Dataset Information

Efficacy and Safety of Intravenous Urapidil for Older Hypertensive Patients with Acute Heart Failure: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Urapidil is putatively effective for patients with hypertension and acute heart failure, although randomized controlled trials thereon are lacking. We investigated the efficacy and safety of intravenous urapidil relative to that of nitroglycerin in older patients with hypertension and heart failure in a randomized controlled trial.

Materials and methods

Patients (>60 y) with hypertension and heart failure were randomly assigned to receive intravenous urapidil (n=89) or nitroglycerin (n=91) for 7 days. Hemodynamic parameters, cardiac function, and safety outcomes were compared.

Results

Patients in the urapidil group had significantly lower mean systolic blood pressure (110.1±6.5 mm Hg) than those given nitroglycerin (126.4±8.1 mm Hg, p=0.022), without changes in heart rate. Urapidil was associated with improved cardiac function as reflected by lower N terminal-pro B type natriuretic peptide after 7 days (3311.4±546.1 ng/mL vs. 4879.1±325.7 ng/mL, p=0.027) and improved left ventricular ejection fraction (62.2±3.4% vs. 51.0±2.4%, p=0.032). Patients given urapidil had fewer associated adverse events, specifically headache (p=0.025) and tachycardia (p=0.004). The one-month rehospitalization and all-cause mortality rates were similar.

Conclusion

Intravenous administration of urapidil, compared with nitroglycerin, was associated with better control of blood pressure and preserved cardiac function, as well as fewer adverse events, for elderly patients with hypertension and acute heart failure.

SUBMITTER: Yang W

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5122625 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy and Safety of Intravenous Urapidil for Older Hypertensive Patients with Acute Heart Failure: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

Yang Wei W Zhou Yu Jie YJ Fu Yan Y Qin Jian J Qin Shu S Chen Xiao Min XM Guo Jin Cheng JC Wang De Zhao Z Zhan Hong H Li Jing J He Jing Yu JY Hua Qi Q

Yonsei medical journal 20170101 1

<h4>Purpose</h4>Urapidil is putatively effective for patients with hypertension and acute heart failure, although randomized controlled trials thereon are lacking. We investigated the efficacy and safety of intravenous urapidil relative to that of nitroglycerin in older patients with hypertension and heart failure in a randomized controlled trial.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>Patients (>60 y) with hypertension and heart failure were randomly assigned to receive intravenous urapidil (n=89) or nit ...[more]

PMID: 27873502

Similar Datasets

Project description:Esaxerenone, a mineralocorticoid receptor blocker (MRB), is a new antihypertensive agent. However, esaxerenone-related data with respect to hypertension with heart failure are limited. We investigated the safety and efficacy of esaxerenone in hypertensive patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Hypertensive patients with HFrEF treated with esaxerenone were retrospectively analyzed at two timepoints (short-term: 35±15 days; mid-term: 167±45 days). Adverse events including hyperkalemia (K+ >5.5 mEq/L), worsening renal function (WRF; estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) reduction by ≥20%), and hypotension (systolic blood pressure <90 mmHg) were evaluated. eGFR and K+, serum creatinine, and brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels at baseline, short-term, and mid-term assessments were compared. Patients administered esaxerenone as their first MRB (first-MRB cohort) and those who converted from another MRB (conversion cohort) were separately analyzed. There were 50 (56±10 years old, 26% female) patients. At the short-term assessment, hyperkalemia or hypotension was not observed at a dose of 2.0±0.9 mg/day. Seven patients (14%) showed WRF. K+ was slightly elevated (4.12±0.41 to 4.25±0.39 mmol/L, p = 0.07) and eGFR was significantly reduced (66.9±19.6 mL/min/1.73 m2 to 62.4±19.7 mL/min/1.73 m2, p = 0.006). In the conversion cohort, significant changes in K+ and eGFR from baseline were not observed at the short-term assessment. BNP levels were consistently improved regardless of the cohorts (first-MRB cohort, 310 [110-370] pg/mL to 137 [47-152] pg/mL, p = 0.001; conversion cohort, 181 [30-203] pg/mL to 108 [26-146] pg/mL, p = 0.028). At the mid-term assessment, there were no significant changes in K+ and eGFR compared with the short-term assessment. In conclusion, esaxerenone was safe for hypertensive patients with HFrEF. Hyperkalemia and hypotension were rarely noted, while eGFR was marginally reduced. Moreover, esaxerenone might be beneficial for HFrEF in terms of BNP level reduction.

Project description:ImportancePersistent congestion is associated with worse outcomes in acute heart failure (AHF). Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists administered at high doses may relieve congestion, overcome diuretic resistance, and mitigate the effects of adverse neurohormonal activation in AHF.ObjectiveTo assess the effect of high-dose spironolactone and usual care on N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels compared with usual care alone.Design, setting, and participantsThis double-blind and placebo (or low-dose)-controlled randomized clinical trial was conducted in 22 US acute care hospitals among patients with AHF who were previously receiving no or low-dose (12.5 mg or 25 mg daily) spironolactone and had NT-proBNP levels of 1000 pg/mL or more or B-type natriuretic peptide levels of 250 pg/mL or more, regardless of ejection fraction.InterventionsHigh-dose spironolactone (100 mg) vs placebo or 25 mg spironolactone (usual care) daily for 96 hours.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was the change in NT-proBNP levels from baseline to 96 hours. Secondary end points included the clinical congestion score, dyspnea assessment, net urine output, and net weight change. Safety end points included hyperkalemia and changes in renal function.ResultsA total of 360 patients were randomized, of whom the median age was 65 years, 129 (36%) were women, 200 (55.5%) were white, 151 (42%) were black, 8 (2%) were Hispanic or Latino, 9 (2.5%) were of other race/ethnicity, and the median left ventricular ejection fraction was 34%. Baseline median (interquartile range) NT-proBNP levels were 4601 (2697-9596) pg/mL among the group treated with high-dose spironolactone and 3753 (1968-7633) pg/mL among the group who received usual care. There was no significant difference in the log NT-proBNP reduction between the 2 groups (-0.55 [95% CI, -0.92 to -0.18] with high-dose spironolactone and -0.49 [95% CI, -0.98 to -0.14] with usual care, P = .57). None of the secondary end point or day-30 all-cause mortality or heart failure hospitalization rate differed between the 2 groups. The changes in serum potassium and estimated glomerular filtration rate at 24, 48, 72, and 96 hours. were similar between the 2 groups.Conclusions and relevanceAdding treatment with high-dose spironolactone to usual care for patients with AHF for 96 hours was well tolerated but did not improve the primary or secondary efficacy end points.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02235077.

Project description:Sacubitril-valsartan has been shown to have superior effects over angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers in patients with heart failure (HF) and hypertension. The efficacy and safety of sacubitril-valsartan in patients with HF are controversial. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to assess and compare the effect and adverse events of sacubitril-valsartan, valsartan, and enalapril in patients with HF. We conducted a systematic search using PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Randomized controlled trials involving the use of sacubitril-valsartan in patients with HF were included. We assessed the pooled odds ratio (OR) of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and hospitalization for HF in fixed-effects models and the pooled risk ratio (RR) of symptomatic hypotension, worsening renal function, and hyperkalaemia in fixed-effects models. Of the 315 identified records, six studies involving 14 959 patients were eligible for inclusion. Sacubitril-valsartan reduced the endpoints of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in three trials with pooled ORs of 0.83 (P = 0.0006) and 0.78 (P < 0.0001), respectively. Regarding the composite outcome of hospitalization for HF in five trials, the pooled OR was 0.79 (P < 0.00001). Compared with enalapril or valsartan, sacubitril-valsartan was associated with a high risk of symptomatic hypotension (RR 1.47, P < 0.00001), low risk of worsening renal function (RR 0.81, P = 0.005), and low rate of serious hyperkalaemia (≥6.0 mmol/L) (RR 0.76, P = 0.0007) in all six trials. Compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers, sacubitril-valsartan significantly decreased the risk of death from all causes or cardiovascular causes in HFrEF and hospitalization for HF in both patients with HFrEF and HF with preserved ejection fraction. Sacubitril-valsartan reduced the risk of renal dysfunction and serious hyperkalaemia but was associated with more symptomatic hypotension.

Project description:Background:Shengmai injection (SMI) is made from purified ginseng, Radix Ophiopogonis, and Schisandra chinensis. It has cardiotonic effects and is clinically used for the adjuvant treatment of chronic heart failure (CHF). However, its efficacy and safety are uncertain. The purpose of this study was to systematically evaluate the existing efficacy and safety evidence in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that studied SMI for the treatment of CHF. Methods:PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, clinicaltrials.gov, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, and CBM databases were searched up to September 10, 2019. RCTs that compared basic Western medicine treatment with SMI?+?basic Western medicine were included. The Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess the risk of bias in the RCTs. The meta-analysis used the random effects model; the mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were combined using the inverse variance method, and the Mantel-Haenszel method was used to combine the relative risk (RR) and 95% CIs. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 and Q tests, and the source of heterogeneity was explored by analyzing three preset subgroup hypotheses. Results:A total of 20 RCTs were included (n?=?1562), with a moderate-to-high risk of bias. The meta-analysis showed that, compared with Western medicine alone, SMI adjuvant therapy significantly improved cardiac function indicators, including left ventricular ejection fraction (MD 6.8%, 95% CI 4.68 to 8.91), stroke volume (MD 9.81?ml, 95% CI 5.67 to 13.96), cardiac output (MD 0.96?L/min, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.25), and cardiac index (MD 0.53?L/min, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.70); heterogeneity was generally high among these outcomes. Compared with the controls, patients receiving SMI adjuvant therapy also had a higher response to treatment (RR 2.89, 95% CI 2.10 to 3.99; I2?=?0%), a greater decrease in brain natriuretic peptide levels (MD -284.66?ng/l, 95% CI -353.73 to -215.59, I2?=?0%), and a greater increase in six-minute walk test performance (MD 70.67?m, 95% CI 22.92 to 118.42; I2?=?84%). Nine studies reported mild adverse events, such as gastrointestinal reactions, and no serious adverse events were reported. Conclusion:Currently, available evidence indicates that SMI, as an adjuvant for basic Western medicine treatment, can improve the cardiac function of patients with CHF with good safety outcomes. Because of the high risk of bias among the included RCTs and the large heterogeneity of partial outcomes, the findings of this study must be verified by high-quality studies with large sample sizes.

Project description:Guidelines recommend that exercise training be considered for medically stable outpatients with heart failure. Previous studies have not had adequate statistical power to measure the effects of exercise training on clinical outcomes.To test the efficacy and safety of exercise training among patients with heart failure.Multicenter, randomized controlled trial of 2331 medically stable outpatients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. Participants in Heart Failure: A Controlled Trial Investigating Outcomes of Exercise Training (HF-ACTION) were randomized from April 2003 through February 2007 at 82 centers within the United States, Canada, and France; median follow-up was 30 months.Usual care plus aerobic exercise training, consisting of 36 supervised sessions followed by home-based training, or usual care alone.Composite primary end point of all-cause mortality or hospitalization and prespecified secondary end points of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization, and cardiovascular mortality or heart failure hospitalization.The median age was 59 years, 28% were women, and 37% had New York Heart Association class III or IV symptoms. Heart failure etiology was ischemic in 51%, and median left ventricular ejection fraction was 25%. Exercise adherence decreased from a median of 95 minutes per week during months 4 through 6 of follow-up to 74 minutes per week during months 10 through 12. A total of 759 patients (65%) in the exercise training group died or were hospitalized compared with 796 patients (68%) in the usual care group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.93 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.84-1.02]; P = .13). There were nonsignificant reductions in the exercise training group for mortality (189 patients [16%] in the exercise training group vs 198 patients [17%] in the usual care group; HR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.79-1.17]; P = .70), cardiovascular mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization (632 [55%] in the exercise training group vs 677 [58%] in the usual care group; HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.83-1.03]; P = .14), and cardiovascular mortality or heart failure hospitalization (344 [30%] in the exercise training group vs 393 [34%] in the usual care group; HR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.75-1.00]; P = .06). In prespecified supplementary analyses adjusting for highly prognostic baseline characteristics, the HRs were 0.89 (95% CI, 0.81-0.99; P = .03) for all-cause mortality or hospitalization, 0.91 (95% CI, 0.82-1.01; P = .09) for cardiovascular mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization, and 0.85 (95% CI, 0.74-0.99; P = .03) for cardiovascular mortality or heart failure hospitalization. Other adverse events were similar between the groups.In the protocol-specified primary analysis, exercise training resulted in nonsignificant reductions in the primary end point of all-cause mortality or hospitalization and in key secondary clinical end points. After adjustment for highly prognostic predictors of the primary end point, exercise training was associated with modest significant reductions for both all-cause mortality or hospitalization and cardiovascular mortality or heart failure hospitalization.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00047437.

Project description:Background: Heart failure (HF) is one of the major causes of mortality worldwide, representing the terminal stage of several cardiovascular diseases. Exercise-based rehabilitation is a beneficial therapy for patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). However, there is a lack of specific guidance on clinical decision-making regarding optimal exercise intensity. It is necessary to optimize the clinical recommendations for HF exercises. We will evaluate the efficacy and safety of different aerobic exercise intensities in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF): the HF-EI trial. This trial aims to assess the appropriate exercise intensity for patients with HFrEF. Methods: After a baseline assessment to determine the safety of exercise, 180 patients will be randomly assigned to supervised high-intensity exercise training (ET) group, supervised moderate intensity training (MIT) group, and control group at a ratio of 1:1:1. Patients randomly receiving high intensity training (HIT) undergo supervised ET (3 times/week, 30 min) for aerobic endurance at 70% peak oxygen consumption (peak VO2) intensity for 12 weeks. The MIT patients will perform supervised aerobic ET (3 times/week, 35-42 min) at the anaerobic threshold (AT) intensity for 12 weeks. The control group will continue to maintain their daily activities and will not receive ET. During the baseline and follow-up period, physical examination, laboratory tests, cardiology diagnostic tests, cardiopulmonary exercise tests (CPET), 6-min walk distance (6MWD), scale scores, exercise steps, medications, and clinical events will be monitored. Throughout the research, sport bracelets and patient diaries will be used to monitor and record overall physical activity, training courses, and compliance. Discussion: The HF-EI trial will evaluate the effects of different aerobic exercise intensities on peak VO2, quality of life (QoL), and clinical events among patients with HFrEF. The findings of this trial will provide a basis for formulating exercise prescriptions for patients with HFrEF. Clinical Trial Registration:http://www.chictr.org.cn/, identifier: ChiCTR2000036381.

Dataset Information

Efficacy and Safety of Intravenous Urapidil for Older Hypertensive Patients with Acute Heart Failure: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

Purpose

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Efficacy and Safety of Intravenous Urapidil for Older Hypertensive Patients with Acute Heart Failure: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets