Renal and haemodynamic effects of amlodipine and nifedipine in hypertensive renal transplant recipients

被引:16
作者
Venkat-Raman, G [1 ]
Feehally, J
Elliott, HL
Griffin, P
Moore, RJ
Olubodun, JOB
Wilkinson, R
机构
[1] St Marys Hosp, Portsmouth PO3 6AD, Hants, England
[2] Leicester Gen Hosp, Leicester LE5 4PW, Leics, England
[3] Univ Glasgow, Western Infirm, Glasgow G11 6NT, Lanark, Scotland
[4] Cardiff Royal Infirm, Cardiff, S Glam, Wales
[5] Univ Wales Hosp, Cardiff CF4 4XW, S Glam, Wales
[6] Freeman Rd Hosp, Newcastle Upon Tyne NE7 7DN, Tyne & Wear, England
关键词
amlodipine; cyclosporin A; nifedipine; posttransplant hypertension; renal transplantation;
D O I
10.1093/ndt/13.10.2612
中图分类号
R3 [基础医学]; R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1001 ; 1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Background. Immunosuppressive treatment with cyclosporin A (CsA) improves the survival of renal allografts, but is associated with renal vasoconstriction and hypertension. Previous reports suggest that the calcium-channel blockers nifedipine and amlodipine may improve graft function in CsA-treated patients. We have compared the effects of amlodipine (5-10 mg once daily) and nifedipine retard (10-40 mg twice daily) on renal function and blood pressure in renal transplant recipients treated with CsA. Methods. This was a multicentre, two-way, crossover study in 27 evaluable hypertensive patients with renal insufficiency following renal transplantation, who were maintained on a stable dose of CsA. Patients received either amlodipine (5-10 mg once daily) or nifedipine retard (10-40 mg twice daily) for 8 weeks, and were then crossed over to the other treatment for a further 8 weeks. Results. Trends were seen during amlodipine treatment towards larger improvements, in serum creatinine (by 8% of baseline on amlodipine vs 4% on nifedipine), lithium clearance (13% vs 2%), and glomerular filtration rate 11% vs 7%). Effective renal plasma flow was increased by 11% of baseline on nifedipine vs 9% on amlodipine. There were no significant differences between treatments. Amlodipine and nifedipine lowered systolic blood pressure to a similar extent (21 mmHg vs 15 mmHg respectively, P=0.25), but amlodipine was more effective than nifedipine in lowering diastolic blood pressure (13 mmHg vs 8 mmHg, P=0.006). Both treatments were well tolerated. Conclusion. Once-daily amlodipine is at least as effective as twice-daily nifedipine retard in controlling blood pressure and does not adversely affect graft function in hypertensive renal allograft recipients.
引用
收藏
页码:2612 / 2616
页数:5
相关论文
共 37 条
[1]  
ABUROMEH SH, 1992, CLIN NEPHROL, V37, P183
[2]  
BOURBIGOT B, 1986, LANCET, V1, P1447
[3]  
CANTAROVICH M, 1987, CLIN NEPHROL, V28, P190
[4]  
CAROZZI S, 1995, TRANSPLANT P, V27, P1054
[5]   COMPARISON OF ENALAPRIL AND NIFEDIPINE IN TREATING NON-INSULIN-DEPENDENT DIABETES ASSOCIATED WITH HYPERTENSION - ONE YEAR ANALYSIS [J].
CHAN, JCN ;
COCKRAM, CS ;
NICHOLLS, MG ;
CHEUNG, CK ;
SWAMINATHAN, R .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1992, 305 (6860) :981-985
[6]  
CHUNG M, 1990, HOSP FORMUL, V25, P15
[7]  
CORRADI L, 1994, J HYPERTENS S3, V12, P156
[8]  
Corradi LLP, 1996, AM J HYPERTENS, V9, p152A
[9]   THE INTERACTION OF THE CALCIUM-CHANNEL BLOCKERS VERAPAMIL AND NIFEDIPINE WITH CYCLOSPORINE-A IN PEDIATRIC RENAL-TRANSPLANT PATIENTS [J].
CROCKER, JFS ;
RENTON, KW ;
LEVATTE, TL ;
MCLELLAN, DH .
PEDIATRIC NEPHROLOGY, 1994, 8 (04) :408-411
[10]   PATIENT COMPLIANCE AND THERAPEUTIC COVERAGE - COMPARISON OF AMLODIPINE AND SLOW-RELEASE NIFEDIPINE IN THE TREATMENT OF HYPERTENSION [J].
DETRY, JMR ;
BLOCK, P ;
DEBACKER, G ;
DEGAUTE, JP ;
SIX, R .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, 1995, 47 (06) :477-481