Why the study?
Do calcium-channel blockers prevent the progress of the main complications of hypertension in patients with hypertension?
Do calcium-channel blockers prevent the progress of the main complications of hypertension in patients with hypertension?
This review explores whether calcium-channel blockers can prevent the progression of major hypertensive complications, including cardiac hypertrophy and atherosclerosis.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Uncertain whether calcium-channel blockers prevent hypertensive complications; leaves open need for randomized trials.
It is generally accepted that hypertension doubles the risk of cardiovascular disease, of which coronary heart disease is the most common and lethal. Hypertension is a predisposing factor for the development of stroke, peripheral arterial disease, heart failure and end-state renal disease. Atherosclerosis-causing coronary heart disease is related to the severity of hypertension. Inhibition of calcium entry reduces the active tone of vascular smooth muscle and produces vasodilatation. This pharmacological action has been the basis for the use of calcium-channel blockers (CCBs) for the management of hypertension. Other drug families may achieve this: diuretics, beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor antagonists. Cardiovascular hypertrophy and atherosclerosis are major complications related to high blood pressure. Cardiac hypertrophy is considered as an independent risk factor associated with abnormalities of diastolic function and can result in heart failure. Atherosclerosis is associated with activation of innate immunity. Atherosclerosis is expressing itself not only as coronary heart disease, but as a cerebrovascular and peripheral arterial disease. By impairing physiological vasomotor function, atherosclerosis includes ultimately necrosis of myocardium. CCBs reduce blood pressure. Do they prevent the progress of the main complications of hypertension? This major question is the matter of the present paper.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Théophile Godfraind (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: