Comparison of Efficacy and Safety of Intravenous Labetalol Versus Hydralazine for Management of Severe Hypertension in Pregnancy

Comparing Intravenous Labetalol and Intravenous Hydralazine for Managing Severe Gestational Hypertension

Background Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy are the leading causes of both maternal morbidity and maternal mortality. Hypertensive disorders are acute obstetric emergencies, which refer to various life-threatening medical challenges known to develop during pregnancy, labor, and delivery, requiring urgent attention to reduce blood pressure (BP) for the benefit of the affected mothers and infants. Hydralazine and labetalol have been widely used as the first-line medications in the management of severe hypertension during pregnancy. However, the choice between these two drugs lacks clear evidence regarding their safety and superiority. Several studies have attempted to study intravenous (IV) labetalol versus hydralazine, but very few such comparison studies have been conducted in Africa.  Objective To compare the effectiveness of IV labetalol and IV hydralazine in reducing systolic and diastolic BP in pregnant women with severe hypertension. Also, to determine the time required for hydralazine and labetalol to lower BP to ≤150/100 mmHg, the number of doses needed for each drug, and evaluating maternal and perinatal outcomes. Study design This study employed an open-label randomized clinical trial design conducted in the labor, delivery, and antenatal ward of the Central and Stella Obasanjo Hospital in Benin City. A total of 120 women with severe pregnancy-induced hypertension were randomly assigned to two groups: Group X, consisting of 60 pregnant women, received IV hydralazine at a slow rate of 5 mg for five minutes, repeated every 20 minutes (maximum of five doses) until a blood pressure of ≤150/100 mmHg was achieved. Group Y, also consisting of 60 pregnant women, received IV labetalol in escalating doses of 25, 50, 75, 75, and 75 mg (maximum of 300 mg) every 20 minutes until the blood pressure reached ≤150/100 mmHg. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 23 (IBM Inc., Armonk, New York). Result IV hydralazine achieved the target BP in an average time of 45.80 +/- 25.17 minutes, while IV labetalol took an average of 72.67 +/- 41.80 minutes (p=0.001). The number of doses required to reach the target BP differed significantly between the two drugs. Hydralazine required an average of 1.72 +/- 0.904 doses, whereas labetalol required an average of 3.72 +/- 1.782 doses (p=0.0001). While 45% of women in the hydralazine group attained the target BP with a single dose of hydralazine, only 31.1% of women in the labetalol group were able to attain the target BP with a single dose of labetalol (p=0.02). Overall, target BP was achieved in 55 out of 60 women (91.7%) who were randomized to receive IV hydralazine, whereas 45 out of 60 women (75%) who received IV labetalol achieved the target blood pressure. While hydralazine demonstrated more favorable results in terms of achieving target blood pressure, there were higher incidences of maternal adverse effects in the hydralazine group compared to the labetalol group. However, these adverse effects were not severe enough to warrant discontinuation of the medication. Conclusion IV hydralazine showed faster achievement of the target BP and a lower number of doses required compared to IV labetalol. Additionally, a higher percentage of women in the hydralazine group achieved the target BP with a single dose. However, there were more maternal adverse effects associated with hydralazine, although they were not severe. Perinatal outcomes did not differ significantly between the two groups.

Effectiveness of nifedipine, labetalol, and hydralazine as emergency antihypertension in severe preeclampsia: a randomized control trial

Background: Preeclampsia is a highly prevalent disease among pregnant women. In the event of hypertensive emergency, nifedipine, labetalol, and hydralazine are assigned as first-line therapies in preeclampsia. Further studies are needed to compare the effectiveness of these drugs to find the most cost-effective drug with minimal side effects. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of these drugs in lowering blood pressure during hypertensive emergencies in severe preeclampsia. Methods: 60 pregnant women with severe preeclampsia were recruited in this multiple centre double-blind randomized clinical trial from May 2021 to April 2022 in Indonesia. The patients were divided equally into three groups and treated with three doses of nifedipine, labetalol, and hydralazine, respectively within one hour with 20 minutes interval. The effectiveness was measured based on systolic and diastolic blood pressures, and mean arterial pressure (MAP). The observation was carried out until five hours post-third dose administration.   Results: The blood pressure was reduced significantly after the administration of the first to the third dose of each antihypertensive (p<0.05). A single dose administration, four, one, and three patients had 20% MAP reduction in nifedipine, labetalol, and hydralazine group. Three, seven, and one patient had a failure of reaching 20% MAP reduction even after receiving the third dose. The effectiveness of the drugs to achieve 20% reduction of MAP could be ranked as follows: nifedipine>labetalol>hydralazine (57.49%, 42.13%, and 40.87%, respectively) for single dose and hydralazine>nifedipine>labetalol (111.3%, 85.12%, and 90.04%, respectively) for triple dose. Conclusions: Nifedipine is the most effective drug to reduce the blood pressure when single dose administration is used, but requires more doses to further reduce the blood pressure. Hydralazine is the most effective when the drug administration is maxed up to three doses within 60 minutes with 20 minutes interval. Thai Clinical Trials Registry (TCTR): TCTR20221014007 (14/10/2022).

Pharmaceutical administration for severe hypertension during pregnancy: Network meta-analysis

Aims: To evaluate the efficacy of different pharmacologic treatment for severe hypertension during pregnancy. Methods: Two reviewers searched Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMbase, and the Cochrane Library for randomized clinical trials from the establishment of the database to 15 July 2021 that were eligible for inclusion and analyzed the pharmaceuticals used for severe hypertension in pregnancy. Results: 29 relevant trials with 2,521 participants were involved. Compared with diazoxide in rate of achieving target blood pressure, other pharmaceuticals, including epoprostenol (RR:1.58, 95%CI:1.01-2.47), hydralazine\dihydralazine (RR:1.57, 95%CI:1.07-2.31), ketanserin (RR:1.67, 95%CI:1.09-2.55), labetalol (RR:1.54, 95%CI:1.04-2.28), nifedipine (RR:1.54, 95%CI:1.04-2.29), and urapidil (RR:1.57, 95%CI:1.00-2.47), were statistically significant in the rate of achieving target blood pressure. According to the SUCRA, diazoxide showed the best therapeutic effect, followed by nicardipine, nifedipine, labetalol, and nitroglycerine. The three pharmaceuticals with the worst therapeutic effect were ketanserin, hydralazine, and urapidil. It is worth noting that the high ranking of the top two pharmaceuticals, including diazoxide and nicardipine, comes from extremely low sample sizes. Other outcomes were reported in the main text. Conclusion: This comprehensive network meta-analysis demonstrated that the nifedipine should be recommended as a strategy for blood pressure management in pregnant women with severe hypertension. Moreover, the conventional pharmaceuticals, including labetalol and hydralazine, showed limited efficacy. However, it was important to note that the instability of hydralazine reducing blood pressure and the high benefit of labetalol with high dosages intakes should also be of concern to clinicians.

Effect of perioperative magnesium sulfate and labetalol infusion on peripheral perfusion and postoperative pain in nasal surgery: a randomized controlled trial

Background

Maintenance of adequate peripheral perfusion during controlled hypotension is necessary for patient safety and improved surgical outcomes during controlled hypotension in nasal surgery. The hypothesis of this study was to investigate the effect of perioperative magnesium sulfate and labetalol infusion on peripheral perfusion and postoperative pain in patients undergoing nasal surgery.

Methods

A total of 50 patients were randomly assigned into two equal groups in this double-blind clinical study: the magnesium sulfate group; received 40 mg/kg loading dose of intravenous (IV) magnesium sulfate followed by 10–15 mg/kg/h continuous IV infusion and the labetalol group; received 0.25 mg/kg loading dose of IV labetalol followed by 0.5–1 mg/kg/h continuous IV infusion to achieve a mean arterial blood pressure (MABP) of = 55–65 mmHg. The primary outcome was to compare the effect of perioperative magnesium sulfate and labetalol infusion on peripheral perfusion during nasal surgery. The secondary outcomes were the assessment of serum lactate, postoperative pain, time to the first call for pethidine (rescue analgesic) and total pethidine consumption.

Results

PPI was comparable between the groups at baseline, intubation, and 5 min. In contrast, magnesium sulfate group had a significantly higher PPI than the labetalol group. The magnesium sulfate group had a significantly higher MABP and heart rate compared to labetalol group. The time to reach the target MABP was significantly prolonged in magnesium sulfate than the labetalol group [21.6 ± 1.7 vs 6.9 ± 1.5] min. VAS scores were significantly lower for 2 hs postoperatively in the magnesium sulfate group than the labetalol group. The time to first call of pethidine was significantly prolonged in the magnesium sulfate group compared to the labetalol group [113.1 ± 5.2 vs 28.2 ± 1.5] min.

Conclusions

Magnesium sulfate maintains wider PPI and offers better postoperative pain relief compared to labetalol during induced hypotension in nasal surgery.

Trial registration

Institutional review board approval (ref: 6601/20–12-2020).

Clinicaltrial.gov (ref: NCT04688203, date of registration: 29 -12–2020).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13037-022-00336-7.

Different dosage regimens of nifedipine, labetalol, and hydralazine for the treatment of severe hypertension during pregnancy: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

This network meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of intravenous (IV) hydralazine, oral nifedipine, and IV labetalol with different dosage regimens in the treatment of severe hypertension during pregnancy.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed on PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) exploring the effects of hydralazine, nifedipine, and labetalol in the treatment of severe hypertension during pregnancy.

RESULTS

A total of 21 RCTs with 2183 patients comparing 7 regimens (oral nifedipine 50,60,90 mg; hydralazine 15,25 mg; and labetalol 220,300 mg) were identified. Compared with IV labetalol 300 mg, nifedipine 50,60, and 90 mg significantly improved the successful treatment rate of severe hypertension during pregnancy, nifedipine 50 and 90 mg and IV hydralazine 25 mg required significantly fewer doses to achieve target blood pressure (BP), and nifedipine 50 mg took significantly shorter time to achieve target BP. Subgroup analysis showed that only nifedipine 50 mg tablets, not capsules, required a significantly shorter time and fewer doses to achieve target BP than IV labetalol 300 mg. Moreover, nifedipine 60,90 mg showed superior effectiveness than IV hydralazine 15,25 mg in the successful treatment rate of severe hypertension during pregnancy. SUCRA analysis suggested that nifedipine 50,60,90 mg as the better regimens with the lower rates of overall ADR and neonatal complications.

CONCLUSION

These findings demonstrated the superiority of oral nifedipine 50,60,90 mg, especially oral nifedipine 50 mg tablets, in the treatment of severe hypertension during pregnancy than IV labetalol 300 mg, while oral nifedipine 60,90 mg also showed superiority in the successful treatment rate of severe hypertension during pregnancy than IV hydralazine 15,25 mg. However, the limitations of the underlying data indicate that future large-scale and rigorous RCTs are needed to confirm such findings.

Clinical Evaluation of Pinggan Yiqi Yangshen Recipe Combined with Labetalol Hydrochloride and Magnesium Sulfate in the Treatment of PIH

Background

To observe the clinical effect of Pinggan Yiqi Yangshen recipe combined with labetalol hydrochloride and magnesium sulfate in the treatment of pregnancy-induced hypertension (PIH).

Methods

A total of 126 patients with PIH diagnosed in our hospital from January 2016 to May 2018 were randomly divided into the control group and the experimental group, with 63 cases in each group. The control group was treated with labetalol combined with magnesium sulfate. On the basis of the control group, the experimental group was treated with Pinggan Yiqi Yangshen recipe. Clinical efficacy, blood pressure, renal function, and biochemical indexes were compared between the two groups. Moreover, pregnancy outcomes and adverse reactions were compared between the two groups.

Results

After treatment, the total effective rate in the experimental group was higher than in the control group. Blood pressure and mean arterial pressure in the experimental group were more significantly downregulated than the control group. Renal function indexes and biochemical indexes in the experimental group were more significant than those in the control group. The incidence of cesarean section, preterm birth, and abnormal fetal heart rate in the experimental group was significantly lower than that in the control group. There was no difference in the incidence of fetal distress, postpartum hemorrhage, neonatal asphyxia, and adverse reactions between the two groups.

Conclusion

Pinggan Yiqi Yangshen recipe combined with labetalol hydrochloride and magnesium sulfate can effectively reduce the blood pressure of patients with PIH, help patients to return to normal levels of biochemical indexes and renal function indexes, and improve pregnancy outcomes with high safety, which is worthy of further promotion and application in clinical practice.

Guidelines for the management of women with severe pre-eclampsia

OBJECTIVE

To provide national guidelines for the management of women with severe pre-eclampsia.

DESIGN

A consensus committee of 26 experts was formed. A formal conflict-of-interest (COI) policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guidelines process was conducted independently of any industrial funding. The authors were advised to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE®) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence. The potential drawbacks of making strong recommendations in the presence of low-quality evidence were emphasised.

METHODS

The last SFAR and CNGOF guidelines on the management of women with severe pre-eclampsia were published in 2009. The literature is now sufficient for an update. The aim of this expert panel guidelines is to evaluate the impact of different aspects of the management of women with severe preeclampsia on maternal and neonatal morbidities separately. The experts studied questions within 7 domains. Each question was formulated according to the PICO (Patients Intervention Comparison Outcome) model and the evidence profiles were produced. An extensive literature review and recommendations were carried out and analysed according to the GRADE® methodology.

RESULTS

The SFAR/CNGOF experts panel provided 25 recommendations: 8 have a high level of evidence (GRADE 1+/-), 9 have a moderate level of evidence (GRADE 2+/-), and for 7 recommendations, the GRADE method could not be applied, resulting in expert opinions. No recommendation was provided for 3 questions. After one scoring round, strong agreement was reached between the experts for all the recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

There was strong agreement among experts who made 25 recommendations to improve practices for the management of women with severe pre-eclampsia.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of MT-1207, a novel multitarget blocker of α1 receptor, 5-HT2A receptor, and calcium channel, in healthy subjects

BACKGROUND

MT-1207 is a novel multitarget blocker of α1 receptor, 5-HT2A receptor, and calcium channel that is currently under development for the treatment of hypertension. In this study, we evaluated the tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and pharmacodynamics (PD) of MT-1207 in healthy Chinese subjects.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We examined the effects of a single-ascending dose (SAD) of MT-1207 (5-40 mg) and MT-1207 (40 mg) administered in combination with food in 56 healthy subjects.

RESULTS

No serious adverse events or discontinuations due to adverse events (related to MT-1207) occurred in either study. MT-1207 was rapidly absorbed (median Tmax: 0.5-1.25 h). The mean t_1/2 of MT-1207 was approximately 4-7 hours. Systemic exposure (Cmax and AUC) to MT-1207 increased in proportion to dose. Food had little effect on the pharmacokinetics of MT-1207, such as t_1/2 and AUC. For 4h-24 h after administration, the blood pressure reduction in the MT-1207 group was higher than that in the placebo group, showing the antihypertensive effect. Blood pressure reduction after MT-1207 administration showed some dose-dependent trend in the 5-20 mg groups.

CONCLUSIONS

MT-1207 was well tolerated in all subjects. PD measurements demonstrated the antihypertensive effects of MT-1207.