Advertisement

Comparison of Therapeutic Studies on Regression of Left Ventricular Hypertrophy

  • Roland E. Schmieder
  • Markus P. Schlaich
Chapter
Part of the Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology book series (AEMB, volume 432)

Summary

In numerous studies left ventricular hypertrophy has been clearly established to be a strong, blood-pressure independent risk factor for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. In fact, increased echocardiographic left ventricular mass has been shown to predict cardiovascular complications not only in patients with hypertension, but also in the general population. Preliminary data revealed that regression of left ventricular hypertrophy indeed reduces cardiovascular complications. As a consequence, regression of left ventricular hypertrophy by drug treatment has emerged as a desirable goal in patients with echocardiographically determined left ventricular hypertrophy. These findings raised the question, whether certain antihypertensive drugs differ in their ability to reduce left ventricular mass. To resolve this issue several comparative studies and some meta-analyses have been carried out.

In a meta-analysis by Dahlöf et al., comprising 109 treatment studies published until december 1990 with a total of 2357 patients, ACE-inhibitors (-15%) were most effective in reducing left ventricular mass followed by diuretics (-11.3%), calcium channel blockers (-8.5%) and β-blockers (-8%). Reduction in left ventricular mass was mainly due to a decrease in wall thickness except for diuretics which predominantly reduced ventricular diameter. Although reduction in blood pressure was similar for all antihypertensive agents, the correlation between changes in mean arterial pressure and effect on left ventricular mass was only significant for β-blockers with a modest correlation for ACE-inhibitors and no clearcut relation for diuretics and calcium channel blockers.

Another meta-analysis by Cruickshank et al., screening articles for the same publication period and comprising 104 studies with a total of 2107 patients also showed best results in reducing left ventricular mass for ACE-inhibitors as single antihypertensive therapy. Calcium channel blockers were more effective than β-blockers with diuretics in the intermediate range.

In a meta-analysis of Schmieder et al, only double-blind, randomized, controlled clinical studies with parallel group design were considered.Out of a large sample size of 471 studies identified by extensive literature search, only 39 studies of presumably high scientific quality, published until July 1995 fulfilled inclusion criteria. After adjustment for different durations of treatment, left ventricular mass decreased with ACE-inhibitors by 13% (95% CI: 9.9–16.8%), with calcium channel blockers by 9% (95% CI: 5.5–13.1%), with β-blockers by 6% (95% CI: 2.3–8.6%) and with diuretics by 7% (95% CI: 3.0–10.7%) at similar fallen blood pressure. An update of this meta-analysis including all available data until the end of 1996, comprising a total of 1715 patients found a reduction of left ventricular mass by 12% (95% CI: 9.0–14.5%) for ACE-inhibitors, by 11% (95% CI: 7.8–13.7%) for calcium channel blockers, by 5% (95% CI: 1.2–7.3%) for β-blockers and by 8% (95% CI: 3.9–11.1%) for diuretics.

Regarding the available data, blockade of angiotensin II by ACE-inhibitors emerged as the most potent approach for the treatment of left ventricular hypertrophy. The most recent updated meta-analysis revealed that calcium channel blockers emerged to be similarly potent or according to other studies to be at least the second choice of drug class.

Keywords

Left Ventricular Hypertrophy Calcium Channel Blocker Ventricular Hypertrophy Left Ventricular Mass Left Ventricular Mass Index 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Levy D, Garrison RJ, Savage DD, Kannel WB, Castelli WR. Prognostic implications of echocardiographically determined left ventricular mass in the Framingham Heart Study. N Engl J Med 1990; 322:1561–66 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kannel WB. Left ventricular hypertrophy as a risk factor: the Framingham experience. J Hypertens 1991; 9 (Suppl): S3–S9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Koren MJ, Savage DD, Casale PN, Laragh JH, Devereux RB. Changes in left ventricular mass predict risk in essential hypertension [abstract]. Ciculation 1990; 82(suppl III): 20 Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Muiesan ML, Salvetti M, Rizzoni D, et al. Association of change in left ventricular mass with prognosis during long-term antihypertensive treatment. J Hypertens 1996; 13: 1091–95 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jennings, G, Dart A, Meredith I, Korner P, Laufer E, Dewar E. Effects of exercise and other non-pharma-cologic measures on blood pressure and cardiac hypertrophy. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1991; 17(suppl 2): S70–S74 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    MacMahon SW, McDonald GJ, Bernstein L, et al. Comparison of weight reduction with metoprolol and treatment of hypertension in young overweight patients. Lancet 1986; I: 1233–1236 Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    MacMahon SW, Wilcken DEL, McDonald GJ. The effect of weight reduction on left ventricular mass: a randomized controlled trial in young, overweight hypertensive patients. N Engl J Med 1986; 314: 334–339 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Liebson PR, Grandits TA, Dianzumba S, et al. Comparison of five antihypertensive monotherapies and placebo for change in left ventricular mass in patients receiving nutritional hygienic therapy in the Treatment of Mild Hypertension Study (TOMHS). Circulation 1995; 91: 698–706 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ferrara LA, DeSimone G, Pasanisi F, et al. Left ventricular mass reduction during salt depletion in arterial hypertension. Hypertension 1984; 6: 755–759 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jula AM, Karanko HM. Effects on left ventricular hypertrophy of long-term non-pharmacological treatment with sodium restriction in mild to moderate hypertension. Circulation 1994; 89: 1023–1031 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Neaton JD, Grimm RH, Prieas RJ, et al. Treatment of Mild Hypertension Study. Final results. JAMA 1993; 270: 713–724 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Manolio TA, Levy D, Garrison RJ et al. Relation of alcohol intake to left ventricular mass: The Framingham Study. J Am Coll Cardiol 1991; 17: 717–721 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kelemen MH, Effron MB, Valenti SA, Stewart KJ. Exercise training combined with antihypertensive drug therapy. Effects on lipids, blood pressure and left ventricular mass JAMA 1990; 263: 2766–2771 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Senior R, Imbs JL, Bory M, et al. Indapamide reduces hypertensive left ventricular hypertrophy: an international multicenter study. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1993; 22(suppl 6): S106–S110 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gottdiener JS. Hypertensive heart disease in blacks. Cardiovasc Clin 1991; 21: 133–134 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sacks HS, Berrier J, Reitman D, Ancona-Bere VA, Chalmers TC. Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. N Engl J Med 1987; 316: 450–455 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dahlöf B, Pennert K, Hansson L. Reversal of left ventricular hypertrophy in hypertensive patients: a metaanalysis of 109 treatment studies. Am J Hypertens 1992; 5: 95–110 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cruickshank J, Lewis J, Moore EV, Dodd C. Reversibility of left ventricular hypertrophy by differing types of antihypertensive thearpy. J Hum Hypertens 1992; 6: 85–90 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Schmieder RE, Martus P, Klingbeil A. Reversal of left ventricular hypertrophy in essential hypertension: a meta-analysis of randomized double-blind studies. JAMA 1996; 275: 1507–1513 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roland E. Schmieder
    • 1
  • Markus P. Schlaich
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of Medicine IVUniversity of Erlangen-NürnbergGermany

Personalised recommendations