Drugs

, Volume 49, Issue 4, pp 516–535 | Cite as

Choosing the Right ACE Inhibitor

A Guide to Selection
  • Gastone Leonetti
  • Cesare Cuspidi
Review Article

Summary

To find out if there are one or more criteria to guide selection among the ACE inhibitors for the treatment of arterial hypertension, we have reviewed the principal pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic aspects of the more frequently used agents of this class of antihypertensive drugs.

Among the pharmacokinetic aspects that we have considered, terminal half-life, as related to the duration of the antihypertensive effect, and the route of elimination may have an impact in the clinical selection among the various ACE inhibitors. On the other hand, all the other characteristics have no pragmatic clinical relevance or may be corrected by dosage adjustment.

Among the pharmacodynamic aspects, the antihypertensive efficacy of the different ACE inhibitors seems to be very similar, and some of the differences found in different studies are probably due to the population investigated and to the protocol of the study (time of blood pressure measurements, diet, drug dosage etc.). However, some differences can be found among the various ACE inhibitors when the antihypertensive efficacy is evaluated also as trough to peak ratio of blood pressure reduction. Indeed, in respect of the administration schedule of each ACE inhibitor not all the agents of this class have a trough to peak ratio above 50 to 60%, as suggested by the Food and Drug Administration of the US. According to this criterion, especially when blood pressure is measured with 24-hour noninvasive ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, some drugs such as lisinopril, enalapril and trandolapril should be preferred for their higher trough to peak ratios.

Left ventricular hypertrophy is significantly reduced by antihypertensive agents, the ACE inhibitors being the most effective. Indeed, the reduction of left ventricle mass for each 1mm Hg reduction in mean blood pressure is greater for ACE inhibitors than for other classes of antihypertensive agents. However, this effect seems more class related than characteristic of one or more among the various ACE inhibitors.

Insulin resistance is elevated in hypertensive patients and it has been thought responsible for or associated with other metabolic abnormalities. ACE inhibitors seem to correct the insulin resistance of hypertensive patients, but this effect also appears to be class related more than limited to one ACE inhibitor or another. Our knowledge of this field is still limited and more studies are necessary, especially to understand the prognostic impact of insulin resistance and/or insulin resistance improvement.

Renal protection of ACE inhibitors was first evaluated in patients with scleroderma crises, and thereafter has been extensively investigated in patients with renal insufficiency, due to diabetic nephropathy, with or without arterial hypertension. In both clinical diseases ACE inhibitors caused a significant improvement in prognosis. More doubtful are the long term effects of ACE inhibitors in patients with renal insufficiency due to nondiabetic nephropathy. In hypertensive patients with normal renal function and microproteinuria the ACE inhibitors reduce blood pressure and microalbuminuria in short and long term studies, without lowering glomerular filtration rate and renal blood flow. Renoprotection has been investigated predominantly with captopril and enalapril and they seem equipotent.

No clinically relevant significant differences have been found among the ACE inhibitors in their use in elderly hypertensive patients and in their impact on quality of life. Finally, the effect of ACE inhibitors on atherosclerotic disease of carotid arteries is the subject of ongoing studies.

In conclusion, there is no clinically relevant difference among the various ACE inhibitors for the treatment of patients with uncomplicated essential hypertension, when the agents are administered in the correct dosage regimen. However, if we consider the trough to peak ratio of blood pressure reduction, some of them seem to have a more favourable profile, although the long term impact is still unknown. Hypertensive patients with renal insufficiency, secondary either to hypertension or to other disease, seem to benefit from all ACE inhibitors, but some of them with a double route of excretion could be selected in comparison with those eliminated renally only because they do not need dosage adjustment.

Keywords

Captopril Enalapril Angiotensin Converting Enzyme Inhibitor Ramipril Lisinopril 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Edwards CRW, Padfield PL. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors: past, present and bright future. Lancet 1985; 1: 30–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Frohlich ED, Cooper RA, Lewis EJ. Review of the overall experience of captopril in hypertension. Arch Intern Med 1984; 144: 1441–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lancaster SG, Todd PA. Lisinopril: preliminary review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties and therapeutic use in hypertension and congestive heart failure. Drugs 1988; 35: 646–69.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rotmensch HH, Vlasses PH, Ferguson RK. Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors. Med Clin North Am 1988; 72: 399–424.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Salvetti A. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in the treatment of mild to moderate essential hypertension. Am J Hypertens 1989; 2: 94S–9S.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Salvetti A, Pedrinelli R, Arzilli F, et al. Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors in hypertension: a review. Int J Clin Pharmacol Res. 1985; 5 (6): 429–38.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Todd PA, Hell RC. Enalapril: a review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and therapeutic use in hypertension and congestive heart failure. Drugs 1986; 31: 198–248.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vidt PC, Bravo EL, Fouard M. Captopril. N Engl J Med 1982; 306: 214–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Williams GH. Converting enzyme inhibitors in the treatment of hypertension. N Engl J Med 1988; 319: 1517–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Salvetti A. Newer ACE-inhibitors: a look at the future. Drugs 1990; 40: 800–28.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Abrams WB, Davies RO, Gomez HJ. Clinical pharmacology of enalapril. J Hypertens 1984; 2 Suppl. 2: 31–6.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Davies RO, Gomez HG, Irving JD, et al. An overview of the clinical pharmacology of enalapril. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1984; 14 Suppl. 2: 215S–229S.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gomez NJ, Cirillo YJ, Monclor F. The clinical pharmacology of lisinopril. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1987; 9 Suppl. 3: 527–34.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lancaster SG, Todd PA. Lisinopril: a preliminary review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties and therapeutic use in hypertension and heart failure. Drugs 1988; 35: 646–69.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Frank GJ, Knapp LE, Olson SC, et al. Overview of quinapril, a new ACE-inhibitor. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1990; 15 Suppl. 2: 14S–23S.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Olson SC, Horvath AM, Michniewicxz BO, et al. The clinical pharmacokinetics of quinapril. Angiology 1989; 40: 351–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Deget F, Brogden RN. Cilazapril: a review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and therapeutic potential in cardiovascular disease. Drugs 1991; 41: 799–820.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Francis RJ, Brown AN, Kler L, et al. Pharmacokinetics of the converting enzyme inhibitor cilazapril in normal volunteers and the relationship to enzyme inhibition: development of a mathematical model. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1987; 9: 32–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Todd PA, Benfield P. Ramipril: a review of its pharmacological properties and therapeutic efficacy in cardiovascular disorders. Drugs 1990; 1: 110–35.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yarmant D, Bender N. The renin-angiotensin system and ramipril a new converting enzyme inhibitor. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1989; 14 Suppl. 4: 46–52.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Shionoiri H, Ikeda Y, Kimura K, et al. Pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of single-dose ramipril in hypertensive patients with various degrees of renal function. Curr Ther Res 1986; 40: 74–85.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Todd PA, Fitton A. Perindopril: a review of its pharmacological properties and therapeutic use in cardiovascular disorders. Drugs 1991; 42: 90–114.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bussien JP, D’Amore GF, Perret L, et al. Single and repeated dosing of the converting enzyme inhibitor perindopril to normal subjects. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1986; 39: 554–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kairer G, Ackermann S, Sionfi A. Pharmacokinetics of a new angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, benazepril hydrochloride, in special populations. Am Heart J 1989; 117: 746–51.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Onoyama K, Nanishi F, Okuda S, et al. Pharmacokinetics of a new angiotensin I converting enzyme inhibitor (delapril) in patients with deteriorated kidney function and in normal control subjects. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1988; 43: 242–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sybertz EJ, Watkins RW, Ahn HG, et al. Pharmacologic, metabolic and toxicologic profile of spirapril (SCH 33844), a new angiotensin converting inhibitor. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1987; 10 Suppl. 7: 105–8.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Richer C, Giroux B, Plouin PF, et al. Captopril: pharmacokinetics, antihypertensive and biological effects in hypertensive patients. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1984; 17: 243–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Jarrott B, Drummer O, Hooper R, et al. Pharmacokinetic properties of captopril after acute and chronic administration to hypertensive subjects. Am J Cardiol 1982; 49: 1547–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Duchin KL, Singhvi SM, Willard DA, et al. Captopril kinetics. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1982; 31: 452–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Onoyama K, Hirakata H, Tsuruda H, et al. Pharmacokinetics of a new angiotensin I converting enzyme inhibitor (alacepril) after oral dosing in fasting or fed states. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1985; 38: 462–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Shionoiri H, Miyazaki N, Yasuda G, et al. Pharmacokinetics and antihypertensive effects of single and consecutive dosing of alacepril (Du-1219) in patients with severe hypertension. Curr Ther Res 1985; 38: 537–47.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Duchin KL, Waclawski AP, Tu JI, et al. Pharmacokinetics, safety, and pharmacologic effects of fosinopril sodium an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor in healthy subjects. J Clin Pharmacol 1991; 31: 58–64.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Singhvi SM, Duchin KL, Morrison RA, et al. Disposition of fosinopril sodium in healthy subjects. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1988; 25: 9–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    De Forrest JM, Powell JR, Cushman DW, et al. Preclinical pharmacological characteristics of SQ 29852 the prototype of a novel class on angiotensin I converting enzyme inhibitors. 11th Scientific Meeting of the International Society of Hypertension; 1986: Heidelberg: 310.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kripalani KY, McKinstry DN, Singhvi SM. Disposition of captopril in normal subjects. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1980; 27: 636–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Johnatan CI, Jackson BJ, Larmour I, et al. Plasma enalapril levels and hormonal effect, after short and long-term administration in essential hypertension. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1984; 18 Suppl. 2: 233–9.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Louis WJ, Conway EL, Krum H, et al. Comparison of the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of perindopril, cilazapril and enalapril. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol Suppl 1992; 19: 55–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Shionoiri H, Minamisawa K, Veda S-i, et al. Pharmacokinetics and antihypertensive effects of lisinopril in hypertensive patients with normal and impaired renal function. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1990; 16: 594–600.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Third GS. Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor: comparative structure, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther 1990; 4: 199–206.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Cirillo VJ, Gomez HJ, Salomon J, et al. Lisinopril: dose-peak effect relationship in essential hypertension. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1988; 25: 533–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Millar JA, Derkx FHM, McLean K, et al. Pharmacodynamics of converting enzyme inhibition of cardiovascular and autonomie effects of MK 421 (enalapril) and MK 521. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1982; 14: 347–55.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Till AE, Gower HJ, Hichens M, et al. Pharmacokinetics of repeated oral doses of enalapril (MK 421) in normal volunteers. Biopharm Drug Dispos 1984; 5: 273–80.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Wadworth AW, Brogden RN. Quinapril: a review of its pharmacological properties, and therapeutic efficacy in cardiovascular disorders. Drugs 1991; 41: 378–88.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Wellstein A, Essig J, Belz GG. Inhibition of angiotensin I response by cilazapril and its time course in normal volunteers. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1987; 41: 639–44.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Johnston CI, Mendelsohn FAO, Ubeia RB, et al. Inhibition of angiotensin converting enzyme in plasma and tissues: studies ex vivo after administration of ACE-inhibitors. J Hypertens 1988; 6 Suppl. 3: 17–22.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Schneller M, Wusstreager J, Waeber B, et al. Haemodynamic and pharmacological effects of the converting enzyme inhibitor tiazepril in normal volunteers. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1985; 28: 267–72.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Debusmann ER, Pujadar JO, Lahn W, et al. Influence of renal function on the pharmacokinetics of ramipril (HOE 498). Am J Cardiol 1987; 59: 70D–8D.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Hui KK, Duchin KL, Kripalani KJ, et al. Pharmacokinetics of fosinopril in patients with various degrees of renal function. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1991; 49: 457–67.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Shionoiri H, Yaruda G, Ate Y, et al. Pharmacokinetics and acute effect on the renin-angiotensin system of delapril in patients with chronic renal failure. Clin Nephrol 1987; 27: 65–70.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Shionoiri H, Niyazaki N, Yashuda G, et al. Blood concentration and urinary excretion of enalapril in patients with chronic renal failure. Jpn J Nephrol 1985; 27: 1291–7.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Collins JD, Robinson J, Wade A, et al. Investigation of the pharmacokinetics and metabolism of RV 44570 in healthy male volunteers following oral administration of 14C-labeled compound. Data on file Roussel-Uclaf 1988, report 1GB1-101.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Bacini T, Sybertz EJ, Watkins RW et al. Antihypertensive activity of SCH 31846, a non-sulphydryl angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1983; 5: 655–67.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Sybertz EJ, Watkins RW, Ahn HS, et al. Pharmacologic, metabolic, and toxicologic profile of spirapril converting inhibitor. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1987; 10 Suppl. 7: 105–8.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Page IH. On the nature of the pressor action of renin. J Exp Med 1939; 70: 521–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Peart WS. The renin-angiotensin system. Pharmacol Rev 1965; 17: 143–83.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Vallotton MB. The renin-angiotensin system. Trends Pharmacol Sci 1987; 8: 69–74.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Buhler FR, Laragh JH, Baer L, et al. Propranolol inhibition of renin secretion: a specific approach to diagnosis and treatment of renin-dependent hypertensive disease. N Engl J Med 1972; 287: 1209–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Weber MA, Stokes GS, Gain JM. Comparison of the effects on renin release of beta-adrenergic antagonists with different properties. J Clin Invest 1974; 54: 1413–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Ondetti MA, Cushman DW. Inhibition of the renin-angiotensin system: a new approach to the therapy of hypertension. J Med Chem 1981; 24: 355–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Ondetti MA, Rubin B, Cushman DW. Design of specific inhibitors of angiotensin converting enzyme: a new class of orally active antihypertensive agents. Science 1977; 196: 441–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Ondetti MA. Structural relationship of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors to pharmacology activity. Circulation 1987; 77 Suppl. 1: 174–8.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Wong PC, Hart SD, Duncla JV, et al. Non-peptide angiotensin II receptor antagonists: studies with DuP 753 and EXP 3174. Eur J Physiol 1991; 202: 323–30.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Smith RD, Chiv AT, Wong PC, et al. Pharmacology of nonpeptide angiotensin II receptor antagonists. Ann Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 1992; 32: 135–65.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Weber MA. Clinical experience with the angiotensin II, receptors antagonist losartan: a preliminary report. Am J Hypertens 1992; 5: 247S–51S.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Weinberger MH. Blood pressure and metabolic responses to hydrochlorothiazide, captopril, and the combination in black and white mild-to-moderate hypertensive patients. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1985; 7: S52–S55.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Muiesan G, Agabiti-RoSci E, Buoninconti R, et al. Antihypertensive efficacy and tolerability of captopril in the elderly: comparison with hydrochlorothiazide and placebo in a multicentre, double blind study. J Hypertens 1987; 5 Suppl. 5: S599–602.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Andern L, Karlberg B, Ohman P, et al. Captopril and atenolol combined with hydrochlorothiazide in essential hypertension. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1982; 14: 107S–111S.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Shapiro DA, Liss CL, Walker JF, et al. Enalapril and hydrochlorothiazide as antihypertensive agents in the elderly. J Cardiovac Pharmacol 1987; 10 Suppl. 7: S160–2.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Frishman WH, Goldberger J, Sherman D. Enalapril, hydrochlorothiazide, and combination therapy in patients with moderate hypertension. J Clin Hypertens 1987; 3: 520–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Edmonds D, Greminger P, Locher R, et al. Enalapril as a firststep agent in essential hypertension: a comparative study with atenolol. J Hypertens 1986; 4 Suppl. 5: S406–9.Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Pool JL, Gennari J, Goldstein R, et al. Controlled multicenter study of the antihypertensive effects of lisinopril, hydrochlorothiazide and lisinopril plus hydrochlorothiazide in the treatment of 394 patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1987; 9 Suppl. 3: S36–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Kochar MS, Bolek G, Kalbfleisch JH, et al. A 52-week comparison of lisinopril, hydrochlorothiazide, and their combination in hypertension. J Clin Pharmacol 1987; 27: 373–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Bolzano K, Arriaga J, Bernai R, et al. The antihypertensive effect of lisinopril compared to atenolol in patients with mild to moderate hypertension. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1987; 9 Suppl. 3: 543–7.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    MacLean D. Quinapril: a double blind, placebo controlled trial in essential hypertension. Angiology 1989; 40: 370–81.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Goldstein RJ. The treatment of moderate to severe hypertension with ACE inhibitors. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1990; 15 Suppl. 2:S29–35.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Stumpe KO, Overlack A, Kollock R, et al. Effects of the new angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor, ramipril, in patients with essential hypertension. Klin Wochenschr 1986; 64: 558–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Villamil AS, Cairns V, Witte PU, et al. A double blind study to compare the efficacy, tolerance and safety of two doses of the angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor ramipril with placebo. Am J Cardiol 1987; 59: 110D–4D.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Anderson RJ, Duchin KL, Gore RD, et al. Once-daily fosinopril in the treatment of hypertension. Hypertension 1991; 17: 636–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Pool JL. Antihypertensive effect of fosinopril, a new angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor: finding of the fosinopril study group II. Clin Ther 1990; 12: 520–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Lees KR, Reid JL, Scott MG, et al. Captopril versus perindopril: a double-blind study in essential hypertension. J Hum Hypertens 1989; 3: 17–27.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Kogler P. Cilazapril: a new non thiol-containing angiotensin converting enzyme. Am J Med 1989; 87 Suppl. 6B: 50S–5S.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Garanin GA. A comparison of once-daily antihypertensive therapy with captopril and enalapril. Clin Med Res 1986; 40: 567–74.Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    De Cesaris R, Ranieri G, Salzano EV, et al. Once-daily therapy with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors in mild hypertension: a comparison of captopril and enalapril. J Hypertens 1987; 5 Suppl. 5: S595–7.Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Lai C, Onnis E, Pirisi R, et al. Influenza degli ACE-inibitori enalapril e captopril sulla tolleranza allo sforzo in pazienti ipertesi. Cardiologia 1988; 33: 211–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Lewis RA, Baker KM, Ayers CR, et al. Captopril versus enalapril maleate: a comparison of antihypertensive and hormonal effects. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1985; 7 Suppl. 1: S12–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Gosse P, Dallocchio M, Gonegon R. ACE-inhibitors in mild to moderate hypertension: comparison of lisinopril and captopril administered once daily. J Hum Hypertens 1989; 3: 23–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Witte PU, Walter V. Comparative double-blind study of ramipril and captopril in mild to moderate essential hypertension. Am J Cardiol 1987; 59: 115D–20D.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Fogari R, Poletti L, Tettamanti R, et al. Antihypertensive activity and duration of action of dilevalol in hypertensive patients at rest and during exercise: a comparison with captopril, G It Cardiol 1999; 20: 309–15.Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Goldstein RJ. Amulticenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel comparison of fosinopril sodium and enalapril maleate for the treatment of mild-to-moderate essential hypertension. Drug Invest 1991; 3 Suppl. 4: 38–44.Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Zabludowski J, Rosenfeld J, Akbary MA, et al. A multicenter comparative study between ramipril and enalapril in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension. Curr Med Res Op 1988; 11: 93–106.Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Morgan T, Anderson A. Duration of antihypertensive effect of perindopril (P), enalapril (E) and captopril (C) [abstract]. Hypertension 1993; 21: 161.Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Frishman WH. Quinapril versus captopril twice daily as initial monotherapy in severe hypertension. Am J Hypertens 1990; 3: 100A–5A.Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Goldstein RJ. The treatment of moderate to severe hypertension with ACE inhibitors. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1990; 15 Suppl. 2:S29–35.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Schnaper HW. Comparison of the efficacy and safety of quinapril vs captopril in the treatment of moderate to severe hypertension. Angiology 1989; 40: 389–93.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Taylor SA. The treatment of mild to moderate hypertension with ACE-inhibitors. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1990; 15 Suppl. 2: S24–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Conway J, Coats AJS, Bird R. Lisinopril and enalapril in hypertension: a comparative study using ambulatory monitoring. J Cardiovasc Hypertens 1990; 4: 235–9.Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Whelton A, Dunner Jr B, Glazer G, et al. Twenty-four hour blood pressure effect of once-daily lisinopril, enalapril, and placebo in patients with mild to moderate hypertension. J Hum Hypertens 1992; 6: 325–31.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Salvetti A, Di Venanzio L, Arzilli F. Farmaci a lunga durata di azione e compliance alla terapia cardiovascolare. Cardiologia 1992; 37 Suppl. 1: 169–73.Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Division of Cardio-Renal Drugs Products, Food and Drug Administration. Proposed guidelines for the clinical evaluation of antihypertensive drugs. Rockville MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, 1988.Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Fogari R, Poletti L, Tettamanti F, et al. Antihypertensive activity and duration of dilevalol in hypertensive patients at rest and during exercise: a comparison with captopril. Gior It Cardiol 1990; 20 (4): 309–15.Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Morgan T, Anderson A. Clinical efficacy of perindopril in hypertension. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol 1992; 19: 61–65.Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Salvetti A, Caiazza A, Ghisoni F, et al. The dose-response curve of lisinopril in essential hypertensives: a cross-over multicenter study. Current advances in ACE-inhibition. In: MacGregor GA, Sever PS, Caldwell D, et al, editors. Proceedings of the International Symposium on ACE Inhibitors; 1991 Feb 17–21: London. London: Churchill Livingstone, 1991: 161–4.Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Guntzel P, Kobrin I, Pasquier C, et al. The effect of cilazapril, an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor, on peak and trough blood pressure measurements in hypertensive patients. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1991; 17: 8–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Kobrin I, Guntzel P, Viskoper R, et al. Antihypertension duration of action of cilazapril in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension. Drugs 1991; 41 Suppl. 1: 31–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Ford NF, Fulmor IE, Nichola PS, et al. Fosinopril monotherapy: relationship between blood pressure reduction and time of administration. Clin Cardiol 1993; 16: 324–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Gomez HJ. Dose-response studies with benazepril in mild to moderate hypertension. Clin Cardiol 1991; 14 Suppl. 4: IV22–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Mancia G, Di Rienzo M, Parati G. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring use in hypertension research and clinical practice. Hypertension 1993; 21: 510–24.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Zannad F. Trandolapril: how does it differ from other angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors? Drugs 1993; 46 Suppl. 2: 172–82.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Levy D. Left ventricular hypertrophy: epidemiological insights from the Framingham Heart Study. Drugs 1988; 35 Suppl. 5: 1–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Levy D, Garrison RJ, Savage DD, et al. Prognostic implications of echocardiographically determined left ventricular mass in the Framingham Heart Study. N Engl J Med 1990; 332: 1561–6.Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    Cruickshank JM, Lewis J, Moore V, et al. Reversibility of left ventricular hypertrophy by differing types of antihypertensive therapy. J Hum Hypertens 1992; 6: 85–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Dahlof P, Pennert K, Hansson L. Reversal of left ventricular hypertrophy in hypertensive patients: a meta-analysis of 109 treatment studies. Am J Hypertens 1992; 5: 95–110.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Asmar RG, Pannier B, Santoni JP, et al. Reversion of cardiac hypertrophy and reduced arterial compliance after converting enzyme inhibition in essential hypertension. Circulation 1988; 78: 941–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Asmar RG. Treatment for one year with perindopril: effect on cardiac mass and arterial compliance in essential hypertension. J Hypertens 1988; 6 Suppl. 3: 33–9.Google Scholar
  115. 115.
    Schelling P, Fisher H, Ganten D. Angiotensin and cell growth: a look to cardiovascular hypertrophy. J Hypertens 1991; 9: 3–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Garavaglia GE, Messerli FH, Nunez BD, et al. Immediate and short term cardiovascular effects of a new converting enzyme inhibitor (lisinopril) in essential hypertension. Am J Cardiol 1988; 62: 912–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Ventura HO, Frohlich ED, Messerli FH, et al. Cardiovascular effects and regional blood flow distribution associated with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibition (captopril) in essential hypertension. Am J Cardiol 1985; 55: 1023–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    Grandi AM, Venco A, Barzizza F, et al. Effect of enalapril on left ventricular mass and performance in essential hypertension. Am J Cardiol 1989; 63: 1093–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Dunn FG, Oigman W, Ventura HO, et al. Enalapril improves systemic and renal hemodynamic and allows regression of left ventricular mass in essential hypertension. Am J Cardiol 1984; 53: 105–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Nakashima Y, Fouad FM, Tarazi RC. Regression of left ventricular hypertrophy from systemic hypertension by enalapril. Am J Cardiol 1984; 53: 1044–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Lombardo M, Zaini G, Pastori F, et al. Left ventricular mass and function before and after captopril treatment. J Hypertens 1983; 1: 215–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Muiesan ML, Agabiti-RoSci E, Romanelli G, et al. Beneficial effects of one year’s treatment with captopril on left ventricular anatomy and function in hypertensive patients with left ventricular hypertrophy. Am J Med 1988; 84 Suppl. 3A: 129–32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  123. 123.
    Julien J, Doufleux MA, Prasquier R, et al. Effects of captopril and minoxidil on left ventricular hypertrophy in resistant hypertensive patients: a 6 month double-blind comparison. J Am Coll Cardiol 1990; 16: 13742.Google Scholar
  124. 124.
    Mezzetti A, Guglielmi MD, Mancini M, et al. Captopril improves blood pressure control and favors the regression of left ventricular hypertrophy in patients taking hydrochlorothiazide. Curr Ther Res 1990; 47: 146–55.Google Scholar
  125. 125.
    Picca M, Azzollini F, Zocca A, et al. Effects of enalapril on left ventricular hypertrophy and systolic function in patients with essential hypertension. Adv Ther 1989; 6: 149–59.Google Scholar
  126. 126.
    Leonetti G, Fogari R, Mazzola C, et al. Effects of blood pressure reduction with trandolapril and enalapril on left ventricular hypertrophy and exercise tolerance. J Hypertens 1993; 11 Suppl. 5: S356–7.Google Scholar
  127. 127.
    Modan M, Haikin H, Almog S, et al. Hyperinsulinemia: a link between hypertension, obesity and glucose intolerance. J Clin Invest 1985; 75: 809–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Ferrannini E, Haffner SM, Stern MP. Essential hypertension: an insulin resistant state. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1990; 15 Suppl. 5: S18–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    Ferrannini E, Buzzigoli G, Bonadonna R. Insulin resistance in essential hypertension. N Engl J Med 1987; 317: 350–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  130. 130.
    Natali A, Santoro D, Palombo C, et al. Impaired insulin action on skeletal muscle metabolism in essential hypertension. Hypertension 1991; 17: 170–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  131. 131.
    Pollare T, Lithell H, Berne C. Insulin resistance is a characteristic feature of primary hypertension indipendent of obesity. Metabolism 1990; 39: 167–74.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Ferrannini E, Natali A, Cerri M, et al. Hypertension: a metabolic disorder. Diabetes Metab 1989; 15: 284–91.Google Scholar
  133. 133.
    Stout RW. Overview of the association between insulin and atherosclerosis. Metabolism 1985; 34 Suppl. 1: 7–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  134. 134.
    Fuh MMT, Shieh SM, Wu DA, et al. Abnormalities of carbohydrate and lipid metabolism in patients with hypertension. Arch Intern Med 1987; 147: 1035–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  135. 135.
    Shen RC, Schieh SM, Fuh DA, et al. Resistance to insulin-stimulated glucose uptake in patients with hypertension. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1988; 66: 580–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  136. 136.
    Donnelly R. Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and insulin sensitivity: metabolic effects in hypertension, diabetes and heart failure. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1992; 20 Suppl. 11: S38–44.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  137. 137.
    Beratorp K, Lindgarde F, Mattiasson I. Long-term effects on insulin sensitivity and sodium transport in glucose-intolerant hypertensive subjects when beta-blockade is replaced by captopril treatment. J Hum Hypertens 1992; 6: 291–8.Google Scholar
  138. 138.
    Lithell HO, Pollare T, Berne C. Insulin sensitivity in newly detected hypertensive patients: influence of captopril and other antihypertensive agents on insulin sensitivity and related biological parameters. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1990; 15 Suppl. 5: S46–52.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  139. 139.
    Berne C, Pollare T, Lithell H. Effects of antihypertensive treatment on insulin sensitivity with special reference to ACE-inhibitors. Diabetes Care 1991; 14 Suppl. 4: 32–47.Google Scholar
  140. 140.
    Berne C. Metabolic effects of ACE-inhibitors. J Intern Med 1991; 229 Suppl. 2: 119–25.Google Scholar
  141. 141.
    Lithell HO. Effect of antihypertensive drugs on insulin, glucose and lipid metabolism. Diabetes Care 1991; 14: 203–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  142. 142.
    Pollare T, Lithell H, Berne C. A comparison of the effects of hydrochlorothiazide and captopril on glucose and lipid metabolism in patients with hypertension. N Engl J Med 1989; 868–73.Google Scholar
  143. 143.
    Baba T, Kodama T, Ishizaki T. Effect of chronic treatment with enalapril on glucose tolerance and serum insulin in non-resistent Japanese patients with essential hypertension. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1993; 45: 23–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  144. 144.
    Santoro D, Quinones Galvan A, Natali A, et al. Some metabolic aspects of essential hypertension and its treatment. Am J Med 1993; 94 Suppl. 4A: 4A.32S–39S.Google Scholar
  145. 145.
    Paolisso G, Gambardella A, Verza M, et al. ACE-inhibition improves insulinsensitivity in aged insulin-resistant hypertensive patients. J Hum Hypertens 1992; 6: 175–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  146. 146.
    United States Renal Data System. USRDS 1990 Annual Data report. Bethesda, MD: National Institute of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive Diseases, 1990.Google Scholar
  147. 147.
    Baldwin DS. Ceonic glomerulonephrites: non immunologic mechanism of progressive glomerular damage. Kidney Int 1982; 21: 109–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  148. 148.
    Klahr S, Schreiner G, Ichikawa I. The progression of renal disease. N Engl J Med 1988; 318: 1657–66.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  149. 149.
    Oldrizzi L, Rugio C, Valvo E, et al. Progression of renal failure in patients with renal disease of diverse etiology on proteinrestricted diet. Kidney Int 1985; 27: 553–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  150. 150.
    Brenner BM. Nephron adaptation to renal injury or ablation. Am J Physiol 1985; 249: F324–37.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  151. 151.
    Azar S, Johnson MA, Hertel B, et al. Single nephron pressure, flows and resistance in hypertensive kidneys with nephrosclerosis. Kidney Int 1977; 12: 28–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  152. 152.
    Lopez-Ovejero JA, Saal SDF, D’Angelo WA, et al. Reversal of vascular and renal crises of sclerodermia by oral angiotensin converting enzyme blockade. N Eng J Med 1979; 300: 1417–9.Google Scholar
  153. 153.
    Grünfeld JP, Pulik M, Revellaud RJ, et al. Scleroderma complicated by arterial hypertension and renal insufficiency: favourable effects of captopril. Nouv Presse Med 1980; 9: 2658–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  154. 154.
    Mercatello A, Arch PY. Beneficial effect of converting enzyme inhibitor on the acute renal insufficiency of scleroderma with arterial hypertension. Nouv Presse Med 1981; 10: 1596–601.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  155. 155.
    Flechet ML, Bravard P, Godin M. Scleroderma complicated by arterial hypertension and kidney failure: treatment with captopril. Nouv Presse Med 1981; 10: 1848–53.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  156. 156.
    Kasiske BL, Kalis RSV, Ma JR, et al. Effect of antihypertensive therapy on the kidney in patients with diabetes: a meta-regression analysis. Ann Intern Med 1993; 118: 129–38.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  157. 157.
    Wee PM, Epstein M. Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and progression of non-diabetic chronic renal disease. Arch Intern Med 1993; 153: 1479–59.Google Scholar
  158. 158.
    Liungman S. Microalbuminuria in essential hypertension. Am J Hypertens 1990; 3: 956–60.Google Scholar
  159. 159.
    Yudkin JS, Forrest RD, Jackson CA. Microalbuminuria as predictor of vascular disease in non-diabetic subjects. Lancet 1988; 2: 530–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  160. 160.
    Bianchi S, Bigazzi G, et al. Microalbuminuria in patients with essential hypertension: effect of an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor and of a calcium channel blocker. Am J Hypertens 1991; 4: 291–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  161. 161.
    Bigazzi R, Bianchi S, Baldari D, et al. Long term effects of a converting enzyme inhibitor and a calcium channel blocker on urinary albumin excretion in patients with essential hypertension. Am J Hypertens 1993; 6: 108–13.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  162. 162.
    Bianchi S, Bigazzi R, Baldari G, et al. Microalbuminuria in patients with essential hypertension: effects of several antihypertensive drugs. Am J Med 1992; 93: 525–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  163. 163.
    Julius S. The therapeutic dilemma of hypertension in the elderly. Drugs 1988; 36 Suppl. I: 7–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  164. 164.
    Smith WM. Epidemiology of hypertension in older patients. Am J Med 1988; 85 Suppl. 3B: 2–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  165. 165.
    Amery A, Birkenhager W, Brixco P, et al. Mortality and morbidity: results from the European Working Party on High Blood Pressure in the Elderly trial. Lancet 1985; 1: 1349–54.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  166. 166.
    SHEP Cooperative Research Group. Prevention of stroke by antihypertensive drug treatment in older persons with isolated systolic hypertension: final results of SHEP. JAMA 1991; 265: 3255–64.Google Scholar
  167. 167.
    Dahlof B, Lindholm LH, Hansson L, et al. Morbidity and mortality in the Swedish Trial in Old Patients with Hypertension (STOP-Hypertension). Lancet 1991; 338: 1281–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  168. 168.
    Medical Research Council Working Group. MRC trial of treatment of hypertension in older adults: principal results. BMJ 1992; 304: 405–12.Google Scholar
  169. 169.
    Laragh JH. Vasoconstriction-volume analysis for understanding and treating hypertension: the use of renin and aldosterone profile. Am J Med 1973; 55: 261–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  170. 170.
    Buhler FR. Antihypertensive treatment according to age, plasma renin and race. Drugs 1988; 35: 495–503.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  171. 171.
    Schoenberger JA. Epidemiology and evaluation: steps toward hypertension treatment in the 1990. Am J Med 1991; 90: Suppl. 4B: 3–7.Google Scholar
  172. 172.
    Beard K, Bulpitt C, Masci B, et al. Management of elderly patients with sustained hypertension. BMJ 1992; 304: 412–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  173. 173.
    Hall WD. Hypertension in the elderly with a special focus on treatment with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and calcium antagonists. Am J Cardiol 1992; 69: 33E–42E.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  174. 174.
    Messerli FH. Antihypertensive therapy: is it different in the elderly? Drugs 1990; 39: 49–52.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  175. 175.
    Baker SL. A study of the use of captopril in elderly hypertensive patients. Age Ageing 1988; 17: 17–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  176. 176.
    Muiesan G, Agabiti-RoSci E, Buoninconti R, et al. Antihypertensive efficacy and tolerability of captopril in the elderly: comparison with hydrochlorothiazide and placebo in a multicenter, double-blind study. J Hypertens 1987; 5 Suppl. 5: S599–602.Google Scholar
  177. 177.
    Suraniti S, Berrut G, Marre M, et al. Antihypertensive efficacy and acceptability of perindopril in elderly hypertensive patients. Am J Cardiol 1993; 71: 28E–31E.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  178. 178.
    Silagy CA, McNeil JJ, McGrath BP. Crossover comparison of atenolol, enalapril, hydrochlorothiazide and isradipine for isolated systolic systemic hypertension. Am J Cardiol 1992; 70: 1299–305.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  179. 179.
    Schnaper HW. Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor for systemic hypertension in young and elderly patients. Am J Cardiol 1992; 69: 54c–8c.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  180. 180.
    Saalbabach R, Wochnik G, Maversberger H, et al. Antihypertensive efficacy, tolerance, and safety of ramipril in young versus old patients: a retrospective study. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1991; 18 Suppl. 2: S134–6.Google Scholar
  181. 181.
    Mulinari R, Gavras I, Gavras H. Efficacy and tolerability of enalapril monotherapy in mild to moderate hypertension in older patients compared to younger patients. Clin Ther 1987; 9: 678–89.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  182. 182.
    Chalmers D, Dombey SL, Lawson DH. Post-marketing surveillance study of captopril (for hypertension): a preliminary report. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1987; 24: 343–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  183. 183.
    Cooper WD, Sheldom D, Brown D, et al. Post-marketing surveillance of enalapril experience in 11 710 hypertensive patients in general practice. J R Coll Gen Pract 1987; 37: 346–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  184. 184.
    Jachuk SJ, Brierly H, Jachuk S, et al. The effect of hypotensive therapy on the quality of life. J R Coll Gen Pract 1982; 33: 103–9.Google Scholar
  185. 185.
    Croog SH, Levine S, Testa MR, et al. The effects of antihypertensive therapy on the quality of life. N Engl J Med 1986; 314: 1657–64.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  186. 186.
    Beto JA, Bansal VK. Quality of life in treatment of hypertension: metaanalysis of clinical trials. J Hypertens 1992; 5: 125–33.Google Scholar
  187. 187.
    Testa MA, Anderson RB, Nackley JF, et al. Quality of life and antihypertensive therapy in men: a comparison of captopril with enalapril. N Engl J Med 1993; 328: 907–13.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  188. 188.
    Zanchetti A. The antiatherogenic effects of antihypertensive therapy: experimental and clinical evidence. Clin Exp Hypertens A 1992; 14 (Pts 1–2): 307–31.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  189. 189.
    Geisterfer AAT, Peach MJ, Owens G. Angiotensin II induces hypertrophy not hyperplasia, of cultured rat aortic smooth muscle cells. Circ Res 1988; 62: 749–56.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  190. 190.
    Naftilan AJ, Pratt RE, Dzau VJ. Induction of platelet-derived growth factor A-chain and C-myc gene expression by angiotensin II in cultured rat vascular smooth muscle cells. J Clin Invest 1989; 83: 1419–24.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  191. 191.
    Aberg G, Ferre P. Effects of captopril on atherosclerosis in cynomolgus monkeys. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1990; 15 Suppl. 5: S65–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  192. 192.
    Powell JS, Clorel JP, Mueller CKM, et al. Inhibition of angiotensin converting enzyme prevent neointimal proliferation after vascular injury. Science 1989; 245: 186–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  193. 193.
    Chobanian AV, Handenschiildt CC, Hickernam C, et al. Antiatherogenic effect of captopril in the watanabe heritable hyperlipidemic rabbit. Hypertension 1990; 15: 327–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis International Limited 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gastone Leonetti
    • 1
  • Cesare Cuspidi
    • 2
  1. 1.Istituto Scientifico Ospedale S. Luca, Centro Auxologico Italiano, and Cattedra Terapia Medica SistematicaUniversità degli StudiMilanItaly
  2. 2.Istituto Clinica Medica Generale e Terapia MedicaUniversità di MilanoMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations