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
Original Article

Nebivolol, But Not Metoprolol, Lowers Blood Pressure in Nitric Oxide–Sensitive Human HypertensionNovelty and Significance

Luis E. Okamoto, Alfredo Gamboa, Cyndya A. Shibao, Amy C. Arnold, Leena Choi, Bonnie K. Black, Satish R. Raj, David Robertson, Italo Biaggioni
Download PDF
https://doi.org/10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.114.04116
Hypertension. 2014;64:1241-1247
Originally published September 29, 2014
Luis E. Okamoto
From the Vanderbilt Autonomic Dysfunction Center and Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Department of Medicine (L.E.O., A.G., C.A.S., A.C.A., B.K.B., S.R.R., D.R., I.B.), and Departments of Pharmacology (S.R.R., D.R., I.B.), Neurology (D.R.), and Biostatistics (L.C.), Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alfredo Gamboa
From the Vanderbilt Autonomic Dysfunction Center and Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Department of Medicine (L.E.O., A.G., C.A.S., A.C.A., B.K.B., S.R.R., D.R., I.B.), and Departments of Pharmacology (S.R.R., D.R., I.B.), Neurology (D.R.), and Biostatistics (L.C.), Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Cyndya A. Shibao
From the Vanderbilt Autonomic Dysfunction Center and Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Department of Medicine (L.E.O., A.G., C.A.S., A.C.A., B.K.B., S.R.R., D.R., I.B.), and Departments of Pharmacology (S.R.R., D.R., I.B.), Neurology (D.R.), and Biostatistics (L.C.), Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Amy C. Arnold
From the Vanderbilt Autonomic Dysfunction Center and Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Department of Medicine (L.E.O., A.G., C.A.S., A.C.A., B.K.B., S.R.R., D.R., I.B.), and Departments of Pharmacology (S.R.R., D.R., I.B.), Neurology (D.R.), and Biostatistics (L.C.), Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Leena Choi
From the Vanderbilt Autonomic Dysfunction Center and Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Department of Medicine (L.E.O., A.G., C.A.S., A.C.A., B.K.B., S.R.R., D.R., I.B.), and Departments of Pharmacology (S.R.R., D.R., I.B.), Neurology (D.R.), and Biostatistics (L.C.), Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Bonnie K. Black
From the Vanderbilt Autonomic Dysfunction Center and Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Department of Medicine (L.E.O., A.G., C.A.S., A.C.A., B.K.B., S.R.R., D.R., I.B.), and Departments of Pharmacology (S.R.R., D.R., I.B.), Neurology (D.R.), and Biostatistics (L.C.), Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Satish R. Raj
From the Vanderbilt Autonomic Dysfunction Center and Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Department of Medicine (L.E.O., A.G., C.A.S., A.C.A., B.K.B., S.R.R., D.R., I.B.), and Departments of Pharmacology (S.R.R., D.R., I.B.), Neurology (D.R.), and Biostatistics (L.C.), Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
David Robertson
From the Vanderbilt Autonomic Dysfunction Center and Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Department of Medicine (L.E.O., A.G., C.A.S., A.C.A., B.K.B., S.R.R., D.R., I.B.), and Departments of Pharmacology (S.R.R., D.R., I.B.), Neurology (D.R.), and Biostatistics (L.C.), Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Italo Biaggioni
From the Vanderbilt Autonomic Dysfunction Center and Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Department of Medicine (L.E.O., A.G., C.A.S., A.C.A., B.K.B., S.R.R., D.R., I.B.), and Departments of Pharmacology (S.R.R., D.R., I.B.), Neurology (D.R.), and Biostatistics (L.C.), Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Supplemental Materials
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters

Jump to

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgments
    • Sources of Funding
    • Disclosures
    • References
  • Figures & Tables
  • Supplemental Materials
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
Loading

Abstract

Nebivolol, unlike other selective β1-receptor blockers, induces vasodilation attributable to increased NO bioavailability. The relative contribution of this mechanism to the blood pressure (BP)–lowering effects of nebivolol is unclear because it is normally masked by baroreflex buffering. Autonomic failure provides a unique model of hypertension devoid of autonomic modulation but sensitive to the hypotensive effects of NO potentiation. We tested the hypothesis that nebivolol would decrease BP in these patients through a mechanism independent of β-blockade. We randomized 20 autonomic failure patients with supine hypertension (14 men; 69±2 years) to receive a single oral dose of placebo, nebivolol 5 mg, metoprolol 50 mg (negative control), and sildenafil 25 mg (positive control) on separate nights in a double-blind, crossover study. Supine BP was monitored every 2 hours from 8:00 pm to 8:00 am. Compared with placebo, sildenafil and nebivolol decreased systolic BP during the night (P<0.001 and P=0.036, by mixed-effects model, maximal systolic BP reduction 8-hour postdrug of −20±6 and −24±9 mm Hg, respectively), whereas metoprolol had no effect. In a subanalysis, we divided patients into sildenafil responders (BP fall >20 mm Hg at 4:00 am) and nonresponders. Nebivolol significantly lowered systolic BP in sildenafil responders (−44±13 mm Hg) but not in nonresponders (1±11 mm Hg). Despite lowering nighttime BP, nebivolol did not worsen morning orthostatic tolerance compared with placebo. In conclusion, nebivolol effectively lowered supine hypertension in autonomic failure, independent of β1-blockade. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that NO potentiation contributes significantly to the antihypertensive effect of nebivolol.

  • autonomic nervous system
  • hypertension
  • nebivolol
  • nitric oxide

Introduction

See Editorial Commentary, pp 1194–1195

Nebivolol is a selective β1-adrenergic receptor blocker and is considered a third-generation β-blocker with unique vasodilatory actions.1 This characteristic makes it advantageous in the treatment of hypertension. It is proposed that augmentation of NO bioavailability underlie this vasodilatory effect.2–4 The magnitude and relative contribution of NO-dependent vasodilation to the blood pressure (BP)–lowering effect of nebivolol, however, is not known.

To address this question we studied patients with autonomic failure. The clinical hallmark of these patients is severe disabling orthostatic hypotension, but ≈50% of them also have severe supine hypertension.5 Autonomic failure patients have several characteristics that make them ideal to test the hypothesis that NO mechanisms contribute to the BP-lowering effects of nebivolol. First, these patients lack autonomically mediated baroreflex buffering and therefore have exaggerated responses to most pressor and depressor agents.6–9 Second, traditional β-blockers have no BP effect in these patients because of low β-adrenoreceptor tone.10,11 Finally, we have previously shown that these patients have an exaggerated response to NO-mediated vasodilation.12

Thus, autonomic failure provides a unique model of hypertension devoid of autonomic modulation, resistant to β-blockade, but sensitive to enhancement of NO-mediated vasodilation. This allowed us to compare the BP effect of placebo, nebivolol, metoprolol (negative control), and sildenafil (positive control). We hypothesized that if NO-mediated vasodilation contributes to the BP-lowering effect of nebivolol then BP will be lowered by nebivolol and sildenafil, but not by metoprolol in autonomic failure patients. Finally, to further assess the therapeutic potential of nebivolol for the management of supine hypertension in autonomic failure, we measured its effect on nocturnal natriuresis and morning orthostatic tolerance.

Methods

Subjects

We studied 20 patients with severe primary autonomic failure diagnosed with pure autonomic failure (n=10), Parkinson disease (n=4), or multiple system atrophy (n=6) using the diagnostic criteria of the American Autonomic Society.13 All patients had supine hypertension defined as systolic BP (SBP) ≥150 mm Hg or diastolic BP (DBP) ≥90 mm Hg.14 Patients were excluded if they had secondary causes of autonomic failure (eg, diabetes mellitus or amyloidosis) or renal failure. The Vanderbilt University Institutional Review Board approved this study, and written informed consent was obtained from each patient before initiating the study (http://clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01044693).

General Protocol

Patients were admitted to the Clinical Research Center at Vanderbilt University and were placed on a low-monoamine, methylxanthine-free diet containing 150-mEq sodium and 60- to 80-mEq potassium per day. Medications affecting BP, blood volume and the autonomic nervous system were withheld for ≥5 half-lives before testing, including fludrocortisone, β-blockers, or other antihypertensive medications. All other medications were held constant throughout the study. All patients were screened with a comprehensive medical history, physical examination, 12-lead ECG, laboratory assessments, and standardized autonomic function tests,15 including orthostatic stress test, Valsalva maneuver, hyperventilation, cold pressor test, isometric handgrip, and sinus arrhythmia.16 BP and heart rate (HR) were obtained intermittently using an automated oscillometric sphygmomanometer (Dinamap ProCare, GE Healthcare), and continuously with finger photoplethysmography (Nexfin, BMEYE). HR was measured by continuous ECG. During the orthostatic test, supine and upright blood samples were obtained for norepinephrine and renin measurements while patients were supine and upright, as previously described.17 Plasma norepinephrine was determined by high-performance liquid chromatography with electrochemical detection.18 Plasma renin activity was measured by conversion of angiotensinogen to Ang I using radioimmunoassay (IgG Corporation). For statistical analysis, values of renin activity that were below detection limits (<0.2 ng/mL per hour) were assigned a value of one-half the detection limit.

Overnight Medication Trials

We performed a randomized, double-blind, 4-period, 4-treatment, crossover study comparing the effects of a single oral dose of nebivolol 5 mg (Bystolic, Forest Laboratories, Inc), metoprolol tartrate 50 mg (Lopressor, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp.; negative control), sildenafil 25 mg (Viagra, Pfizer, Inc; positive control), and placebo on overnight BP in patients with primary autonomic failure. The primary outcome was the decrease in SBP after drug administration. Secondary outcomes included changes in HR, nocturnal natriuresis, and morning orthostatic tolerance. The doses of nebivolol and metoprolol were chosen based on comparative studies showing similar acute β1-blockade,19 which corresponds to the initial effective recommended dose in hypertensive patients.20,21 Medications were prepared by a compounding pharmacy, and patients and investigators were blinded to group assignment. The Vanderbilt Investigational Drug Pharmacy was responsible for randomization, independent of investigators. The order of the treatment sequences was randomized using computer-generated random numbers before study initiation. Consecutive subjects were randomly assigned to 1 of the 24 possible treatment sequences. Studies were conducted on consecutive nights in 12 patients. Medications were administered with 50 mL of tap water at 8:00 pm and ≥2.5 hours after the last meal. Patients were instructed to remain supine throughout the night. Fluid intake was restricted to avoid the pressor effect of water drinking.8 BP was measured twice in a row at 2-hour intervals from 8:00 pm to 8:00 am by an automated sphygmomanometer (Dinamap). Because supine hypertension increases nocturnal pressure natriuresis to promote volume depletion and worsening of morning orthostatic tolerance, we assessed the effect of the interventions on morning orthostatic tolerance.7 At 8:00 am, patients were asked to stand for ≤10 minutes. BP and HR were measured at 1, 3, 5, and 10 minutes of standing, or as long as tolerated, to assess morning orthostatic tolerance. Urine was collected for 12 hours after drug administration for determination of volume and sodium and creatinine levels. Nocturnal sodium excretion was defined as the ratio of urinary sodium to urinary creatinine to correct for the incomplete bladder emptying seen in these patients.13

Statistical Methods

The primary outcome was the decrease in SBP after drug administration defined as the change in the supine SBP (ΔSBP) values after drug (9:00 pm to 8:00 am) from baseline (8:00 pm). The main comparisons were between the active treatment groups versus placebo. A mixed-effects model was used to examine whether the ΔSBP differed among treatment groups. The model included the intercept and the time slope as random effects. To model a time trend, linear and quadratic functions of time as well as their interaction with treatment group were included in the model. Age, body mass index, period, and the baseline measurements were included as fixed effects to adjust for their potential confounding effects. Differences in the changes in mean arterial pressure and DBP between treatment groups were analyzed using the same approach. Secondary outcomes included changes in HR, morning orthostatic tolerance and nocturnal natriuresis. Orthostatic tolerance was defined as the area under the curve of standing SBP calculated by the trapezoidal rule (upright SBP multiplied by standing time).22 Comparisons were made only for patients who could stand after all treatment groups, as previously reported.22 Overall differences in secondary outcomes among treatment groups in the secondary outcomes were analyzed using repeated-measures ANOVA. If a significant overall treatment difference was found, paired comparisons between treatment groups were performed using paired t tests with Bonferroni correction as post hoc test. Power calculation was based on preliminary data from 3 patients. The difference in SBP mean values between nebivolol and placebo 8 hours after drug administration was of 28 mm Hg, with SD of difference of 33 mm Hg. A sample size of 20 patients would have 95% power to detect a difference in mean values between treatments with an α level of 0.05 using paired t test analysis (PS Dupont, Version 3.0.34). Data are presented as mean±SEM. All of the tests were 2-tailed, and a P value of <0.05 was considered significant. Analyses were performed with STATA 11.0 (StataCorp) and SPSS 22.0 (IBM Corp).

Results

Patient Characteristics and Autonomic Testing

We studied 20 severe primary autonomic failure patients with supine hypertension (14 men; 69±2 years; Table 1). A history of hypertension was present before the diagnosis of autonomic failure in only 4 patients (20%). In the remainder, hypertension followed the diagnosis of autonomic failure. The presence of severe autonomic failure was evidenced by profound orthostatic hypotension (fall in SBP from 169±6 supine to 83±6 mm Hg standing) without an adequate compensatory HR increase (from 68±2 supine to 83±3 bpm standing), and by impaired autonomic reflexes (Table 2). Sinus arrhythmia was blunted, the decrease in BP during the strain phase (phase II early) of the Valsalva maneuver was exaggerated, and the expected BP increase before the release (phase II late) and recovery phase (phase IV) was absent.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Patient Characteristics

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Autonomic Function and Orthostatic Stress Tests

Antihypertensive Effects of Nebivolol Versus Metoprolol

The effect of placebo, metoprolol, nebivolol, and sildenafil on nighttime supine SBP is shown in Figure 1A and on HR in Figure 1B. Average baseline supine SBP was similar among treatment groups (placebo 154±7 mm Hg, metoprolol 157±5 mm Hg, nebivolol 162±5 mm Hg, and sildenafil 158±6 mm Hg; P=0.635). Both sildenafil and nebivolol decreased SBP significantly compared with placebo (P<0.001 and P=0.036 by mixed-effects model, respectively), whereas metoprolol produced no significant effect. DBP and mean arterial BP followed a similar trend. Compared with placebo, sildenafil and nebivolol decreased DBP (P<0.001 for both drugs) and mean arterial BP (P<0.001 for sildenafil and P=0.002 for nebivolol), whereas metoprolol had no significant effect. The maximal reduction in SBP was seen at 8 hours after drug (4:00 am) for all active medications (metoprolol, −7±6 mm Hg; sildenafil, −20±6 mm Hg; and nebivolol, −24±9 mm Hg). At this time point, nebivolol produced a significantly greater decrease in SBP and DBP compared with metoprolol (SBP, −24±9 versus −7±7 mm Hg, respectively; P=0.006 [Figure 2A] and DBP, −12±4 versus −2±3 mm Hg, respectively; P=0.010).

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

Effect of a single oral dose of placebo, metoprolol (50 mg), nebivolol (5 mg), and sildenafil (25 mg) on nighttime blood pressure (A) and heart rate (B) in autonomic failure patients with supine hypertension. Medications were administered at 8:00 pm. Changes from baseline (8:00 pm) in supine systolic blood pressure (ΔSBP) and heart rate (ΔHR) are expressed as mean±SEM. Sildenafil and nebivolol decreased blood pressure significantly compared with placebo (P<0.001 and P=0.036 by mixed-effects model, respectively), and the maximal effect was seen at 4 am (8 hours) for both drugs. Nebivolol and metoprolol produced a similarly small decrease in heart rate compared with placebo and sildenafil.

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

Comparison of the changes in supine systolic blood pressure (ΔSBP; A) and heart rate (ΔHR; B) from baseline (8:00 pm) to the time of the maximal blood pressure effect (4:00 am, 8 hours after drug). Nebivolol produced a significantly greater decrease SBP compared with metoprolol. Heart rate was similarly decreased in both groups. Values are expressed as mean±SEM. The P values were generated by Wilcoxon signed-rank test.

Both nebivolol and metoprolol produced a small but significant decrease in HR during the night compared with placebo (P=0.01 by 2-way ANOVA; Figure 1B), resulting in a similar maximal decrease of −8±2 bpm at 6:00 am with nebivolol and −8±1 bpm at 8:00 am with metoprolol. At a time when the BP-lowering effects were maximal (4:00 am), the negative chronotropic effect of both medications was similar (−6±2 nebivolol versus -6±2 metoprolol bpm; P=0.996; Figure 2B).

We found no evidence of a carry-over effect between study days. There was no difference in baseline BP between groups, and our statistical analysis included baseline BP as a cofounder.

Effects of Treatment on Urinary Sodium Excretion and Morning Orthostatic Tolerance

None of the medications had an effect on nocturnal urinary sodium excretion compared with placebo (P=0.607 by 1-way ANOVA; Figure 3A). Orthostatic tolerance, estimated as the area under the curve of standing SBP during a 10-minute standing test, was similar among treatment groups (P=0.597 by 1-way ANOVA; Figure 3B).

Figure 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 3.

Effect of medications on nocturnal urinary sodium excretion (UNa+/Cr; A) and morning upright blood pressure (calculated as the area under the curve of upright systolic blood pressure [AUCSBP] during a 10-minute standing test; B). There were no significant differences either outcome between groups. Values are expressed as mean±SEM. Comparisons between groups were performed using 1-way ANOVA.

BP Effect of Nebivolol in Responders and Nonresponders to Sildenafil

To determine whether the SBP reduction with sildenafil was associated with that of nebivolol, patients were divided into responders (n=11) and nonresponders (n=9) to sildenafil. A sildenafil response was arbitrarily defined as a decrease in SBP of >20 mm Hg from baseline to 4:00 am (maximal response). Sildenafil responders also had a significant decrease in SBP with nebivolol (−44±13 mm Hg). In nonresponders to sildenafil, nebivolol had no effect (1±11 mm Hg). The difference in the BP effects produced by nebivolol between responders and nonresponders to sildenafil was statistically significant (P=0.016; Figure 4).

Figure 4.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 4.

Comparison of the effect of nebivolol on systolic blood pressure (ΔSBP) between responders (n=11) and nonresponders (n=9) to sildenafil. Response to sildenafil was defined as a drop from baseline in SBP >20 mm Hg measured at 4 am (maximal response). Responders to sildenafil had a significant decrease in SBP with nebivolol compared with nonresponders, in whom nebivolol had no effect. Values are expressed as mean±SEM. The P values were generated by Wilcoxon signed-rank test.

Discussion

The main finding of this study is that nebivolol, but not metoprolol, lowered BP in patients with autonomic failure and supine hypertension, and the magnitude of this effect was similar to that of the phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor sildenafil. Furthermore, nebivolol only lowered BP in those patients who were sensitive to sildenafil. Taken together, our findings suggest that NO-mediated vasodilation contributes to the BP-lowering effect of nebivolol in human hypertension.

Selective antagonists of β1-adrenergic receptors, such as the second-generation β-blocker metoprolol, are effective in preventing cardiovascular events in patients with coronary artery disease and heart failure,23,24 primarily via chronotropic and inotropic inhibitory mechanisms resulting in decreased cardiac output.25 Through this mechanism, these agents effectively lower BP in essential hypertensive patients in a magnitude comparable with other hypertensive drugs. Nonetheless, selective β1-adrenoreceptor antagonists are not recommended as first-line therapy,20 because previous studies have shown that they are less efficacious in reducing cardiovascular events in uncomplicated hypertensive patients.26,27 Such inferiority has been proposed to be the result of failure of selective β1-adrenoreceptor antagonists to reduce central BP compared with other antihypertensive drugs with vasodilatory properties.28–30

The third-generation β-blocker nebivolol is a highly selective β1-adrenoreceptor antagonist that has vasodilatory properties. Studies in vitro, animal models, and humans have shown that nebivolol produced endothelial-derived NO-dependent vasodilation of conductance and resistance arteries and veins by increasing NO bioavailability.2–4,31,32 Intrabrachial infusion of nebivolol increased forearm blood flow in healthy subjects and essential hypertensive patients,31,32 whereas selective β1-blockade with atenolol had no effect.31 Furthermore, the NO synthase inhibitor NG-monomethyl-L-arginine could inhibit this vasodilation.31 The precise mechanisms by which nebivolol increases endothelial-derived NO bioavailability is not completely understood but may involve activation of endothelial NO synthase through stimulation of β3-adrenoreceptors expressed in endothelial cells, reduction of asymmetrical dimethylarginine levels, and reduction of reactive oxygen species.1,33 The well-established changes induced by nebivolol in forearm blood flow and individual vessels, however, may not necessarily translate into reduced peripheral resistance as indicated by the absence of effect on systemic vascular resistance in some studies in hypertensive patients.34,35 It is difficult, therefore, to assess the contribution of NO-mediated vasodilation to the BP-lowering effect of nebivolol in essential hypertension because of the buffering effect of the autonomic baroreflex.

Patients with primary autonomic failure have severe baroreflex impairment characterized by disabling orthostatic hypotension, hypersensitivity to pressor and depressor stimuli, and in approximately half of them, supine hypertension.5–9 The hypertension in autonomic failure patients with impairment of central autonomic pathways (multiple system atrophy) is driven by unregulated residual sympathetic tone.36 The cause of hypertension in patients with peripheral autonomic neuropathy (pure autonomic failure, Parkinson’s disease) is not known but it is characterized by increased vascular resistance despite having low plasma norepinephrine and renin activity.5,37 NO function is increased in both forms of autonomic failure, as evidenced by a significant increase in BP when endothelial NO synthase was inhibited by NG-monomethyl-L-arginine and a significant BP reduction with the phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor sildenafil.12 Therefore, these patients provide a unique opportunity to examine the contribution of NO-mediated vasodilatory mechanisms to the BP-lowering effect of nebivolol. Indeed, we found that nebivolol and sildenafil significantly reduced nighttime BP compared with placebo, whereas metoprolol had no effect. In our study, nebivolol decreased nighttime BP by −44±13 mm Hg in patients who responded to sildenafil, whereas having no effect in nonresponders (1±11 mm Hg). Sildenafil potentiates endogenous cyclic GMP signaling, which in humans is mostly triggered by NO mechanisms and by atrial natriuretic peptides. Patients with autonomic failure have increased responses to NO mechanisms and, conversely, smokers, known to have deficient NO mechanisms, have less improvement of endothelium-dependent vascular responses to sildenafil.38 Taken together, these observations are consistent with the postulate that the decrease in BP by nebivolol in autonomic failure is related to NO mechanisms. We cannot rule out, however, that natriuretic peptides or other mechanisms such as impairment of cyclic GMP signaling can contribute to our observations.

Both metoprolol and nebivolol produced a similar small but significant decrease in HR. Given that the loss of efferent sympathetic function may be incomplete in some patients with severe autonomic failure, this finding may not be unexpected because these patients may have some residual sympathetic tone.6 These data suggest that the BP-lowering effect of nebivolol was independent of β1-adrenoreceptor blockade, given that both nebivolol and metoprolol were equipotent with respect to the β1-blocking effect of residual cardiac sympathetic tone but only nebivolol had a significant BP-lowering effect compared with placebo.

The supine hypertension of autonomic failure is associated with hypertensive heart disease and impaired renal function.39–41 Furthermore, nighttime pressure natriuresis and the resulting volume depletion can exacerbate orthostatic hypotension in the morning.2,7 Treatment of supine hypertension in autonomic failure is therefore aimed at not only preventing long-term consequences of hypertension but also reducing pressure diuresis to improve early morning orthostatic tolerance. Because nebivolol was effective in treating nighttime hypertension and did not worsen morning orthostatic tolerance, it may be useful in the treatment of nighttime supine hypertension. The fact that it was not effective in all patients, however, underscores the need to individualize treatment in these patients.

In conclusion, nebivolol effectively improved supine hypertension in autonomic failure, to a similar degree as sildenafil. The mechanism seems to be independent of β-blockade and is likely because of potentiation of NO. The decrease in nighttime BP was not associated with worsening of morning orthostatic tolerance and, therefore, nebivolol might be a useful alternative as a treatment of supine hypertension in patients with autonomic failure. As with other drugs used in this patient population, treatment should be individualized, and further studies are needed to assess the efficacy and safety of chronic administration.

Perspectives

Traditional β-blockers are effective BP-lowering agents but are not recommended as first-line therapy for uncomplicated essential hypertension because they are less efficacious in reducing cardiac events. This is thought to be associated with failure to reduce central BP compared with other antihypertensive drugs with vasodilatory properties. Newer generation β-blockers, however, have ancillary vasodilating properties but the contribution of this mechanism to their antihypertensive effects is unknown. In particular, nebivolol is a highly selective β1-adrenoreceptor antagonist with NO-mediated vasodilatory properties. Our findings in autonomic failure patients with supine hypertension showed that nebivolol effectively lowered BP by a β1-blockade–independent mechanism, presumably associated with NO potentiation. These patients offer a unique model to explore human cardiovascular pharmacology in the absence of the confounding effects of autonomic buffering. Given that they have extreme sensitivity to any pressor or depressor stimuli, nonautonomic mechanisms of action of drugs can be unmasked in these patients. Our findings also have important implications for the management of these patients but the long-term safety and efficacy of this approach will need to be addressed in future studies.

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge the patients who volunteered for these studies and the Clinical Research Center nurses who made this study possible.

Sources of Funding

This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants RO1 NS055670, PO1 HL56693, Autonomic Rare Diseases Clinical Research Consortium Grant U54 NS065736, and UL1 RR024975-01 (Clinical and Translational Science Award, now at the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, Grant 2 UL1 TR000445-06), the Paden Dysautonomia Center, and by the Forest Research Institute (BYS-MD 34). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH.

Disclosures

This study was funded by an Investigator-Initiated Research grant from Forest Research Institute (PI: Italo Biaggioni, MD). There are no other financial disclosures related to this study.

  • Received June 23, 2014.
  • Revision received July 4, 2014.
  • Accepted August 14, 2014.
  • © 2014 American Heart Association, Inc.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Gao Y,
    2. Vanhoutte PM
    . Nebivolol: an endothelium-friendly selective β1-adrenoceptor blocker. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 2012;59:16–21.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Dessy C,
    2. Saliez J,
    3. Ghisdal P,
    4. Daneau G,
    5. Lobysheva II,
    6. Frérart F,
    7. Belge C,
    8. Jnaoui K,
    9. Noirhomme P,
    10. Feron O,
    11. Balligand JL
    . Endothelial beta3-adrenoreceptors mediate nitric oxide-dependent vasorelaxation of coronary microvessels in response to the third-generation beta-blocker nebivolol. Circulation. 2005;112:1198–1205.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    1. Kubli S,
    2. Feihl F,
    3. Waeber B
    . Beta-blockade with nebivolol enhances the acetylcholine-induced cutaneous vasodilation. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2001;69:238–244.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Bowman AJ,
    2. Chen CP,
    3. Ford GA
    . Nitric oxide mediated venodilator effects of nebivolol. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1994;38:199–204.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Shannon J,
    2. Jordan J,
    3. Costa F,
    4. Robertson RM,
    5. Biaggioni I
    . The hypertension of autonomic failure and its treatment. Hypertension. 1997;30:1062–1067.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    1. Jordan J,
    2. Shannon JR,
    3. Biaggioni I,
    4. Norman R,
    5. Black BK,
    6. Robertson D
    . Contrasting actions of pressor agents in severe autonomic failure. Am J Med. 1998;105:116–124.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Jordan J,
    2. Shannon JR,
    3. Pohar B,
    4. Paranjape SY,
    5. Robertson D,
    6. Robertson RM,
    7. Biaggioni I
    . Contrasting effects of vasodilators on blood pressure and sodium balance in the hypertension of autonomic failure. J Am Soc Nephrol. 1999;10:35–42.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    1. Jordan J,
    2. Shannon JR,
    3. Grogan E,
    4. Biaggioni I,
    5. Robertson D
    . A potent pressor response elicited by drinking water. Lancet. 1999;353:723.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Shibao C,
    2. Gamboa A,
    3. Diedrich A,
    4. Dossett C,
    5. Choi L,
    6. Farley G,
    7. Biaggioni I
    . Acarbose, an alpha-glucosidase inhibitor, attenuates postprandial hypotension in autonomic failure. Hypertension. 2007;50:54–61.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. 10.↵
    1. Man in’t Veld AJ,
    2. Boomsma F,
    3. Schalekamp MA
    . Effects of beta-adrenoceptor agonists and antagonists in patients with peripheral autonomic neuropathy. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1982;13(Suppl 2):367S–374S.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Man In’T Veld AJ,
    2. Schalekamp MA
    . Pindolol acts as beta-adrenoceptor agonist in orthostatic hypotension. BMJ. (Clin Res Ed). 1981;283:561.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  12. 12.↵
    1. Gamboa A,
    2. Shibao C,
    3. Diedrich A,
    4. Paranjape SY,
    5. Farley G,
    6. Christman B,
    7. Raj SR,
    8. Robertson D,
    9. Biaggioni I
    . Excessive nitric oxide function and blood pressure regulation in patients with autonomic failure. Hypertension. 2008;51:1531–1536.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. 13.↵
    1. Kaufmann H
    . Consensus statement on the definition of orthostatic hypotension, pure autonomic failure and multiple system atrophy. Clin Auton Res. 1996;6:125–126.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Biaggioni I,
    2. Robertson RM
    . Hypertension in orthostatic hypotension and autonomic dysfunction. Cardiol Clin. 2002;20:291–301, vii.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Baughman KL,
    2. Greene BM
    1. Robertson D
    . Assessment of autonomic function. Baughman KL, Greene BM, In: Diagnostic Manual for the House Officer. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 1981:86–131.
  16. 16.↵
    1. Robertson D,
    2. Biaggioni I
    1. Mosqueda-Garcia R
    . Evaluation of autonomic failure. Robertson D, Biaggioni I, In: Disorders of the Autonomic Nervous System. London, UK: Harwood Academic Publishers; 1995:25–59.
  17. 17.↵
    1. Arnold AC,
    2. Okamoto LE,
    3. Gamboa A,
    4. Shibao C,
    5. Raj SR,
    6. Robertson D,
    7. Biaggioni I
    . Angiotensin II, independent of plasma renin activity, contributes to the hypertension of autonomic failure. Hypertension. 2013;61:701–706.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. 18.↵
    1. Goldstein DS,
    2. Eisenhofer G,
    3. Stull R,
    4. Folio CJ,
    5. Keiser HR,
    6. Kopin IJ
    . Plasma dihydroxyphenylglycol and the intraneuronal disposition of norepinephrine in humans. J Clin Invest. 1988;81:213–220.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Triposkiadis F,
    2. Giamouzis G,
    3. Kelepeshis G,
    4. Sitafidis G,
    5. Skoularigis J,
    6. Demopoulos V
    . Acute hemodynamic effects of moderate doses of nebivolol versus metoprolol in patients with systolic heart failure. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2007;45:71–77.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. 20.↵
    1. James PA,
    2. Oparil S,
    3. Carter BL,
    4. et al
    . 2014 evidence-based guideline for the management of high blood pressure in adults: report from the panel members appointed to the Eighth Joint National Committee (JNC 8). JAMA. 2014;311:507–520.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. 21.↵
    1. Münzel T,
    2. Gori T
    . Nebivolol: the somewhat-different beta-adrenergic receptor blocker. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54:1491–1499.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    1. Okamoto LE,
    2. Shibao C,
    3. Gamboa A,
    4. Choi L,
    5. Diedrich A,
    6. Raj SR,
    7. Black BK,
    8. Robertson D,
    9. Biaggioni I
    . Synergistic effect of norepinephrine transporter blockade and α-2 antagonism on blood pressure in autonomic failure. Hypertension. 2012;59:650–656.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  23. 23.↵
    1. Bangalore S,
    2. Steg G,
    3. Deedwania P,
    4. Crowley K,
    5. Eagle KA,
    6. Goto S,
    7. Ohman EM,
    8. Cannon CP,
    9. Smith SC,
    10. Zeymer U,
    11. Hoffman EB,
    12. Messerli FH,
    13. Bhatt DL
    ; REACH Registry Investigators. β-Blocker use and clinical outcomes in stable outpatients with and without coronary artery disease. JAMA. 2012;308:1340–1349.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. 24.↵
    1. Hjalmarson A,
    2. Goldstein S,
    3. Fagerberg B,
    4. et al
    . Effects of controlled-release metoprolol on total mortality, hospitalizations, and well-being in patients with heart failure: the Metoprolol CR/XL Randomized Intervention Trial in congestive heart failure (MERIT-HF). MERIT-HF Study Group. JAMA. 2000;283:1295–1302.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    1. Kukin ML,
    2. Mannino MM,
    3. Freudenberger RS,
    4. Kalman J,
    5. Buchholz-Varley C,
    6. Ocampo O
    . Hemodynamic comparison of twice daily metoprolol tartrate with once daily metoprolol succinate in congestive heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;35:45–50.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    1. Dahlöf B,
    2. Devereux RB,
    3. Kjeldsen SE,
    4. Julius S,
    5. Beevers G,
    6. de Faire U,
    7. Fyhrquist F,
    8. Ibsen H,
    9. Kristiansson K,
    10. Lederballe-Pedersen O,
    11. Lindholm LH,
    12. Nieminen MS,
    13. Omvik P,
    14. Oparil S,
    15. Wedel H
    ; LIFE Study Group. Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension study (LIFE): a randomised trial against atenolol. Lancet. 2002;359:995–1003.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. 27.↵
    1. Dahlöf B,
    2. Sever PS,
    3. Poulter NR,
    4. Wedel H,
    5. Beevers DG,
    6. Caulfield M,
    7. Collins R,
    8. Kjeldsen SE,
    9. Kristinsson A,
    10. McInnes GT,
    11. Mehlsen J,
    12. Nieminen M,
    13. O’Brien E,
    14. Ostergren J
    ; ASCOT Investigators. Prevention of cardiovascular events with an antihypertensive regimen of amlodipine adding perindopril as required versus atenolol adding bendroflumethiazide as required, in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial-Blood Pressure Lowering Arm (ASCOT-BPLA): a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2005;366:895–906.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    1. Williams B,
    2. Lacy PS,
    3. Thom SM,
    4. Cruickshank K,
    5. Stanton A,
    6. Collier D,
    7. Hughes AD,
    8. Thurston H,
    9. O'Rourke M
    ; CAFE Investigators; Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial Investigators; CAFE Steering Committee and Writing Committee. Differential impact of blood pressure-lowering drugs on central aortic pressure and clinical outcomes: principal results of the conduit artery function evaluation (cafe) study. Circulation. 2006;113:1213–1225.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  29. 29.↵
    1. Polónia J,
    2. Barbosa L,
    3. Silva JA,
    4. Bertoquini S
    . Different patterns of peripheral versus central blood pressure in hypertensive patients treated with β-blockers either with or without vasodilator properties or with angiotensin receptor blockers. Blood Press Monit. 2010;15:235–239.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. 30.↵
    1. Kampus P,
    2. Serg M,
    3. Kals J,
    4. Zagura M,
    5. Muda P,
    6. Karu K,
    7. Zilmer M,
    8. Eha J
    . Differential effects of nebivolol and metoprolol on central aortic pressure and left ventricular wall thickness. Hypertension. 2011;57:1122–1128.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  31. 31.↵
    1. Cockcroft JR,
    2. Chowienczyk PJ,
    3. Brett SE,
    4. Chen CP,
    5. Dupont AG,
    6. Van Nueten L,
    7. Wooding SJ,
    8. Ritter JM
    . Nebivolol vasodilates human forearm vasculature: evidence for an L-arginine/NO-dependent mechanism. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1995;274:1067–1071.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  32. 32.↵
    1. Dawes M,
    2. Brett SE,
    3. Chowienczyk PJ,
    4. Mant TG,
    5. Ritter JM
    . The vasodilator action of nebivolol in forearm vasculature of subjects with essential hypertension. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1999;48:460–463.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  33. 33.↵
    1. Ladage D,
    2. Brixius K,
    3. Hoyer H,
    4. Steingen C,
    5. Wesseling A,
    6. Malan D,
    7. Bloch W,
    8. Schwinger RH
    . Mechanisms underlying nebivolol-induced endothelial nitric oxide synthase activation in human umbilical vein endothelial cells. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol. 2006;33:720–724.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. 34.↵
    1. Eeftinck Schattenkerk DW,
    2. van den Bogaard B,
    3. Cammenga M,
    4. Westerhof BE,
    5. Stroes ES,
    6. van den Born BJ
    . Lack of difference between nebivolol/hydrochlorothiazide and metoprolol/hydrochlorothiazide on aortic wave augmentation and central blood pressure. J Hypertens. 2013;31:2447–2454.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  35. 35.↵
    1. Himmelmann A,
    2. Hedner T,
    3. Snoeck E,
    4. Lundgren B,
    5. Hedner J
    . Haemodynamic effects and pharmacokinetics of oral d- and l-nebivolol in hypertensive patients. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1996;51:259–264.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  36. 36.↵
    1. Shannon JR,
    2. Jordan J,
    3. Diedrich A,
    4. Pohar B,
    5. Black BK,
    6. Robertson D,
    7. Biaggioni I
    . Sympathetically mediated hypertension in autonomic failure. Circulation. 2000;101:2710–2715.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  37. 37.↵
    1. Kronenberg MW,
    2. Forman MB,
    3. Onrot J,
    4. Robertson D
    . Enhanced left ventricular contractility in autonomic failure: assessment using pressure-volume relations. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1990;15:1334–1342.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  38. 38.↵
    1. Kimura M,
    2. Higashi Y,
    3. Hara K,
    4. Noma K,
    5. Sasaki S,
    6. Nakagawa K,
    7. Goto C,
    8. Oshima T,
    9. Yoshizumi M,
    10. Chayama K
    . PDE5 inhibitor sildenafil citrate augments endothelium-dependent vasodilation in smokers. Hypertension. 2003;41:1106–1110.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  39. 39.↵
    1. Maule S,
    2. Milan A,
    3. Grosso T,
    4. Veglio F
    . Left ventricular hypertrophy in patients with autonomic failure. Am J Hypertens. 2006;19:1049–1054.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  40. 40.↵
    1. Vagaonescu TD,
    2. Saadia D,
    3. Tuhrim S,
    4. Phillips RA,
    5. Kaufmann H
    . Hypertensive cardiovascular damage in patients with primary autonomic failure. Lancet. 2000;355:725–726.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  41. 41.↵
    1. Garland EM,
    2. Gamboa A,
    3. Okamoto L,
    4. Raj SR,
    5. Black BK,
    6. Davis TL,
    7. Biaggioni I,
    8. Robertson D
    . Renal impairment of pure autonomic failure. Hypertension. 2009;54:1057–1061.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text

Novelty and Significance

What Is New?

  • Nebivolol effectively lowers blood pressure in autonomic failure patients with supine hypertension without worsening morning orthostatic tolerance.

  • β1-blockade–independent mechanisms, presumably nitric oxide potentiation, contribute to the blood pressure–lowering effect of nebivolol in these patients.

What Is Relevant?

  • Our findings provide evidence of the contribution of β1-blockade–independent mechanisms, namely nitric oxide potentiation, to the blood pressure–lowering effects of nebivolol in human hypertension.

  • Nebivolol might be an alternative for the treatment of supine hypertension in autonomic failure patients. Safety and long-term efficacy studies, however, are required to address the clinical usefulness of this approach.

Summary

Nebivolol, a third-generation β1-adrenoreceptor blocker, effectively reduces blood pressure in patients with autonomic failure and supine hypertension through a mechanism independent of β1-blockade. Nitric oxide potentiation may contribute to this effect because nebivolol had a similar blood pressure drop to that of patients who were sensitive to sildenafil.

View Abstract
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

This Issue

Hypertension
December 2014, Volume 64, Issue 6
  • Table of Contents
Previous ArticleNext Article

Jump to

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgments
    • Sources of Funding
    • Disclosures
    • References
  • Figures & Tables
  • Supplemental Materials
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters

Article Tools

  • Print
  • Citation Tools
    Nebivolol, But Not Metoprolol, Lowers Blood Pressure in Nitric Oxide–Sensitive Human HypertensionNovelty and Significance
    Luis E. Okamoto, Alfredo Gamboa, Cyndya A. Shibao, Amy C. Arnold, Leena Choi, Bonnie K. Black, Satish R. Raj, David Robertson and Italo Biaggioni
    Hypertension. 2014;64:1241-1247, originally published September 29, 2014
    https://doi.org/10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.114.04116

    Citation Manager Formats

    • BibTeX
    • Bookends
    • EasyBib
    • EndNote (tagged)
    • EndNote 8 (xml)
    • Medlars
    • Mendeley
    • Papers
    • RefWorks Tagged
    • Ref Manager
    • RIS
    • Zotero
  •  Download Powerpoint
  • 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.
    Nebivolol, But Not Metoprolol, Lowers Blood Pressure in Nitric Oxide–Sensitive Human HypertensionNovelty and Significance
    (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
    Nebivolol, But Not Metoprolol, Lowers Blood Pressure in Nitric Oxide–Sensitive Human HypertensionNovelty and Significance
    Luis E. Okamoto, Alfredo Gamboa, Cyndya A. Shibao, Amy C. Arnold, Leena Choi, Bonnie K. Black, Satish R. Raj, David Robertson and Italo Biaggioni
    Hypertension. 2014;64:1241-1247, originally published September 29, 2014
    https://doi.org/10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.114.04116
    del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo

Related Articles

Cited By...

Subjects

  • Basic, Translational, and Clinical Research
    • Clinical Studies
    • Etiology
    • Autonomic Nervous System

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