Hemodynamic study of nifedipine administration in hypertensive patients

Hemodynamic effects of calcium channel blockers in essential hypertension

Calcium channel blockers decrease blood pressure in essential hypertension due to a marked reduction of systemic vascular resistance (arteriolar tone). They also dilate conducting arteries but have no venodilatory effect in antihypertensive doses. With the dihydropyridines (e.g. nifedipine) and diltiazem there is a transient increase in heart rate and cardiac output but this is not observed with verapamil. The vasodilatory responsiveness in the resistance vessels to calcium channel blockers is selectively enhanced in patients with established essential hypertension but not in the early borderline phase of hypertension. During treatment with chlorthalidone, atenolol, acebutolol or nitrendipine for four to six weeks the reduction of blood pressure is accompanied by a selective decrease in the vasodilatory responsiveness to calcium channel blockers.

Nifedipine potentiates the toxic effects of cocaine in mice

The calcium channel blockers (CCBs) have been shown to be effective in attenuating the behavioral effects of cocaine in rodents and subjective effects in cocaine-using volunteers. There have been reports indicating that, in the presence of toxic doses of cocaine, the CCBs could actually potentiate cocaine toxicity in rats. The present study was undertaken to make toxicological assessment of the potentiating effect of CCBs in mice. Nifedipine and nimodipine dose-dependently increased the lethalities produced by 80 mg/kg cocaine. In the presence of 40 mg/kg nifedipine, the LD50 of cocaine was decreased from 80.7 to 66.3 mg/kg. Nifedipine potentiated cocaine toxicities in both ICR and Swiss-Webster mice. The increased toxicity was not accompanied by alterations in blood electrolytes. The mechanism of increased cocaine toxicity by CCBs remains to be determined. However, our results corroborate previous findings in rats and suggest that the possibility of an antidote exacerbating the toxic effects of cocaine has to be taken into consideration when screening for therapeutic agents.

Short- and long-term effects of antihypertensive drugs on arterial reflections, compliance, and impedance

This article reviews our work on the effects of different classes of antihypertensive agents on the hemodynamic alterations in essential human hypertension. Short-term studies were done during cardiac catheterization in young normotensive subjects (mean age, 33 years; range, 19 to 40) and several different age-matched (range, 25 to 53 years) groups of patients with essential hypertension. Aortic impedance, resistance, wave reflections, and compliance were calculated from high-fidelity recordings of ascending aortic pressure and flow signals during baseline and after nitroprusside, propranolol followed by phentolamine, phentolamine, captopril, and nifedipine, respectively, at doses sufficient to normalize blood pressure in each hypertensive group. Propranolol exacerbated all the hemodynamic parameters; these effects were only partially overcome by phentolamine. Among the other agents only phentolamine did not completely normalize compliance, and only captopril did not completely normalize wave reflections. The long-term study was a randomized, double-blind comparison of fosinopril and atenolol in 79 normotensive subjects and 79 essential hypertensive patients. Baseline 24-hour ambulatory blood pressures and carotid artery tonometry to index wave reflections were performed in all subjects and in hypertensive patients after 8 weeks of therapy. Both fosinopril and atenolol normalized blood pressure and lowered the elevated augmentation index, but fosinopril had a significantly larger effect than atenolol. Both short- and long-term beta-blockade did not have as beneficial an effect as the other agents. Thus, the differing hemodynamic effects of the various classes of antihypertensive agents might be a consideration in the choice of therapy.

Arterial hemodynamics in human hypertension. Effects of the calcium channel antagonist nifedipine

Previous studies have shown some distinct hemodynamic alterations in essential hypertension, including increased resistance, wave reflections, and pulse wave velocity and decreased arterial compliance. These abnormalities are completely normalized by nonspecific smooth muscle dilation with nitroprusside but not by combined alpha- and beta-adrenergic blockade or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition, suggesting an enhanced smooth muscle tone that cannot be attributed solely to the sympathetic nervous or renin-angiotensin systems. Since hypertensive patients have an enhanced calcium influx-dependent vasoconstriction, we performed the present study to examine the extent to which the dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonist nifedipine could normalize the hemodynamic abnormalities in essential hypertension. An essential hypertensive patient group was compared with a normotensive group similar in age, body size, and proportion of men and women. During diagnostic cardiac catheterization, ascending aortic micromanometer pressures and electromagnetic flows were measured at baseline and after sufficient sublingual nifedipine (mean, 24 mg) to normalize blood pressure. From the pressures and flows, aortic input impedance, wave reflection magnitude, and compliance were computed. In the hypertensive group, the hemodynamic alterations were indistinguishable from those summarized above. Nifedipine produced sufficient vasodilation to completely normalize all of these hemodynamic alterations, including wave reflections. From these results, together with those reported in our previous studies, it is clear that the various classes of antihypertensive agents affect hemodynamics differently. All are capable of decreasing blood pressure to normotensive levels, but only nitroprusside and nifedipine can also completely normalize all the other pulsatile hemodynamic alterations. Thus, these hemodynamic effects of the different classes of antihypertensive agents should be considered in choosing a therapeutic modality.

Invasive hemodynamic evaluation of sublingual captopril and nifedipine in patients with arterial hypertension after abdominal aortic surgery

OBJECTIVES

To examine the central hemodynamic and blood gas responses to sublingual captopril and nifedipine administration in patients with arterial hypertension after abdominal aortic surgery.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, parallel-group clinical study.

SETTING

Twenty-nine-bed medical-surgical intensive care unit in a university hospital.

PATIENTS

Twenty patients with arterial hypertension (mean arterial pressure of > or = 115 mm Hg) the day after abdominal aortic surgery. Patients with bilateral renal artery stenoses, identified with the preoperative angiogram, were excluded.

INTERVENTIONS

Pressures were measured using intravascular catheters and cardiac output was determined by thermodilution for 2 hrs after captopril 25 mg (n = 10) or nifedipine 10 mg (n = 10) was administered by the sublingual route.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Captopril administration and nifedipine administration decreased mean arterial pressure (from 121 +/- 1 to 94 +/- 4 mm Hg and from 121 +/- 2 to 94 +/- 2 [sem] mm Hg, respectively), pulmonary arterial pressure, pulmonary artery occlusion pressure, and right atrial pressure (p < .001 for all variables). Changes in heart rate and in cardiac output were not significant. PaO2 decreased after nifedipine, from 101 +/- 8 to 81 +/- 3 torr [13.5 +/- 1.1 to 10.8 +/- 0.4 kPa] (p < .01), but not after captopril (104 +/- 9 to 100 +/- 7 torr [13.9 +/- 1.2 to 13.3 +/- 0.9 kPa]). Excessive or symptomatic decreases in blood pressure were not observed, nor was deterioration in renal function observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Sublingual captopril and nifedipine were equally effective for the treatment of arterial hypertension after abdominal aortic surgery. Nifedipine, but not captopril, caused a deterioration in pulmonary gas exchange.

Vasoinhibitory effect of NP-252, a new dihydropyridine derivative, in canine cerebral artery

The vasoinhibitory effect of NP-252, a 1,4-dihydropyridine derivative Ca++ antagonist, was examined in canine cerebral artery, and this effect was compared with that of nifedipine. NP-252 (10(-7)M) and nifedipine (10(-6) M) nearly abolished the contraction induced by addition of Ca++ to Ca(++)-free medium containing KC1. NP-252 (10(-6)M) and nifedipine (10(-6)M) attenuated the contraction produced by thromboxane A2 agonist (STA2) in normal medium, and the resultant contractions were 22% (n = 6) and 35% (n = 6) of the control contraction, respectively. The vasoinhibitory effects of NP-252 were significantly stronger than those of nifedipine in canine cerebral artery. NP-252 (10(-7) and 10(-6) M) dose-dependently attenuated nifedipine-resistant Ca(++)-contraction in the presence of STA2 in both canine cerebral and coronary arteries. The inhibitory effect of combined treatment with NP-252 (10(-6) M) and nitroglycerin (10(-6) M) on nifedipine-resistant Ca(++)-contraction in the cerebral artery was additive. These results indicate that NP-252 possesses a stronger vasoinhibitory effect than that of nifedipine in canine cerebral artery.

Effects of nifedipine pretreatment on subjective and cardiovascular responses to intravenous cocaine in humans

The effects of oral nifedipine pretreatment on subjective and cardiovascular responses to intravenous cocaine infusions were studied in cocaine-using volunteers. Nifedipine, 10 mg or placebo, was administered 20-25 min before placebo, 20 mg, or 40 mg cocaine, using a repeated measures randomized double-blind design. The variables measured were self-reported subjective effects, general behavior rated by two observers, blood pressure and heart rate. Cocaine produced the expected dose-related effects on subjective and cardiovascular measures. Nifedipine pretreatment attenuated some subjective effects of cocaine. Nifedipine directly reduced blood pressure but did not antagonize the effects of cocaine on blood pressure. These findings suggest that dihydropyridine calcium channel modulators may be useful compounds in the clinical management of cocaine users.

Antihypertensive effectiveness of the nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system

The results of a multicenter trial conducted in order to determine the therapeutic efficacy of the gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) formulation of nifedipine in comparison with hydrochlorothiazide and placebo in the management of mild to moderate essential hypertension are presented. During a one-week wash-out phase, antihypertensive therapy was discontinued in all patients. After a three-week single-blind placebo period, eligible patients were randomly assigned in a double-blind fashion to one of three treatment groups for a one-week titration period and a nine-week efficacy period. Patients received either nifedipine GITS, 30 or 60 mg daily; hydrochlorothiazide, 25 or 50 mg daily; or placebo. Sitting and standing blood pressures decreased by an average 11.6/10.4 and 10.8/10.8 mm Hg, respectively, with nifedipine GITS therapy, and 14.8/10.8 and 14.3/8.2 mm Hg, respectively, with hydrochlorothiazide therapy. Compared with placebo, these changes were highly significant for both sitting (p less than or equal to 0.005) and standing (p less than or equal to 0.02) measurements. Heart rate remained essentially unchanged in all three groups. It was therefore concluded that monotherapy with nifedipine GITS, at doses of 30 or 60 mg given once daily, effectively reduces blood pressure in patients with hypertension to a degree comparable with that seen in hydrochlorothiazide therapy.

Monotherapy of mild hypertension with nifedipine

The effectiveness of nifedipine as first-line monotherapy for mild diastolic hypertension (range: 95 to 105 mm Hg) was tested in this placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized trial. Fifty-six patients were enrolled and, after titration of the placebo or active drug, they were followed for 12 weeks. Significant declines in the sitting systolic and diastolic pressures of -19 +/- 4 mm Hg (standard error) and -13 +/- 2 mm Hg, respectively, were observed during this follow-up period. Overall, 75 percent of patients receiving active drug had diastolic pressures less than or equal to 90 mm Hg at the last treatment visit. Heart rate was not significantly changed in the sitting position during the treatment period, and the majority of patients (75 percent) showed a response to nifedipine doses of 10 or 20 mg orally three times daily in the capsule form. The levels of the systolic and diastolic pressures at entry were not predictive of the dose of nifedipine required for effective blood pressure control.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of nifedipine in patients at steady state

The pharmacokinetics and associated pharmacodynamics of nifedipine were studied at steady state in 12 patients with angina pectoris who were receiving nifedipine 10-40 mg tid. After dosing, serum nifedipine concentrations rose rapidly and decayed in a log-linear fashion. The mean (+/- SEM) maximum serum concentration (Cmax) after dose normalization, and the time to Cmax (tmax) were 115 +/- 7 ng/mL and 0.72 +/- 0.13 hr, respectively. The mean area under the plasma concentration-time curve per 10-mg dose was 304 +/- 34 hr-ng/mL. The average elimination rate constant was 0.205 +/- 0.016 hr, and the harmonic mean elimination half-life was 3.4 hr (range, 2.5-4.9 hr). Heart rate increased (5-6 beats/min, P less than .05) from baseline for up to one hour after dose, while mean diastolic blood pressure decreased (6-15 mm Hg, P less than .05) for up to four hours. Cardiac output was increased (1.1-2.8 L/min, P less than .05), and calculated total systemic resistance (3.8-6.3 mm Hg/L/min, P less than .05) was decreased for the entire dosing interval after nifedipine dosing. Hysteresis plots for heart rate and mean diastolic blood pressure showed a time lag between changes in serum nifedipine concentrations and heart rate, but not between serum nifedipine concentrations and blood pressure. Changes in cardiac output did not correlate with serum nifedipine concentrations. The steady-state kinetic and dynamic parameter values in patients with angina pectoris in this study were similar to those found in healthy volunteers or hypertensive patients after acute nifedipine administration.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Nifedipine in the treatment of essential hypertension

The antihypertensive efficacy of nifedipine as a second-step drug in 24 patients, uncontrolled by a diuretic alone, was studied according to a double-blind placebo-controlled protocol. A significant blood pressure lowering was observed in nine out of 12 patients receiving the active drug and four out of 12 receiving placebo. Average mean blood pressure decreased by 13 +/- 1 mm Hg in the active drug group versus 5 +/- 3 mm Hg in the placebo group (P less than .02). There were no consistent changes or significant differences in heart rate or in the levels of plasma renin activity and plasma catecholamines between the two groups. In conclusion, nifedipine appears to be a safe and effective antihypertensive agent when used in conjunction with a diuretic for the treatment of moderately severe hypertension.

Calcium channel blockers as antihypertensive agents

Because of their unique action on the cardiovascular system, the calcium channel blockers have generated a great deal of excitement among pharmacologists, physiologists, and clinicians. One obvious potential application for these drugs is in antihypertensive therapy and, although experience with these agents for this indication is limited in the United States, it is considerable in Europe and Japan. These agents' ultimate role in antihypertensive therapy, however, has not been established. Since the available calcium channel blockers are structurally diverse, it is uncertain whether they will have comparable effects in hypertension. The rationale for the use of calcium channel blockers in treating hypertension and the relevant pharmacologic actions of these agents is discussed, along with a summary of some of the clinical trials, observations from our own experience with these drugs, and speculation about their future role in antihypertensive therapy.