Use of 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring to assess blood pressure control: A comparison of olmesartan medoxomil and amlodipine besylate

Blood Pressure Monitoring

Volumn 11, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 135-141

  Chrysant, Steven G ^a   Marbury, Thomas C ^b   Silfani, Tonous N ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b ORLANDO CLINICAL RESEARCH CENTER   (United States)

^c DAIICHI SANKYO INC   (United States)

Author keywords

24 h blood pressure control; Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring; Amlodipine besylate; Angiotensin II receptor blockers; Blood pressure goal rates; Calcium channel blockers; Olmesartan medoxomil

Indexed keywords

AMLODIPINE BESYLATE; OLMESARTAN; PLACEBO;

ADULT; ARTICLE; BLOOD PRESSURE MEASUREMENT; BLOOD PRESSURE MONITORING; BLOOD PRESSURE REGULATION; CALCULATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIASTOLIC BLOOD PRESSURE; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; DRUG EFFICACY; EDEMA; FEMALE; HEMATURIA; HUMAN; HYPERGLYCEMIA; HYPERTENSION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL ASSESSMENT; MULTICENTER STUDY; NAUSEA; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SYSTOLIC BLOOD PRESSURE; THERAPY EFFECT; TREATMENT RESPONSE;

AMLODIPINE; ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENTS; BLOOD PRESSURE; BLOOD PRESSURE MONITORING, AMBULATORY; FEMALE; HUMANS; HYPERTENSION; IMIDAZOLES; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; TETRAZOLES; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 33746158062     PISSN: 13595237     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.mbp.0000209087.40117.b3     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Chrysant SG, Marbury TC, Robinson TD. Antihypertensive efficacy and safety of olmesartan medoxomil compared with amlodipine for mild-to-moderate hypertension. J Hum Hypertens 2003; 17:425-432.
2. Oparil S, Williams D, Chrysant SG, Marbury TC, Neutel J. Comparative efficacy of olmesartan, losartan, valsartan, and irbesartan in the control of essential hypertension. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2001; 3:283-291, 318.
3. Smith DH, Dubiel R, Jones M. Use of 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring to assess antihypertensive efficacy: a comparison of olmesartan medoxomil, losartan potassium, valsartan, and irbesartan. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs 2005; 5:41-50.
4. McGrath BP. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Med J Aust 2002; 176:588-592.
5. White WB. Circadian variation of blood pressure: clinical relevance and implications for cardiovascular chronotherapeutics. Blood Press Monit 1997; 2:47-51.
6. Neutel JM, Elliott WJ, Izzo JL, Chen CL, Masonson HN. Antihypertensive efficacy of olmesartan medoxomil, a new angiotensin II receptor antagonist, as assessed by ambulatory blood pressure measurements. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2002; 4:325-331.
7. Chrysant SG, Chrysant GS, Desai A. Current status of angiotensin receptor blockers for the treatment of cardiovascular diseases: focus on telmisartan. J Hum Hypertens 2005; 19:173-183.
8. Chrysant SG, Miller E. Effects of atenolol and diltiazem-SR on exercise and pressure load in hypertensive patients. Clin Cardiol 1994; 17:670-674.
9. Chrysant SG. Treatment of white coat hypertension. Curr Hypertens Rep 2000; 2:412-417.
10. White WB, Schulman P, McCabe EJ, Dey HM. Average daily blood pressure, not office blood pressure, determines cardiac function in patients with hypertension. JAMA 1989; 261:873-877.
11. Ohkubo T, Imai Y, Tsuji I, Nagai K, Watanabe N, Minami N, et al. Prediction of mortality by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring versus screening blood pressure measurements: a pilot study in Ohasama. J Hypertens 1997; 15:357-364.
12. Redon J, Campos C, Narciso ML, Rodicio JL, Pascual JM, Ruilope LM. Prognostic value of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in refractory hypertension: a prospective study. Hypertension 1998; 31:712-718.
13. Khattar RS, Swales JD, Banfield A, Dore C, Senior R, Lahiri A. Prediction of coronary and cerebrovascular morbidity and mortality by direct continuous ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in essential hypertension. Circulation 1999; 100:1071-1076.
14. Staessen J, Beilin L, Parati G, Waeber B, White W. Task force IV: clinical use of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Participants of the 1999 Consensus Conference on Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring. Blood Press Monit 1999; 4:319-331.
15. White WB. Ambulatory blood pressure as a predictor of target organ disease and outcome in the hypertensive patient. Blood Press Monit 1999; 4:181-184.
16. Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR, Cushman WC, Green LA, Izzo JL Jr, et al. Seventh report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Hypertension 2003; 42:1206-1252.
17. Ramsay L, Williams B, Johnston G, MacGregor G, Poston L, Potter J, et al. Guidelines for management of hypertension: report of the third working party of the British Hypertension Society. J Hum Hypertens 1999; 13:569-592.
18. Guidelines Committee. 2003 European Society of Hypertension-European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension. J Hypertens 2003; 21:1011-1053.
19. Hajjar I, Kotchen TA. Trends in the prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension in the United States, 1988-2000. JAMA 2003; 290:199-206.
20. Andrejak M, Genes N, Vaur L, Poncelet P, Clerson P, Carre A. Electronic pill-boxes in the evaluation of antihypertensive treatment compliance: comparison of once daily versus twice daily regimen. Am J Hypertens 2000; 13:184-190.
21. Luft FC, Fineberg NS, Weinberger MH. Long-term effect of nifedipine and hydrochlorothiazide on blood pressure and sodium homeostasis at varying levels of salt intake in mildly hypertensive patients. Am J Hypertens 1991; 4:752-760.