COMPARATIVE STUDY OF EFFECTIVENESS AND SAFETY OF AZILSARTAN AND CANDESARTAN CILEXETIL IN PATIENTS WITH GRADE 1-2 ESSENTIAL HYPERTENSION IN A TERTIARY CARE HOSPITAL

Indu Priyadarshini, Satish Kumar, Nadia Az Zahra

Abstract


Introduction: - Hypertension is defined as either a sustained systolic blood pressure of greater than 140 mm Hg or a sustained diastolic blood pressure of greater than 90 mm Hg. . It can lead to coronary artery disease (CAD), heart failure, stroke, renal failure and other health problems. The angiotensin receptor blockers are effective antihypertensive agent with excellent tolerability profiles. The present study was designed to compare the clinical effectiveness and tolerability of Azilsartan 40 mg OD with Candesartan 12mg OD in patients with grade 1-2 essential hypertension.

Materials and methods: - The present study was a randomized study in 80 eligible patients comparing the effectiveness and safety of Azilsartan 40 mg with candesartan 12mg in patients with grade 1 or 2 essential hypertension.

Result - Significantly greater reductions in the sitting DBP and SBP were recorded in the Azilsartan group in comparison with the candesartan group at 2 weeks, 4 weeks and 8 weeks. (P value<0.001). The most common adverse effect occurring in the patients in Azilsartan as well  as in candesartan were nasopharyngitis, upper RTI and pharyngitis. Hypotension related adverse effects such as dizziness, syncope, vertigo was reported in both the drugs.

Conclusion: - Azilsartan is more effective and safe blood pressure lowering drug as comparable to that of Candesartan

Keywords


Blood Pressure, Azilsartan, Candesartan

Full Text:

PDF

References


Whalen Karen, Richard Finkel, and Thomas A. Panavelil. Lippincots illustrated reviews: Pharmacology. Sixth edition. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer, 2015 pg. no:225.

Smith DH. Comparison of angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists in the treatment of essential hypertension. Drugs. 2008; 68:1207–1225.

Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America. Edarbi prescribing information. 2011

Elliott, WJ, Plauschinat, CA, Skrepnek, GH, et al. Persistence, adherence, and risk of discontinuation associated with commonly prescribed antihypertensive drug monotherapies. J Am Board Fam Med. 2007; 20(1): 72– 80.

Ojima M, Igata H, Tanaka M, Sakamoto H, Kuroita T, Kohara Y, Kubo K, Fuse H, Imura Y, Kusumoto K, Nagaya H. In vitro antagonistic properties of a new angiotensin type 1 receptor blocker, azilsartan, in receptor binding and function studies. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2011; 336:801–808.

Neal B, MacMahon S, Chapman N. Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists’ Collaboration. Effects of ace inhibitors, calcium antagonists, and other bloodpressure-lowering drugs: Results of prospectively designed overviews of randomised trials. Blood pressure lowering treatment trialists’ collaboration. Lancet. 2000; 356:1955-64

Bakris GL, Sica D, Weber M, White WB, Roberts A, Perez A, Cao C, Kupfer S. The comparative effects of azilsartan medoxomil and olmesartan on ambulatory and clinic blood pressure. J Clin Hypertens. 2011; 13:81–88.

White WB, Weber MA, Sica D, Bakris GL, Perez A, Cao C, Kupfer S. Effects of the angiotensin receptor blocker azilsartan medoxomil versus olmesartan and valsartan on ambulatory and clinic blood pressure in patients with stages 1 and 2 hypertension. Hypertension. 2011; 57:413–420.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.