Effects of long-term therapy with labetalol on lipoprotein metabolism in patients with mild hypertension

Beta blockers in the management of chronic kidney disease

The sympathetic nervous system modulates renal function through its receptors namely beta1 (cardiac output and renin release), alpha1 (systemic and renovascular constriction), and beta2 renovascular dilation. Sympathetic overactivity is commonly seen in chronic kidney disease (CKD) and is an important contributor to increasing the risk of cardiovascular events as well as increasing renal disease progression. Recent evaluations of drug use in people with CKD shows a remarkably low percentage of patients receiving beta-blockers, especially in more advanced stage CKD when cardiovascular risk is higher. This is in large part due to tolerability of these agents. Moreover, water-soluble beta-blockers such as atenolol and metoprolol are dialyzable and require supplementation to avoid exacerbation of arrhythmias following dialysis. Newer vasodilating beta-blockers have better tolerability and different effects on renal hemodynamics as well as metabolic variables. These effects are related to the relative alpha1-blocking effect of agents such as carvedilol and labetolol, with carvedilol having relatively greater alpha-blocking effects. Few studies evaluate beta-blockers on cardiovascular risk in CKD patients. Studies with carvedilol demonstrate attenuated increases in albuminuria as well as reduction in cardiovascular events in CKD patients with hypertension. This paper reviews the animal and clinical trial data that evaluate beta-blockers in CKD highlighting the vasodilating beta-blockers. It is apparent that greater use of this drug class for blood pressure control would further enhance reduction of risk of heart failure, the most common cause of death in the first year of starting dialysis.

Quality of life in hypertensive patients treated with either carvedilol or enalapril

An important aspect of antihypertensive drug treatment is quality of life (QL) which should at least not be negatively affected. In this study, the QL during treatment with carvedilol (C), a beta-blocker with vasodilating properties due to alpha-1-receptor blockade, was compared to that of enalapril (E) in patients who had responded to the treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with mild to moderate hypertension (diastolic blood pressure 95-115 mmHg) were randomised to receive either E(n = 119) of C(n = 129) in a double-blind multicenter study. The starting doses were 12.5 (C) and 10 (E) mg with doubling of the dose if necessary at 3-week intervals. If insufficient blood pressure (BP) control was found at 50 mg C or 40 mg E, 12.5 mg of hydrochlorothiazide was added. After having reached the goal BP the patients entered a 5-months maintenance period. General well-being was evaluated by the "Göteborg Quality of Life Questionnaire".

RESULTS

Equally many patients in the respective treatment groups responded at the different dose levels. Diastolic BP after 5 months in the maintenance period was similar on C and E, respectively. For most items, QL was not affected by the treatments. An increased incidence of cough was perceived in the E group (p < 0.001). None of the C treated patients reported frequent cough at the end of the study compared with 12% of E treated patients.

CONCLUSION

C and E had similar BP lowering effects. Neither treatment seemed to affect the patients QL adversely. Cough, although seldom leading to withdrawal from the therapy, may be more common than is commonly recognised during treatment with ACE-inhibitors.

Antihypertensive and metabolic effects of long-term treatment with amosulalol in non-insulin dependent diabetics

In this open study, 41 hypertensive patients with non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus were treated with the combined alpha- and beta-adrenoceptor blocker amosulalol hydrochloride for 24 weeks, either alone or added to existing antihypertensive therapy. The effects on blood pressure, glucose and lipid metabolism were examined. Daily administration of 20 to 60 mg amosulalol caused a significant reduction in both systolic and diastolic blood pressure within 2 weeks. This effect was stable, lasting for the entire trial period. The mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure decreased from 174 +/- 13/92 +/- 9 mmHg at the beginning to 148 +/- 16/80 +/- 11 mmHg at the end of the trial. Heart rate was not affected. Plasma glucose and haemoglobin Alc levels showed a tendency to decrease without any statistical significance. Total and HDL-cholesterol and triglyceride levels also remained unchanged. Although 3 patients had complained of dizziness, all were easily manageable. The results indicate that amosulalol is effective in the treatment of hypertension in non-insulin dependent diabetics and does not affect glucose and lipid metabolism.

Evaluation of labetalol in elderly patients with essential hypertension

Labetalol was evaluated in a multicenter, placebo-controlled study of elderly patients (greater than or equal to 60 years) with mild to moderate essential hypertension. After a placebo-washout period, doses were titrated from 100 mg BID to a maximum of 400 mg BID over a 6-week period. Once blood pressure control (standing diastolic blood pressure [SDBP] less than 90 mm Hg and greater than or equal to 10 mm Hg reduction from baseline) was achieved or the maximum allowable dosage had been given, the dosage remained the same until the end of the study. The titration phase was followed by a 4-week maintenance period. Blood pressure control was achieved in 37/54 (69%) of the patients who were treated with labetalol compared with 21/58 (36%) of the patients who received placebo (P less than .001). Twenty-nine (78%) of those controlled on labetalol responded to doses of 200 mg or less BID, and there was no significant difference between groups with respect to orthostatic blood pressure changes. Adverse experiences were generally mild and occurred with similar frequency in the labetalol and placebo groups; six patients who received labetalol and five who received placebo withdrew from the study due to adverse experiences, but in only one case (labetalol) was the adverse experience considered drug-related. In summary, labetalol effectively and safely lowered diastolic blood pressure in the elderly without producing significant orthostatic changes.

Treatment of hypertension in the elderly with labetalol

Elderly and young hypertensive patients differ with regard to clinical and pathophysiologic profiles. In the elderly, hypertension is generally characterized by elevated peripheral vascular resistance and decreased cardiac output. To establish an individualized or patient-specific approach to their treatment, antihypertensive agents must be evaluated specifically in this subpopulation. Labetalol, an alpha- and beta-blocking agent, has been shown to lower blood pressure in young and elderly hypertensive patients primarily by reducing peripheral vascular resistance without compromising cardiac output. Examination of recent reports on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamic effects, and on the efficacy and safety of labetalol in elderly persons with hypertension, leads us to conclude that the drug appears to be well suited for use in these patients.

Lipids, lipoproteins, and coronary heart disease: implications for antihypertensive therapy

There is now considerable evidence that treatment of abnormalities of lipids and lipoproteins reduces the incidence of coronary heart disease (CHD). Treatment of hypertension, another major cardiovascular risk factor, has not been shown to have the same impact on CHD. Possible explanations for this are that cardiovascular risk factors may occur in combination in an individual or that therapy for hypertension has adversely affected one or several of the other risk factors for CHD, thereby offsetting the benefit gained by lowering blood pressure. This article reviews the relationship between lipids, lipoproteins, and coronary heart disease, and the impact of cholesterol lowering on CHD. The evidence that antihypertensive drugs are associated with lipid and lipoprotein abnormalities is introduced by a critical appraisal of the several studies for such evidence. Implications for the treatment of the hypertensive patient are discussed.

Labetalol. A reappraisal of its pharmacology, pharmacokinetics and therapeutic use in hypertension and ischaemic heart disease

Since labetalol was first reviewed in the Journal (1978), its scope of therapeutic use has expanded and become better defined. Labetalol is an adrenoceptor blocking drug with combined alpha- and beta-blocking properties. These result in a more favourable haemodynamic profile for labetalol compared with 'pure' beta-blockers or pure alpha-blockers, but also contribute to a wider range, but not an overall increased incidence, of adverse effects. The drug is effective and well-tolerated in patients with all grades of hypertension, but is of particular value in special subgroups such as Black patients, the elderly and patients with renal hypertension. While comparative studies are not extensive, available data show that the drug reduces blood pressure to a similar extent, and in a similar proportion of patients, as 'pure' beta-blockers such as propranolol, pure alpha-blockers such as prazosin, calcium antagonists (nifedipine, verapamil), and centrally acting drugs (clonidine and methyldopa). Labetalol is very effective in hypertensive pregnant women and in hypertensive crises, where it provides good control of blood pressure without serious adverse effects, and where few therapeutic options exist. Few controlled studies have investigated the use of labetalol in deliberate induction of hypotension or prevention of hypertension during anaesthesia, and also in patients with ischaemic heart disease. However, available evidence suggests a role for labetalol in these indications and further studies should aid in clarification of its efficacy in these areas. Thus, with its broad scope of therapeutic use in hypertension labetalol remains an important therapeutic option, and the drug may well find an additional place in the treatment of myocardial ischaemia if further evidence confirms encouraging preliminary findings.