Skip to main content
  • American Heart Association
  • Science Volunteer
  • Warning Signs
  • Advanced Search
  • Donate

  • Home
  • About this Journal
    • General Statistics
    • Editorial Board
    • Editors
    • Information for Advertisers
    • Author Reprints
    • Commercial Reprints
    • Customer Service and Ordering Information
  • All Issues
  • Subjects
    • All Subjects
    • Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
    • Basic, Translational, and Clinical Research
    • Critical Care and Resuscitation
    • Epidemiology, Lifestyle, and Prevention
    • Genetics
    • Heart Failure and Cardiac Disease
    • Hypertension
    • Imaging and Diagnostic Testing
    • Intervention, Surgery, Transplantation
    • Quality and Outcomes
    • Stroke
    • Vascular Disease
  • Browse Features
    • AHA Guidelines and Statements
    • Acknowledgment of Reviewers
    • Clinical Implications
    • Clinical-Pathological Conferences
    • Controversies in Hypertension
    • Editors' Picks
    • Guidelines Debate
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Recent Advances in Hypertension
    • SPRINT Trial: the Conversation Continues
  • Resources
    • Instructions to Reviewers
    • Instructions for Authors
    • →Article Types
    • → Submission Guidelines
      • Research Guidelines
        • Minimum Information About Microarray Data Experiments (MIAME)
      • Abstract
      • Acknowledgments
      • Clinical Implications (Only by invitation)
      • Conflict(s) of Interest/Disclosure(s) Statement
      • Figure Legends
      • Figures
      • Novelty and Significance: 1) What Is New, 2) What Is Relevant?
      • References
      • Sources of Funding
      • Tables
      • Text
      • Title Page
      • Online/Data Supplement
    • →Tips for Easier Manuscript Submission
    • → General Instructions for Revised Manuscripts
      • Change of Authorship Form
    • → Costs to Authors
    • → Open Access, Repositories, & Author Rights Q&A
    • Permissions to Reprint Figures and Tables
    • Journal Policies
    • Scientific Councils
    • AHA Journals RSS Feeds
    • International Users
    • AHA Newsroom
  • AHA Journals
    • AHA Journals Home
    • Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology (ATVB)
    • Circulation
    • → Circ: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
    • → Circ: Genomic and Precision Medicine
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Imaging
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Interventions
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Quality & Outcomes
    • → Circ: Heart Failure
    • Circulation Research
    • Hypertension
    • Stroke
    • Journal of the American Heart Association
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

  • My alerts
  • Sign In
  • Join

  • Advanced search

Header Publisher Menu

  • American Heart Association
  • Science Volunteer
  • Warning Signs
  • Advanced Search
  • Donate

Hypertension

  • My alerts
  • Sign In
  • Join

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Home
  • About this Journal
    • General Statistics
    • Editorial Board
    • Editors
    • Information for Advertisers
    • Author Reprints
    • Commercial Reprints
    • Customer Service and Ordering Information
  • All Issues
  • Subjects
    • All Subjects
    • Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
    • Basic, Translational, and Clinical Research
    • Critical Care and Resuscitation
    • Epidemiology, Lifestyle, and Prevention
    • Genetics
    • Heart Failure and Cardiac Disease
    • Hypertension
    • Imaging and Diagnostic Testing
    • Intervention, Surgery, Transplantation
    • Quality and Outcomes
    • Stroke
    • Vascular Disease
  • Browse Features
    • AHA Guidelines and Statements
    • Acknowledgment of Reviewers
    • Clinical Implications
    • Clinical-Pathological Conferences
    • Controversies in Hypertension
    • Editors' Picks
    • Guidelines Debate
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Recent Advances in Hypertension
    • SPRINT Trial: the Conversation Continues
  • Resources
    • Instructions to Reviewers
    • Instructions for Authors
    • →Article Types
    • → Submission Guidelines
    • →Tips for Easier Manuscript Submission
    • → General Instructions for Revised Manuscripts
    • → Costs to Authors
    • → Open Access, Repositories, & Author Rights Q&A
    • Permissions to Reprint Figures and Tables
    • Journal Policies
    • Scientific Councils
    • AHA Journals RSS Feeds
    • International Users
    • AHA Newsroom
  • AHA Journals
    • AHA Journals Home
    • Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology (ATVB)
    • Circulation
    • → Circ: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
    • → Circ: Genomic and Precision Medicine
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Imaging
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Interventions
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Quality & Outcomes
    • → Circ: Heart Failure
    • Circulation Research
    • Hypertension
    • Stroke
    • Journal of the American Heart Association
Letters to the Editor

Response to Is Combined L- and T-Channel Blockade Better than L-Channel Blockade in Therapy?

David P. Wilson, Christine J. Ball, Stuart P. Turner, David A. Saint, John F. Beltrame
Download PDF
https://doi.org/10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.109.133850
Hypertension. 2009;54:e4
Originally published June 17, 2009
David P. Wilson
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christine J. Ball
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Stuart P. Turner
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
David A. Saint
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
John F. Beltrame
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters

Jump to

  • Article
    • Acknowledgments
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
Loading

We acknowledge and endorse the comments made by Godfraind1 that the response to Ca2+ channel blockers is multifactorial. However, our data indicate that regional differences in Ca2+ L- and T-channel abundance may be important additional mechanisms that account for differential responses to Ca2+ channel blockers. Data from our previous and ongoing studies suggest that the greater inhibition of constrictor responses in microvessels by combined L- and T-channel blockers compared with the L-channel blocker is independent of many of these alternate mechanisms.

Our studies focused on the inhibition of constrictor responses by Ca2+ channel blockers and, therefore, their ability to inhibit Ca2+ channel activation and/or to maintain an inactivated state. Both endothelin and depolarizing potassium solution responses were more effectively inhibited in microvessels by the combined L- and T-channel blockers than by the L-channel blockers. We have also observed these differences with phenylephrine constrictor responses, suggesting that the inhibition of Ca2+ channel activation (and/or maintenance of Ca2+ channel inactivation) by the combined L- and T-channel blocker is more effective in the microvessels. Our ongoing studies are evaluating the relative contribution of the L and T channels in this phenomenon.

Regarding other non-Ca2+ channel blocking effects of the Ca2+ channel blockers, we excluded endothelial influences, eg, NO production, by observing the phenomenon in endothelial denuded microvessels. Our ongoing studies are evaluating whether vascular disease states also influence the distribution of T versus L channels. These studies provide impetus for the further development of combined L- and T-channel blockers, because these agents may provide incremental benefits in the treatment of cardiovascular disorders.

Acknowledgments

Disclosures

None.

References

  1. ↵
    Godfraind T. Is combined L- and T-channel blockade better than L-channel blockade in therapy? Hypertension. 2009; 54: e3.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
View Abstract
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

This Issue

Hypertension
July 2009, Volume 54, Issue 1
  • Table of Contents
Previous ArticleNext Article

Jump to

  • Article
    • Acknowledgments
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters

Article Tools

  • Print
  • Citation Tools
    Response to Is Combined L- and T-Channel Blockade Better than L-Channel Blockade in Therapy?
    David P. Wilson, Christine J. Ball, Stuart P. Turner, David A. Saint and John F. Beltrame
    Hypertension. 2009;54:e4, originally published June 17, 2009
    https://doi.org/10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.109.133850

    Citation Manager Formats

    • BibTeX
    • Bookends
    • EasyBib
    • EndNote (tagged)
    • EndNote 8 (xml)
    • Medlars
    • Mendeley
    • Papers
    • RefWorks Tagged
    • Ref Manager
    • RIS
    • Zotero
  • Article Alerts
    Log in to Email Alerts with your email address.
  • Save to my folders

Share this Article

  • Email

    Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Hypertension.

    NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

    Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
    Response to Is Combined L- and T-Channel Blockade Better than L-Channel Blockade in Therapy?
    (Your Name) has sent you a message from Hypertension
    (Your Name) thought you would like to see the Hypertension web site.
  • Share on Social Media
    Response to Is Combined L- and T-Channel Blockade Better than L-Channel Blockade in Therapy?
    David P. Wilson, Christine J. Ball, Stuart P. Turner, David A. Saint and John F. Beltrame
    Hypertension. 2009;54:e4, originally published June 17, 2009
    https://doi.org/10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.109.133850
    del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo

Related Articles

Cited By...

Subjects

  • Intervention, Surgery, Transplantation
    • Pharmacology

Hypertension

  • About Hypertension
  • Instructions for Authors
  • AHA CME
  • Guidelines and Statements
  • Permissions
  • Journal Policies
  • Email Alerts
  • Open Access Information
  • AHA Journals RSS
  • AHA Newsroom

Editorial Office Address:
7272 Greenville Ave.
Dallas, TX 75231
email: hypertension@heart.org

Information for:
  • Advertisers
  • Subscribers
  • Subscriber Help
  • Institutions / Librarians
  • Institutional Subscriptions FAQ
  • International Users
American Heart Association Learn and Live
National Center
7272 Greenville Ave.
Dallas, TX 75231

Customer Service

  • 1-800-AHA-USA-1
  • 1-800-242-8721
  • Local Info
  • Contact Us

About Us

Our mission is to build healthier lives, free of cardiovascular diseases and stroke. That single purpose drives all we do. The need for our work is beyond question. Find Out More about the American Heart Association

  • Careers
  • SHOP
  • Latest Heart and Stroke News
  • AHA/ASA Media Newsroom

Our Sites

  • American Heart Association
  • American Stroke Association
  • For Professionals
  • More Sites

Take Action

  • Advocate
  • Donate
  • Planned Giving
  • Volunteer

Online Communities

  • AFib Support
  • Garden Community
  • Patient Support Network
  • Professional Online Network

Follow Us:

  • Follow Circulation on Twitter
  • Visit Circulation on Facebook
  • Follow Circulation on Google Plus
  • Follow Circulation on Instagram
  • Follow Circulation on Pinterest
  • Follow Circulation on YouTube
  • Rss Feeds
  • Privacy Policy
  • Copyright
  • Ethics Policy
  • Conflict of Interest Policy
  • Linking Policy
  • Diversity
  • Careers

©2018 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. The American Heart Association is a qualified 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization.
*Red Dress™ DHHS, Go Red™ AHA; National Wear Red Day ® is a registered trademark.

  • PUTTING PATIENTS FIRST National Health Council Standards of Excellence Certification Program
  • BBB Accredited Charity
  • Comodo Secured