Trial reportJournal of hypertension2019
The association of smoothness index of central blood pressure with ambulatory carotid femoral pulse wave velocity after 20-week treatment with losartan in combination with amlodipine versus hydrochlorothiazide.
Trial report in Journal of hypertension, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
20 authors at 17 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this study was to identify associations between the smoothness index of central SBP (CSBP) and changes of ambulatory carotid femoral pulse wave velocity in response to 20-week treatments with losartan and amlodipine vs. losartan and hydrochlorthiazide combinations.
methodsFor 142 (losartan and hydrochlorthiazide: 72, losartan and hydrochlorthiazide: 70) patients examined with ambulatory central blood pressure (BP) monitoring device, we calculated smoothness indices and trough-to-peak ratios of brachial SBP, CSBP, ambulatory pulse pressure amplification (APPA), ambulatory augmentation index at heart rate 75 beats per minute (AAIx75) and ambulatory carotid femoral pulse wave velocity (AcfPWV).
resultsMean age was 58.9 ± 12.3 years, and women accounted for 25.9%. Changes in office SBP/DBP were not different between groups (losartan and hydrochlorthiazide: -15.2 ± 15.0/-7.8 ± 8.0 vs. losartan and amlodipine: -14.9 ± 13.7/-9.2 ± 7.5 mmHg). Reduction of 24-h CSBP was not significantly different (losartan and hydrochlorthiazide: 6.4 ± 1.1 vs. losartan and amlodipine: 9.2 ± 1.1 mmHg, P = 0.074). Reduction in nocturnal AcfPWV was greater in the losartan and amlodipine group (losartan and hydrochlorthiazide: 0.09 ± 0.05 vs. losartan and amlodipine: 0.26 ± 0.05 m/s, P = 0.0216). Intraindividual SIs for CSBP were higher in the losartan and amlodipine group (0.40 ± 0.57 vs. 0.65 ± 0.74, P = 0.022). In multivariable regression analysis, smoothness index of CSBP was independently associated with the losartan and amlodipine group. In model additionally considering the changes in arterial stiffness, decrease in AcfPWV instead of the treatment group was independently associated with smoothness indices. In mediation analysis, smoothness index was fully mediated by reduction in night-time AcfPWV.
conclusionLosartan and amlodipine combination was superior to the losartan and hydrochlorthiazide combination in terms of achieving higher smoothness index for CSBP after 20-week treatments. The effect of losartan and amlodipine on smoothness index was fully mediated by reduction of night-time AcfPWV.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.