Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Atenolol”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1988

Nifedipine and atenolol singly and combined for treatment of essential hypertension: comparative multicentre study in general practice in the United Kingdom. Nifedipine-Atenolol Study Review Committee.

A randomised double blind parallel group study was performed to compare the efficacy and acceptability of slow release nifedipine (maximum dose 40 mg twice a day) with those of atenolol (maximum dose 100 mg once a day) as single agents for the treatment of essential hypertension. Of 410 patients recruited almost exclusively from general practices in 22 centres in the United Kingdom 210 received nifedipine and 200 atenolol. Both drugs significantly reduced blood pressure, and control--a reduction of the diastolic pressure to less than 95 mm Hg--was obtained in about 65% of patients. Those who received nifedipine had more pronounced reductions in systolic pressure than those who received atenolol. One hundred and forty nine patients who failed to respond adequately to either atenolol or nifedipine in low doses were given both drugs once daily for eight weeks in a fixed combination capsule that contained atenolol 50 mg and nifedipine 20 mg. All patients showed further reductions in blood pressure, although those who were taking beta atenolol before the combination capsule had more pronounced reductions in systolic pressures. Twenty six patients (12%) were withdrawn because of adverse effects while taking nifedipine compared with 19 (10%) taking atenolol. Flushing and oedema were more common after the calcium antagonist, whereas diarrhoea and dyspepsia were more common after atenolol. The frequencies of headaches, dizziness, fatigue, and dyspnoea were equally distributed between the two groups. When the fixed combination capsule was taken side effects such as flushing and oedema continued. Nifedipine was more effective than atenolol in lowering systolic blood pressure, although neither drug used alone controlled the pressure of more than two thirds of the patients studied. When used in a fixed combination slightly better control of blood pressure was achieved with a lower dose of each drug.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1988

Atenolol-nifedipine combinations compared to atenolol alone in hypertension: efficacy and tolerability.

1. In a double-blind, randomised, three-way-crossover study, 25 patients with sitting diastolic blood pressure between 95 and 120 mm Hg (Phase V) after 4 weeks' run-in on atenolol 50 mg twice daily, received atenolol 50 mg twice daily alone, atenolol 50 mg plus nifedipine 20 mg each twice daily and atenolol 50 mg plus nifedipine 40 mg each twice daily in three treatment periods each lasting 4 weeks. 'Washout' periods were not included. 2. The two combination treatment regimes lowered the 12 h post-dose blood pressure more effectively than did atenolol alone, but the high dose nifedipine combination was no more effective than the low dose nifedipine combination. Sitting systolic BP (+/- s.e. mean) at the end of each period was 174 +/- 5 mm Hg after the atenolol run-in, 170 +/- 5 mm Hg with atenolol alone, 156 +/- 5 mm Hg with the low dose combination and 158 +/- 4 mm Hg with the high dose combination. Corresponding diastolic BP readings were 106 +/- 2 mm Hg, 106 +/- 2 mm Hg, 97 +/- 2 mm Hg and 99 +/- 2 mm Hg respectively. 3. Side-effects tended to occur less commonly with the low dose of the fixed combination than with atenolol alone. An increased number of side-effects occurred with the 40 mg twice daily doses of nifedipine, particularly flushing/erythema, oedema of the ankles/feet, and a hot feeling in the legs. These differences did not reach significance. 4. Overall compliance was good (98 +/- 0.7 s.e. mean %) and was similar within the different treatment regimes.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Adolescent↗
PubMed1992

Effectiveness of antihypertensive medications in office and ambulatory settings: a placebo-controlled comparison of atenolol, metoprolol, chlorthalidone, verapamil, and an atenolol-chlorthalidone combination.

In a double-blind, crossover study, five white men with mild-to-moderate hypertension received placebo and fixed doses of atenolol, metoprolol, chlorthalidone, verapamil, and the combination of atenolol and chlorthalidone in a quasi-random order. Daily dosages were: atenolol, 100 mg; metoprolol, 200 mg; chlorthalidone, 50 mg; verapamil, 240 mg; and the same doses of atenolol and chlorthalidone in combination. Standard office and daytime ambulatory blood pressures were assessed at the end of each month-long trial. Atenolol, metoprolol, chlorthalidone, and verapamil controlled office blood pressure with similar reductions. Verapamil did not lower ambulatory blood pressure at this dose (which is lower than is now commonly used), but reductions in ambulatory blood pressure were similar for atenolol, metoprolol, and chlorthalidone. The combination of atenolol and chlorthalidone maintained blood pressure control more effectively than the single drug treatments in both office and ambulatory settings, and the combined hypotensive effects were additive. However, reductions in the office due to the combination appeared to overestimate hypotensive effectiveness in the ambulatory setting. This study suggests that the effectiveness of commonly prescribed antihypertensive regimens varies according to setting as well as drug, and that assessment of treatment effectiveness can be improved by automated ambulatory blood pressure monitoring.

Adult↗
PubMed1999

[Relationship between sympathetic activity and response to treatment with atenolol in hypertensive patients. Investigation group of the study of efficiency and tolerance of atenolol in hypertensive patients with increase in the sympathetic activity].

BACKGROUND: Therapeutical response to antihypertensive treatment is poorly predicted by individual clinical or biochemical characteristics. Some preliminary data indicate that therapeutical response to atenolol might depend on physical and/or sympathetic activity. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the blood pressure response to atenolol depending on physical and sympathetic activity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One thousand one hundred forty hypertensive patients were treated with the beta adrenorecepetor blocker atenolol in an open fashion during 3 months. Before the beginning of the treatment, we evaluated current weekly physical activity (direct interview), as well as sympathetic activity (direct interview and baseline heart rate). RESULTS: Age or physical activity did not correlate with blood pressure response to atenolol. Conversely, hypertensive patients with symptoms suggesting sympathetic overactivity (three or more of the following symptoms: palpitations, anxiety, diaphoresis, headache, tremor or weakness; n = 456), showed a more pronounced decrease in systolic (27.7 [13.4] vs 25.8 [14.3] mmHg; p = 0.0226) and diastolic (17.6 [8.3] vs 15.5 [8.6] mmHg; p = 0.0001) blood pressures (SBP and DBP), with respect to the remaining hypertensive patients (n = 719). Moreover, we found a statistically significant correlation between blood pressure fall with atenolol and baseline heart rate (r = 0.107, P < 0.001 for SBP, and r = 0.142, p < 0.001 for DBP). CONCLUSION: Baseline tachycardia or symptoms suggesting anxiety, emotional tension or sympathetic overactivity are associated with a more pronounced blood pressure fall to antihypertensive treatment with atenolol. These circumstances may play a role when choosing a new antihypertensive therapy.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2002

Comparison of actions of irbesartan versus atenolol on cardiac repolarization in hypertensive left ventricular hypertrophy: results from the Swedish Irbesartan Left Ventricular Hypertrophy Investigation Versus Atenolol (SILVHIA).

Left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy is associated with a substantial risk for malignant arrhythmias and sudden death. The effects of antihypertensive therapy on QT dispersion, which reflects cardiac repolarization heterogeneity, in relation to changes in LV mass has not been well studied. Repeat echocardiography and QT measurements (standard 12-lead electrocardiograms) were performed in hypertensive patients with LV hypertrophy, who were randomized double-blind to receive the angiotensin II type 1-receptor blocker irbesartan (n = 44) or the beta(1)-receptor blocker atenolol (n = 48) for 48 weeks, and in 37 matched hypertensive control subjects without LV hypertrophy. LV mass index was related to QT dispersion (r = 0.34, p <0.001). The reduction in LV mass was greater using irbesartan than using atenolol (-27 +/- 28 vs -15 +/- 21 g/m(2) at 48 weeks, p = 0.021), with similar reductions in blood pressure. Irbesartan decreased QT dispersion (from 56 +/- 24 ms to 45 +/- 20 ms at 48 weeks; p <0.001) and QTc dispersion (from 57 +/- 24 to 44 +/- 19 ms at 48 weeks; p <0.001). In contrast, atenolol had minor effects. The decreases in QT and QTc dispersions were greater using irbesartan than using atenolol (p = 0.001 and p = 0.011, respectively); the same results were found when changes in LV mass, blood pressure, and heart rate were also included in multivariate analyses. Thus, heterogeneity of ventricular repolarization is related to the degree of LV hypertrophy. Irbesartan, but not atenolol, reduces QT and QTc dispersions independent of changes in LV mass, blood pressure, or heart rate, and thus seems to induce structural and electrical remodeling in a direction that could decrease the risk of fatal events in hypertensive patients.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗
PubMed2003

Long-term effects of irbesartan and atenolol on the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system in human primary hypertension: the Swedish Irbesartan Left Ventricular Hypertrophy Investigation versus Atenolol (SILVHIA).

We examined long-term influence of the angiotensin II type 1-receptor blocker irbesartan and the beta1-adrenergic receptor blocker atenolol on some neurohormonal systems implicated in the pathophysiology of cardiac hypertrophy. Thus, 115 hypertensive patients with left ventricular hypertrophy were randomized to receive double-blind irbesartan or atenolol, with additional therapy if needed. Neurohormone measurements and echocardiography were performed at weeks 0, 12, 24, and 48. Left ventricular mass was reduced more by irbesartan than by atenolol (-26 g/m2 versus -14 g/m2, P = 0.024), despite similar reductions in blood pressure. Plasma renin activity and angiotensin II increased (P < 0.001) by irbesartan (0.9 +/- 0.7 to 3.4 +/- 4.2 ng/mL x h, and 3.0 +/- 1.6 to 13.0 +/- 17.7 pmol/L), but decreased (P < 0.01) by atenolol (1.0 +/- 0.6 to 0.7 +/- 0.6 ng/mL x h, and 3.4 +/- 1.6 to 3.2 +/- 2.2 pmol/L). Serum aldosterone decreased (P < 0.05) by both irbesartan (346 +/- 140 to 325 +/- 87 pmol/L) and atenolol (315 +/- 115 to 283 +/- 77 pmol/L). Changes in left ventricular mass by irbesartan related inversely to changes in plasma renin activity, angiotensin II, and aldosterone (all P < 0.05). Plasma levels and 24-hour urinary excretions of catecholamines, plasma leptin, proinsulin, insulin and insulin sensitivity remained largely unchanged in both groups. Thus, the renin-angiotensin aldosterone system appears to be an important non-hemodynamic factor in the regulation of left ventricular mass.

Adult↗
PubMed1978

Comparison of atenolol with propranolol in the treatment of angina pectoris with special reference to once daily administration of atenolol.

Fourteen patients with angina pectoris completed a double blind trial of atenolol 25 mg, 50 mg, and 100 mg twice daily and propranolol 80 mg thrice daily. In comparison with placebo, all active treatments significantly reduced anginal attacks, consumption of glyceryl trinitrate, resting and exercise heart rate, resting and exercise systolic blood pressure, and significantly prolonged exercise time. There was no significant difference between the effects of propranolol and atenolol. Nine patients completed a further trial comparing atenolol given once or twice daily. Both regimens were effective and there was no significant difference between the reductions in anginal attacks, glyceryl trinitrate consumption, systolic blood pressure, or heart rate. Twenty-four-hour ambulatory electrocardiograms showed that atenolol consistently reduced heart rate throughout the 24-hour period whether given once or twice daily. Atenolol is a potent antianginal agent which, in most patients, is likely to be effective once daily.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Tissue velocity echocardiography shows early improvement in diastolic function with irbesartan and atenolol therapy in patients with hypertensive left ventricular hypertrophy. Results form the Swedish Irbesartan Left Ventricular Hypertrophy Investigation vs Atenolol (SILVHIA).

BACKGROUND: Abnormal diastolic function is common in hypertensive left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH). Early identification and treatment may prevent future cardiovascular events. METHODS: We examined 58 hypertensive patients with LVH, 38 with hypertension but no LVH, and 38 normotensive subjects. The effects of the AT1 receptor blocker irbesartan and the beta1 blocker atenolol on diastolic function during 48 weeks of treatment were evaluated in the LVH group by tissue velocity echocardiography (TVE). We measured basal septal and lateral wall velocities of early (Em) and late (Am) diastolic myocardial wall motion, Em velocity deceleration time (E-decm), and isovolumic relaxation time (IVRTm). For comparison, diastolic function was assessed by conventional mitral pulse wave Doppler echocardiography. RESULTS: Diastolic function was impaired in both hypertensive groups. Irbesartan and atenolol (week 48, septal wall) improved IVRTm (-44%, P<.001, and -19%, P<.001; P<or=.001 between groups), E-decm (+56%, P<.001, and +53%, P<.001), and Em/Am (+11%, P=.396, and +20%, P=.010). Only irbesartan improved E/Em (-4%, P=.052 v +2%, P=.041). For irbesartan, relative changes in IVRTm and in septum thickness were related (P=.017), whereas relative changes in the Em/Am ratio and in heart rate were related for atenolol (P=.027). Alterations in diastolic dysfunction were greater and detected earlier with TVE than with conventional echocardiography. CONCLUSIONS: The TVE is more sensitive than conventional echocardiography in detecting alterations in diastolic function. Both irbesartan and atenolol improve diastolic function, but through different mechanisms. The improvement in IVRTm was greater with irbesartan, and only irbesartan improved E/Em. This may have implications on the treatment of high risk hypertensive patients.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗
PubMed1993

Atenolol versus the fixed combination of atenolol and nifedipine in stable angina pectoris.

One hundred and fourteen patients (94 male) with chronic stable angina who had a positive exercise test after 4 weeks on atenolol alone were randomized to receive either atenolol alone or the fixed combination of atenolol and nifedipine slow release formulation for 4 weeks in a double-blind cross-over manner. Exercise stress testing (Bruce protocol) at the end of each treatment period demonstrated that the time to the onset of pain and occurrence of 1 mm ST segment depression improved significantly (P < 0.05 and P < 0.001 respectively) whilst on the fixed combination compared to atenolol alone. In order to achieve sufficient sensitivity in the analysis of the exercise times, novel statistical methods based on survival analysis were used. Maximum ST segment depression was 0.13 mm less (P < 0.04) while on the fixed combination. The incidence of withdrawals and adverse effects was similar on both treatments.

Adult↗
PubMed1985

A comparison of labetalol and prazosin combined with atenolol in non-responders to atenolol plus hydrochlorothiazide in uncomplicated hypertension.

After screening two local populations in the northern part of The Netherlands for hypertension, patients with a diastolic pressure (DP) between 95 and 120 mmHg were treated daily either with 50 mg hydrochlorothiazide or 100 mg atenolol. Nonresponders were given the combination and if necessary the dose of atenolol was increased to 200 mg. Non-responders to the latter combination were randomized and treated either with 50 mg hydrochlorothiazide and labetalol or with 50 mg hydrochlorothiazide, 200 mg atenolol and prazosin. If after 1 month a DP less than or equal to 90 mmHg had been reached the patient was reassessed after a further 3 months. If a DP greater than 90 mmHg was found the dose of labetalol or prazosin was increased and the patient was re-examined after 1 month. This protocol was followed until the maximum dose was reached or adverse reactions prevented a further increase in dosage. During 6 months of treatment there was a further drop in systolic and diastolic blood pressures under both regimens of, respectively, 8.6 and 2.4 mmHg for labetalol, and 7.7 and 5.0 mmHg for the prazosin group. At the end of the period the average daily doses of labetalol and prazosin were 1256 mg and 4.3 mg, respectively. There was no significant difference in the average number of complaints between the labetalol and the prazosin group.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

A double-blind crossover trial of atenolol, enalapril and the fixed combination of atenolol and nifedipine in mild and moderate hypertension.

Sixty-three patients with mild to moderate hypertension completed a double-blind, randomised crossover trial of atenolol 100 mg daily, enalapril 20 mg daily and the fixed combination atenolol 50 mg and nifedipine retard 20 mg (Tenif) once daily. In the three areas of efficacy that the study compared-24-hour post dose blood pressure, control of blood pressure over the dosing period with particular reference to the waking day and attenuation of systolic blood pressure on exercise-atenolol and the fixed combination demonstrated greater efficacy than enalapril.

Atenolol↗
PubMed1990

Comparison of the efficacy and long-term tolerability of a combination of atenolol and nifedipine with atenolol alone in the treatment of hypertension.

This randomised, double-blind crossover study in 30 hypertensive patients has demonstrated that the fixed combination of atenolol (50 mg) and nifedipine retard (20 mg) once daily lowered blood pressure to a significantly greater extent than atenolol (50 mg once daily) alone. In a follow-up six-month open tolerance study there was no evidence of tachyphylaxis, and treatment with the fixed combination was well tolerated. In selected hypertensive patients use of this fixed formulation may result in improved blood pressure control and benefit patient compliance.

Adult↗
PubMed1986

Tissue atenolol levels following chronic beta-adrenoceptor blockade using oral atenolol in dogs.

Tissue atenolol concentrations are high following chronic continuous beta-adrenoceptor blockade in dogs. Furthermore, significant concentrations of this poorly lipid soluble drug are found within the central nervous system after chronic dosing. It is suggested that all beta-adrenoceptor blocking agents may enter the central nervous system in significant and sufficient quantities to account for a central antihypertensive action of this group of compounds. Sequestration of beta-adrenoceptor agents in the CNS or other tissues may account for other clinically observed effects including adaptive effects.

Animals↗