Effect of indomethacin on the antihypertensive efficacy of valsartan and lisinopril: a multicentre study

The Effects of Pain and Analgesic Medications on Blood Pressure

Purpose of Review

To review the blood pressure (BP) effects of pain and analgesic medications and to help interpret BP changes in people suffering from acute or chronic pain.

Recent Findings

Acute pain evokes a stress response which prompts a transient BP increase. Chronic pain is associated with impaired regulation of cardiovascular and analgesia systems, which may predispose to persistent BP elevation. Also analgesics may have BP effects, which vary according to the drug class considered. Data on paracetamol are controversial, while multiple studies indicate that non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs may increase BP, with celecoxib showing a lesser impact. Hypotension has been reported with opioid drugs. Among adjuvants, tricyclic antidepressants and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors could be pro-hypertensive due to potentiation of adrenergic transmission.

Summary

Pain and analgesics may induce a clinically significant BP destabilization. The implications on hypertension incidence and BP control remain unclear and should be explored in future studies.

Graphical abstract

Drug-induced endocrine blood pressure elevation

Patients with uncontrolled hypertension are at risk for cardiovascular complications. The majority of them suffers from unidentified forms of hypertension and a fraction has so-called secondary hypertension with an identifiable cause. The patient's medications, its use of certain herbal supplements and over-the-counter agents represent potential causal factors for secondary hypertension that are often overlooked. The current review focuses on drugs that are likely to elevate blood pressure by affecting the human endocrine system at the level of steroid synthesis or metabolism, mineralocorticoid receptor activity, or by affecting the catecholaminergic system. Drugs with known adverse effects but where benefits outweigh their risks, drug candidates and market withdrawals are reviewed. Finally, potential therapeutic strategies are discussed.

Resistant Hypertension: Detection, Evaluation, and Management: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Resistant hypertension (RH) is defined as above-goal elevated blood pressure (BP) in a patient despite the concurrent use of 3 antihypertensive drug classes, commonly including a long-acting calcium channel blocker, a blocker of the renin-angiotensin system (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker), and a diuretic. The antihypertensive drugs should be administered at maximum or maximally tolerated daily doses. RH also includes patients whose BP achieves target values on ≥4 antihypertensive medications. The diagnosis of RH requires assurance of antihypertensive medication adherence and exclusion of the "white-coat effect" (office BP above goal but out-of-office BP at or below target). The importance of RH is underscored by the associated risk of adverse outcomes compared with non-RH. This article is an updated American Heart Association scientific statement on the detection, evaluation, and management of RH. Once antihypertensive medication adherence is confirmed and out-of-office BP recordings exclude a white-coat effect, evaluation includes identification of contributing lifestyle issues, detection of drugs interfering with antihypertensive medication effectiveness, screening for secondary hypertension, and assessment of target organ damage. Management of RH includes maximization of lifestyle interventions, use of long-acting thiazide-like diuretics (chlorthalidone or indapamide), addition of a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (spironolactone or eplerenone), and, if BP remains elevated, stepwise addition of antihypertensive drugs with complementary mechanisms of action to lower BP. If BP remains uncontrolled, referral to a hypertension specialist is advised.

[Clinical relevance of drug interactions between nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and antihypertensives]

Objetivo

Establecer la relevancia clínica de las interacciones medicamentosas reportadas entre antiinflamatorios no esteroideos (AINE) y antihipertensivos basándose en la gravedad y la probabilidad de ocurrencia de la interacción.

Diseño

Revisión sistemática.

Fuentes de datos

Se realizó una búsqueda en PubMed/Medline utilizando los términos Mesh: NSAIDs, Antihypertensive drugs y Drug interactions.

Extracción de datos

Se incluyeron publicaciones entre 2002 y 2012 de estudios en humanos, en español e inglés y con acceso a texto completo. Fueron incluidos los artículos que la búsqueda arrojó y algunas de las referencias usadas en dichos trabajos. Fueron excluidos los trabajos con métodos in vitro, con efectos sobre la hipertensión ocular y aquellos que no consideraran la interacción AINE-antihipertensivos. Para la selección de los trabajos incluidos participaron 3 revisores independientes. Se usó una herramienta especialmente diseñada para la extracción de datos y análisis de la relevancia clínica de la interacción.

Resultados

Se incluyeron 19 artículos de los 50 encontrados. Allí se identificaron 21 interacciones de mecanismo farmacodinámico, clasificadas por su relevancia clínica en nivel 2 (riesgo alto; 76,2%) y nivel 3 (riesgo medio; 23,8%). Adicionalmente se encontró evidencia de 16 combinaciones que no presentaron interacción.

Conclusiones

Algunos AINE pueden disminuir la efectividad del tratamiento antihipertensivo cuando se utilizan simultáneamente con antihipertensivos, en especial con inhibidores de la enzima conversora de angiotensina, diuréticos, bloqueadores beta y antagonistas de los receptores de angiotensina. No se encontró evidencia de la modificación del efecto de los antagonistas de los canales de calcio, especialmente dihidropiridínicos, por el uso simultáneo con AINE.

A systematic review of the effect of paracetamol on blood pressure in hypertensive and non-hypertensive subjects

AIM

To review current evidence on the effect of paracetamol on blood pressure (BP), the quality of the previous studies and the validity of the results, and to summarize these findings.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane library and EMBASE for publications between the years 1963 and 2012.

RESULTS

We identified three case reports, seven prospective observational trials, six randomized controlled trials, one commentary and two reviews. Some, but not all, of the observational studies, which included over 147 000 patients, showed an increased risk of hypertension with paracetamol use. The randomized studies were generally small and the results were inconsistent. Three studies, which included 104 patients, showed an increase of systolic BP by ~4 mmHg, two studies, which included 27 patients, reported no change in BP and one study, which included 21 patients, reported a fall in BP although no placebo arm was included for comparison.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall effect of paracetamol on BP is unclear. Given that paracetamol is often suggested as a safer alternative to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), it would seem that further prospective evidence is now needed to address the effect of paracetamol on BP. This would be best done with larger studies in relevant cohorts using BP measured by ambulatory BP monitoring as the primary endpoint.

Effect of naproxen and acetaminophen on blood pressure lowering by ramipril, valsartan and aliskiren in hypertensive patients

BACKGROUND

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are frequently used for reducing pain and other symptoms in osteoarthritis (OA). NSAIDs have been associated with an increase in blood pressure (BP) in both normotensive and hypertensive individuals and a blunting effect on various anti-hypertensive medications. Acetaminophen effects on anti-hypertensive treatment, instead, are still a matter of debate.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of naproxen versus acetaminophen on ramipril, valsartan and aliskiren therapy in hypertensive patients with OA in a double-blind, cross-over study, by measuring clinic, ambulatory BP and heart rate (HR).

RESULTS

One hundred seventy four patients were randomly treated with ramipril, valsartan or aliskiren for 8 weeks and 135 patients with normalized BP were randomized to receive naproxen or acetaminophen for 2 weeks. Naproxen significantly increased clinic and ambulatory systolic/diastolic BP (SBP/DBP) values in patients treated with ramipril (p < 0.01) or valsartan (p < 0.05), but did not affect aliskiren effects. Also acetaminophen slightly but significantly affected clinic and ambulatory SBP/DBP in all three groups and, surprisingly, it also produced a slight increase in HR (+3.1, +3.3 and +3.4 b/min day-time HR values, for ramipril, valsartan and aliskiren, respectively; p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Both naproxen and acetaminophen can affect anti-hypertensive therapy with ramipril, valsartan or aliskiren with a different extent. When acetaminophen is chosen for OA management in subjects with hypertension, patients should be evaluated as carefully as when traditional NSAIDs are given.

Drug interactions between antihypertensive drugs and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents: a descriptive study using the French Pharmacovigilance database

Drug-drug interactions (DDIs) between antihypertensive drugs and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) can lead to adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Guidelines are available to help prescribers deal with these drug associations, but their implementation is not well evaluated. The aims of this study were to assess the prevalence of NSAIDs exposure in patients treated with antihypertensive drugs, using the French Pharmacovigilance database, and explore the ADRs related to DDIs between antihypertensive drugs and NSAIDs. Over the 11, 442 notifications of ADRs recorded in this database in patients treated with oral antihypertensive drugs between 2008 and 2010, 517 (4.5 and 95% CI: 4.1-4.9) also included exposure to NSAIDs. These subjects were more frequently women, took more drugs in general, and were younger and less frequently treated with antiplatelet drugs. In 24.2% of them (125 patients), a DDI between NSAIDs and antihypertensive drugs was potentially the cause of the reported ADR. Acute renal failure caused by DDIs between NSAIDs and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), or diuretics was the most frequently reported ADR (20.7%). Finally, in the French Pharmacovigilance database, around one-fourth of associations NSAIDs  +  antihypertensive drugs are associated with a 'serious' ADR (mainly acute renal failure), suggesting that this well-known DDI is not enough taken into account by prescribers.

Comparative effects of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) on blood pressure in patients with hypertension

Background

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may disrupt control of blood pressure in hypertensive patients and increase their risk of morbidity, mortality, and the costs of care. The objective of this study was to examine the association between incident use of NSAIDs and blood pressure in patients with hypertension.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult hypertensive patients to determine the effects of their first prescription for NSAID on systolic blood pressure and antihypertensive drug intensification. Data were collected from an electronic medical record serving an academic general medicine practice in Indianapolis, Indiana, USA. Using propensity scores to minimize bias, we matched a cohort of 1,340 users of NSAIDs with 1,340 users of acetaminophen. Propensity score models included covariates likely to affect blood pressure or the use of NSAIDs. The study outcomes were the mean systolic blood pressure measurement after starting NSAIDs and changes in antihypertensive therapy.

Results

Compared to patients using acetaminophen, NSAID users had a 2 mmHg increase in systolic blood pressure (95% CI, 0.7 to 3.3). Ibuprofen was associated with a 3 mmHg increase in systolic blood pressure compared to naproxen (95% CI, 0.5 to 4.6), and a 5 mmHg increase compared to celecoxib (95% CI, 0.4 to 10). The systolic blood pressure increase was 3 mmHg in a subgroup of patients concomitantly prescribed angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors or calcium channel blockers and 6 mmHg among those prescribed a beta-adrenergic blocker. Blood pressure changes in patients prescribed diuretics or multiple antihypertensives were not statistically significant.

Conclusion

Compared to acetaminophen, incident use of NSAIDs, particularly ibuprofen, is associated with a small increase in systolic blood pressure in hypertensive patients. Effects in patients prescribed diuretics or multiple antihypertensives are negligible.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and hypertension treatment intensification: a population-based cohort study

PURPOSE

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are known to antagonize the effects of antihypertensive drugs, and these associations can lead to an increase in arterial blood pressure. However, the impact of NSAIDs on hypertension treatment management in large-scale populations remains poorly evaluated. We examined whether the introduction of NSAID into the treatment regimen would induce an intensification of hypertension treatment (defined as the introduction of a new antihypertensive drug).

METHODS

We conducted a cohort study involving 5,710 hypertensive subjects included in the French health insurance system database who had been treated and stabilized with their antihypertensive therapy and not exposed to any NSAID between 1 April 2005 and 1 April 2006. The maximum follow-up duration was 4 years.

RESULTS

Adjusted hazard ratios (HR) for hypertension treatment intensification were 1.34 [95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.05-1.71] for NSAIDs in general, 1.79 (95 % CI 1.15-2.78) for diclofenac and 2.02 (95 % CI:1.09-3.77) for piroxicam. There were significant interactions between NSAIDs and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs; HR 4.09, 95 % CI 2.02-8.27) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs; HR 3.62, 95 % CI 1.80-7.31), but not with other antihypertensive drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

Exposure to NSAIDs leads to an intensification of hypertension treatment, especially in patients treated with ACEIs or ARBs. Renin-angiotensin system blockers should be avoided whenever NSAIDs are prescribed.

Efficacy and safety of valsartan in hypertensive Taiwanese patients: post-marketing surveillance study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of valsartan in Taiwanese patients with essential hypertension.

METHODS

This 12-week multi-center, open-label, observational, post-marketing surveillance study enrolled 2046 hypertensive patients who were prescribed valsartan 80 or 160 mg as monotherapy or in combination with other antihypertensives based on clinical judgment. The primary endpoint was the incidence rate of dizziness with valsartan 160 mg monotherapy or combination therapy at Week 4. Secondary endpoints included the blood-pressure-lowering efficacy and the overall safety and tolerability of valsartan at Weeks 4 and 12.

RESULTS

The monotherapy and combination groups had comparable baseline characteristics. At Week 4, monotherapy was found non-inferior to combination for incidence rate of dizziness (monotherapy, 9.25%; combination, 10%; difference in incidence of dizziness, 0.75%; 95% CI - 0.61% to 2.12%; non-inferiority margin, -1.33%;WaldTest approach). Greater blood pressure (BP) reduction was noted atWeek 12 than atWeek 4.The antihypertensive effect was greater with combination therapy and the 160-mg dose. BP control (systolic <140 mmHg or diastolic <90 mmHg) was achieved in 80-90% patients.Valsartan was well tolerated; most commonly reported adverse events included dizziness, headache, constipation and cough.

CONCLUSION

Valsartan is an effective treatment option for essential hypertension in Taiwanese patients.

The effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs on blood pressure in hypertensive patients

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are ubiquitous medications used by a wide range of people from otherwise healthy normotensive patients to hypertensive patients with many significant comorbidities. Through a variety of mechanisms related to prostaglandin inhibition, including sodium retention and vasoconstriction, these agents may increase blood pressure. This leads to potentially detrimental effects. A review of the current literature regarding this topic yielded 2 meta-analyses and 10 randomized controlled trials. There is evidence of small blood pressure increases in normotensive patients taking NSAIDs approximating +1.1 mm Hg. Patients with treated hypertension show variable increases with NSAID treatment, ranging up to +14.3 mm Hg for systolic pressure and +2.3 mm Hg for diastolic blood pressure. Most antihypertensive medications seem to have decreased effects with concomitant NSAID administration, with the exception of calcium channel blockers. Given the current literature, it appears that NSAIDs increase blood pressure in patients with controlled-hypertension, but the quantity of this increase is variable. If possible, patients who have hypertension should avoid taking NSAIDs.

The effects of lumiracoxib 100 mg once daily vs. ibuprofen 600 mg three times daily on the blood pressure profiles of hypertensive osteoarthritis patients taking different classes of antihypertensive agents

AIMS

To examine whether the blood pressure (BP) profiles of lumiracoxib and high-dose ibuprofen differed in patients treated with different classes of antihypertensive medications.

METHODS

A 4-week, multicentre, randomised, double-blind study has compared the effects of lumiracoxib 100 mg once daily (od) (n = 394) and ibuprofen 600 mg three times daily (tid) (n = 393) on ambulatory BP in osteoarthritis (OA) patients with controlled hypertension. Here, we present subgroup analyses for patients receiving different antihypertensive classes. The primary outcome was a comparison of the change in 24-h mean systolic ambulatory BP (MSABP) from baseline to week 4. Patients receiving angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) represented the largest subgroups receiving antihypertensive monotherapy.

RESULTS

For patients receiving an ARB monotherapy, the least squares mean (LSM) 24-h MSABP at week 4 fell with lumiracoxib 100 mg od and increased with ibuprofen 600 mg tid, creating an estimated treatment difference of 8.1 mmHg in favour of lumiracoxib (p < 0.001). For patients receiving an ACEI and a beta-blocker monotherapy, the estimated treatment difference was 8.2 mmHg (p < 0.001) and 5.8 mmHg (p = 0.002) in favour of lumiracoxib respectively. These treatment differences were greater than observed in the overall population (5.0 mmHg in favour of lumiracoxib). In patients receiving diuretics or calcium channel blockers, treatment differences in MSABP were smaller and not statistically significant, although they remained in favour of lumiracoxib.

CONCLUSION

Lumiracoxib 100 mg od resulted in less destabilisation of BP than high-dose ibuprofen 600 mg tid, and this effect was the greatest in subgroups treated with drugs blocking the renin-angiotensin system.

Valsartan: more than a decade of experience

Valsartan is a nonpeptide angiotensin receptor antagonist that selectively blocks the binding of angiotensin II to the angiotensin II type 1 receptor. The efficacy, tolerability and safety of valsartan have been demonstrated in large-scale studies in hypertension, heart failure (HF) and post-myocardial infarction (MI). This review focuses on what was learned from the valsartan clinical research programme and other comparative trials published from 1997 to the present. Many studies have demonstrated the efficacy of valsartan in lowering blood pressure (BP) in a variety of patient populations (including elderly, women, children, obese patients, patients with diabetes mellitus, patients with chronic kidney disease [CKD], patients at high risk of cardiovascular [CV] disease, African Americans, Hispanic Americans and Asians) and in improving outcomes in CV disease and CKD. In hypertension, valsartan exhibits dose-dependent efficacy in reducing both systolic and diastolic BP over the once-daily dose range of 80-320 mg; doses as high as 640 mg/day have been studied and found to be efficacious and safe. BP control can be enhanced with a more consistent 24-hour BP-lowering profile by using single-pill, fixed-dose combination therapy with valsartan plus hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ). The cardioprotective benefits of valsartan have been demonstrated in large-scale outcome trials and include significant reductions in CV morbidity and mortality in HF, following MI, and in patients with co-morbid hypertension and coronary artery disease and/or HF; reductions in HF hospitalizations; and reductions in the incidence of stroke. The magnitude of these effects is comparable with that demonstrated with angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors; however, valsartan has a more favourable tolerability profile, with a significantly lower incidence of cough and only rare reports of angio-oedema, both class effects of ACE inhibitor use. Consistent with its angiotensin receptor-blocking effects, valsartan also reduces circulating levels of biochemical markers that are associated with angiotensin II-mediated endothelial dysfunction and CV risk (e.g. high-sensitivity C-reactive protein or oxidized low-density lipoprotein). Improvements in CKD with valsartan include statistically and clinically meaningful reductions in urinary albumin and protein excretion in patients with type 2 diabetes and in nondiabetic patients with CKD. In short-term studies, valsartan has improved or stabilized various indices of metabolic function in at-risk patients, including those with co-morbid hypertension, obesity and/or metabolic syndrome. Because of this, valsartan is being prospectively investigated for its ability to reduce the incidence of new-onset diabetes and provide cardioprotection in patients with impaired glucose tolerance. Valsartan and valsartan/HCTZ are well tolerated. In clinical trials, adverse events during valsartan treatment were similar to those occurring with placebo. The combination of valsartan/HCTZ was better tolerated than HCTZ alone. Valsartan is administered once daily for hypertension; doses are usually taken upon awakening. In patients with HF or MI, valsartan is administered twice daily.

Hypertension in rheumatoid arthritis

RA associates with an increased burden of cardiovascular disease, which is at least partially attributed to classical risk factors such as hypertension (HT) and dyslipidaemia. HT is highly prevalent, and seems to be under-diagnosed and under-treated among patients with RA. In this review, we discuss the mechanisms that may lead to increased blood pressure in such patients, paying particular attention to commonly used drugs for the treatment of RA. We also suggest screening strategies and management algorithms for HT, specific to the RA population, although it is clear that these need to be formally assessed in prospective randomized controlled trials designed specifically for the purpose, which, unfortunately, are currently lacking.

Valsartan: the past, present and future

Valsartan (Diovan) is a widely use angiotensin receptor blocker that prevents angiotensin II from binding to the subtype 1 receptor. Stimulation of the subtype 1 receptor is believed to mediate many of the deleterious effects accompanied by increased angiotensin II levels. Valsartan is effective in the treatment of hypertension, alone and in combination with hydrochlorothiazide. Valsartan is similarly as effective as angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) blockers following myocardial infarction accompanied with left ventricular dysfunction, and/or heart failure. For the treatment of congestive heart failure with left ventricular dysfunction, valsartan offers a reduction in mortality in patients not able to tolerate an ACE inhibitor and in combination with an ACE inhibitor, valsartan reduces morbidity (hospitalization for heart failure).

NSAID use and BP in treated hypertensives: a retrospective controlled observational study

The objective of this study was to investigate the association between NSAID use and blood pressure (BP) among a sample of treated hypertensive patients. A controlled observational study was designed in UK primary care setting. Patients with diagnosed hypertension and currently being prescribed antihypertensive medication registered with four general practices, comparing patients also prescribed NSAIDs (exposed) to those not prescribed NSAIDs (unexposed). Majority of the patients were elderly. Systolic and diastolic pressure were the outcome measures. Data were collected for 184 NSAID users and 762 nonusers with a mean age of 68 years. There was no difference in either systolic (adjusted difference 1.9 mmHg, 95% CI -0.7 to 4.5, P=0.15) or diastolic (adjusted difference 1.0 mmHg, 95% CI -0.3 to 2.3, P=0.15) blood pressure. There was no evidence of any interactions according to categories of age, sex, or number of antihypertensive drugs prescribed. Among NSAID users, there was no evidence of any differences in blood pressure according to NSAID type or dose. In conclusion we found no evidence for an association between NSAID usage and BP control in known hypertensive patients receiving antihypertensive medication in primary care. The reported association between NSAID use and BP control appears much less substantial than has been previously suggested.

Antihypertensive therapy: special focus on drug interactions

Today, the lifetime risk of patients aged 55-65 years to receive antihypertensive drugs approaches 60%. Yet, recent trials suggest that hypertension is not adequately controlled in the majority of patients. The prevalence of hypertension increases with advancing age, as does the prevalence of comorbid conditions and the total number of medications taken. Multi-drug therapy, advancing age and comorbid conditions are also key risk factors for adverse drug reactions and drug interactions. In this review, the authors evaluate the most frequently used antihypertensive drugs (diuretics, beta-adrenergic blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, calcium channel blockers, angiotensin II receptor Type 1 blockers and alpha-adrenergic blockers) with special reference to pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic drug interactions. As the spectrum of drugs prescribed is constantly changing, safety yesterday does not imply safety today and safety today does not imply safety tomorrow. Furthermore, therapeutic efficacy should not be neglected over concerns regarding drug interactions. Many patients are at risk of clinically relevant drug interactions involving antihypertensive drugs but, presently, even more patients may be at risk of suffering from the consequences of their inadequately treated hypertension. In this respect, the authors discuss controversial viewpoints on the overall clinical relevance of drug interactions occurring at the level of cytochrome P450 metabolism.