- gina without hospitalization, heart failure [HF], and peripheral arterial disease). Results Mean follow-up was 4.9 years. The primary outcome occurred in 2956 par- ticipants, 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 amlo- dipine (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 sys- tolic 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 (0.8mmHg, 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.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Antihypertensive, T., & Treatment, L. (2002). Major Outcomes in High-Risk Hypertensive Patients Randomized to or Calcium Channel Blocker vs Diuretic, 288(23).

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free