Why the study?
Does doxazosin improve blood pressure and lipid profiles compared to hydrochlorothiazide in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension?
Does doxazosin improve blood pressure and lipid profiles compared to hydrochlorothiazide in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension?
Doxazosin provides comparable blood pressure lowering to hydrochlorothiazide but with a more favorable lipid profile and fewer metabolic side effects.
Doxazosin offers a metabolically favorable alternative to HCTZ in mild hypertension; extends RCT comparisons of alpha-blockers versus thiazides.
Hjortdahl P, von Krogh H, Daae L, Holme I, Hjermann I (Department of General Practice, University of Oslo, Oslo City Board of Health, Central Laboratory, Life Insurance Companies' Institute for Medical Statistics, Department of Internal Medicine, Ullevaal University Hospital, Oslo, Norway). A 24‐week multicenter double‐blind study of doxazosin and hydrochlorothiazide in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension. The new α 1 ‐adrenoceptor antagonist, doxazosin (DOX), was compared with hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ), both drugs administered once daily, in a randomized double‐blind study including 115 patients. The mean final daily doses used were DOX, 10.8 mg; HCTZ, 89.1 mg. There were no statistically significant differences between treatment groups for blood pressure (BP) changes except that HCTZ produced a significantly greater fall ( p =0.04) in supine systolic BP than DOX. The statistically significant mean differences in changes in lipid parameters (total cholesterol and total triglycerides) were in favour of DOX. The number of patients reporting side‐effects were DOX, 27/57; HCTZ, 29/53, with two DOX‐and five HCTZ‐treated patients withdrawn due to side‐effects. In the HCTZ‐treated group, laboratory serum tests indicated 11 patients with abnormally low potassium and seven with abnormally high uric acid concentrations. The overall results suggest a benefit‐to‐risk ratio in favour of DOX.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hjortdahl et al. (1987) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: