ArticleARYA atherosclerosis2022
Comparing outcomes of clonidine and captopril in patients with hypertensive urgency: A randomized clinical trial.
Article in ARYA atherosclerosis, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Digital pharmacoepidemiology of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in Russia.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHypertension (HTN) is the second leading risk factor for death and disability. One fourth of healthcare in Eastern Europe and Central Asia is being spent on blood pressure (BP)-related diseases. An important situation in patients with high BP is hypertensive crisis (BP > 180/120 mmHg), which is divided to hypertensive emergency and urgency. Therefore, here, we decided to compare the effect of captopril and clonidine in patients with hypertensive urgencies, and their side effects.
methodsThis was a parallel-group randomized clinical trial. Patients, who referred to emergency ward with any symptoms of hypertensive crisis, underwent a careful history taking and clinical examination. Individuals with systolic BP (SBP) ≥ 180 mmHg or diastolic BP (DBP) ≥ 110 mmHg with no evidence of end organ damage were randomly assigned into two interventions, clonidine and captopril. 25% decrease in BP was considered as ideal relief.
resultsRegarding the duration of response to treatment drugs, patients who received clonidine relieved significantly faster than those who received captopril (P = 0.016). Moreover, the frequencies of side effects such as headache, dizziness/vertigo, dry mouth, and drowsiness in the clonidine group were significantly lower than captopril group (P < 0.05).
conclusionPatients in clonidine group relieved sooner and experienced fewer side effects. Therefore, this study suggests clonidine as a more effective therapeutic for hypertensive urgency compared with captopril.
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.