Effect of Antihypertensive Treatment on Structure and Function of Resistance Arteries in Essential Hypertensive Patients

  • Ernesto L. Schiffrin
  • Li Yuan Deng
  • Pierre Larochelle
Part of the Experimental Biology and Medicine book series (EBAM, volume 26)

Abstract

Altered structure and function of resistance arteries may play a role in the maintenance of elevated blood pressure and in the pathogenesis of its complications. In order to evaluate the effects of antihypertensive drugs on resistance arteries, seventeen male untreated mild essential hypertensive patients participated in a double-blind randomized trial comparing an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor, cilazapril, and a beta blocker, atenolol. Blood pressure before treatment was similarly elevated in both groups of patients (148±4/99±1 mmHg). Patients were treated with either cilazapril 2.5−5 mg per day or atenolol 25−100 mg per day. At 1 year of treatment blood pressure was 131± 2/86±1 mmHg in both groups of patients. Resistance arteries dissected from gluteal subcutaneous fat biopsies obtained before treatment and at one year showed that media/lumen ratio of arteries from patients treated with cilazapril was reduced to 6.3± 0.2% from 7.5±0.3% before treatment (p<0.05), whereas in arteries from patients treated with atenolol there was no significant difference (8.0±0.6% before and 8.1±0.5% after 1 year of treatment). Depressed media stress responses to norepinephrine, arginine vasopressin and endothelin-1 were normalized in patients on cilazapril but were unchanged in those on atenolol. Thus, treatment for one year with a converting enzyme inhibitor corrects in part the structural and functional abnormalities present in subcutaneous resistance arteries of patients with mild essential hypertension.

Keywords

Essential Hypertension Angiotensin Converting Enzyme Inhibitor Beta Blocker Antihypertensive Treatment Arginine Vasopressin 
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.
    Mulvany, M.J. and C. Aalkjaer. Structure and function of small arteries. Physiol. Rev. 70: 921–971, 1990.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schiffrin, E.L. Reactivity of small blood vessels in hypertension. Relationship with structural changes. Hypertension 19 (Suppl. I I): I I-1-II-9, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Folkow, B. Physiological aspects of primary hypertension. Physiol. Rev. 62: 347–504, 1982.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Aalkjaer, C., A.M. Heagerty, K.K. Petersen, J.D. Swales and M.J. Mulvany. Evidence for increased media thickness, increased neuronal amine uptake, and depressed excitation-contraction coupling in isolated resistance vessels form essential hypertensives. Circ. Res. 61: 181–186, 1987.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mulvany, M.J., P.K. Hansen and C. Aalkjaer. Direct evidence that the greater contractility of resistance vessels in spontaneously hypertensive rats is associated with a narrowed lumen, a thickened media, and an increased number of smooth muscle cell layers. Circ. Res. 43: 854–864, 1978.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Schiffrin, E.L., L.Y. Deng and P. Larochelle. Morphology of resistance arteries and comparison of effects of vasoconstrictors in mild essential hypertensive patients. Clin. Invest. Med. 16: 177–186, 1993.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Deng, L.Y. and E.L. Schiffrin. Morphologic and functional alterations of mesenteric small resistance arteries in early renal hypertension in the rat. Am. J. Physiol. (Heart and Circ. Physiol.) 261: H1171 - H1177, 1991.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mulvany, M.J. and W. Halpern. Contractile properties of small arterial resistance vessels in spontaneously hypertensive and normotensive rats. Circ. Res. 41: 19–26, 1977.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lockette, W., Y. Otsuka and O. Carretero. The loss of endothelium-dependent vascular relaxation in hypertension. Hypertension 8(Suppl. 2):II-61-II-66, 1986Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Deidrick, D.A., Z. Yang, F.R. Buhler and T.F. Luscher. Impared endothelium-dependent relaxations in hypertensive resistance arteries involve the cyclooxygenase pathway. Am.J. Physiol. (Heart Circ. Physiol.) 258: H445 - H451, 1990.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Haarap, S.B., W.M. Van der Merwe, S.A. Griffin, F. McPHerson and A.F. Lever. Brief angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor treatment in young spontaneously hypertensive rats reduced blood pressure longterm. Hypertension. 16: 603–614, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Deng, L.Y. and E.L. Schiffrin. Effect of antihypertensive treatment in response to endothelin of resistance arteries of hypertensive rats. J. Cardiovasc. Pharmacol. 21: 725–731, 1993.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Heagerty, A.M., S.J. Bund and C. Aalkjaer. Effects of drug treatmenton resistance arteriole morphology in essential hypertension: direct evidence for structural remodelling of resistance vessels. Lancet 2: 1209–1212, 1988.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Aalkjaer, C., H. Eiskjaer, M.J. Mulvany, B. Jestersen, T. Kjaer, S.S. Sorensen and E.B. Pedersen. Abnormal structure and function of isolated subcutaneous resistance vessels from essential hypertensive patients despite antihypertensive treatment. J. Hypert. 7: 305–310, 1989.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schiffrin, E.L., L.Y. Deng and P. Larochelle. Effect of a beta blocker or a converting enzyme inhibitor on resistance arteries in essential hypertension. Hypertension. 23: 83–91, 1994.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schiffrin, E.L., L.Y. Deng and P. Larochelle. Blunted effects of endothelin upon small subcutaneous resistance arteries of mild essential hypertensive patients. J. Hypert. 10: 437–444, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sihm, I., A.P. Schroeder, C.Aalkjaer, M. Holm, B. Morn, M.J. Mulvany, K. Thygesen and O. Lederballe. Normalization of media to lumen ratio of human subcutaneous arteries during antihypertensive treatment with a perindopril based regimen. Eur. Heart J. 14(suppl.): 63 (Abstract), 1993.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    gibbons, G.H., R.E. Pratt and V.J. Dzau. Vascular smooth muscle cell hypertrophy vs. hyperplasia. Autocrine transforming growth factor-ßl expression determines growth response to angiotensin II. J. Clin. Invest. 90: 456–461, 1992.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Geisterfer, A.A.T., M.J. Peach and G.K. Owens. Angiotensin II induces hypertrophy, not hyperplasia, of cultured rat aortic smooth muscle cells. Circ. Res. 62: 749–756, 1988.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Griffin, S.A., W.C.B. Brown, F. Macpherson, J.C. McGrath, V.G. Wilson, N. Korsgaard, M.J. Mulvany and A.F. Lever. Angiotensin Il causes vascular hypertrophy in part by a non-pressor mechanism. Hypertesnion 17: 626–635, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hajdu, M.A., D.D. Heistad and G.L. Baumbach. Effects of antihypertensive therapy on mechanics of cerebral arterioles in rats. Hypertension. 17: 308–316, 1991.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ernesto L. Schiffrin
    • 1
  • Li Yuan Deng
    • 1
  • Pierre Larochelle
    • 1
  1. 1.Hypertension Group, Clinical Research Institute of Montreal and Division of Internal Medicine, Hôtel-Dieu de MontréalUniversity of MontrealMontréalCanada

Personalised recommendations