Review of the Pharmacokinetics of Fosinopril in Special Populations

Differential effects of fosinopril and enalapril in patients with mild to moderate chronic heart failure. Fosinopril in Heart Failure Study Investigators

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the efficacy and safety of fosinopril in the treatment of chronic heart failure (CHF), patients with mild to moderate CHF and left ventricular ejection fractions <40% were randomly assigned in a double-blind manner to receive fosinopril 5 to 20 mg every day (n = 122) or enalapril 5 to 20 mg every day (n = 132) for 1 year.

RESULTS

The event-free survival time was longer (1.6 vs 1.0 months, P= .032) and the total rate of hospitalizations plus deaths was smaller with fosinopril than with enalapril (19.7% vs 25.0%, P= .028). There was consistently better symptom improvement with fosinopril (P< .05). The incidence of orthostatic hypotension was lower in the fosinopril group (1.6% vs 7.6%, P< .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Fosinopril 5 to 20 mg every day was more effective in improving symptoms and delaying events related to worsening of CHF and produced less orthostatic hypotension than enalapril 5 to 20 mg every day.

Pharmacokinetics of fosinoprilat in Chinese and whites after intravenous administration

The pharmacokinetics of fosinoprilat was studied in 12 healthy Chinese men after a 7.5 mg intravenous dose of fosinoprilat. The data were compared with those from an earlier study using the same protocol in nine healthy white men. Blood and urine samples were obtained before and at various time intervals after fosinoprilat administration up to 24 hours and 48 hours, respectively. Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated by fitting the plasma or serum concentrations to a three-compartment model. The total clearance (Clt), renal clearance (ClT), and nonrenal clearance (ClNR) were significantly lower in Chinese (16.29 +/- 6.92, 6.85 +/- 2.97, and 9.44 +/- 5.08 mL.hr-1.kg-1) than those obtained in whites (29.88 +/- 6.36, 13.55 +/- 3.45, and 16.33 +/- 5.07 mL.hr-1.kg-1). The Chinese subjects had a significantly lower volume of distribution (Vc [volume of distribution of central compartment] and Vdss [volume of distribution at steady state]) (29.38 +/- 21.12 and 73.67 +/- 40.20 mL/kg) than white men (58.14 +/- 15.01 and 152.49 +/- 24.89 mL/kg). The Chinese men also had a shorter elimination half-life than whites, although not statistically significant. The respective half-lives in Chinese and whites were 5.51 +/- 1.53 and 8.24 +/- 1.99 hours. The significant differences in ClNR and ClR may be related to lower liver elimination function and lower kidney excretory function, respectively. Plasma protein binding may contribute to part of the difference in the volume of distribution. Chinese men have smaller volume of distribution and clearances of fosinoprilat after intravenous administration compared with white men. The cumulative urine excretion of fosinoprilat was not different between Chinese and whites. Chinese may require a lower fosinoprilat dosage to obtain plasma concentrations similar to whites after intravenous administration. However, since a relatively high variation was found in fosinopril oral absorption, the oral dosage of fosinopril for Chinese and whites may not be different. Further study is obviously needed to elucidate whether the pharmacodynamic effect may be different between Chinese and whites.

The renin-angiotensin system and angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors

Anaesthetists will encounter increasing numbers of patients who are receiving long-term treatment with ACE inhibitors for hypertension, congestive heart failure and prophylactically following myocardial infarction. Our understanding of the physiology and pharmacology of the renin-angiotensin system has dramatically increased in the last decade, and has led to the discovery of endogenous renin-angiotensin systems which may be physiologically more important than the better understood circulating system. There are several reports of adverse interactions between anaesthesia and ACE inhibitors, manifested as hypotension and bradycardia, which may be delayed until the postoperative period. The mechanism behind them is not understood and, as yet, no published studies have attempted to address this issue. It is possible, however, that dehydration associated with the pre-operative fast may play an important role. ACE inhibitors may, in the future, prove to be useful in the subspecialties of cardiac and vascular anaesthesia, where they might be used in an attempt to preserve cardiac function following periods of ischaemia and cardiopulmonary bypass, and to avoid renal damage following aortic cross-clamping. Meanwhile, it would seem prudent to exercise caution when anaesthetising patients taking ACE inhibitors and to be fully prepared to treat the hypotension and bradycardia which may occur.