Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

R Viskoper

Publications and source records attributed to R Viskoper.

12 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2000

Randomised controlled trial of dual blockade of renin-angiotensin system in patients with hypertension, microalbuminuria, and non-insulin dependent diabetes: the candesartan and lisinopril microalbuminuria (CALM) study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess and compare the effects of candesartan or lisinopril, or both, on blood pressure and urinary albumin excretion in patients with microalbuminuria, hypertension, and type 2 diabetes. DESIGN: Prospective, randomised, parallel group, double blind study with four week placebo run in period and 12 weeks' monotherapy with candesartan or lisinopril followed by 12 weeks' monotherapy or combination treatment. SETTING: Tertiary hospitals and primary care centres in four countries (37 centres). PARTICIPANTS: 199 patients aged 30-75 years. INTERVENTIONS: Candesartan 16 mg once daily, lisinopril 20 mg once daily. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Blood pressure and urinary albumin:creatinine ratio. RESULTS: At 12 weeks mean (95% confidence interval) reductions in diastolic blood pressure were 9.5 mm Hg (7.7 mm Hg to 11.2 mm Hg, P<0.001) and 9.7 mm Hg (7.9 mm Hg to 11.5 mm Hg, P<0.001), respectively, and in urinary albumin:creatinine ratio were 30% (15% to 42%, P<0.001) and 46% (35% to 56%, P<0.001) for candesartan and lisinopril, respectively. At 24 weeks the mean reduction in diastolic blood pressure with combination treatment (16.3 mm Hg, 13.6 mm Hg to 18.9 mm Hg, P<0. 001) was significantly greater than that with candesartan (10.4 mm Hg, 7.7 mm Hg to 13.1 mm Hg, P<0.001) or lisinopril (mean 10.7 mm Hg, 8.0 mm Hg to 13.5 mm Hg, P<0.001). Furthermore, the reduction in urinary albumin:creatinine ratio with combination treatment (50%, 36% to 61%, P<0.001) was greater than with candesartan (24%, 0% to 43%, P=0.05) and lisinopril (39%, 20% to 54%, P<0.001). All treatments were generally well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Candesartan 16 mg once daily is as effective as lisinopril 20 mg once daily in reducing blood pressure and microalbuminuria in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes. Combination treatment is well tolerated and more effective in reducing blood pressure.

Adult↗
PubMed1997

Mibefradil in the treatment of systemic hypertension: comparative studies with other calcium antagonists.

This paper summarizes the results of 4 double-blind studies of antihypertensive therapy in which mibefradil was compared with other commonly used calcium antagonists (diltiazem CD, amlodipine, nifedipine SR, and nifedipine GITS) at the recommended dose range. A total of 640 patients were included, with 361 randomized to mibefradil, 98 to diltiazem CD, 119 to amlodipine, 71 to nifedipine SR, and 36 to nifedipine GITS. Trials included an active treatment phase of 6 or 12 weeks in duration. Compared with diltiazem CD or nifedipine SR, mibefradil demonstrated statistically significant greater efficacy. Decreases in sitting diastolic blood pressure (SDBP) after treatment with mibefradil 100 mg once daily were 14.0 +/- 7.8 mm Hg compared with 9.5 +/- 7.5 mm Hg with diltiazem CD 360 mg once daily (p = 0.001), and 12.8 +/- 8.4 mm Hg compared with 8.1 +/- 19.2 mm Hg with nifedipine SR 40 mg twice daily (p = 0.014). Patients on mibefradil also had higher normalization (SDBP reduced to < or = 90 mm Hg) and response (SDBP reduction > or = 10 mm Hg or normalization) rates than did those on diltiazem CD or nifedipine SR. The overall incidence of adverse events was similar among these 3 compounds, but the number of premature withdrawals due to adverse events was greater with both comparators than with mibefradil. Treatment with 100 mg mibefradil or 10 mg amlodipine once daily resulted in statistically significant decreases from baseline in SDBP of 11.5 +/- 8.2 mm Hg and 13.2 +/- 7.9 mm Hg, respectively, which were statistically equivalent. However, patients treated with amlodipine had a considerably greater incidence of leg edema than did those treated with mibefradil (33.6% vs 4.2%, respectively). Similarly, 100 mg mibefradil was equivalent in efficacy to 60 mg nifedipine GITS once daily, but patients on mibefradil experienced fewer vasodilatory related adverse events. In summary, mibefradil demonstrated superior efficacy to diltiazem CD and nifedipine SR and equivalent efficacy to amlodipine and nifedipine GITS in the treatment of hypertension.

Adult↗
PubMed1995

Rhabdomyolysis in paraphenylenediamine intoxication.

Edema of the upper airways and rhabdomyolysis developed in a young patient as a consequence of paraphenylenediamine poisoning. Treatment with adrenaline, steroids and enforced diuresis prevented tracheostomy and renal failure.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed1993

Effect of placebo on office and on 24 hour noninvasive ambulatory blood pressure measurements.

Elevated BP in the clinical but not during daily activities (white coat hypertension) is a well recognised problem encountered in the diagnosis of mild hypertension. The aim of this study is to evaluate this phenomenon with a study population of 90 mild hypertensive patients subjected to 24h BP measurement, and to assess the effect of placebo on both the office and the daytime continual BP monitored values. For this purpose, 90 patients were evaluated after four weeks of single-blind placebo (Phase I) and, of these, 27 patients were evaluated after a further four weeks of double-blind placebo administration (Phase II). During Phase I treatment the mean office SBP (163.9 mmHg) and the mean office DBP (104.5 mmHg) were significantly higher than the average of the six readings obtained during the first two hours of automatic continual BP monitoring (158.6 and 98 mmHg respectively, P < 0.001) (white coat effect). These differences were much more pronounced when the comparison was made between office measurements and the average daytime values (SBP 152.8 mmHg, DBP 93.1 mmHg). At the end of Phase II, the average values of BP measurements obtained both in the office and from continual monitoring were significantly lower (placebo effect). However, the difference between the office and the daytime values persisted. Thus, notwithstanding the reduction in the BP measurements following placebo administration, the white coat effect persists.

Adult↗
PubMed1991

Antihypertensive duration of action of cilazapril in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension.

The efficacy of cilazapril monotherapy was evaluated in 2 multicentre double-blind dose-response trials. After 4 weeks of a single-blind placebo run-in period, patients with uncomplicated mild to moderate essential hypertension and a sitting diastolic blood pressure of 100 to 115 mm Hg, 24 hours after the last placebo dose (trough), were randomised to take either placebo or cilazapril 2.5 mg or 5 mg for 4 weeks (study 1, 86 patients) or 8 weeks (study 2, 78 patients). Sitting diastolic blood pressure was checked every 2 weeks at trough in both studies and at peak in study 2. The reductions in sitting diastolic blood pressure from baseline at trough, and the difference from placebo, were clinically and statistically significant for both cilazapril groups in the 2 studies. The reduction in blood pressure in both active treatment groups was similar, but the response rate with cilazapril 5 mg was greater than that with 2.5 mg. More than 50% of the peak effect was still present at trough for both cilazapril groups. It is concluded that both dosages of cilazapril are effective and reduce blood pressure compared with placebo over a 24-hour period.

Adult↗
PubMed1983

The role of the doctor-nurse team in control of hypertension in family practice in Israel.

In the 1960s and early 1970s, only 9.4% of all hypertensives in Israel were under control, due to a low rate of detection, a high dropout rate and a low rate of patient compliance. In the past seven years, a program of screening and careful follow-up of hypertensives in over 400 community clinics has been introduced, based on the active participation of clinic nurses in addition to that of family doctors. This program has been associated with a large increase in the number of detected hypertensives, a fall in the dropout rate, and a decrease in patient waiting time. In one study of 5,541 hypertensives treated initially by a doctor alone, and then by the doctor-nurse team, the number of treated hypertensives who were under control increased from 42.1 to 84.6%. The improvement in hypertension control has paralleled the reduction in cardiovascular disease in Israel.

Family Practice↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Normoglycemic diabetic retinopathy and nephropathy.

End-stage renal failure is one of the major complications of diabetes and a significant cause of death in this population. At present, its cause is unknown, and consequently, attempts to prevent it are arbitrary. It has been suggested that improved control of blood glucose and hypertension may prevent the onset of renal failure in patients with diabetes mellitus. We present a case in which, despite near-normal levels of blood glucose and blood pressure, a relentless downhill course ensued resulting in severe renal failure and near blindness as a result of diabetic nephropathy and retinopathy.

Adult↗