Calcium channel blockers as the treatment of choice for hypertension in renal transplant recipients: fact or fiction

Antihypertensive treatment for kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

The comparative effects of specific blood pressure (BP) lowering treatments on patient-important outcomes following kidney transplantation are uncertain. Our 2009 Cochrane review found that calcium channel blockers (CCBs) improved graft function and prevented graft loss, while the evidence for other BP-lowering treatments was limited. This is an update of the 2009 Cochrane review.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of different classes and combinations of antihypertensive drugs in kidney transplant recipients.

SEARCH METHODS

We contacted the Information Specialist and searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 3 July 2024 using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register were identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs evaluating any BP-lowering agent in recipients of a functioning kidney transplant for at least two weeks were eligible.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed the risks of bias and extracted data. Treatment estimates were summarised using the random-effects model and expressed as relative risk (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Evidence certainty was assessed using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) processes. The primary outcomes included all-cause death, graft loss, and kidney function.

MAIN RESULTS

Ninety-seven studies (8706 participants) were included. One study evaluated treatment in children. The overall risk of bias was unclear to high across all domains. Compared to placebo or standard care alone, CCBs probably reduce all-cause death (23 studies, 3327 participants: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.95; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty evidence) and graft loss (24 studies, 3577 participants: RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.95; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). CCBs may make little or no difference to estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (11 studies, 2250 participants: MD 1.89 mL/min/1.73 m2, 95% CI -0.70 to 4.48; I2 = 48%; low certainty evidence) and acute rejection (13 studies, 906 participants: RR 10.8, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.35; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). CCBs may reduce systolic BP (SBP) (3 studies, 329 participants: MD -5.83 mm Hg, 95% CI -10.24 to -1.42; I2 = 13%; low certainty evidence) and diastolic BP (DBP) (3 studies, 329 participants: MD -3.98 mm Hg, 95% CI -5.98 to -1.99; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence). CCBs have uncertain effects on proteinuria. Compared to placebo or standard care alone, angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) may make little or no difference to all-cause death (7 studies, 702 participants: RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.58 to 2.21; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence), graft loss (6 studies, 718 participants: RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.13; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence), eGFR (4 studies, 509 participants: MD -2.46 mL/min/1.73 m2, 95% CI -7.66 to 2.73; I2 = 64%; low certainty evidence) and acute rejection (4 studies, 388 participants: RR 1.75, 95% CI 0.76 to 4.04; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence). ACEi may reduce proteinuria (5 studies, 441 participants: MD -0.33 g/24 hours, 95% CI -0.64 to -0.01; I2 = 67%; low certainty evidence) but had uncertain effects on SBP and DBP. Compared to placebo or standard care alone, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) may make little or no difference to all-cause death (6 studies, 1041 participants: RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.31; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence), eGRF (5 studies, 300 participants: MD -1.91 mL/min/1.73 m2, 95% CI -6.20 to 2.38; I2 = 57%; low certainty evidence), and acute rejection (4 studies, 323 participants: RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.29; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence). ARBs may reduce graft loss (6 studies, 892 participants: RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.84; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence), SBP (10 studies, 1239 participants: MD -3.73 mm Hg, 95% CI -7.02 to -0.44; I2 = 63%; moderate certainty evidence) and DBP (9 studies, 1086 participants: MD -2.75 mm Hg, 95% CI -4.32 to -1.18; I2 = 47%; moderate certainty evidence), but has uncertain effects on proteinuria. The effects of CCBs, ACEi or ARB compared to placebo or standard care alone on cardiovascular outcomes (including fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction, fatal or nonfatal stroke) or other adverse events were uncertain. The comparative effects of ACEi plus ARB dual therapy, alpha-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists compared to placebo or standard care alone were rarely evaluated. Head-to-head comparisons of ACEi, ARB or thiazide versus CCB, ACEi versus ARB, CCB or ACEi versus alpha- or beta-blockers, or ACEi plus CCB dual therapy versus ACEi or CCB monotherapy were scarce. No studies reported outcome data for cancer or life participation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For kidney transplant recipients, the use of CCB therapy to reduce BP probably reduces death and graft loss compared to placebo or standard care alone, while ARB may reduce graft loss. The effects of ACEi and ARB compared to placebo or standard care on other patient-centred outcomes were uncertain. The effects of dual therapy, alpha-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists compared to placebo or standard care alone and the comparative effects of different treatments were uncertain.

Role of hypertension in progression of pediatric CKD

Hypertension is frequent in children with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Its prevalence varies according to CKD stage and cause. It is relatively uncommon in children with congenital kidney disease, while acquired kidney disease is associated with a higher prevalence of hypertension. Studies in children with CKD utilizing ambulatory blood pressure monitoring also showed a high prevalence of masked hypertension. Uncontrolled and longstanding hypertension in children is associated with progression of CKD. Aggressive treatment of high blood pressure should be an essential part of care to delay CKD progression in children.

Role of cyclosporin A in the treatment of kidney disease and nephrotoxicity

The clinical use of cyclosporin A (CsA) has led to significant advances and achievements in the field of transplantation and immune diseases. However, the nephrotoxicity of CsA is a major concern in current immunosuppression regimens. CsA causes abnormal kidney function while treating kidney disease, causing problems for clinicians and patients. Evidence of CsA nephrotoxicity is almost always present in transplant recipients after long-term CsA administration (up to 10 years), and similar phenomena occur with other calcineurin inhibitors. In this review, we summarize the mechanisms and influencing factors of CsA for the treatment of primary nephrotic syndrome. The mechanisms of CsA nephrotoxicity, clinical-pathological features, diagnosis, prevention strategies, and risk factors are summarized. We discuss the correlates and mechanisms of the switch between kidney disease prevention and nephrotoxicity of CsA to better understand the function of CsA in the kidney and to provide a basis for the prevention and treatment of CsA nephrotoxicity.

Cardiovascular Risk after Kidney Transplantation: Causes and Current Approaches to a Relevant Burden

Background. Cardiovascular disease is a frequent complication after kidney transplantation and represents the leading cause of mortality in this population. Material and Methods. We searched for the relevant articles in the National Institutes of Health library of medicine, transplant, cardiologic and nephrological journals. Results. The pathogenesis of cardiovascular disease in kidney transplant is multifactorial. Apart from non-modifiable risk factors, such as age, gender, genetic predisposition and ethnicity, several traditional and non-traditional modifiable risk factors contribute to its development. Traditional factors, such as diabetes, hypertension and dyslipidemia, may be present before and may worsen after transplantation. Immunosuppressants and impaired graft function may strongly influence the exacerbation of these comorbidities. However, in the last years, several studies showed that many other cardiovascular risk factors may be involved in kidney transplantation, including hyperuricemia, inflammation, low klotho and elevated Fibroblast Growth Factor 23 levels, deficient levels of vitamin D, vascular calcifications, anemia and poor physical activity and quality of life. Conclusions. The timely and effective treatment of time-honored and recently discovered modifiable risk factors represent the basis of the prevention of cardiovascular complications in kidney transplantation. Reduction of cardiovascular risk can improve the life expectancy, the quality of life and the allograft function and survival.

New Approaches to Cardiovascular Disease and Its Management in Kidney Transplant Recipients

Cardiovascular events, including ischemic heart disease, heart failure, and arrhythmia, are common complications after kidney transplantation and continue to be leading causes of graft loss. Kidney transplant recipients have both traditional and transplant-specific risk factors for cardiovascular disease. In the general population, modification of cardiovascular risk factors is the best strategy to reduce cardiovascular events; however, studies evaluating the impact of risk modification strategies on cardiovascular outcomes among kidney transplant recipients are limited. Furthermore, there is only minimal guidance on appropriate cardiovascular screening and monitoring in this unique patient population. This review focuses on the limited scientific evidence that addresses cardiovascular events in kidney transplant recipients. Additionally, we focus on clinical management of specific cardiovascular entities that are more prevalent among kidney transplant recipients (ie, pulmonary hypertension, valvular diseases, diastolic dysfunction) and the use of newer evolving drug classes for treatment of heart failure within this cohort of patients. We note that there are no consensus documents describing optimal diagnostic, monitoring, or management strategies to reduce cardiovascular events after kidney transplantation; however, we outline quality initiatives and research recommendations for the assessment and management of cardiovascular-specific risk factors that could improve outcomes.

Approach and Management of Hypertension After Kidney Transplantation

Hypertension is one of the most common cardiovascular co-morbidities after successful kidney transplantation. It commonly occurs in patients with other metabolic diseases, such as diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidemia, and obesity. The pathogenesis of post-transplant hypertension is complex and is a result of the interplay between immunological and non-immunological factors. Post-transplant hypertension can be divided into immediate, early, and late post-transplant periods. This classification can help clinicians determine the etiology and provide the appropriate management for these complex patients. Volume overload from intravenous fluid administration is common during the immediate post-transplant period and commonly contributes to hypertension seen early after transplantation. Immunosuppressive medications and donor kidneys are associated with post-transplant hypertension occurring at any time point after transplantation. Transplant renal artery stenosis (TRAS) and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) are recognized but common and treatable causes of resistant hypertension post-transplantation. During late post-transplant period, chronic renal allograft dysfunction becomes an additional cause of hypertension. As these patients develop more substantial chronic kidney disease affecting their allografts, fibroblast growth factor 23 (FGF23) increases and is associated with increased cardiovascular and all-cause mortality in kidney transplant recipients. The exact relationship between increased FGF23 and post-transplant hypertension remains poorly understood. Blood pressure (BP) targets and management involve both non-pharmacologic and pharmacologic treatment and should be individualized. Until strong evidence in the kidney transplant population exists, a BP of <130/80 mmHg is a reasonable target. Similar to complete renal denervation in non-transplant patients, bilateral native nephrectomy is another treatment option for resistant post-transplant hypertension. Native renal denervation offers promising outcomes for controlling resistant hypertension with no significant procedure-related complications. This review addresses the epidemiology, pathogenesis, and specific etiologies of post-transplant hypertension including TRAS, calcineurin inhibitor effects, OSA, and failed native kidney. The cardiovascular and survival outcomes related to post-transplant hypertension and the utility of 24-h blood pressure monitoring will be briefly discussed. Antihypertensive medications and their mechanism of actions relevant to kidney transplantation will be highlighted. A summary of guidelines from different professional societies for BP targets and antihypertensive medications as well as non-pharmacological interventions, including bilateral native nephrectomy and native renal denervation, will be reviewed.

Treating Gout in Kidney Transplant Recipients

Objective

To review the etiology, treatment, and preventive strategies of hyperuricemia and gout in kidney transplant recipients.

Data Sources

Primary literature was obtained via Medline (1966-June 2003).

Study Selection and Data Extraction

Studies evaluating treatment and prevention of hyperuricemia and gout in kidney transplantation were considered for evaluation. English-language studies were selected for inclusion.

Data Synthesis

Approximately 14000 kidney transplantations were performed in the United States in 2003, and of those transplant recipients, nearly 13% will experience a new onset of gout. The prevalence of hyperuricemia is even greater. There are several mechanisms by which hyperuricemia and gout develop in kidney transplant recipients. Medication-induced hyperuricemia and renal dysfunction are 2 of the more common mechanisms. Prophylactic and treatment options include allopurinol, colchi cine, corticosteroids, and, if absolutely necessary, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

Conclusion

It is generally recommended to decide whether the risks of prophylactic therapy and treatment outweigh the benefits. Often, the risk of adverse events associated with agents to treat these ailments tends to outweigh the benefits; therefore, treatment is usually reserved for symptomatic episodes of acute gout. Practitioners must also decide if changes in immunosuppressive regimens may be of benefit on a patient-by-patient basis.

Management of Hypertension in Solid-Organ Transplantation

Posttransplant hypertension is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease and chronic renal allograft dysfunction. A significant number of transplant recipients suffer from posttransplant hypertension in part because of corticosteroid and calcineurin inhibitor use. Although the optimal blood pressure range and the antihypertensive agents of choice in the transplant population have not been determined, the guidelines for blood pressure control in the general population can be extrapolated to the transplant population. The choice of an antihypertensive regimen should be tailored on the basis of the individual patient's risk factors and comorbidities.

American Society of Nephrology Quiz and Questionnaire 2015: Electrolytes and Acid-Base Disorders

The Nephrology Quiz and Questionnaire remains an extremely popular session for attendees of the annual Kidney Week meeting of the American Society of Nephrology. During the 2015 meeting the conference hall was once again overflowing with eager quiz participants. Topics covered by the experts included electrolyte and acid-base disorders, glomerular disease, end-stage renal disease and dialysis, and kidney transplantation. Complex cases representing each of these categories together with single-best-answer questions were prepared and submitted by the panel of experts. Before the meeting, training program directors of nephrology fellowship programs and nephrology fellows in the United States answered the questions through an internet-based questionnaire. During the live session members of the audience tested their knowledge and judgment on the same series of case-oriented questions in a quiz. The audience compared their answers in real time using a cell-phone app containing the answers of the nephrology fellows and training program directors. The results of the online questionnaire were displayed, and then the quiz answers were discussed. As always, the audience, lecturers, and moderators enjoyed this highly educational session. This article recapitulates the session and reproduces selected content of educational value for theClinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrologyreaders. Enjoy the clinical cases and expert discussions.

The safe introduction of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor in renal allograft recipients

Antihypertensive and renoprotective treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) or angiotensin II receptor blocker is indicated in almost all chronic renal failure patients. However, this treatment is not widely used for renal allograft recipients mainly because of the potential side effects, including a decrease in renal function as well as onset of hyperkalemia or anemia. Herein we investigated the effects of ACEI introduction to hypertensive renal transplantation patients who did not display renal artery stenosis. At least 2 months after transplantation, we exchanged amlodipine (5 mg) for either ramipril or perindopril (5 mg) in 25 patients who were free of renal artery stenosis as determined indirectly by measuring the renal arterial resistance index with the noninvasive, inexpensive Doppler ultrasound method. The resistance index was evaluated again at 2 weeks. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure, serum creatinine, calculated creatinine clearance, serum potassium, hemoglobin and hematocrit were also measured before as well as at 2, 4, and 12 weeks after conversion to ACEI. The conversion did not change the mean renal arterial resistance index, nor did it influence renal function or blood count, and it was equally effective for controlling blood pressure. The serum potassium level increased at 2 and 4 weeks; however, it was within the normal range in all patients. Our data suggested that measurement of the renal arterial resistance index is a noninvasive, inexpensive, and reliable preselection method before introduction of ACEI in renal allograft recipients.

Normalization of deranged signal transduction in lymphocytes of COPD patients by the novel calcium channel blocker H-DHPM

Investigations on the role of intracellular Ca(2+) ion concentration in the mechanism of development of COPD in smokers and non-smokers were carried out. The intracellular Ca(2+) levels were found to be increased in human lymphocytes in patients with COPD as compared to non-smokers and smokers without COPD. The investigations reveal an association in altered intracellular Ca(2+) regulation in lymphocytes and severity of COPD, by means of significant activation of Protein kinase C and inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS). The effect of a novel calcium channel blocker ethyl 4-(4'-heptanoyloxyphenyl)-6-methyl-3,4-dihydropyrimidin-2-one-5-carboxylate (H-DHPM) as a potential candidate for the treatment of COPD was also investigated. H-DHPM treated cells showed a decrease in intracellular Ca(2+) level as compared to the control cells. Molecular studies were carried out to evaluate the expression profile of NOS isoforms in human lymphocytes and it was shown that H-DHPM decreases the increased iNOS in COPD along with reestablishing the normal levels of endothelial nitric oxide synthase (eNOS). The results of H-DHPM were comparable with those of Amlodipine, a known calcium channel blocker. Calcium channel blocker H-DHPM proves to be a potential candidate for the treatment of COPD and further clinical studies are required to prove its role in the treatment of pulmonary hypertension (PH).

Management of Hypertension in Renal Transplant Patients: A Comprehensive Review of Nonpharmacologic and Pharmacologic Treatment Strategies

Objective:

To review the guidelines and literature for the treatment of hypertension in renal transplant patients and to provide guidance to practitioners in the selection of appropriate nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic treatment options.

Data Sources:

A PubMed search (January 1948–March 2010) was performed using the search terms hypertension, antihypertensive agents, blood pressure, and cardiovascular disease, in combination with renal transplant and kidney transplant. The search was limited to articles published in English. All relevant peer-reviewed original studies, meta-analyses, guidelines, consensus statements, and review articles were examined. In addition, reference citations from publications identified were reviewed.

Study Selection and Data Extraction:

All literature found was evaluated for inclusion. Review articles as well as prospective and retrospective original research articles were reviewed.

Data Synthesis:

Hypertension after solid organ transplantation is a problem commonly encountered in patients during their posttransplantation clinic visits. Effective management of these patients' hypertension is crucial, as hypertension left untreated may lead to increased morbidity and mortality as well as graft loss. The unique, multifactorial etiology of hypertension in this population makes treatment choices more challenging compared to treatment of a nontransplant patient. Therefore, to guide practitioners in this process, we developed a hypertension management protocol, taking into account the unique considerations faced in the adult renal transplant population. The review guides practitioners from the initial assessment of patients' hypertension through the evaluation and selection of nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic treatment options and provides information about the discontinuation of certain antihypertensive medications. It also provides a concise, but comprehensive review of the major antihypertensive drug classes and economic considerations.

Conclusions:

The management of hypertension in posttransplantation patients is challenging and complicated, yet necessary to prevent morbidity, mortality, and graft loss for these patients. Therapy should be individualized based on patient assessment, response to previous therapy, and economic considerations.

Antihypertensives for kidney transplant recipients: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

In nontransplant populations, effects of different antihypertensive drug classes vary. Relative effects in kidney transplant recipients are uncertain. We performed a systematic review including random effects meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, using Cochrane Collaboration methodology. We identified 60 trials, enrolling 3802 recipients. Twenty-nine trials (2262 patients) compared calcium channel blockers (CCB) with placebo or no treatment, 10 trials (445 patients) compared angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) with placebo or no treatment, and seven studies (405 patients) compared CCB with ACEi. CCB compared with placebo or no treatment (plus additional agents in either arm as required) reduced graft loss (risk ratio [RR] 0.75, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.57-0.99) and improved glomerular filtration rate (GFR; mean difference [MD] 4.5 mL/min, 95% CI 2.2-6.7). Data on ACEi versus placebo or no treatment were inconclusive for GFR (MD -8.1 mL/min, 95% CI -18.6-2.4) and inconsistent for graft loss, precluding meta-analysis. In direct comparison with CCB, ACEi decreased GFR (MD 11.5 mL/min, 95% CI 7.2-15.8), proteinuria (MD 0.28 g/day, 95% CI 0.10-0.47), hemoglobin (MD 11.5 g/L, 95% CI 7.2-15.8), and increased hyperkalemia (RR 3.7, 95% CI 1.9-7.7). Graft loss data were inconclusive (RR 7.4, 95% CI 0.4-140). These data suggest that CCB may be preferred as first-line agents for hypertensive kidney transplant recipients.

Antihypertensive treatment for kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

In some nontransplant populations, effects of different antihypertensive drug classes vary. Relative effects in kidney transplant recipients are uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess comparative effects of different classes of antihypertensive agents in kidney transplant recipients.

SEARCH STRATEGY

MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, conference proceedings and reference lists of identified studies were searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of any antihypertensive agent applied to kidney transplant recipients for at least two weeks were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data was extracted by two investigators independently. Study quality, transplant outcomes and other patient centred outcomes were assessed using random effects meta-analysis. Risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes, both with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Stratified analyses and meta-regression were used to investigate heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 60 studies, enrolling 3802 recipients. Twenty-nine studies (2262 participants) compared calcium channel blockers (CCB) to placebo/no treatment, 10 studies (445 participants) compared angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) to placebo/no treatment and seven studies (405 participants) compared CCB to ACEi. CCB compared to placebo/no treatment (plus additional agents in either arm as required) reduced graft loss (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.99) and improved glomerular filtration rate (GFR), (MD, 4.45 mL/min, 95% CI 2.22 to 6.68). Data on ACEi versus placebo/no treatment were inconclusive for GFR (MD -8.07 mL/min, 95% CI -18.57 to 2.43), and variable for graft loss, precluding meta-analysis. In direct comparison with CCB, ACEi decreased GFR (MD -11.48 mL/min, 95% CI -5.75 to -7.21), proteinuria (MD -0.28 g/24 h, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.10), haemoglobin (MD -12.96 g/L, 95% CI -5.72 to -10.21) and increased hyperkalaemia (RR 3.74, 95% CI 1.89 to 7.43). Graft loss data were inconclusive (RR 7.37, 95% CI 0.39 to 140.35). Other drug comparisons were compared in small numbers of participants and studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that CCB may be preferred as first line agents for hypertensive kidney transplant recipients. ACEi have some detrimental effects in kidney transplant recipients. More high quality studies reporting patient centred outcomes are required.

Renin angiotensin system blockade in kidney transplantation: a systematic review of the evidence

ACE-inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) slow the progression of renal disease in non-transplant patients. A systematic review of randomized trials (n = 21 trials with 1549 patients) was conducted to determine the effect of ACE-inhibitor or ARB use following kidney transplantation. With a median follow-up of 27 months, ACE-inhibitor or ARB use was associated with a significant decrease in glomerular filtration rate (-5.8 mL/min; 95% CI -10.6 to -0.99). ACE-inhibitor or ARB use resulted in a lower hematocrit (-3.5%; 95% CI -6.1 to -0.95), reduction in proteinuria (-0.47 gm/d; 95% CI -0.86 to -0.08) but no change in the serum potassium (0.18 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.03 to 0.40). ACE-inhibitor or ARB use results in clinically important reductions in proteinuria, hematocrit and glomerular filtration rate in renal transplant recipients, but there are insufficient data to determine the effect on patient or graft survival. Randomized trials of sufficient power and duration that examine these hard outcomes should be conducted. Until such trials are completed, this study provides quantitative estimates of the risks and benefits of ACE-inhibitor or ARB use that can be used by clinicians considering prescribing these medications to kidney transplant recipients or to researchers designing future trials.

[Antihypertensive drug-drug interactions]

A drug interaction is the quantitative or qualitative modification of the effect of a drug by the simultaneous or successive administration of a different one. Hypertensive patients, mainly the more elderly ones, frequently present concomitant diseases that require the administration of several medicines which facilitates the appearance of interactions. The lack of effectiveness of the antihypertensive treatment is a relatively frequent fact that sometimes is due to interactions of antihypertensive drugs with other treatments. It is difficult to determine the incidence of interactions, but it is related to the number of drugs administered simultaneously. Between 37 and 60% of hospital-admissions are treated with potentially dangerous drug associations and up to a 6% of fatal events are due to this circumstance. Among antihypertensive drugs, diuretics and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors are less affected by drug-interactions. Lipophilic beta-blockers agents may present some clinical relevant interactions, whereas calcium channel blockers, especially the non-dihydropiridinic ones, are implied in clinically relevant pharmacokinetic interactions. Among the angiotensin receptor blockers there are differences that would have to be considered when they are used in patients who receive other drugs. Although it is impossible for the doctor to remember all the clinical relevant interactions, it is important to bear in mind their existence and the possible mechanisms of production which can help to identify them and to contribute to their prevention. The most frequent interactions related with clinical problems are the pharmacokinetic ones, mainly those related to the metabolism through the cytochrome P450 system or the presystemic clearance by means of the P-glycoprotein. Enzymes of the cytochrome P450 system may present polymorphisms that can explain the individual differences in the response to drugs or the appearance of drug-interactions.

PIES method of critique

Critical evaluation of clinical trials is essential prior to applying results into clinical practice. We have created the acronym, PIES (Population, Intervention, Endpoints, and Statistics) that encapsulates the four basic aspects of a trial. The PIES method creates a systematic approach to critically evaluating a trial, allowing practitioners to formulate opinions as to the applicability to clinical practice.