Objective:To investigate the effectiveness and efficiency of combining levamlodipine besylate and valsartan in the treatment of hypertension.Methods:This study selected 28 patients with hypertension as observation sub...Objective:To investigate the effectiveness and efficiency of combining levamlodipine besylate and valsartan in the treatment of hypertension.Methods:This study selected 28 patients with hypertension as observation subjects.The treatment duration ranged from January 2020 to June 2023.Using the random number table method,patients were divided into two groups.The control group received treatment with valsartan,while the observation group received a combination of valsartan and levamlodipine besylate.Therapeutic effects and safety were compared between the groups,and changes in the patient’s blood pressure and renal function index levels were assessed.Results:The total clinical effective rate of the observation group was significantly higher than that of the control group(P<0.05).The observation group demonstrated better diastolic blood pressure,systolic blood pressure,and renal function indicators compared to the control group(P<0.05).There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions between the two groups(P>0.05).Conclusion:The combined treatment of levamlodipine besylate and valsartan in patients with hypertension showed significant clinical efficacy and holds broad application value.展开更多
Background The incidence of leg edema caused by calcium channel blockers（CCB） is so high, some studies tried combination with angiotension converting enzyme inhibitors（ACEI） or diuretics to overcome this problem.H...Background The incidence of leg edema caused by calcium channel blockers（CCB） is so high, some studies tried combination with angiotension converting enzyme inhibitors（ACEI） or diuretics to overcome this problem.However, there is no comparison about which is better to improve edema at present. Methods This study was designed as a single-center, prospective, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, clinical trial. 224 hypertensive patients with leg edema after 4 weeks since taking levamlodipine were enrolled, and they were randomly divided into levamlodipine ＋ furosemide（CD） group and levamlodipine ＋ enalapril（CA） group for another 4 weeks. Ankle circumference（AC）, edema score（ES）, blood pressure（BP） and cure rate of leg edema were evaluated. Results Altogether 179 patients（89 in CD group and 90 in CA group） completed the 4-week treatment. After the 4-week therapy with furosemide or enalapril, most subjects were free of edema in either group（96.51% vs.96.67%, P 〉 0.05）. Only 4 in CD group and 3 in CA group had mild edema. Enalapril was more effective than furosemide to reduce AC（10.92 ± 1.84 mm vs. 12.97 ± 2.46 mm, P 〈 0.05）. But for ES, there was no significant difference. And there were no significant differences in antihypertensive effect between them. Uric acid（UA）was increased significantly in CD group（10.70 ± 18.48 μmol/L vs. 0.22 ± 28.13 μmol/L, P 〈 0.05）. Conclusion Enalapril is more effective than furosemide in attenuating lower extremity edema caused by levamlodipine in essential hypertensive population, with equal antihypertensive efficacy and less uric acid increasing.展开更多
目的探讨沙库巴曲缬沙坦联合马来酸左旋氨氯地平治疗原发性高血压伴稳定型心绞痛(EH+SAP)的效果。方法选取2021年5月~2023年4月新疆生产建设兵团第一师医院EH+SAP患者128例,采用随机数字表法分为两组,各64例。两组均给予常规治疗,对照...目的探讨沙库巴曲缬沙坦联合马来酸左旋氨氯地平治疗原发性高血压伴稳定型心绞痛(EH+SAP)的效果。方法选取2021年5月~2023年4月新疆生产建设兵团第一师医院EH+SAP患者128例,采用随机数字表法分为两组,各64例。两组均给予常规治疗,对照组采用奥美沙坦联合马来酸左旋氨氯地平治疗,观察组采用沙库巴曲缬沙坦联合马来酸左旋氨氯地平治疗。两组均连续治疗8周后进行疗效评估。比较两组治疗前、治疗8周血压、心绞痛情况、硝酸甘油用量变化,并检测中性粒细胞/高密度脂蛋白胆固醇比值(NHR)、心血管调节肽(salusin-β)水平。分析治疗8周NHR、salusin-β与血压、心绞痛情况、硝酸甘油用量的关系。统计两组治疗期间不良反应发生率。结果观察组治疗总有效率高于对照组[92.19%(59/64)比78.13%(50/64),P<0.05];治疗8周后两组24 h平均收缩压(24 h SBP)[(124.26±8.58)mmHg比(129.15±9.04)mm Hg]、24 h平均舒张压(24 h DBP)[(84.46±6.21)mmHg比(88.12±6.77)mmHg]、收缩压变异性(SBPV)[(9.54±2.42)mmHg比(10.63±2.30)mmHg]、舒张压变异性(DBPV)[(7.59±1.54)mmHg比(8.32±1.43)mmHg]、心绞痛发作次数[(0.33±0.10)次/周比(0.44±0.13)次/周]、心绞痛持续时间[(2.73±0.61)min比(3.42±0.98)min]、硝酸甘油用量[(0.17±0.05)mg/周比(0.23±0.06)mg/周]、NHR[(4.32±0.89)比(4.79±0.93)]、salusin-β[(3.65±0.57)nmol/L比(3.96±0.55)nmol/L]降低,且观察组低于对照组(P均<0.05);两组治疗8周NHR、salusin-β与24 h SBP、24 h DBP、SBPV、DBPV、心绞痛发作次数、心绞痛持续时间、硝酸甘油使用量均呈正相关(P<0.05);治疗期间两组水肿、头晕、潮红、心悸、低血压发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论沙库巴曲缬沙坦联合马来酸左旋氨氯地平对EH+SAP疗效显著,可有效控制患者血压,减轻心绞痛症状,可能与调节NHR、salusin-β水平变化有关,且安全性有保障。展开更多
目的对比高血压患者分别应用苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平片与苯磺酸氨氯地平片治疗的临床疗效。方法90例高血压患者,通过随机数字表法分为对照组(45例)、观察组(45例)。给予对照组患者苯磺酸氨氯地平片治疗,给予观察组患者苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平片...目的对比高血压患者分别应用苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平片与苯磺酸氨氯地平片治疗的临床疗效。方法90例高血压患者,通过随机数字表法分为对照组(45例)、观察组(45例)。给予对照组患者苯磺酸氨氯地平片治疗,给予观察组患者苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平片治疗。比较两组临床疗效、不良反应发生率及治疗前后动态血压[24 h收缩压(SBP)、舒张压(DBP)]、心率(HR)、血清学指标[同型半胱氨酸(Hcy)、B型尿钠肽(BNP)、白细胞介素-6(IL-6)]。结果观察组临床总有效率95.56%(43/45)高于对照组的88.89%(40/45),但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。治疗前及治疗后两组组间24 h SBP、24 h DBP、HR比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);观察组与对照组治疗后24 h SBP、24 h DBP分别为(144.58±9.06)、(85.26±6.84)mm Hg(1 mm Hg=0.133 kPa)与(146.24±8.58)、(86.47±8.65)mm Hg,均低于治疗前的(164.76±10.47)、(100.95±10.94)mm Hg与(165.87±11.56)、(101.35±11.16)mm Hg(P<0.05);观察组与对照组治疗后HR与治疗前比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。治疗前及治疗后两组组间BNP、Hcy、IL-6水平比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);相比治疗前,观察组与对照组治疗后BNP、Hcy、IL-6水平均降低(P<0.05)。治疗后,观察组不良反应发生率2.22%明显低于对照组的17.78%(P<0.05)。结论高血压患者使用苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平片与苯磺酸氨氯地平片治疗,其治疗效果及对血压的控制、血清学指标的影响相近,但苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平片不良反应发生率更低,因此临床可根据患者实际情况进行选择。展开更多
目的 探析老年单纯收缩期高血压患者应用苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平联合依那普利治疗的临床效果及对血管内皮细胞功能的影响。方法 100例老年单纯收缩期高血压患者,遵循随机数字表设计方式将其分为对照组、观察组,每组50例。对照组给予依那普...目的 探析老年单纯收缩期高血压患者应用苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平联合依那普利治疗的临床效果及对血管内皮细胞功能的影响。方法 100例老年单纯收缩期高血压患者,遵循随机数字表设计方式将其分为对照组、观察组,每组50例。对照组给予依那普利治疗,观察组给予依那普利联合苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平治疗。对比两组患者血压[日间平均收缩压(DMSBP)、夜间平均收缩压(NMSBP)、24 h平均收缩压(24 h MSBP)]水平、临床疗效、内皮功能指标[一氧化氮(NO)、血流介导的血管扩张功能(FMD)、内皮素-1(ET-1)]。结果 治疗前,两组患者DMSBP、NMSBP、24 h MSBP无显著差异(P>0.05);治疗后,两组DMSBP、NMSBP、24 h MSBP均较治疗前有所改善,其中观察组DMSBP(120.52±10.01)mm Hg(1 mm Hg=0.133 kPa)、NMSBP(113.74±11.81)mm Hg、24 h MSBP(117.54±10.87)mm Hg均低于对照组的(138.45±12.35)、(132.63±12.70)、(134.02±12.58)(P<0.05)。观察组病情控制总有效率96.0%显著高于对照组的80.0%(P<0.05)。治疗前,两组患者NO、FMD、ET-1水平无显著差异(P>0.05);治疗后,两组NO、FMD、ET-1水平均较治疗前有所改善,其中观察组NO(6.25±1.39)μmol/L、FMD(7.68±1.13)%高于对照组的(5.61±1.25)μmol/L、(5.31±1.01)%, ET-1(60.84±10.48)ng/L低于对照组的(68.15±9.59)ng/L(P<0.05)。结论 对老年单纯收缩期高血压患者给予苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平片联合依那普利治疗效果良好,可有效改善患者血压水平及内皮功能,可于此类患者群体中推广。展开更多
目的 对比苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平与缬沙坦对高血压合并阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停综合征患者的降压效果.方法 选取我院诊断为轻、中度成人高血压合并阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停综合征患者83例,通过服用安慰剂后2周,分为试验组43例和对照组40例,行24 h动...目的 对比苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平与缬沙坦对高血压合并阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停综合征患者的降压效果.方法 选取我院诊断为轻、中度成人高血压合并阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停综合征患者83例,通过服用安慰剂后2周,分为试验组43例和对照组40例,行24 h动态血压监测后分别服用苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平、缬沙坦,坚持服药8周后行24 h动态血压监测分析.结果 服药8周后两组动态血压结果比较,24 h平均收缩压（24 h SBP）与24 h平均舒张压（24 h DBP）、日间平均收缩压（dMSP）与平均舒张压（dMDP）、夜间平均收缩压（nMSP）与平均舒张压（nMDP）较用药前基础血压均有显著下降（P〈0.05）.试验组与对照组间24 h SBP、24 h DBP、dMSP、dMDP、nMDP比较未见统计学差异（P〉0.05）.试验组与对照组两组间dMSP比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）.试验组有效率69.8%,对照组有效率72.5%,试验组与对照组疗效比较未见统计学差异（P〉0.05）.结论 苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平能够有效降低阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停综合征合并高血压患者的血压,与缬沙坦相比无明显差异.展开更多
文摘Objective:To investigate the effectiveness and efficiency of combining levamlodipine besylate and valsartan in the treatment of hypertension.Methods:This study selected 28 patients with hypertension as observation subjects.The treatment duration ranged from January 2020 to June 2023.Using the random number table method,patients were divided into two groups.The control group received treatment with valsartan,while the observation group received a combination of valsartan and levamlodipine besylate.Therapeutic effects and safety were compared between the groups,and changes in the patient’s blood pressure and renal function index levels were assessed.Results:The total clinical effective rate of the observation group was significantly higher than that of the control group(P<0.05).The observation group demonstrated better diastolic blood pressure,systolic blood pressure,and renal function indicators compared to the control group(P<0.05).There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions between the two groups(P>0.05).Conclusion:The combined treatment of levamlodipine besylate and valsartan in patients with hypertension showed significant clinical efficacy and holds broad application value.
基金supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China(No.81641058)
文摘Background The incidence of leg edema caused by calcium channel blockers（CCB） is so high, some studies tried combination with angiotension converting enzyme inhibitors（ACEI） or diuretics to overcome this problem.However, there is no comparison about which is better to improve edema at present. Methods This study was designed as a single-center, prospective, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, clinical trial. 224 hypertensive patients with leg edema after 4 weeks since taking levamlodipine were enrolled, and they were randomly divided into levamlodipine ＋ furosemide（CD） group and levamlodipine ＋ enalapril（CA） group for another 4 weeks. Ankle circumference（AC）, edema score（ES）, blood pressure（BP） and cure rate of leg edema were evaluated. Results Altogether 179 patients（89 in CD group and 90 in CA group） completed the 4-week treatment. After the 4-week therapy with furosemide or enalapril, most subjects were free of edema in either group（96.51% vs.96.67%, P 〉 0.05）. Only 4 in CD group and 3 in CA group had mild edema. Enalapril was more effective than furosemide to reduce AC（10.92 ± 1.84 mm vs. 12.97 ± 2.46 mm, P 〈 0.05）. But for ES, there was no significant difference. And there were no significant differences in antihypertensive effect between them. Uric acid（UA）was increased significantly in CD group（10.70 ± 18.48 μmol/L vs. 0.22 ± 28.13 μmol/L, P 〈 0.05）. Conclusion Enalapril is more effective than furosemide in attenuating lower extremity edema caused by levamlodipine in essential hypertensive population, with equal antihypertensive efficacy and less uric acid increasing.
文摘目的探讨沙库巴曲缬沙坦联合马来酸左旋氨氯地平治疗原发性高血压伴稳定型心绞痛(EH+SAP)的效果。方法选取2021年5月~2023年4月新疆生产建设兵团第一师医院EH+SAP患者128例,采用随机数字表法分为两组,各64例。两组均给予常规治疗,对照组采用奥美沙坦联合马来酸左旋氨氯地平治疗,观察组采用沙库巴曲缬沙坦联合马来酸左旋氨氯地平治疗。两组均连续治疗8周后进行疗效评估。比较两组治疗前、治疗8周血压、心绞痛情况、硝酸甘油用量变化,并检测中性粒细胞/高密度脂蛋白胆固醇比值(NHR)、心血管调节肽(salusin-β)水平。分析治疗8周NHR、salusin-β与血压、心绞痛情况、硝酸甘油用量的关系。统计两组治疗期间不良反应发生率。结果观察组治疗总有效率高于对照组[92.19%(59/64)比78.13%(50/64),P<0.05];治疗8周后两组24 h平均收缩压(24 h SBP)[(124.26±8.58)mmHg比(129.15±9.04)mm Hg]、24 h平均舒张压(24 h DBP)[(84.46±6.21)mmHg比(88.12±6.77)mmHg]、收缩压变异性(SBPV)[(9.54±2.42)mmHg比(10.63±2.30)mmHg]、舒张压变异性(DBPV)[(7.59±1.54)mmHg比(8.32±1.43)mmHg]、心绞痛发作次数[(0.33±0.10)次/周比(0.44±0.13)次/周]、心绞痛持续时间[(2.73±0.61)min比(3.42±0.98)min]、硝酸甘油用量[(0.17±0.05)mg/周比(0.23±0.06)mg/周]、NHR[(4.32±0.89)比(4.79±0.93)]、salusin-β[(3.65±0.57)nmol/L比(3.96±0.55)nmol/L]降低,且观察组低于对照组(P均<0.05);两组治疗8周NHR、salusin-β与24 h SBP、24 h DBP、SBPV、DBPV、心绞痛发作次数、心绞痛持续时间、硝酸甘油使用量均呈正相关(P<0.05);治疗期间两组水肿、头晕、潮红、心悸、低血压发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论沙库巴曲缬沙坦联合马来酸左旋氨氯地平对EH+SAP疗效显著,可有效控制患者血压,减轻心绞痛症状,可能与调节NHR、salusin-β水平变化有关,且安全性有保障。
文摘目的对比高血压患者分别应用苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平片与苯磺酸氨氯地平片治疗的临床疗效。方法90例高血压患者,通过随机数字表法分为对照组(45例)、观察组(45例)。给予对照组患者苯磺酸氨氯地平片治疗,给予观察组患者苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平片治疗。比较两组临床疗效、不良反应发生率及治疗前后动态血压[24 h收缩压(SBP)、舒张压(DBP)]、心率(HR)、血清学指标[同型半胱氨酸(Hcy)、B型尿钠肽(BNP)、白细胞介素-6(IL-6)]。结果观察组临床总有效率95.56%(43/45)高于对照组的88.89%(40/45),但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。治疗前及治疗后两组组间24 h SBP、24 h DBP、HR比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);观察组与对照组治疗后24 h SBP、24 h DBP分别为(144.58±9.06)、(85.26±6.84)mm Hg(1 mm Hg=0.133 kPa)与(146.24±8.58)、(86.47±8.65)mm Hg,均低于治疗前的(164.76±10.47)、(100.95±10.94)mm Hg与(165.87±11.56)、(101.35±11.16)mm Hg(P<0.05);观察组与对照组治疗后HR与治疗前比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。治疗前及治疗后两组组间BNP、Hcy、IL-6水平比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);相比治疗前,观察组与对照组治疗后BNP、Hcy、IL-6水平均降低(P<0.05)。治疗后,观察组不良反应发生率2.22%明显低于对照组的17.78%(P<0.05)。结论高血压患者使用苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平片与苯磺酸氨氯地平片治疗,其治疗效果及对血压的控制、血清学指标的影响相近,但苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平片不良反应发生率更低,因此临床可根据患者实际情况进行选择。
文摘目的 探析老年单纯收缩期高血压患者应用苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平联合依那普利治疗的临床效果及对血管内皮细胞功能的影响。方法 100例老年单纯收缩期高血压患者,遵循随机数字表设计方式将其分为对照组、观察组,每组50例。对照组给予依那普利治疗,观察组给予依那普利联合苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平治疗。对比两组患者血压[日间平均收缩压(DMSBP)、夜间平均收缩压(NMSBP)、24 h平均收缩压(24 h MSBP)]水平、临床疗效、内皮功能指标[一氧化氮(NO)、血流介导的血管扩张功能(FMD)、内皮素-1(ET-1)]。结果 治疗前,两组患者DMSBP、NMSBP、24 h MSBP无显著差异(P>0.05);治疗后,两组DMSBP、NMSBP、24 h MSBP均较治疗前有所改善,其中观察组DMSBP(120.52±10.01)mm Hg(1 mm Hg=0.133 kPa)、NMSBP(113.74±11.81)mm Hg、24 h MSBP(117.54±10.87)mm Hg均低于对照组的(138.45±12.35)、(132.63±12.70)、(134.02±12.58)(P<0.05)。观察组病情控制总有效率96.0%显著高于对照组的80.0%(P<0.05)。治疗前,两组患者NO、FMD、ET-1水平无显著差异(P>0.05);治疗后,两组NO、FMD、ET-1水平均较治疗前有所改善,其中观察组NO(6.25±1.39)μmol/L、FMD(7.68±1.13)%高于对照组的(5.61±1.25)μmol/L、(5.31±1.01)%, ET-1(60.84±10.48)ng/L低于对照组的(68.15±9.59)ng/L(P<0.05)。结论 对老年单纯收缩期高血压患者给予苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平片联合依那普利治疗效果良好,可有效改善患者血压水平及内皮功能,可于此类患者群体中推广。
文摘目的 对比苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平与缬沙坦对高血压合并阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停综合征患者的降压效果.方法 选取我院诊断为轻、中度成人高血压合并阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停综合征患者83例,通过服用安慰剂后2周,分为试验组43例和对照组40例,行24 h动态血压监测后分别服用苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平、缬沙坦,坚持服药8周后行24 h动态血压监测分析.结果 服药8周后两组动态血压结果比较,24 h平均收缩压（24 h SBP）与24 h平均舒张压（24 h DBP）、日间平均收缩压（dMSP）与平均舒张压（dMDP）、夜间平均收缩压（nMSP）与平均舒张压（nMDP）较用药前基础血压均有显著下降（P〈0.05）.试验组与对照组间24 h SBP、24 h DBP、dMSP、dMDP、nMDP比较未见统计学差异（P〉0.05）.试验组与对照组两组间dMSP比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）.试验组有效率69.8%,对照组有效率72.5%,试验组与对照组疗效比较未见统计学差异（P〉0.05）.结论 苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平能够有效降低阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停综合征合并高血压患者的血压,与缬沙坦相比无明显差异.
