This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 46/2/e6    most recent 01.HYP.0000179215.13289.55v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Safar, M. E. Articles by Dahlöf, B. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Safar, M. E. Articles by Dahlöf, B. Pubmed/NCBI databases Compound via MeSH Substance via MeSH Hazardous Substances DB ATENOLOL LOSARTAN POTASSIUM Medline Plus Health Information Blood Pressure Medicines High Blood Pressure Stroke Related Collections Cerebrovascular disease/stroke Clinical Studies

(Hypertension. 2005;46:e6.)
© 2005 American Heart Association, Inc.

Hypertension Electronic Pages

Pulse Pressure and Antihypertensive Agents

Diagnosis Center, Hôtel-Dieu Hospital, Paris, France

Michael F. O’Rourke

University of New South Wales/St. Vincent’s Clinic/VCCRI, Sydney, Australia

An extract of the first 250 words of the full text is provided, because this article has no abstract.

In their subanalysis of the LIFE study,¹ the authors conclude that they "show superior protection against stroke in patients treated with losartan when compared with atenolol ... This difference may be related to specific effects of angiotensin type 1 receptor antagonism ... beyond blood BP reduction." The authors do not consider the alternative hypothesis: that the changes in pulse pressure (PP) might differ markedly under losartan and atenolol and also according to the site of PP arterial measurements.²

As a consequence of differences in arterial stiffness and timing of wave reflections along the arterial tree, PP is lower in central than in peripheral arteries, whereas mean arterial pressure (MAP) is nearly the same. This phenomenon is attenuated in aged people and in the presence of bradycardia.² Thus, mechanical forces at the site of target organ damage are not accurately measured by the brachial BP cuff. Furthermore, antihypertensive agents may cause the same MAP reduction at the brachial and central arteries sites but with different values of central PP.^2–5 For instance, in double-blind studies comparing converting enzyme inhibitors and ß-blockers, atenolol does not modify carotid or aortic PP, whereas converting enzyme inhibitors markedly reduce carotid PP for the same MAP reduction.^4,5

In the present study, brachial PP is a predictor of stroke when measured in baseline conditions, mostly in the higher PP tertile of the population, in which mean age is 69 years. Under drug treatment by atenolol, it is expected that central PP remains unchanged, whereas under losartan, central PP . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Frej Fyhrquist

Minerva Institute for Medical Research and Department of Internal Medicine, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Finland

Richard B. Devereux

Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York, New York

Sverre E. Kjeldsen

Ullevaal University Hospital, Oslo, Norway

Björn Dahlöf

Sahlgrenska University Hospital/Östra, Göteborg, Sweden

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. F. O'Rourke and J. B. Seward Central Arterial Pressure and Arterial Pressure Pulse: New Views Entering the Second Century After Korotkov Mayo Clin. Proc., August 1, 2006; 81(8): 1057 - 1068. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]