Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Small substudy on fibrinolytic markers warrants no practice change in hypertensive LVH; leaves open class-specific effects on thrombotic risk.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of the beta-blocker atenolol with the angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) losartan on plasma tissue-type plasminogen activator (tPA) activity and mass concentration, plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1) activity, tPA/PAI-1 complex, and von Willebrand factor (VWF). DESIGN: A prespecified, explorative substudy in 22 patients with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) performed within randomized multicenter, double-blind prospective study. RESULTS: After a median of 36 weeks of treatment, there were significant differences between the treatment groups, atenolol versus losartan, in plasma median levels of tPA mass (11.9 vs 7.3 ng/mL, P = .019), PAI-1 activity (20.7 vs 4.8 IU/mL, P = .030), and tPA/PAI-1 complex (7.1 vs 2.5 ng/mL, P = .015). In patients treated with atenolol, median levels of tPA mass (8.9-11.9 ng/mL, P = .021) and VWF (113.5%-134.3%, P = .021) increased significantly, indicating a change toward a more prothrombotic state. No significant changes occurred in the losartan group. CONCLUSION: Losartan treatment was associated with preserved fibrinolytic balance compared to a more prothrombotic fibrinolytic and hemostatic state in the atenolol group. These findings suggest different fibrinolytic and hemostatic responses to treatment in hypertensive patients with LVH.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Boman et al. (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: