Persistent olmesartan-based blood pressure-lowering effects on morning hypertension in Asians: the HONEST study

Antihypertensive effect of azilsartan versus olmesartan in patients with essential hypertension: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The comparison of antihypertensive effects between azilsartan and olmesartan in patients with essential hypertension has been investigated in several studies. The results were not consistent. We performed this meta-analysis determining the antihypertensive effect of azilsartan versus olmesartan in patients with essential hypertension.

METHODS

Pubmed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central were searched for all published randomized studies comparing the antihypertensive effects between azilsartan and olmesartan in patients with essential hypertension.

RESULTS

The antihypertensive effects were assessed in 1402 patients included in five trials. The reduction of office systolic blood pressure treated with azilsartan was greater than olmesartan (weighted mean differences (WMD) - 2.15 (95% confidence interval (CI), - 3.78, - 0.53) mm Hg, p < 0.01). There was no significant difference in reduction of office diastolic blood pressure between azilsartan and olmesartan (WMD - 0.99 (95% CI, - 2.06, 0.08) mm Hg, p > 0.05). The reduction of office systolic blood pressure treated with azilsartan was greater than olmesartan at same dose for both drugs (WMD - 2.24 (95% CI, - 4.03, - 0.44) mm Hg, p < 0.05), whereas there was no significant difference in reduction of office diastolic blood pressure between azilsartan and olmesartan (WMD - 0.55 (95% CI, - 1.76, 0.66) mm Hg, p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis provides the evidence that the reduction of office systolic blood pressure treated with azilsartan was greater than olmesartan in patients with essential hypertension. These findings suggest the importance of strict designed randomized controlled trials in determining antihypertensive effects of angiotensin II receptor blockers in clinical practice.

Home sphygmomanometers can help in the control of blood pressure: a nationwide field survey

Home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM), which integrates patients into their treatment program, is a self-management tool. The prevalence of home sphygmomanometer ownership and patient compliance with HBPM guidelines are not well known, especially in developing and underdeveloped countries. The aims of this study were to measure the prevalence of home sphygmomanometer ownership among hypertensive subjects through a nationwide field survey (PatenT2), to investigate the validation of sphygmomanometers and consistency of the user arm circumference and cuff size of the upper-arm device owned, as well as to compare blood pressure (BP) readings between hypertensive subjects who have or do not have a sphygmomanometer. Sample selection was based on a multistratified proportional sampling procedure to select a nationally representative sample of the adult population (n = 5437). Of 1650 hypertensive subjects, 332 (20.1%) owned a device, but the percentage of patients who owned a sphygmomanometer was 28.8% among patients who were aware of their hypertension (260/902). The usage of wrist devices and nonvalidated devices is common, and selection of an appropriate cuff size is ignored. Linear-regression analysis showed that owning a BP monitor is associated with decreases of 3.7 mmHg and 2.8 mmHg for systolic and diastolic BPs, respectively. Many patients do not own a sphygmomanometer. The decrease of systolic and diastolic BPs among BP monitor owners is a striking finding. The implementation of a hypertension care program consisting of sphygmomanometer reimbursement and training of patients in its use for HBPM might be cost-effective.