CAJ | 학술논문

目的:比较贝那普利分别与苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平或硝苯地平缓释片合用,治疗单用贝那普利不能控制其血压降至目标水平的原发性高血压患者的疗效、不良反应.方法:112例单用贝那普利治疗不能控制其理想血压的患者分成2组,在贝那普利原有剂量不变下,分别加用苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平或硝苯地平缓释片治疗,用药4～6 wk后判断降压疗效并记录不良反应.结果:加用苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平后有效率为85.71%,加用硝苯地平缓释片后为78.57%,2组疗效比较无统计学意义(P＞0.05),加用苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平后的显效率(73.21%)高于加用硝苯地平缓释片(54.38%,P＜0.05),降SBP的幅度显著大于加用硝苯地平缓释片(P＜0.01),且不良反应显著低于加用硝苯地平组(8.93% vs 28.5%,P＜0.01).结论:对单用贝那普利治疗不能控制至理想血压的患者,贝那普利合用苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平或硝苯地平缓释片治疗都是有效的.从对血压的降低水平、对SBP的显效率和不良事件的发生率综合评价,贝那普利和苯磺酸左旋氨氯地平联合更适合于此类患者的治疗.
목적:비교패나보리분별여분광산좌선안록지평혹초분지평완석편합용,치료단용패나보리불능공제기혈압강지목표수평적원발성고혈압환자적료효、불량반응.방법:112례단용패나보리치료불능공제기이상혈압적환자분성2조,재패나보리원유제량불변하,분별가용분광산좌선안록지평혹초분지평완석편치료,용약4～6 wk후판단강압료효병기록불량반응.결과:가용분광산좌선안록지평후유효솔위85.71%,가용초분지평완석편후위78.57%,2조료효비교무통계학의의(P＞0.05),가용분광산좌선안록지평후적현효솔(73.21%)고우가용초분지평완석편(54.38%,P＜0.05),강SBP적폭도현저대우가용초분지평완석편(P＜0.01),차불량반응현저저우가용초분지평조(8.93% vs 28.5%,P＜0.01).결론:대단용패나보리치료불능공제지이상혈압적환자,패나보리합용분광산좌선안록지평혹초분지평완석편치료도시유효적.종대혈압적강저수평、대SBP적현효솔화불량사건적발생솔종합평개,패나보리화분광산좌선안록지평연합경괄합우차류환자적치료.
AIM: To compare the BP-reducing effects and adverse drug reactions of the therapy of combined benazepril and levamlodipine (B/LA) with benazepril and nifedepine sustained-tablet (B/NSr) in the patients with mild or moderate hypertension inadequately controlled by benazepril alone. METHODS: The study was performed on 112 patients with mild or moderate primary hypertension inadequately controlled by Benazeprial alone. The patients were randomly divided into 2 groups. Continued previous benazepril treatment , the B/LA group( n = 56) added levarnlodipine,2.5 mg once daily for 2 wk, the B/NSr group( n = 56)added nifedepine sustained-release tablets, 10 mg once daily for 2wk. Examinations were performed before the patients admitted to the trial. The patients who did not achieve a satisfactory BP-reducing added levamlodipine 2.5 mg twice daily in the B/LA group or nifedepine sustained-release tablet 10 mg twice daily in the B/NSr group. The total combination-treatment period was 4 - 6 wk. RESULTS: Total BP-reducing utility rate of the B/LA group was 85.71%, and that of the B/NSr group was 78.57 % ( P ＞ 0.05), but the obvious BPreducing utility rate in the B/LA Group were 73.21%, which was significantly higher than that in the B/NSr group (57.14 %, P ＜0.05 ), especially the SBP-reducing level in the B/LA group was significantly higher than that of in the B/NSr group (P ＜ 0.01 ). There were 8.93 % adverse drug reactions in the B/LA group and 21.43% in the B/NSr group ( P ＜ 0.01). CONCLUSION: Either of the B/LA or the B/NSr is effective in the treatment of hypertension inadequately controlled by benazepril alone, but the B/LA is more desirable therapy than the B/NSr.