Dataset Information

Secoisolariciresinol Diglucoside (SDG) Isolated from Flaxseed, an Alternative to ACE Inhibitors in the Treatment of Hypertension.

ABSTRACT: Secoisolariciresionol diglucoside (SDG) is a plant lignan isolated from flaxseed and is phytoestrogen. SDG is a potent and long-acting hypotensive agent. Plant phytoestrogens have inhibitory effects on angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE). The hypotensive effects of SDG, a phytoestrogen, may be mediated through inhibition of ACE. The objective of this study was to investigate if SDG-induced hypotension is mediated through inhibition of ACE. The Sprague Dawley male rats were anesthetized and trachea was cannulated. The right jugular vein was cannulated to administer the drug and the carotid artery was cannulated to record arterial pressures using PIOEZ-1 miniature model transducer (Becton, Dickinson and Company, Franklin Lakes, NJ) and Beckman dynograph (Beckman Instruments, Inc., Schiller Park, IL). The effects of angiotensin I (0.2 µg/kg, intravenously [IV]) in the absence and presence of SDG (10 mg/kg, IV), and SDG alone on systolic, diastolic, and mean arterial pressures were measured before and after 15, 30, and 60 minutes of drug administration. SDG decreased the systolic, diastolic, and mean arterial pressure by 37, 47, and 43%, respectively, at 15 minutes and 18.8, 21.2, and 20.3%, respectively, at 60 minutes. Angiotensin I increased the arterial pressure. SDG decreased angiotensin I-induced rise in the systolic, diastolic, and mean arterial pressures by 60, 58, and 51%, respectively, at 15 minutes and 48, 46, and 30%, respectively, at 60 minutes. The data suggest that SDG reduced the angiotensin I-induced rise in the arterial pressures and hence SDG is a potent ACE inhibitor.

SUBMITTER: Prasad K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3830572 | biostudies-other | 2013 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRenin inhibitors (RIs) reduce blood pressure more than placebo, with the magnitude of this effect thought to be similar to that for angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors. However, a drug's efficacy in lowering blood pressure cannot be considered as a definitive indicator of its effectiveness in reducing mortality and morbidity. The effectiveness and safety of RIs compared to ACE inhibitors in treating hypertension is unknown.ObjectivesTo evaluate the benefits and harms of renin inhibitors compared to ACE inhibitors in people with primary hypertension.Search methodsThe Cochrane Hypertension Group Information Specialist searched the following databases for randomized controlled trials up to August 2020: the Cochrane Hypertension Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also contacted authors of relevant papers about further published and unpublished work. The searches had no language restrictions.Selection criteriaWe included randomized, active-controlled, double-blinded studies (RCTs) with at least four weeks follow-up in people with primary hypertension, which compared renin inhibitors with ACE inhibitors and reported morbidity, mortality, adverse events or blood pressure outcomes. We excluded people with proven secondary hypertension.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently selected the included trials, evaluated the risks of bias and entered the data for analysis.Main resultsWe include 11 RCTs involving 13,627 participants, with a mean baseline age from 51.5 to 74.2 years. Follow-up duration ranged from four weeks to 36.6 months. There was no difference between RIs and ACE inhibitors for the outcomes: all-cause mortality: risk ratio (RR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 1.18; 5 RCTs, 5962 participants; low-certainty evidence; total myocardial infarction: RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.22 to 3.39; 2 RCTs, 957 participants; very low-certainty evidence; adverse events: RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.03; 10 RTCs, 6007 participants; moderate-certainty evidence; serious adverse events: RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.64; 10 RTCs, 6007 participants; low-certainty evidence; and withdrawal due to adverse effects: RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.06; 10 RTCs, 6008 participants; low-certainty evidence. No data were available for total cardiovascular events, heart failure, stroke, end-stage renal disease or change in heart rate. Low-certainty evidence suggested that RIs reduced systolic blood pressure: mean difference (MD) -1.72, 95% CI -2.47 to -0.97; 9 RCTs, 5001 participants; and diastolic blood pressure: MD -1.18, 95% CI -1.65 to -0.72; 9 RCTs, 5001 participants, to a greater extent than ACE inhibitors, but we judged this to be more likely due to bias than a true effect. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: For the treatment of hypertension, we have low certainty that renin inhibitors (RI) and angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors do not differ for all-cause mortality and myocardial infarction. We have low to moderate certainty that they do not differ for adverse events. Small reductions in blood pressure with renin inhibitors compared to ACE inhibitors are of low certainty. More independent, large, long-term trials are needed to compare RIs with ACE inhibitors, particularly assessing morbidity and mortality outcomes, but also on blood pressure-lowering effect.

Project description:A 2007 systematic review compared angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) in patients with hypertension. Direct renin inhibitors (DRIs) have since been introduced, and significant new research has been published. We sought to update and expand the 2007 review.We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE (through December 2010) and selected other sources for relevant English-language trials.We included studies that directly compared ACE inhibitors, ARBs, and/or DRIs in at least 20 total adults with essential hypertension; had at least 12 weeks of follow-up; and reported at least one outcome of interest. Ninety-seven (97) studies (36 new since 2007) directly comparing ACE inhibitors versus ARBs and three studies directly comparing DRIs to ACE inhibitor inhibitors or ARBs were included.A standard protocol was used to extract data on study design, interventions, population characteristics, and outcomes; evaluate study quality; and summarize the evidence.In spite of substantial new evidence, none of the conclusions from the 2007 review changed. The level of evidence remains high for equivalence between ACE inhibitors and ARBs for blood pressure lowering and use as single antihypertensive agents, as well as for superiority of ARBs for short-term adverse events (primarily cough). However, the new evidence was insufficient on long-term cardiovascular outcomes, quality of life, progression of renal disease, medication adherence or persistence, rates of angioedema, and differences in key patient subgroups.Included studies were limited by follow-up duration, protocol heterogeneity, and infrequent reporting on patient subgroups.Evidence does not support a meaningful difference between ACE inhibitors and ARBs for any outcome except medication side effects. Few, if any, of the questions that were not answered in the 2007 report have been addressed by the 36 new studies. Future research in this area should consider areas of uncertainty and be prioritized accordingly.

Project description:Arterial hypertension (AH) is a progressive issue that grows in importance with the increased average age of the world population. The potential role of artificial intelligence (AI) in its prevention and treatment is firmly recognized. Indeed, AI application allows personalized medicine and tailored treatment for each patient. Specifically, this article reviews the benefits of AI in AH management, pointing out diagnostic and therapeutic improvements without ignoring the limitations of this innovative scientific approach. Consequently, we conducted a detailed search on AI applications in AH: the articles (quantitative and qualitative) reviewed in this paper were obtained by searching journal databases such as PubMed and subject-specific professional websites, including Google Scholar. The search terms included artificial intelligence, artificial neural network, deep learning, machine learning, big data, arterial hypertension, blood pressure, blood pressure measurement, cardiovascular disease, and personalized medicine. Specifically, AI-based systems could help continuously monitor BP using wearable technologies; in particular, BP can be estimated from a photoplethysmograph (PPG) signal obtained from a smartphone or a smartwatch using DL. Furthermore, thanks to ML algorithms, it is possible to identify new hypertension genes for the early diagnosis of AH and the prevention of complications. Moreover, integrating AI with omics-based technologies will lead to the definition of the trajectory of the hypertensive patient and the use of the most appropriate drug. However, AI is not free from technical issues and biases, such as over/underfitting, the "black-box" nature of many ML algorithms, and patient data privacy. In conclusion, AI-based systems will change clinical practice for AH by identifying patient trajectories for new, personalized care plans and predicting patients' risks and necessary therapy adjustments due to changes in disease progression and/or therapy response.

Dataset Information

Secoisolariciresinol Diglucoside (SDG) Isolated from Flaxseed, an Alternative to ACE Inhibitors in the Treatment of Hypertension.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets