Why the study?
Does fixed-dose combination therapy with enalapril/lercanidipine improve blood pressure control and cardiovascular/renal protection in hypertensive patients?
Does fixed-dose combination therapy with enalapril/lercanidipine improve blood pressure control and cardiovascular/renal protection in hypertensive patients?
Fixed-dose combination therapy with enalapril and lercanidipine offers an effective and well-tolerated strategy to improve blood pressure control and adherence in hypertensive patients.
Supports adherence in hypertension; leaves open dedicated outcome trials before practice change.
Recent hypertension guidelines have highlighted the need to achieve blood pressure control in order to effectively reduce cardiovascular and renal morbidity and mortality. However, blood pressure control remains poorly achieved in the general population, particularly in high- or very-high-risk hypertensive patients. In view of the growing need to achieve better blood pressure control and provide adequate cardiovascular and renal protection in hypertensive patients, the implementation of combination therapies--especially fixed-dose combinations--is currently recommended. A greater use of fixed-combination therapies, based on a single daily administration of two drugs, in fact, may favor better compliance and adherence to prescribed antihypertensive medications. Among the possible fixed-dose combinations, the one based on angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and calcium-channel blockers, may be considered an effective, safe and well-tolerated approach and may provide a beneficial impact on cardiovascular risk. This article reviews the potential role of fixed-combination therapy in the treatment of hypertension with a specific focus on an emerging calcium-channel blocker angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor fixed-dose combination based on a new-generation dihiidropiridinic calcium-channel blocker (lercanidipine) and the prototype angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (enalapril).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tocci et al. (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: