Key result
The authors present a differing viewpoint on the proper choices and sequences of antihypertensive drug therapy for patients with diabetes mellitus compared to a recent working group report.
This editorial presents a differing viewpoint on the proper choices and sequences of antihypertensive drug therapy for patients with diabetes mellitus compared to a recent working group report.
Publication of the report composed by The Working Group on Hypertension in Diabetes1comes at a propitious time, a time of rising concerns about the coexistence of the two diseases and increasing interest about newer therapies that may lessen their destructive impact. We believe that most of this report is factually correct and appropriately focused, so that it will have a major beneficial influence on clinical practice. The authors deserve our enthusiastic thanks. However, there are a few minor points and one more fundamental issue that we believe deserve, if not rebuttal, at least the presentation of a differing viewpoint. The minor points can be quickley covered; the fundamental issue as to the proper choices and sequences of antihypertensive drug therapy deserves more attention. In doing so, we iterate our general agreement with the substance of the report. MINOR POINTS In the fourth paragraph of the introduction, the sentence
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Norman M. Kaplan (1987) conducted an editorial in Hypertension and Diabetes Mellitus. Antihypertensive drug therapy was evaluated. The authors present a differing viewpoint on the proper choices and sequences of antihypertensive drug therapy for patients with diabetes mellitus compared to a recent working group report.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: