lisinopril and Albuminuria

The importance of the renin angiotensin system (RAS) in the development and progression of the diabetic nephropathy is confirmed with the recent demonstration that the development of nephropathy in the diabetic patients can be avoided by blockers of the RAS. For that reason, the promotion of preventive programs for the detection of microalbuminuria, from the early phases of the diabetes is needed. Control of blood pressure, of glucose and lipids are needed. If microalbuminuria is present, the administration of a blocker of RAS, even in the presence of normal blood pressure can prevent the progression to diabetic nephropathy. The main objective to prevent the development and progression of nephropathy in the diabetic patients, as well as the cardiovascular risk, is a strict control of the PA.

Topics: Albuminuria; Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Animals; Antihypertensive Agents; Benzimidazoles; Benzoates; Blood Glucose; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Nephropathies; Disease Progression; Drug Therapy, Combination; Homeostasis; Humans; Lisinopril; Losartan; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Renin-Angiotensin System; Risk Factors; Telmisartan

Topics: Albuminuria; Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; Benzimidazoles; Biomarkers; Biphenyl Compounds; Collagen Type IV; Diabetic Nephropathies; Diet, Protein-Restricted; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Insulin; Life Style; Lisinopril; Tetrazoles

Topics: Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Diabetic Retinopathy; Humans; Hypertension; Lisinopril; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Renin-Angiotensin System

The aim of study was the optimization of treatment in patients with arterial hypertension and coexistent type 2 diabetes mellitus. The study involved 96 persons with arterial hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus (2 of them were excluded). Patients with arterial hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus (n=94) were divided in two subgroups: persons from the first (n=54) were treated by telmisartan 40-80 mg/day; second (n=40) - by lisinopril 10-20 mg/day. People from the first subgroup (n=54) were divided in Іa (n=25) and Іb (n=29) according to the level of endothelin-1. Persons from the Іa subgroup with less than 10 pg/ml levels of endothelin were treated by telmisartan 40 mg/day. People from the Іb subgroup with more than 10 pg/ml levels of endothelin were treated by telmisartan 80 mg/day. Patients were observed by echocardiography, albumin excretion rate in six months and by glycated hemoglobin in 3 months. Telmisartan is not worse than lisinopril according to protection of heart and kidney. Under the influence of treatment with telmisartan at a dose of 40 mg/day in subjects with arterial hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus and less than 10 pg/ml level of endothelin-1, the values of albumin excretion rate decreased by 9,7% (p=0,0328), and left ventricular mass index - by 6,7% (p=0,0007). In coexistent patients with greater than 10 pg/ml level of endothelin-1 and 80 mg/day dose of telmisartan, the level of albumin excretion rate was reduced by 4,9% (p=0,0435), and left ventricular mass index - by 3,1% (p<0,0001). If the level of this indicator is less than 10 pg/ml, the dose of telmisartan is 40 mg/day, if the level of endothelin-1 is more than 10 pg/ml, the dose of telmisartan is 80 mg/day.

Topics: Albuminuria; Antihypertensive Agents; Blood Pressure; Comorbidity; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Nephropathies; Endothelin-1; Glycated Hemoglobin; Humans; Hypertension; Lisinopril; Middle Aged; Renin-Angiotensin System; Telmisartan; Treatment Outcome

Hypertension develops early in patients with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) and is associated with disease progression. The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) is implicated in the pathogenesis of hypertension in patients with ADPKD. Dual blockade of the RAAS may circumvent compensatory mechanisms that limit the efficacy of monotherapy with an angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin II-receptor blocker (ARB).. In this double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned 486 patients, 18 to 64 years of age, with ADPKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate [GFR], 25 to 60 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) of body-surface area) to receive an ACE inhibitor (lisinopril) and placebo or lisinopril and an ARB (telmisartan), with the doses adjusted to achieve a blood pressure of 110/70 to 130/80 mm Hg. The composite primary outcome was the time to death, end-stage renal disease, or a 50% reduction from the baseline estimated GFR. Secondary outcomes included the rates of change in urinary aldosterone and albumin excretion, frequency of hospitalizations for any cause and for cardiovascular causes, incidence of pain, frequency of ADPKD-related symptoms, quality of life, and adverse study-medication effects. Patients were followed for 5 to 8 years.. There was no significant difference between the study groups in the incidence of the composite primary outcome (hazard ratio with lisinopril-telmisartan, 1.08; 95% confidence interval, 0.82 to 1.42). The two treatments controlled blood pressure and lowered urinary aldosterone excretion similarly. The rates of decline in the estimated GFR, urinary albumin excretion, and other secondary outcomes and adverse events, including hyperkalemia and acute kidney injury, were also similar in the two groups.. Monotherapy with an ACE inhibitor was associated with blood-pressure control in most patients with ADPKD and stage 3 chronic kidney disease. The addition of an ARB did not alter the decline in the estimated GFR. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; HALT-PKD [Study B] ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01885559.).

Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Albuminuria; Aldosterone; Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Benzimidazoles; Benzoates; Blood Pressure; Disease Progression; Double-Blind Method; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Glomerular Filtration Rate; Humans; Hypertension; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Lisinopril; Male; Middle Aged; Polycystic Kidney, Autosomal Dominant; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Telmisartan; Young Adult

Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) is the most common genetic kidney condition and is associated with important renal and cardiovascular manifestations in childhood. Renal cystic disease can be documented in some cases as early as in utero. Early intervention is critical if the long-term complications of this condition, including end-stage renal disease, are to be ameliorated. Here we describe our ongoing randomized double-blind placebo-controlled phase III clinical trial to assess the effect of pravastatin treatment on renal and cardiovascular disease progression in 107 children and young adults age 8-22 years with ADPKD who are receiving the angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor lisinopril. Baseline demographic and laboratory data are provided. Results of this study could markedly impact the standard of care for evaluation and treatment of ADPKD in this population.

Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Child; Disease Progression; Double-Blind Method; Female; Humans; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; Hypertension; Hypertrophy, Left Ventricular; Kidney; Lisinopril; Male; Polycystic Kidney, Autosomal Dominant; Pravastatin; Renin-Angiotensin System; Young Adult

In this prospective study, the effects of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor [lisinopril (LIS)] and an angiotensin II receptor antagonist [losartan (LOS)] were compared in nephrotic patients with idiopathic membranous nephropathy.. Twenty-seven patients (13 males, mean age +/- SD 51.3 +/- 15.4 years) were treated with LIS (13 patients, six males, mean age 52.1 +/- 15.3 years) or LOS (14 patients, seven males, mean age 50.5 +/- 15.5 years) for 12 months. At baseline and after the treatment period, serum albumin, total cholesterol, estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR), 24 h proteinuria and mean arterial pressure were determined.. Proteinuria (g/24 h) was significantly reduced in both groups (LIS from 4.82 +/- 1.26 to 1.75 +/- 0.64, p < 0.0001; LOS from 4.55 +/- 1.09 to 2.54 +/- 1.94, p = 0.002) (all results +/- SD). Serum albumin levels (g/dl) increased significantly in both groups (LIS 2.27 +/- 0.41 to 3.17 +/- 0.63, p < 0.0001; LOS 2.93 +/- 0.40 to 3.55 +/- 0.44, p < 0.0001). GFR (ml/min x 1.73 m(2)) did not change significantly in either group (LIS 55 +/- 17 to 56 +/- 17, p = 0.65; LOS 64 +/- 18 to 59 +/- 16, p = 0.13). Total cholesterol (mg/dl) was significantly reduced only in the lisinopril group (LIS 347 +/- 81 to 266 +/- 64, p < 0.0001; LOS 306 +/- 58 to 263 +/- 77, p = 0.138). Mean arterial pressure (mmHg) was reduced in both groups (LIS 107 +/- 12 to 95 +/- 6, p < 0.0001; LOS 104 +/- 10 to 96 +/- 5, p = 0.003). In the comparison between the two groups, serum albumin levels were higher in the losartan group at baseline (p < 0.0001) and after 12 months (p = 0.029). There were no significant differences between the baseline and end-of-study values for the rest of the studied parameters.. Treatment with lisinopril and losartan in nephrotic patients with idiopathic membranous nephropathy results in similar (and significant) effects on renal function, hypoalbuminaemia, proteinuria and blood pressure.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Albuminuria; Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Blood Pressure; Female; Glomerular Filtration Rate; Glomerulonephritis, Membranous; Humans; Hypercholesterolemia; Lisinopril; Losartan; Male; Middle Aged; Nephrotic Syndrome; Prevalence; Prospective Studies; Proteinuria

Our aim was to evaluate the markers of tubulointerstitial damage, neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) and kidney injury molecule1 (KIM1) in Type 1 diabetic patients with different levels of albuminuria and in control subjects. In addition, the effect of renoprotective treatment on urinary NGAL was evaluated in diabetic nephropathy.. This was a cross-sectional study in 58 normoalbuminuric (u-albumin <30 mg/24 h), 45 microalbuminuric (30-300 mg/24 h) and 45 macroalbuminuric (>300 mg/24 h) Type 1 diabetic patients and 55 non-diabetic control subjects. Furthermore, in a second study, urine-NGAL was measured in a randomized cross-over study of 56 Type 1 diabetic patients with diabetic nephropathy treated with lisinopril 20, 40 and 60 mg daily..   Urine-NGAL levels were [geometric mean (95% CI)]: control subjects 74 (52-104) (pg/mmol creatinine), normoalbuminuric 146 (97-221), microalbuminuric 222 (158-312) and macroalbuminuric group 261 (175-390). Urine-NGAL increased significantly from the normo- to the micro- and further to the macroalbuminuric group (P<0.05). Urine-NGAL was higher in normoalbuminuric vs. control subjects (P<0.01). Plasma-NGAL was significantly higher in the normoalbuminuric and macroalbuminuric groups than in the control group. Urine-KIM1 was higher in all diabetic groups than in the control group (P<0.001), with no difference between diabetic groups. During lisinopril treatment, urine-NGAL was reduced (95% CI) 17% (11-50) (not significant).. Urine-NGAL and urine-KIM1 (u-KIM1) are elevated in Type1 diabetic patients, with or without albuminuria, indicating tubular damage at an early stage. Urine-NGAL increases significantly with increasing albuminuria. The ACE inhibitor lisinopril reduced urine-NGAL, but this was not statistically significant.

Topics: Acute-Phase Proteins; Albuminuria; Cross-Sectional Studies; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetic Nephropathies; Hepatitis A Virus Cellular Receptor 1; Humans; Lipocalin-2; Lipocalins; Lisinopril; Male; Membrane Glycoproteins; Middle Aged; Proto-Oncogene Proteins; Receptors, Virus

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the optimal renoprotective effect of ultrahigh doses of lisinopril, as reflected by short-term changes in urinary albumin excretion rate (UAER), in type 1 diabetic patients with diabetic nephropathy.. At the Steno Diabetes Center, 49 type 1 diabetic patients with diabetic nephropathy completed this double-masked randomised crossover trial consisting of an initial washout period followed by three treatment periods each lasting 2 months, where all patients received lisinopril 20, 40 and 60 mg once daily in randomised order in addition to slow-release furosemide. Allocation was concealed by sequentially numbered opaque sealed envelopes. UAER, 24 h ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) and estimated GFR were determined at baseline and after each treatment period.. All 49 patients completed all three treatment periods. Baseline values were: UAER (geometric mean [95% CI]) 362 (240-545) mg/24 h, 24 h ABP (mean [SD]) 142 (14)/74 (8) mmHg and estimated GFR 75 (29) ml min(-1) 1.73 m(-2). Reductions in UAER from baseline were 63%, 71% and 70%, respectively, with the increasing doses of lisinopril (p < 0.001). Compared with lisinopril 20 mg there was a further reduction in UAER of 23% with lisinopril 40 mg and 19% with 60 mg, p < 0.05. ABP was reduced from baseline by 10/5, 13/7 and 12/7 mmHg (p < 0.001 vs baseline, p < 0.05 for diastolic ABP 20 vs 40 mg, otherwise NS between doses). The difference in UAER between 20 and 40 mg lisinopril was significant after adjustment for changes in ABP (p < 0.01). Two patients were excluded from the study because of an increase in plasma creatinine and one because of high BP; otherwise the study medication was well tolerated with few, mild, dose-independent adverse effects.. Lisinopril 40 mg once daily is generally safe and offers additional reductions in BP and UAER in comparison with the currently recommended dose of 20 mg. Lisinopril 60 mg offers no further beneficial effect.. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00118976.

Topics: Adult; Albuminuria; Antihypertensive Agents; Cross-Over Studies; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetic Angiopathies; Diabetic Nephropathies; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Double-Blind Method; Female; Glomerular Filtration Rate; Humans; Lisinopril; Male; Middle Aged; Protective Agents

Aldosterone promotes glomerular and tubular sclerosis independent of angiotensin II in animal models of diabetic nephropathy. Most human studies testing the renoprotective benefit of adding an angiotensin receptor blocker or a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist to a regimen based on inhibition of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) used relatively low doses of ACE inhibitors. Furthermore, these studies did not determine whether antiproteinuric effects were independent of BP lowering. We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in 81 patients with diabetes, hypertension, and albuminuria (urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio > or =300 mg/g) who all received lisinopril (80 mg once daily). We randomly assigned the patients to placebo, losartan (100 mg daily), or spironolactone (25 mg daily) for 48 wk. We obtained blood and urine albumin, urea, creatinine, electrolytes, A1c, and ambulatory BP at baseline, 24, and 48 wk. Compared with placebo, the urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio decreased by 34.0% (95% CI, -51.0%, -11.2%, P = 0.007) in the group assigned to spironolactone and by 16.8% (95% CI, -37.3%, +10.5%, P = 0.20) in the group assigned to losartan. Clinic and ambulatory BP, creatinine clearance, sodium and protein intake, and glycemic control did not differ between groups. Serum potassium level was significantly higher with the addition of either spironolactone or losartan. In conclusion, the addition of spironolactone, but not losartan, to a regimen including maximal ACE inhibition affords greater renoprotection in diabetic nephropathy despite a similar effect on BP. These results support the need to conduct a long-term, large-scale, renal failure outcomes trial.

Topics: Adult; Albuminuria; Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Bicarbonates; Blood Pressure; Creatinine; Diabetic Nephropathies; Double-Blind Method; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Glycated Hemoglobin; Humans; Hypertension; Lisinopril; Losartan; Male; Middle Aged; Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists; Potassium; Renin-Angiotensin System; Spironolactone

Microalbuminuria is known as an independent predictor for stroke, myocardial infarction, and death. The purpose of the VALERIA trial was a comparison of the efficacy and safety of combination therapy of valsartan and lisinopril with valsartan and lisinopril high-dose monotherapy in patients with hypertension and microalbuminuria.. This was a randomized, double-blind, interventional, parallel-group study. After a washout/placebo-run-in phase of 3 weeks, 133 patients were randomized to treatment (1: 1:1) with either lisinopril 40 mg, valsartan 320 mg, or a combination of valsartan/lisinopril 320/20 mg for 30 weeks.. At baseline, the urine albumin creatinine ratio was similar for the three treatment groups (geometric means, lisinopril 9.6 mg/mmol, valsartan 9.1 mg/mmol, and valsartan/lisinopril 9.5 mg/mmol). After 30 weeks of treatment, the geometric mean urine albumin creatinine ratio had decreased in all three groups by 41, 51, and 62% to 5.7 mg/mmol (lisinopril), 4.5 mg/mmol (valsartan), and 3.6 mg/mmol (valsartan/lisinopril). The decrease for valsartan/lisinopril was statistically significantly greater compared with lisinopril [adjusted ratio 60%, confidence interval (38-94%), P = 0.029]. Normalization of microalbuminuria was greatest with valsartan and valsartan/lisinopril (lisinopril 17%, valsartan 31%, and valsartan/lisinopril 38% of patients) and was statistically significant for lisinopril in contrast with valsartan/lisinopril (P = 0.034). Differences in blood pressure reduction between the groups were not statistically significant. All treatments were safe and well tolerated.. The combination of valsartan and lisinopril provided a significantly better reduction of urine albumin creatinine ratio and more than doubled the rate of patients with normalized urine albumin creatinine ratio compared with lisinopril alone. All treatments were safe and well tolerated.

Topics: Aged; Albuminuria; Antihypertensive Agents; Blood Pressure; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Humans; Hypertension, Renal; Lisinopril; Male; Middle Aged; Tetrazoles; Treatment Outcome; Valine; Valsartan

Elevated pulse pressure (PP) is strongly associated with micro- and macrovascular complications in type 2 diabetic patients. We examined the effect of 12 months of dual blockade with candesartan and lisinopril vs. high-dose lisinopril monotherapy on ambulatory PP in hypertensive type 2 diabetic patients from the CALM (Candesartan and Lisinopril Microalbuminuria Trial) II study.. The CALM II study was a 12-month prospective, randomized, parallel-group, double-masked study that included 75 type 1 and type 2 diabetic subjects with hypertension. Participants were randomized for treatment with either high-dose lisinopril (40 mg once daily (o.d.)) or for dual blockade treatment with candesartan (16 mg o.d.) and lisinopril (20 mg o.d.). In this article, we present data from the post-hoc subgroup of 51 type 2 diabetic subjects who completed the full 12-month study period with successful ambulatory blood pressure (BP) measurements at both baseline and follow-up visits.. Baseline 24-h BP values were similar in the two groups (24-h systolic BP (SBP) 130 +/- 12 vs. 127 +/- 9, 24-h diastolic BP (DBP) 77 +/- 8 vs. 74 +/- 7, and 24-h PP 53 +/- 8 vs. 53 +/- 7 mm Hg, for the lisinopril and dual blockade groups, respectively, P > 0.2 for all). Compared with lisinopril monotherapy, dual blockade treatment caused a highly significant reduction in 24-h PP levels (-5 +/- 5 mm Hg, P = 0.003), albeit the difference in the BP lowering effect between the treatment groups did not differ significantly for 24-h systolic (P = 0.21) or diastolic (P = 0.49) BP. Dual blockade treatment significantly lowered 24-h SBP (-5 +/- 11 mm Hg, P = 0.03), but not 24-h DBP (-2 +/- 7 mm Hg, P = 0.29), whereas in the lisinopril group, the opposite effect was observed (24-h SBP -1 +/- 9 mm Hg, P = 0.45, 24-h SBP -3 +/- 7 mm Hg, P = 0.03).. Twelve months of dual blockade with candesartan and lisinopril significantly reduced PP when compared with high-dose monotherapy with lisinopril. Larger studies are needed to confirm this observation, and to evaluate whether this effect translates into a greater degree of end-organ protection from dual blockade treatment than from conventional angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibition.

Topics: Aged; Albuminuria; Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Benzimidazoles; Biphenyl Compounds; Blood Pressure; Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Humans; Hypertension; Lisinopril; Male; Middle Aged; Tetrazoles; Treatment Outcome

Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors have favourable effects on hypertension and diabetic nephropathy, but persistent use may result in incomplete blockade of the renin-angiotensin system. Long-term effects of dual blockade using the ACE inhibitor lisinopril and the long-acting angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) telmisartan on blood pressure and albumin excretion rate (AER) were evaluated. Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension (systolic blood pressure [SBP] >or=140 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure [DBP] >or=90 mmHg) and microalbuminuria (AER 30-300 mg/24h) received 20mg of lisinopril or 80 mg of telmisartan once a day for 24 weeks. Patients were then randomised to continuing treatment with the respective monotherapy or with lisinopril plus telmisartan for a further 28 weeks. Significant (P<0.001) declines in SBP (11.1 mmHg versus 10.0 mmHg), DBP (5.6 mmHg versus 5.3 mmHg) and AER (98 mg/24 h versus 80 mg/24 h) were achieved with lisinopril (n=95) or telmisartan (n=97), respectively, after 24 weeks. Subsequent treatment with lisinopril plus telmisartan for 28 weeks resulted in further significant reductions (P<0.001) in SBP, DBP and AER compared with either monotherapy. All treatments were well tolerated. Lisinopril plus telmisartan thus provides superior blood pressure and AER control than either monotherapy. We conclude that use of dual blockade may provide a new approach to prevention of diabetic nephropathy in patients with type 2 diabetes, hypertension and microalbuminuria.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Benzimidazoles; Benzoates; Blood Pressure; Creatinine; Cross-Over Studies; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Angiopathies; Diabetic Nephropathies; Female; Humans; Hypertension; Lisinopril; Male; Middle Aged; Prospective Studies; Telmisartan

To analyze the effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor lisinopril on inflammatory cystoid macular edema and visual acuity.. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled cross-over trial.. setting: Outpatient clinic of the Department of Ophthalmology at the University Medical Center of Utrecht. patients: Forty patients with inflammatory cystoid macular edema were included. intervention: Each patient received lisinopril (10 mg daily) or placebo for three months. After two months of a lisinopril/placebo free wash-out period, the groups received the reverse study medication for three months. Fluorescein angiography was performed to evaluate the retina. main outcome measures: Cystoid macular edema, best-corrected visual acuity and contrast sensitivity.. Lisinopril had no effect on cystoid macular edema, visual acuity, papillary leakage, retinal vasculitis, and choroidal leakage. In a subgroup analysis, we observed a decrease in blood pressure (lisinopril, 14 of 36 patients; placebo, 5 of 36 patients; P = .02) and a decrease in morning urinary albumin excretion (lisinopril, 23 of 35 patients; placebo 10 of 34 patients, P = .003) was observed.. Although lisinopril had no effect on inflammatory cystoid macular edema and visual acuity, we found a positive effect on the vascular system.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Blood Pressure; Contrast Sensitivity; Cross-Over Studies; Double-Blind Method; Female; Fluorescein Angiography; Humans; Lisinopril; Macular Edema; Male; Middle Aged; Retinal Vasculitis; Visual Acuity

We investigated the effects of aggressive antihypertensive therapy based on hydrochlorothiazide, candesartan or lisinopril on urinary albumin excretion, endothelial function and inflammatory activity in hypertensive type II diabetic individuals. A total of 70 hypertensive type II diabetic individuals were treated with three antihypertensive strategies in a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy design. Blood pressure was titrated to levels below 130/85 mmHg or a decrease in systolic pressure of 10% with a diastolic pressure below 85 mmHg. After titration, patients were treated for 12 months. Mean blood pressures changed from 157/93, 151/94 and 149/93 at baseline to 135/80, 135/82 and 131/80 mmHg after titration in the hydrochlorothiazide (n=24), candesartan (n=24) and lisinopril (n=22) groups. About 70% reached target blood pressures. However, only 45% had blood pressures <130/85 mmHg. Urinary albumin excretion and levels of soluble vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 and intercellular adhesion molecule-1 decreased (GEE regression coefficients, -2.40 mg/24 h (P<0.001), -85 ng/ml (P=0.01) and -50 ng/ml (P=0.02)), but brachial artery endothelium-dependent and -independent vasodilation and levels of von Willebrand factor and C-reactive protein did not change (GEE regression coefficients, 0.21 mm (P=0.07), 0.04 mm (P=0.43), 0.04 IU/ml (P=0.33) and -1.15 mg/l (P=0.64)). No differences in outcome variables between treatment groups were observed. These data show that achievement of target blood pressures below 130/85 mmHg in hypertensive type II diabetes is difficult. Aggressive antihypertensive therapy can improve urinary albumin excretion, endothelial function and inflammatory activity in hypertensive type II diabetic individuals, regardless of the type of antihypertensive therapy used.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Albuminuria; Antihypertensive Agents; Benzimidazoles; Biphenyl Compounds; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Double-Blind Method; Drug Therapy, Combination; Endothelium, Vascular; Female; Humans; Hydrochlorothiazide; Hypertension; Inflammation; Lisinopril; Male; Middle Aged; Tetrazoles

The aim of this open-labelled, randomised, parallel-group study was to evaluate the effect of long-term monotherapy with manidipine or lisinopril on albumin excretion rate (AER) and left ventricular mass index (LVMI) in hypertensive patients with type-2 diabetes and microalbuminuria.. After a 4-week wash-out period, 174 patients with essential hypertension [diastolic blood pressure (DBP) >80 mmHg and <100 mmHg], type-2 diabetes and microalbuminuria were randomised to manidipine 10 mg o.d. or lisinopril 10 mg o.d.; after 8 weeks, the dose was doubled in non-responders (DBP >80 mmHg); after 3 months, treatment was discontinued in the non-responder patients and in those complaining of side effects; the remaining 121 patients continued their therapy with manidipine or lisinopril, and 99 completed the 2-year study. At the end of the wash-out period, of the titration period and after 6, 12, 18 and 24 months of treatment, BP was measured, AER, creatinine clearance, glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and body mass index (BMI) were evaluated and an echocardiographic evaluation was performed.. The 99 patients who completed the study were statistically analysed according to a per-protocol evaluation. Manidipine and lisinopril significantly reduced systolic blood pressure (SBP) and DBP levels (at 24 months, --22.3/15.5 mmHg, P<0.001 versus baseline and --21.4/15.7 mmHg, P<0.01 versus baseline, respectively). Both drugs provided a significant decrease in AER, but it was significantly more pronounced with lisinopril (at 24 weeks, --37.2 mg/24 h, P<0.001 versus baseline) than with manidipine (--29.9 mg/24 h, P<0.05 versus baseline) and became evident earlier in the lisinopril group (after 3 months versus 6 months of treatment). Manidipine produced a greater reduction of LVMI than lisinopril (--14.9 g/m(2) versus --10.8 g/m(2) at 24 months). The effect was more pronounced in patients with left ventricular hypertrophy at baseline (--19.8 g/m(2) versus --12.8 g/m(2), P<0.05).. These data suggest that, despite similar BP lowering, non-haemodynamic factors play an important role in the pharmacological reduction of AER and LVMI in diabetic hypertensive patients.

Topics: Aged; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Calcium Channel Blockers; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Dihydropyridines; Female; Heart Ventricles; Humans; Hypertension; Lisinopril; Male; Middle Aged; Nitrobenzenes; Piperazines

Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blocking drugs (ARB) block the effect of angiotensin II by different mechanisms. It has been suggested that combined therapy may be more effective at reducing blood pressure (BP) than higher doses of either drug.. Twenty-three elderly patients with systolic hypertension completed a double-blind crossover study comparing placebo, candesartan (C) 16 mg, C32 mg, lisinopril (L) 20 mg, L40 mg and C16 mg + L20 mg. Treatment periods were one month and ambulatory BP measurements were performed at the end of each period. The effects on albumin excretion in eight patients with microalbuminuria were determined.. All treatments lowered BP. The falls in systolic and diastolic BP with C16, C32, L20 and L40 were similar. Plasma renin rose to a similar extent. A plateau effect was reached with C16 and L20. Systolic BP on the combination of C16 + L20 was lower than on each monotherapy (C16, 3.8 mmHg [p=0.002]; C32, 6.4 [0.0003]; L20, 2.9 [0.05]; L40, 3.3 [0.003]). The additional fall in BP with the combination appeared to be due to recruitment of non-responders, rather than to an additive effect in most patients. All treatments reduced microalbuminuria to a similar extent. The combination was well tolerated and there was no deterioration in renal function.. When patients are on a plateau dose of an ACE inhibitor or an ARB, addition of the other drug class has a small but significant incremental effect on BP in the overall group. However, some patients respond better to one drug class than to the other and this may explain the results. This study lends no support to the use of these two drugs in combination to treat hypertension.

Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Albuminuria; Antihypertensive Agents; Benzimidazoles; Biphenyl Compounds; Blood Pressure; Cross-Over Studies; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Humans; Hypertension; Lisinopril; Male; Middle Aged; Tetrazoles; Treatment Outcome

To investigate the anti proteinuric effect of pentoxifylline in diabetic patients, we prospectively studied in 25 hypertensive type 2 diabetic patients with persistent microalbuminuria and normal renal function the impact of combining pentoxifylline with an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor, lisinopril, on urinary albumin excretion and compared the results with those obtained in a control group of 25 type 2 diabetic patients treated with lisinopril only.. Fifty hypertensive type 2 diabetic patients with persistent microalbuminuria (31 males and 19 females, aged between 47-73 years) were randomly assigned to two groups. Group A received lisinopril 10 mg/day, while group B was given lisinopril 10 mg/day and pentoxifylline 600 mg/day for nine months. There were no significant differences between serum creatinine, HbA1c, blood pressure and urinary albumin excretion in both groups (p > 0.05).. Serum creatinine, creatinine clearance, blood pressure, HbA1c levels did not change significantly during the study. Urinary albumin excretion decreased from 228 +/- 28 to 148 +/- 15 mg/day in group A (p < 0.05). In group B urinary albumin excretion decreased from 219 +/- 26 to 128 +/- 12 mg/day (p < 0.05). Pentoxifylline and lisinopril combination caused a significant additional reduction in urinary albumin excretion when compared to lisinopril regimen (p < 0.05).. Our findings suggest that the combination of pentoxifylline with an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor in hypertensive type 2 diabetic patients with persistent microalbuminuria causes a significant reduction in urinary albumin excretion and this effect seems independent from blood pressure and glycemic control.

Topics: Aged; Albumins; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Biomarkers; Blood Pressure; Creatinine; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diastole; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Glycated Hemoglobin; Hematologic Agents; Humans; Hypertension; Lisinopril; Male; Middle Aged; Pentoxifylline; Prospective Studies; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Systole; Treatment Outcome; Urea

This study was carried out to assess whether with a similar degree of blood pressure reduction, Lisinopril compares favorably or otherwise with lacidipine in respect of effects on urinary albumin excretion and renal function as assessed by creatinine clearance, plasma creatinine, urea and electrolytes. Thirty hypertensive diabetic nephropathy patients with moderate hypertension were studied. After a 2-week washout period, they were allocated into two groups matched at baseline for age, sex, weight, blood pressure, and urinary albumin excretion rate as well as creatinine clearance. There were 8 males and 7 females in each group. One group received lisinopril (with furosemide if needed to control BP) and the other group received lacidipine. Staged increases in doses of antihypertensives were used until BP was controlled or maximum dose of 40 mg/day lisinopril or 8 mg/day lacidipine was reached. Furosemide was added to lisinopril if BP was not controlled at 40 mg/day. These medications were given for 12 weeks at the end of which measurements done at baseline were repeated. Comparison of baseline and end of study values of these parameters within the groups and between the two groups were made. Lisinopril group and lacidipine group achieved similar and highly significant reduction in blood pressure levels P < 0.001. There was reduction in urinary albumin excretion rate in both groups but this only reached statistical significance in the lisinopril group [480] [269] mg/day vs. 315 [202] mg/day P < 0.05] while for the lacidipine group it was not significant [491] [257] mg/day vs. 335 [182] mg/day P > 0.05]. However, comparison of albumin excretion rate between both groups at baseline and at end of the study did not show any significant difference, P > 0.1. With both drugs there is a tendency for creatinine clearance to increase and plasma creatinine to drop while plasma potassium tended to rise more with lisinopril than lacidipine but differences within and between both groups, did not reach statistical significance P > 0.05. In conclusion, blood pressure reduction was comparable in both drugs; both drugs reduced albuminuria but lisinopril appeared superior. Treatment with both drugs tended to increase creatinine clearance but both had no significant effects on blood sugar.

Topics: Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; Blood Glucose; Blood Pressure; Creatinine; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Nephropathies; Dihydropyridines; Disease Progression; Female; Humans; Hypertension; Lisinopril; Male; Metabolic Clearance Rate; Middle Aged; Potassium; Prospective Studies; Treatment Outcome; Urea

Increased renal vascular resistance and microalbuminuria are associated with hypertensive target organ damage and may be predictors of hypertensive nephrosclerosis.. We investigated changes in renal resistive index (RI) and urinary albumin excretion (UAE) in a group of patients with primary hypertension before and during long-term antihypertensive treatment.. Thirty-two patients were randomized to receive antihypertensive treatment with either a calcium channel blocker (nifedipine GITS, up to 90 mg/day, n = 16) or an ACE inhibitor (lisinopril, up to 20 mg/day, n = 16), alone or in association with a diuretic (chlortalidone, 25 mg/day). Blood pressure, renal resistive index (by US Doppler) and UAE (mean of three nonconsecutive timed urinary collections, microg/min) were evaluated at baseline and over the course of 24 months of treatment.. Both regimens effectively lowered blood pressure (mean blood pressure from 123 +/- 1.8 at baseline to 103 +/- 1.5 mm Hg at 24 months in the lisinopril group and from 122 +/- 1.9 at baseline to 104 +/- 0.8 at 24 months in the nifedipine group, p < 0.001 for both groups). Overall, blood pressure decrease was associated with a reduction in UAE and no change in RI throughout the study. However, despite similar blood pressure reduction, the two regimens showed different specific effects. Lisinopril was associated with a significant decrease in both UAE (33.8 +/- 16.2 at baseline and 9.1 +/- 2.1 at 24 months, p < 0.01) and renal RI (0.61 +/- 0.02 at baseline and 0.56 +/- 0.04 at 24 months, p < 0.05) while nifedipine GITS did not significantly influence UAE (35.7 +/- 12.2 at baseline and 31.2 +/- 12.1 at 24 months, n.s.) or RI (0.61 +/- 0.01 at baseline and 0.59 +/- 0.02 at 24 months, n.s.).. Effective blood pressure control over a long period of time reduces the severity of organ damage, namely UAE while maintaining renovascular resistance in patients with essential hypertension. Different classes of antihypertensive agents might convey additional specific renal protection beyond blood pressure control. These data could be useful in devising individualized therapeutic strategies in hypertensive patients at increased renal risk.

Topics: Adult; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Blood Pressure; Calcium Channel Blockers; Female; Humans; Hypertension, Renal; Lisinopril; Male; Middle Aged; Nifedipine; Renal Circulation; Vascular Resistance

The objective of the study was to assess the factors related to the occurrence of microalbuminuria during the follow-up of a young adult group with essential hypertension that had not been previously treated. Normo-albuminuric essential hypertensives, <50 years old, who had not been previously treated with antihypertensive drugs and who did not have diabetes mellitus were included. After the initial evaluation, patients were treated using only nonpharmacological measures (n=62), beta-blockers (n=38), ACE inhibitors (n=64), calcium channel blockers (n=8), and several classes (n=15). Measurements were taken for office blood pressure, biochemical profile, and 24-hour urinary albumin excretion at the beginning of the study and were measured yearly during an average of 2.7+/-1.2 years of follow-up. Among the 187 patients included, 22 (11,7%) developed microalbuminuria (progressors, 4.4/100 patients/y). No differences were present between progressors and those who remained normo-albuminuric (nonprogressors) in terms of age, gender, body mass index, disease duration, blood pressure values, biochemical profile, familial history of diabetes or hypertension, smoking habits, or the presence of EKG left ventricular hypertrophy. The group with the lowest progression rate was the patients treated with ACE inhibitors (n=5; 2.9/100 patients/y), followed by the diet group (n=5; 3.3/100 patients/y) and the beta-blockers group (n=5; 4.1/100 patients/y). When we excluded patients treated with calcium channel blockers or those who changed over time between different classes of treatment, no significant differences in the incidence of microalbuminuria were observed among the groups. Progressors showed higher slopes of fasting glucose (4.78+/-11.4 versus 0.50+/-6.8 mg/y, P<0.02) and uric acid (0.58+/-0.93 versus 0.05+/-1.10 mg/y, P<0.03) compared with the slopes of nonprogressors. Both the slopes for glucose and systolic blood pressure over time were associated independently with the slope of the logarithm of urinary albumin excretion when adjusted for age, gender, and treatment groups. Cox proportional hazard model for progression of microalbuminuria showed that baseline urinary albumin excretion (risk ratio [RR]=1.06; confidence interval [CI] 95%, 1.01 to 1.11), slope for systolic blood pressure (RR=1.11; CI 95%, 1.03 to 1.20), and slope for glucose (RR=1.08; CI 95%, 1.03 to 1.14) were independently associated to the development of microalbuminuria. In conclusion, in a group

Topics: Adrenergic beta-Antagonists; Adult; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; Atenolol; Bisoprolol; Calcium Channel Blockers; Enalapril; Female; Humans; Hypertension; Lisinopril; Male; Middle Aged; Nifedipine; Proportional Hazards Models; Regression Analysis; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome

The main objective of the CALM (Candesartan And Lisinopril Microalbuminuria) study is to assess the effect of a dual blockade of the renin-angiotensin system--using both an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE-I) and an angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker--in patients with type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure and microalbuminuria. The study included 200 patients randomized to receive candesartan 16 mg or lisinopril 20 mg for 12 weeks, followed by 12 weeks of the same monotherapy or a combination treatment. Main outcomes are the reduction of microalbuminuria and blood pressure. All three of the treatments are effective, but the dual blockade is respectively 18%, 8 mmHg and 5 mmHg more effective in reducing microalbuminuria, systolic and diastolic blood pressure. No comparison is made between this "new" association and the more frequently used biotherapy (i.e. ACE-I plus thiazidic diuretic) and therefore its usefulness in regular practice is still to be determined.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; Benzimidazoles; Biphenyl Compounds; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Nephropathies; Female; Humans; Hypertension; Lisinopril; Male; Middle Aged; Renin-Angiotensin System; Tetrazoles; Treatment Outcome

Antihypertensive treatment is presently recommended in most type 1 diabetic patients with microalbuminuria. The long-term effect of angiotensin converting enzymes (ACE) inhibitor (ACE-i) treatment on exercise urinary albumin excretion (E-UAE) and exercise blood pressure (E-BP) in type 1 diabetic patients with low grade microalbuminuria is not well documented. In addition, the possible predictive effect of baseline E-UAE on the progression of overnight UAE remains to be clarified.. In a randomized placebo controlled double blind study the effects of 2 years treatment with either lisinopril (20 mg o.d.) or placebo was evaluated in 21 normotensive type 1 diabetic patients with overnight UAE between 20 and 70 microg min-1. Determinations of E-UAE and E-BP were performed after exercise on an ergometercycle with a load of 70% of estimated maximal VO2 for 20 min. Patients in the placebo and lisinopril groups were similar with regard to age (35.8 +/- 11.3 vs. 29.3 +/- 8.6 years), duration of diabetes (19.4 +/- 8.2 vs. 16.8 +/- 5.3 years), and HbA1c (9.0 +/- 1.0 vs. 9.4 +/- 1.7%).. At baseline, E-UAE was similar in the two groups (placebo: 150.1 x or divide 3.7, lisinopril: 96.8 x or divide 1.8 microg min-1 (geometric mean x or divide tolerance factor)). After 2 years treatment E-UAE had increased in the placebo group, whereas E-UAE was reduced in the lisinopril treated patients (placebo: 213.6 x or divide 6.9, lisinopril: 48.3 x or divide 3.1 microg min-1, P = 0.04). The relative increase in E-UAE (E-UAE/Pre-exercise UAE) was similar at baseline in both groups (3.7 x or divide 2.3 vs. 2.8 x or divide 2.0) but significantly higher in the placebo group after 2 years (4.4 x or divide 2.4 compared with 1.6 x or divide 1.7 in the lisinopril group, P < 0.01) These changes over two years in relative increase in E-UAE were significantly different (P = 0.03). Exercise blood pressure was similar in both groups at baseline and over 2 years increased in the placebo group (from 166.5 +/- 15.1-179.9 +/- 35.6 mmHg), in contrast to the lisinopril group where E-BP was slightly reduced (from 168.5 +/- 20.6-165.1 +/- 16.6 mmHg) but the difference in blood pressure over the 2 years did not reach statistical significance. Exercise urinary albumin excretion and E-BP were closely associated (correlation for year 2: r = 0.734, P < 0.001), and also changes over the 2 years in E-UAE and E-BP were positively correlated (r = 0.53, P = 0.01). At year 2, overnight UAE, pre-exercise UAE (pre-E-UAE), E-UAE and E-BP were all closely linked (r-values between 0.6 and 0.9, P-values < 0.01). In the prediction of changes in overnight UAE over 2 years, neither baseline E-UAE nor baseline E-BP conveyed explanatory information in comparison with baseline overnight UAE and HbA1c.. In type 1 diabetic patients with low-grade microalbuminuria, 2 years of ACE-i treatment with lisinopril significantly reduced E-UAE. Strong correlations were found between E-UAE and E-BP and also changes over 2 years in these parameters were significantly associated.

Topics: Adult; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Blood Pressure; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Exercise Test; Humans; Lisinopril

To study the effects of ACE-i in type 1 diabetic patients with early microalbuminuria with regard to: i) UAE, ii) 24 h AMBP, including the effect on diurnal BP variation, and iii) renal haemodynamics.. 58 patients with urinary albumin excretion (UAE) between 20-70 microg/min were treated for two years with either the ACE inhibitor (ACE-i) lisinopril (20 mg od) or placebo in two randomised placebo controlled double blind studies. In a subgroup of patients (n=22) we performed 24 h ambulatory blood pressure measurements (AMBP) and renal function tests (constant infusion technique).. i) Changes in UAE over the two years were significantly different (p<0.01) in the two groups with final UAE in the lisinopril group of 19.1 microg/min x/divide 2.5 (geometric mean x/divide tolerance factor) and 44.1 microg/min x/divide 2.8 in the placebo group. In the lisinopril group 20 patients (60.6%) reversed to normoalbuminuria compared to 6 patients (24%) in the placebo group (p<0.02). ii) Clinical BP measurements revealed no differences between groups, but by AMBP significant reductions were detectable in the lisinopril group, primarily in night AMBP (systolic/diastolic: - 6.9 +/- 8.6/- 6.0 +/- 5.3 mmHg, p<0.01) as opposed to increases in the placebo group (3.1 +/- 9.3/1.9 +/- 7.3 mmHg). iii) Changes in UAE and changes in filtration fraction (FF) were positively correlated in the intervention group (r=0.9, p<0.01), i.e. the patients who showed the greatest fall in UAE were the ones with the greatest fall in FF.. ACE-i treatment in patients with low-grade microalbuminuria reduces 24 h AMBP without attenuating diurnal blood pressure variation, reduces UAE significantly, with changes in UAE being strongly associated with changes in FF. Furthermore, compared to placebo, ACE-i reverses micro- to normoalbuminuria in a significant fraction of patients.

Topics: Adult; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Blood Pressure; Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory; Circadian Rhythm; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Double-Blind Method; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Glomerular Filtration Rate; Glycated Hemoglobin; Hemodynamics; Humans; Lisinopril; Male; Placebos; Time Factors

To determine whether circulating plasma vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is elevated in the presence of diabetic microvascular complications, and whether the impact of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors on these complications can be accounted for by changes in circulating VEGF.. Samples (299/354 of those with retinal photographs) from the EUCLID placebo-controlled clinical trial of the ACE inhibitor lisinopril in mainly normoalbuminuric non-hypertensive Type 1 diabetic patients were used. Albumin excretion rate (AER) was measured 6 monthly. Geometric mean VEGF levels by baseline retinopathy status, change in retinopathy over 2 years, and by treatment with lisinopril were calculated.. No significant correlation was observed between VEGF at baseline and age, diabetes duration, glycaemic control, blood pressure, smoking, fibrinogen and von Willebrand factor. Mean VEGF concentration at baseline was 11.5 (95% confidence interval 6.0--27.9) pg/ml in those without retinopathy, 12.9 (6.0--38.9) pg/ml in those with non-proliferative retinopathy, and 16.1 (8.1--33.5) pg/ml in those with proliferative retinopathy (P = 0.06 for trend). Baseline VEGF was 15.2 pg/ml in those who progressed by at least one level of retinopathy by 2 years compared to 11.8 pg/ml in those who did not (P = 0.3). VEGF levels were not altered by lisinopril treatment. Results were similar for AER.. Circulating plasma VEGF concentration is not strongly correlated with risk factor status or microvascular disease in Type 1 diabetes, nor is it affected by ACE inhibition. Changes in circulating VEGF cannot account for the beneficial effect of ACE inhibition on retinopathy.

Topics: Adult; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Blood Glucose; Blood Pressure; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetic Angiopathies; Diabetic Retinopathy; Endothelial Growth Factors; Fibrinogen; Glycated Hemoglobin; Humans; Lisinopril; Lymphokines; Middle Aged; Placebos; Smoking; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factors; von Willebrand Factor

To assess and compare the effects of candesartan or lisinopril, or both, on blood pressure and urinary albumin excretion in patients with microalbuminuria, hypertension, and type 2 diabetes.. Prospective, randomised, parallel group, double blind study with four week placebo run in period and 12 weeks' monotherapy with candesartan or lisinopril followed by 12 weeks' monotherapy or combination treatment.. Tertiary hospitals and primary care centres in four countries (37 centres).. 199 patients aged 30-75 years.. Candesartan 16 mg once daily, lisinopril 20 mg once daily.. Blood pressure and urinary albumin:creatinine ratio.. At 12 weeks mean (95% confidence interval) reductions in diastolic blood pressure were 9.5 mm Hg (7.7 mm Hg to 11.2 mm Hg, P<0.001) and 9.7 mm Hg (7.9 mm Hg to 11.5 mm Hg, P<0.001), respectively, and in urinary albumin:creatinine ratio were 30% (15% to 42%, P<0.001) and 46% (35% to 56%, P<0.001) for candesartan and lisinopril, respectively. At 24 weeks the mean reduction in diastolic blood pressure with combination treatment (16.3 mm Hg, 13.6 mm Hg to 18.9 mm Hg, P<0. 001) was significantly greater than that with candesartan (10.4 mm Hg, 7.7 mm Hg to 13.1 mm Hg, P<0.001) or lisinopril (mean 10.7 mm Hg, 8.0 mm Hg to 13.5 mm Hg, P<0.001). Furthermore, the reduction in urinary albumin:creatinine ratio with combination treatment (50%, 36% to 61%, P<0.001) was greater than with candesartan (24%, 0% to 43%, P=0.05) and lisinopril (39%, 20% to 54%, P<0.001). All treatments were generally well tolerated.. Candesartan 16 mg once daily is as effective as lisinopril 20 mg once daily in reducing blood pressure and microalbuminuria in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes. Combination treatment is well tolerated and more effective in reducing blood pressure.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; Benzimidazoles; Biphenyl Compounds; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Humans; Hypertension; Lisinopril; Middle Aged; Prospective Studies; Renin-Angiotensin System; Tetrazoles; Treatment Outcome

To compare the long-term effect on kidney function of a long-acting calcium antagonist (nisoldipine) versus a long-acting ACE inhibitor (lisinopril) in hypertensive type 1 diabetic patients with diabetic nephropathy.. We performed a 4-year prospective, randomized, double-dummy controlled study comparing nisoldipine (20-40 mg once a day) with lisinopril (10-20 mg once a day). The study was double-blinded for the first year and single-blinded thereafter. The study included 51 hypertensive type 1 diabetic patients with diabetic nephropathy. Three patients dropped out during the first month; results for the remaining 48 patients are presented.. At baseline, the two groups were comparable: glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was 85 +/- 5 and 85 +/- 6 ml x min(-1) x [1.73 m](-2); mean 24-h ambulatory blood pressure was 108 +/- 3 and 105 +/- 2 mmHg, and albuminuria was 1,554 mg/24 h (95% CI 980-2,465) and 1,033 mg/24 h (760-1,406) in the lisinopril and nisoldipine groups, respectively. Mean 24-h arterial blood pressure during the study did not differ between the lisinopril and nisoldipine groups (100 +/- 2 and 103 +/- 1 mmHg, respectively). The time-course of albuminuria differed between groups (P < 0.001). Whereas initiation of treatment with lisinopril resulted in a reduction from baseline albuminuria by 52% (95% CI 14-73), albuminuria in the nisoldipine group did not change throughout the study GFR declined in a biphasic manner with an initial (0-6 months) reduction of 1.3 +/- 0.3 ml x min(-1) x month(-1) in the lisinopril group compared with 0.2 +/- 0.4 ml x min(-1) x month(-1) in the nisoldipine group (P < 0.01). The subsequent sustained decline (6 to 48 months or the end of treatment) was identical in the two groups: 0.5 +/- 0.1 ml min(-1) x month(-1) (NS). Two patients in the lisinopril group and three patients in the nisoldipine group entered therapy for end-stage renal failure.. Long-term treatment with lisinopril or nisoldipine has similar beneficial effects on progression of diabetic nephropathy in hypertensive type 1 diabetic patients.

Topics: Adult; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; Blood Pressure; Calcium Channel Blockers; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetic Nephropathies; Double-Blind Method; Female; Glomerular Filtration Rate; Humans; Kinetics; Lisinopril; Male; Nisoldipine; Placebos; Prospective Studies; Treatment Outcome

The present study was designed to evaluate the effects of an ACE inhibitor, lisinopril, and a calcium antagonist, nitrendipine, on urinary albumin excretion (UAE) and renal function in mild to moderate essential hypertensive patients with microalbuminuria. After the 4-week drug-free period, 17 patients were randomly divided into two groups. The first group (group 1: n=8) received lisinopril 10-20 mg daily for 8 weeks followed by nitrendipine 5-10 mg daily for another 8 weeks. The second group (group 2: n=9) received nitrendipine 5-10 mg daily for 8 weeks followed by lisinopril 10-20 mg daily for another 8 weeks. The mean blood pressure (MBP) significantly decreased in a similar manner in both groups. UAE significantly decreased after 8 weeks of treatment with lisinopril in group 1 and after 8 weeks of subsequent treatment with lisinopril in group 2. On the other hand, UAE was not altered by treatment with nitrendipine. The changes in UAE were significantly correlated with changes in MBP after 8 weeks of treatment with nitrendipine, but not after 8 weeks of treatment with lisinopril. No significant changes in creatinine clearance, urinary excretion of sodium or urinary N-acetyl-beta-D-glucosaminide were observed by any treatment in either group. These results suggest that lisinopril, not nitrendipine, reduces UAE in essential hypertensive patients with microalbuminuria independently of its effective antihypertensive properties.

Topics: Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Blood Pressure; Calcium Channel Blockers; Female; Humans; Hypertension; Kidney; Lisinopril; Male; Middle Aged; Nitrendipine; Severity of Illness Index

Administration of prednisolone causes an abrupt rise in proteinuria in patients with a nephrotic syndrome.. To clarify the mechanisms responsible for this increase in proteinuria we have performed a placebo controlled study in 26 patients with a nephrotic syndrome. Systemic and renal haemodynamics and urinary protein excretion were measured after prednisolone and after placebo.. After i.v. administration of 125-150 mg prednisolone total proteinuria increased from 6.66+/-4.42 to 9.37+/-6.07 mg/min (P<0.001). By analysing the excretion of proteins with different charge and weight (albumin, transferrin, IgG, IgG4 and beta2-microglobulin) it became apparent that the increase of proteinuria was the result of a change in size selectivity rather than a change in glomerular charge selectivity or tubular protein reabsorption. Glomerular filtration rate rose from 83+/-34 ml to 95+/-43 ml/min (P<0.001) after 5 h, whereas effective renal plasma flow and endogenous creatinine clearance remained unchanged. As a result filtration fraction was increased, compatible with an increased glomerular pressure, which probably contributes to the size selectivity changes. Since corticosteroids affect both the renin-angiotensin system and renal prostaglandins, we have evaluated the effects of prednisolone on proteinuria after pretreatment with 3 months of the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor lisinopril or after 2 weeks of the prostaglandin synthesis inhibitor indomethacin. Neither drug had any effect on prednisolone-induced increases of proteinuria.. Prednisolone increases proteinuria by changing the size selective barrier of the glomerular capillary. Neither the renin-angiotensin axis nor prostaglandins seem to be involved in these effects of prednisolone on proteinuria.

Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; beta 2-Microglobulin; Blood Pressure; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Female; Glomerular Filtration Rate; Heart Rate; Hemodynamics; Humans; Immunoglobulin G; Indomethacin; Injections, Intravenous; Lisinopril; Male; Middle Aged; Nephrotic Syndrome; Placebos; Prednisolone; Proteinuria; Renal Circulation; Transferrin

Intervention trials on renal function in IDDM patients with microalbuminuria (MA) should adopt the rate of decline of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) as an outcome measure. However, normotensive IDDM patients with MA show no change in GFR over a follow-up period of 10 years. Thus, in the present study, we used the cumulative incidence of progression to albuminuria (albumin excretion rate [AER] > 200 micrograms/min) from MA as the primary endpoint and the yearly increase in AER at a rate of 50% above baseline as the secondary end-point of renal function.. Ninety-two normotensive IDDM patients underwent double-blind, double-dummy treatment with either lisinopril or slow-release nifedipine in comparison with placebo. Ten patients discontinued the study during the 3-year follow-up period.. During the 3-year follow-up period, 7 of 34 placebo-treated (20.6%), 2 of 32 lisinopril-treated (6.3%), and 2 of 26 nifedipine-treated (7.7%) patients progressed to clinical albuminuria (Fisher's exact test, P < 0.03). Time-to-event analysis indicated a reduction in the risk of progression to macroalbuminuria of 58.1% (95% CI 27.8-68.4%) in the 32 patients on lisinopril (P < 0.02) and of 62.5% (95% CI 32.5-73.4%) in the 26 patients on nifedipine (P < 0.02) after adjustment for mean blood pressure, glycated hemoglobin, and baseline AER in comparison with the 34 patients on placebo. Baseline AER was 71 micrograms/min (range: 20.7-187.3) in progressors and 73 micrograms/min (range: 20.2-174.1) in nonprogressors (NS). The percentage of patients who showed a > 50% yearly increase of AER above baseline values was significantly lower in the lisinopril group (13 of 32, 40.6%, P < 0.02), but not in the nifedipine group (15 of 26, 57.7%), than in the placebo group (23 of 34, 67.6%). The lisinopril group had significantly lower blood pressure values during follow-up than either the nifedipine (P < 0.05) or the placebo (P < 0.01) group.. Our data show that both lisinopril and nifedipine are effective in delaying the occurrence of macroalbuminuria in normotensive IDDM patients with MA. As overt proteinuria strongly predicts end-stage renal failure, both treatments appear capable of preventing such a complication in normotensive IDDM patients with MA. However, lisinopril appears more powerful in slowing the course of nephropathy.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Blood Pressure; Creatinine; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetic Nephropathies; Disease Progression; Double-Blind Method; Electrocardiography; Female; Glomerular Filtration Rate; Glycated Hemoglobin; Humans; Italy; Lisinopril; Male; Middle Aged; Nifedipine; Potassium; Smoking; Time Factors; Vasodilator Agents

To study the effect of lisinopril on the exercise-induced urinary albumin excretion rate.. A total of 26 IDDM patients with normoalbuminuria were randomized into two groups, with one group receiving placebo (n = 13, age 36 +/- 3 years, BMI 24.5 +/- 1.1 kg/m2) and the other group receiving an average of 15 mg lisinopril daily (n = 13, age 34 +/- 2 years, BMI 24.4 +/- 0.9 kg/m2). Overnight and exercise-induced urinary albumin excretion rate was measured at baseline and after 1 and 2 years of treatment. Two patients in the placebo group and none in the lisinopril group developed microalbuminuria.. In the lisinopril group, the exercise-induced urinary albumin excretion rate diminished 46% after the 1st year (P = 0.059) and 66% (P < 0.01) after the 2nd year. However, it remained unchanged in the control group. Systolic blood pressure (sBP) and diastolic blood pressure (dBP) were similar at baseline and after 1 year, but at 2 years, sBP was 13 mmHg lower (P = 0.03) and dBP was 9 mmHg lower (P = 0.052) in the lisinopril group as compared with the control group. The dBP decreased significantly at 1 and 2 years in the lisinopril group, while there was no significant change in the sBP. In the whole group at baseline, the overnight albumin excretion rate correlated with HbA1c (r = 0.50, P < 0.01) and the duration of diabetes (r = 0.39, P < 0.05), and sBP correlated with both the overnight (r = 0.42, P < 0.05) and the exercise-induced (r = 0.48, P < 0.05) albumin excretion rate.. Glycemic control and blood pressure are directly related to the overnight albumin excretion rate also in normotensive normoalbuminuric IDDM patients. Lisinopril treatment reduces the exercise-induced urinary albumin excretion rate in such patients. These data suggest a protective effect of lisinopril against the development of microalbuminuria.

Topics: Adult; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Blood Glucose; Blood Pressure; Body Mass Index; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diastole; Exercise; Exercise Test; Follow-Up Studies; Glycated Hemoglobin; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Insulin; Lisinopril; Placebos; Systole; Time Factors

We examined whether the ACE gene insertion/deletion (I/D) polymorphism modulates renal disease progression in IDDM and how ACE inhibitors influence this relationship. The EURODIAB Controlled Trial of Lisinopril in IDDM is a multicenter randomized placebo-controlled trial in 530 nonhypertensive, mainly normoalbuminuric IDDM patients aged 20-59 years. Albumin excretion rate (AER) was measured every 6 months for 2 years. Genotype distribution was 15% II, 58% ID, and 27% DD. Between genotypes, there were no differences in baseline characteristics or in changes in blood pressure and glycemic control throughout the trial. There was a significant interaction between the II and DD genotype groups and treatment on change in AER (P = 0.05). Patients with the II genotype showed the fastest rate of AER progression on placebo but had an enhanced response to lisinopril. AER at 2 years (adjusted for baseline AER) was 51.3% lower on lisinopril than placebo in the II genotype patients (95% CI, 15.7 to 71.8; P = 0.01), 14.8% in the ID group (-7.8 to 32.7; P = 0.2), and 7.7% in the DD group (-36.6 to 37.6; P = 0.7). Absolute differences in AER between placebo and lisinopril at 2 years were 8.1, 1.7, and 0.8 microg/min in the II, ID, and DD groups, respectively. The significant beneficial effect of lisinopril on AER in the II group persisted when adjusted for center, blood pressure, and glycemic control, and also for diastolic blood pressure at 1 month into the study. Progression from normoalbuminuria to microalbuminuria (lisinopril versus placebo) was 0.27 (0.03-2.26; P = 0.2) in the II group, and 1.30 (0.33-5.17; P = 0.7) in the DD group (P = 0.6 for interaction). Knowledge of ACE genotype may be of value in determining the likely impact of ACE inhibitor treatment.

Topics: Adult; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Blood Pressure; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetic Nephropathies; Disease Progression; Follow-Up Studies; Genotype; Humans; Lisinopril; Middle Aged; Peptidyl-Dipeptidase A; Placebos; Polymorphism, Genetic; Time Factors

Our objective was to compare the effect of a long-acting calcium antagonist (nisoldipine) versus an ACE inhibitor (lisinopril) on albuminuria, arterial blood pressure, and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in hypertensive IDDM patients with diabetic nephropathy. We performed a 1-year, double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, controlled study comparing nisoldipine (20-40 mg once daily) with lisinopril (10-20 mg once daily) in 52 hypertensive IDDM subjects with diabetic nephropathy. Three patients dropped out, and results for the remaining 49 (25 nisoldipine, 24 lisinopril) are presented. Diuretics were required in 10 nisoldipine- and 8 lisinopril-treated patients. Every 3 months, 24-h ambulatory blood pressure (TM2420, A&D, Tokyo, Japan) and albuminuria in three 24-h samples (enzyme immunoassay) were measured; GFR (51Cr-EDTA plasma clearance) was recorded every 6 months. Mean arterial blood pressure (24 h) was reduced from (mean +/- SE) 108 +/- 3 mmHg at baseline to 101 +/- 2 in average during treatment in the lisinopril group and from 105 +/- 2 to 103 +/- 2 in the nisoldipine group (P = 0.06 comparing changes in the two groups). Albuminuria was reduced 47% (95% CI 21-65) in the lisinopril group versus an increase of 11% (-3 to 27) in the nisoldipine group (P = 0.001). Fractional albumin clearance was reduced 37% (95% CI 4-59%) in the lisinopril versus an increase of 35% (8-69%) in the nisoldipine group (P < 0.01). GFR decreased from 85 +/- 5 ml x min(-1) x 1.73 m(-2) to 73 +/- 5 in the lisinopril group and from 84 +/- 6 to 80 +/- 7 in the nisoldipine group (P < 0.05). The effect of study medication on albuminuria and GFR was independent of changes in systemic blood pressure and baseline variables in multiple regression analyses. In summary, lisinopril reduced albuminuria, but also GFR, to a greater extent than did nisoldipine in hypertensive IDDM patients with diabetic nephropathy during the 1st year of treatment. Longer follow-up is required to clarify whether these drugs have different renoprotective effects.

Topics: Adult; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; Blood Pressure; Calcium Channel Blockers; Chi-Square Distribution; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetic Angiopathies; Diabetic Nephropathies; Double-Blind Method; Female; Glomerular Filtration Rate; Humans; Hypertension; Lisinopril; Male; Nisoldipine; Patient Compliance; Renin; Time Factors

The aim of our study was to evaluate whether inhibition of ACE (lisinopril 10-20 mg/day) can reduce the rate of decline in kidney function more than reducing blood pressure with conventional antihypertensive treatment (atenolol 50-100 mg/day), usually in combination with a diuretic. We performed a prospective, randomized, parallel study for 42 months, double blind for the first 12 months and single blind thereafter. Forty-three (21 lisinopril and 22 atenolol) hypertensive NIDDM patients with diabetic nephropathy were enrolled. Data from 36 patients (17 lisinopril and 19 atenolol, 60 +/- 7 years of age, 27 men) who completed at least 12 months of the study period are presented. At baseline, the two groups were comparable: glomerular filtration rate (51Cr-EDTA plasma clearance) was 75 +/- 6 and 74 +/- 8 ml x min(-1) x 1.73 m(-2), mean 24-h ambulatory blood pressure (A&D TM2420) was 110 +/- 3 and 114 +/- 2 mmHg, and 24-h urinary albumin excretion rate was 961 (range 331-5,727) and 1,578 (476-5,806) mg/24 h in the lisinopril and atenolol groups, respectively. The mean follow-up time was similar, 37 and 35 months in the lisinopril and atenolol groups, respectively. Mean ambulatory blood pressure was equally reduced in the two groups, 12 +/- 2 and 10 +/- 2 mmHg in the lisinopril and atenolol groups, respectively. Glomerular filtration rate declined in a biphasic manner with a faster initial (0 to 6 months) change of 1.25 +/- 0.49 and 0.81 +/- 0.29 ml x min(-1) x month(-1) followed by a slower sustained decline (6 to 42 months) of 0.59 +/- 0.10 and 0.54 +/- 0.13 ml x min(-1) x month(-1) in the lisinopril and atenolol groups, respectively. No significant differences were observed in either initial or sustained decline in glomerular filtration rate between the two groups. Urinary albumin excretion was reduced (% reduction of baseline) more in the lisinopril than in the atenolol group, at 55 (95% CI 29-72) and 15% (-13 to 34), respectively (P = 0.01). In conclusion, the relentless decline in kidney function characteristically found in hypertensive NIDDM patients with diabetic nephropathy can be reduced equally effectively by two antihypertensive treatments, the beta-blocker atenolol and the ACE inhibitor lisinopril.

Topics: Aged; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Animals; Antihypertensive Agents; Atenolol; Blood Pressure; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Nephropathies; Double-Blind Method; Follow-Up Studies; Glomerular Filtration Rate; Humans; Hypertension, Renal; Kidney; Lisinopril; Male; Middle Aged; Prospective Studies; Rabbits; Single-Blind Method; Time Factors

Renal disease in people with insulin-dependent diabetes (IDDM) continues to pose a major health threat. Inhibitors of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) slow the decline of renal function in advanced renal disease, but their effects at earlier stages are unclear, and the degree of albuminuria at which treatment should start is not known.. We carried out a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the ACE inhibitor lisinopril in 530 men and women with IDDM aged 20-59 years with normoalbuminuria or microalbuminuria. Patients were recruited from 18 European centres, and were not on medication for hypertension. Resting blood pressure at entry was at least 75 and no more than 90 mm Hg diastolic, and no more than 155 mm Hg systolic. Urinary albumin excretion rate (AER) was centrally assessed by means of two overnight urine collections at baseline, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months.. There were no difference in baseline characteristics by treatment group; mean AER was 8.0 micrograms/min in both groups; and prevalence of microalbuminuria was 13% and 17% in the placebo and lisinopril groups, respectively. On intention-to-treat analysis at 2 years, AER was 2.2 micrograms/min lower in the lisinopril than in the placebo group, a percentage difference of 18.8% (95% CI 2.0-32.7, p = 0.03), adjusted for baseline AER and centre, absolute difference 2.2 micrograms/min. In people with normoalbuminuria, the treatment difference was 1.0 microgram/min (12.7% [-2.9 to 26.0], p = 0.1). In those with microalbuminuria, however, the treatment difference was 34.2 micrograms/min (49.7% [-14.5 to 77.9], p = 0.1; for interaction, p = 0.04). For patients who completed 24 months on the trial, the final treatment difference in AER was 38.5 micrograms/min in those with microalbuminuria at baseline (p = 0.001), and 0.23 microgram/min in those with normoalbuminuria at baseline (p = 0.6). There was no treatment difference in hypoglycaemic events or in metabolic control as assessed by glycated haemoglobin.. Lisinopril slows the progression of renal disease in normotensive IDDM patients with little or no albuminuria, though greatest effect was in those with microalbuminuria (AER > or = 20 micrograms/min). Our results show that lisinopril does not increase the risk of hypoglycaemic events in IDDM.

Topics: Adult; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Blood Pressure; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetic Nephropathies; Double-Blind Method; Female; Humans; Lisinopril; Male; Middle Aged

A double-blind, randomised, parallel group, multicentre, multinational study compared the effects of 12 months' treatment with lisinopril (10-20 mg once daily) or nifedipine retard tablets (20-40 mg twice daily) in 239 males (aged 18-75 years) and 96 post-menopausal females (aged 40-75 years). They all had a history of clinically stable type II diabetes > 3 months, microalbuminuria and early diabetic nephropathy (a urinary albumin excretion (UAE) rate ranging from 20 to 300 micrograms/min) and a sitting diastolic blood pressure (DBP) 90-100 mm Hg (Korotkoff phase V) inclusive at both entry and after 3-4 weeks' placebo treatment. The aim of treatment was to achieve a reduction in sitting DBP to < 90 mm Hg 24-30 h after the last dose of lisinopril or 12-18 hours after the last dose of nifedipine and to evaluate the effect of these treatments on UAE over 12 months. The effect of the two treatments on ambulatory blood pressure (BP) was also evaluated in a subset of patients. Management of diabetes with oral hypoglycaemic drugs, diet and insulin alone or in combination was permitted. Median UAE fell on lisinopril from 65.5 (range 20-297) micrograms/min at baseline to 39.0 (2-510) micrograms/min after 12 months. On nifedipine median UAE fell from 63.0 (range 20-289) micrograms/min at baseline to 58.0 (9-1192) micrograms/min after 12 months. The estimated median difference between the effects of the two treatments was 20 micrograms/min (P = 0.0006). Over 12 months both treatments produced similar falls in sitting BP from 163 +/- 17/99 +/- 6 mm Hg (mean +/- s.d.) to 147 +/- 18/88 +/- 10 mm Hg for lisinopril and from 161 +/- 18/97 +/- 5 mm Hg to 150 +/- 18/88 +/- 9 mm Hg for nifedipine. Ambulatory BP was assessed in a subset of patients and using areas under the BP-time curve (AUC) a comparison of the effects of the two treatments showed no between-treatment differences. Creatinine clearance, glycaemic control (HbA1c) and lipid profiles did not change significantly during either treatment. Frequency of withdrawals and adverse events were similar for both treatments. We conclude that lisinopril has a significantly more beneficial effect on UAE than nifedipine despite similar effects on both BP and glycaemic control in type II diabetic patients with hypertension.

Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Albuminuria; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Nephropathies; Double-Blind Method; Female; Humans; Hypertension; Lisinopril; Male; Middle Aged; Nifedipine

Physical exercise causes transient albuminuria. The mechanisms of postexercise albuminuria are not fully clarified but stimulation of the reninangiotensin system (RAS) probably plays a major role through intrarenal haemodynamic changes causing an elevated filtration pressure. In a randomised, double-blind, crossover study we compared the effects on urinary albumin excretion (UAE) of lisinopril (L) and atenolol (A) therapy, i.e. we aimed to investigate whether inhibition of the RAS or inhibition of beta1-adrenoceptor-mediated effects of the sympathetic nervous system differed with regard to changes in UAE. Sixteen patients with uncomplicated primary hypertension were studied. Four standardised bicycle ergometer exercise tests were performed, before and after each active treatment period. UAE 30 min postexercise, determined by radioimmunoassay, was significantly lowered by both treatments: -278 mu g center dot min-1 (L) and -199 mu g center dot min-1 (A). The reduction of postexercise UAE achieved by treatment with the angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor (L) was significantly greater than that achieved by the beta1-selective adrenoceptor blocker treatment. Blood pressure (BP) at rest and during exercise were equally reduced by both drugs. In conclusion, this study showed that antihypertensive treatment with an ACE inhibitor was more effective in reducing exercise-induced albuminuria than a beta1-selective adrenoceptor-blocking agent with a similar degree of BP reduction in patients with uncomplicated primary hypertension. This suggests that the RAS plays a major role in postexercise albuminuria in hypertensive subjects. The clinical significance of this finding, however, remains to be clarified.

Topics: Adrenergic beta-Antagonists; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Atenolol; Cross-Over Studies; Double-Blind Method; Exercise; Female; Humans; Hypertension; Lisinopril; Male; Middle Aged

Topics: Albuminuria; Delayed-Action Preparations; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Double-Blind Method; Humans; Hypertension; Lisinopril; Nifedipine

The purpose of the study was to compare the effect of treatment with an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (Lisinopril, MSD) or calcium blocker (Nifedipine retard, MSD) treatment during three months on blood pressure (measured with sphygmomanometric method and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring--ABPM) and urinary albumin excretion in essential hypertension class I acc. to WHO. Fifteen untreated patients aged 38 +/- 5 years with essential hypertension participated in the study and received diet with normal sodium content. Urinary albumin excretion was measured by RIA method in two 24 hour urine collections and mean value was calculated. ABPM was measured with Spacelabs monitor. After first examination 8 patients were randomly selected for the treatment with lisinopril and 7 patients to the treatment with nifedipine. The doses of both drugs were gradually adjusted to reach diastolic blood pressure below 90 mmHg. After 3 months of treatment urinary albumin excretion and blood pressure was found in both after treatment in patients treated with lisinopril but not in those receiving nifedipine. In patients treated with lisinopril a correlation between the decrease in systolic and diastolic blood pressure (measured by ABPM) and decrease of urinary albumin excretion was demonstrated. It was concluded that the normalization of blood pressure induced by lisinopril treatment in patients with uncomplicated essential hypertension and normoalbuminuria is accompanied with significant diminution of urinary albumin excretion which suggests preventive action of the drug in the development of microalbuminuria. Diminution of urinary albumin excretion caused by lisinopril is probably due to both the decrease of blood pressure and the specific renal action of the drug.

Topics: Adult; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Blood Pressure; Calcium Channel Blockers; Female; Humans; Hypertension; Lisinopril; Male; Nifedipine

The effects of the angiotensin-converting enzyme lisinopril were compared with those of the calcium antagonist nifedipine in 162 non-insulin-dependent diabetic hypertensive patients for a 24-week period. In 83 and 79 patients, respectively, lisinopril and slow-release nifedipine produced similar reductions in blood pressure (systolic/diastolic: -16/-13 mmHg supine and -14/-11 mmHg standing after lisinopril; -15/-12 mmHg supine and -14/-11 mmHg standing nifedipine). Fasting and post-prandial plasma glucose, glycosylated haemoglobin and plasma lipids appeared to be unaffected by either agent. Also, 28% of the patients on lisinopril and 30% of those on nifedipine presented microalbuminuria. Both drugs induced a reduction in the albumin excretion rate (AER). The geometric mean x:tolerance factor of the reduction in AER among the 23 microalbuminuric patients on lisinopril (-10.0 x:1.3 micrograms/min) was greater, though not significantly so, than that observed in the 26 on nifedipine (-0.9 x 1.2 micrograms/min). Moreover, lisinopril appeared to be better tolerated than nifedipine in our study population. Microalbuminuria is an important risk factor for cardiovascular mortality in non-insulin-dependent diabetic patients as well as in the general population. To what extent a reduction in the AER could ameliorate diabetic patients is, at present, unknown. Finally, both lisinopril and nifedipine showed a similar antihypertensive effect in these patients which was not associated with significant differences in plasma glucose, insulin or lipid concentrations. The clinical consequences of the insignificant differences in AER remain unclear.

Topics: Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; Blood Glucose; Blood Pressure; Calcium Channel Blockers; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Angiopathies; Double-Blind Method; Female; Glycated Hemoglobin; Humans; Hypertension; Insulin; Lisinopril; Male; Middle Aged; Nifedipine

Many patients with arterial hypertension have abnormal urinary excretion levels of albumin. This study was aimed at examining the effects of lisinopril and amlodipine on urinary excretion of albumin and kidney function. Thirty-six previously untreated patients with essential arterial hypertension were divided randomly into two groups. The first group received lisinopril 20 mg daily for 12 weeks followed by 10 mg amlodipine daily for another 12 weeks. The second group received 10 mg amlodipine daily for 12 weeks followed by 20 mg lisinopril daily for another 12 weeks. The arterial pressure decreased in a similar way with both therapies in both groups. In both groups urinary albumin excretion decreased in patients receiving lisinopril (p < 0.01). No significant changes were observed with amlodipine. This study shows that lisinopril, but not amlodipine, is able to reduce urinary excretion of albumin in patients with essential hypertension independently of its effective antihypertensive properties. It is probable that the positive effect of lisinopril on microalbuminuria is attributable to the modifications in intrarenal hemodynamics or to a change in glomerular permeability.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Albuminuria; Amlodipine; Female; Hemodynamics; Humans; Hypertension; Kidney; Lisinopril; Male; Middle Aged

Diabetic nephropathy is characterized by hypertension and a relentless decline in kidney function. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors have been claimed to preserve kidney function better than an equal blood pressure (BP) reduction with conventional antihypertensive treatment (renoprotection). We compared the effect on kidney function of lisinopril (10-20 mg/day) and atenolol (50-100 mg/day) in hypertensive NIDDM patients (mean age 60 +/- 8 years) with diabetic nephropathy. Forty-three (21 lisinopril and 22 atenolol) patients were enrolled in a 1-year randomized double-blind parallel study. Eight patients dropped out, and the results for the remaining 35 patients (16 lisinopril and 19 atenolol) are presented. Diuretics were required in 10 of 16 lisinopril patients and 12 of 19 atenolol patients. The following variables were measured: 24-hour ambulatory BP (Takeda TM2420), albuminuria (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay), fractional albumin clearance, and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) ([51Cr]EDTA technique). The average reduction in mean arterial BP during the 12 months was identical in the two groups 12 +/- 2 vs. 11 +/- 1 mmHg in the lisinopril and atenolol group, respectively. Albuminuria was on average reduced 45% in the lisinopril group vs. 12% in the atenolol group (P < 0.01), and fractional albumin clearance was on average reduced 49% in the lisinopril group vs. 1% in the atenolol group (P < 0.05). GFR declined identically in the two groups 11.7 +/- 2.3 vs. 11.6 +/- 2.3 ml.min-1.year-1 in the lisinopril and atenolol groups, respectively.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Topics: Albuminuria; Apolipoproteins; Apoprotein(a); Atenolol; Blood Pressure; Circadian Rhythm; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Nephropathies; Double-Blind Method; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Glomerular Filtration Rate; Humans; Hypertension; Kidney; Lipoprotein(a); Lisinopril; Male; Middle Aged; Potassium; Renin; Serum Albumin; Sodium; Time Factors; Triglycerides

Given the same level of arterial pressure control, studies in diabetic animal models have demonstrated certain classes of antihypertensive medication to confer better overall preservation of renal histologic features and function as well as reduced albuminuria when compared with other agents. The present study was designed to assess whether any differences exist among antihypertensive agents with regard to progression of diabetic renal disease and albuminuria in human subjects.. The study was a randomized, prospective, parallel group design that evaluated the effects of a converting enzyme inhibitor (lisinopril; group 1), a calcium antagonist (diltiazem hydrochloride; group 2), and a combination of a loop diuretic and a beta-blocker (furosemide and atenolol; group 3) in 30 subjects. All subjects received a low-salt, low-protein diet. Metabolic (blood glucose, cholesterol profiles, and urine urea nitrogen and sodium levels) as well as renal hemodynamic (renal blood flow and glomerular filtration rate) profiles and arterial pressure measurements were performed at various intervals during an 18-month period.. Both groups 1 and 2 had significantly slower rates of decline in glomerular filtration rate compared with group 3. No significant differences were observed in renal hemodynamics between groups 1 and 2 at 18 months. Group 3 had the worst metabolic, lipid, and side-effect profile of any group. Reductions in albuminuria were not different between groups 1 and 2, but both were significantly reduced compared with group 3.. Given a similar level of arterial pressure control, both lisinopril and diltiazem slow progression of diabetic renal disease and reduce albuminuria to a greater extent than does the combination of a loop diuretic and beta-adrenoreceptor antagonist. These drugs were also better tolerated and produced no adverse metabolic effects.

Topics: Albuminuria; Antihypertensive Agents; Atenolol; Diabetic Nephropathies; Diltiazem; Dipeptides; Furosemide; Glomerular Filtration Rate; Hemodynamics; Humans; Lisinopril; Middle Aged; Prospective Studies; Renal Circulation

The presence of slightly increased urinary albumin excretion (UAE), even at levels well below levels detectable by an ordinary dipstick, has been suggested as a predictor of cardiovascular morbidity and as a reflection of the degree of overall vascular permeability. The aim of the present investigation was to study the effects of two different antihypertensive drug regimens, an ACE inhibitor and a beta-adrenoceptor antagonist, on the low UAE rate observed in subjects with uncomplicated, mild to moderate primary hypertension. After a 4-week placebo run-in period, 49 patients (mean age 54 y) were randomly assigned in a double blind manner either to further 4 weeks on placebo (P, n = 15), 8 weeks on lisinopril (L, n = 17; 20 mg/40 mg o.d.) or 8 weeks on atenolol (A, n = 17; 50 mg/100 mg o.d.). The 24-h UAE was measured every second week. At entry and after 4 weeks the glomerular filtration rate and the renal plasma flow were measured. Both drugs lowered blood pressure (BP) to a similar extent after 4 and 8 weeks of treatment; the blood pressures were 160/106 (P), 159/104 (L) and 154/103 (A) at entry, and 133/83 (L) and 134/87 (A) at the end of the study after 8 weeks. On entry the 24-h UAE in all patients ranged from 4 to 49 mg (mean 14.1 mg), and it did not differ significantly between groups.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Topics: Adult; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; Atenolol; Blood Pressure; Dipeptides; Double-Blind Method; Female; Hemodynamics; Humans; Hypertension; Kidney; Lisinopril; Male; Middle Aged

An open, randomized, cross-over study was undertaken to assess the effects of lisinopril and nifedipine on albumin excretion, renal haemodynamics and segmental tubular reabsorption in overt diabetic nephropathy. The study consisted of a 4-week run-in period, a 3-week active treatment period, a 4-week wash-out period and a second 3-week active treatment period. Twelve patients with type 1 diabetes with albuminuria, mild to moderate hypertension and a serum creatinine level of less than 200 mumol l-1 were included. Lisinopril reduced albumin excretion from 1343 +/- 337 micrograms min-1 to 879 +/- 299 micrograms min-1 (P less than 0.01), whereas nifedipine was without effect, 1436 +/- 336 micrograms min-1 vs. 1319 +/- 342 micrograms min-1. Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was unchanged by either drug. Both drugs increased effective renal plasma flow (ERPF) by about 20%. No differences between the drugs were observed with regard to their effect on renal haemodynamic parameters. By contrast, nifedipine exerted an inhibitory effect on several proximal tubular transport markers, whereas lisinopril was without effect. The different actions on tubular transport mechanisms exerted by lisinopril and nifedipine may contribute to the observed effect on albumin excretion.

Topics: Adult; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Biological Transport; Blood Pressure; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetic Nephropathies; Enalapril; Female; Glomerular Filtration Rate; Hemodynamics; Humans; Kidney; Kidney Tubules; Lisinopril; Lithium; Male; Nifedipine; Sodium

The benefit of dual blockade of the renin-angiotensin system is limited by adverse effects. We performed a secondary analysis of the Veterans Affairs Nephropathy in Diabetes (VA NEPHRON-D) Study to describe the effect of increased intensity of renin-angiotensin system blockade on the incidence, risk factors, and outcomes of AKI.. The incidence of AKI was 12.2 (95% confidence interval, 10.5 to 14.0) versus 6.7 (95% confidence interval, 5.6 to 8.2) per 100 patient-years in the combination arm versus monotherapy arms (P<0.001). Individuals with AKI were more likely to develop the primary study end point of death, ESRD, or decline in kidney function (hazard ratio, 1.78; 95% confidence interval, 1.34 to 2.26; P<0.001). Patients with AKI in the combination arm had greater recovery of kidney function (75.9% versus 66.3%; P=0.04), lower 30-day mortality (4.7% versus 15.0%; P<0.01), and lower hazard for development of the primary study end point (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.37 to 0.98).. Dual renin-angiotensin system blockade was associated with an increased risk of AKI compared with monotherapy, but AKI in the setting of monotherapy was associated with lower rates of recovery of kidney function, higher mortality, and higher risk of progression of kidney disease.

Topics: Acute Kidney Injury; Aged; Albuminuria; Blood Pressure; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Glomerular Filtration Rate; Heart Failure; Humans; Incidence; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Lisinopril; Losartan; Male; Middle Aged; Recovery of Function; Renin-Angiotensin System; Risk Factors

The aim of study was to evaluate the effect of commonly used lisinopril, rosuvastatin and their combined action on site-specific nephrotoxicity in rats using clusterin and microalbumin nephrotoxic biomarkers and other related parameters using oral gavage. Rosuvastatin at 2 different doses showed increase in urinary microalbumin levels whereas lisinopril and its combination with rosuvastatin at 2 different doses did not show urinary microalbumin excretion indicating beneficial effects of lisinopril in terms of reducing microalbumin. Urinary clusterin levels significantly increased in high-dose treated animals of lisinopril and rosuvastatin. The use of lisinopril plus rosuvastatin at low dose also led to worsened renal function by raising urinary clusterin levels (217 ± 4.6 ng/ml) when compared with the control (143 ± 3.3 ng/ml). Renal histopathology showed multifocal regeneration of tubules indicating proximal tubule damaged. These results indicate that lisinopril (50 mg/kg), rosuvastatin (100 mg/kg), lisinopril+rosuvastatin (20+40 mg/kg) and lisinopril+rosuvastatin (50+100 mg/kg) showed toxicity only on proximal tubules.

Topics: Acute Kidney Injury; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Animals; Biomarkers; Clusterin; Drug Combinations; Female; Fluorobenzenes; Kidney Tubules, Proximal; Lisinopril; Pyrimidines; Rats; Rats, Wistar; Rosuvastatin Calcium; Sulfonamides

Topics: Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetic Angiopathies; Diabetic Nephropathies; Glomerular Filtration Rate; Humans; Lisinopril; Renin-Angiotensin System

Topics: Albuminuria; Antihypertensive Agents; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Hypertension, Renal; Lisinopril; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tetrazoles; Valine; Valsartan

We studied tubular and glomerular damage in type 1 diabetic patients by measuring urinary-liver fatty acid binding protein (U-LFABP) and albuminuria. Subsequently, we evaluated the effect of ACE inhibition on U-LFABP in patients with diabetic nephropathy.. We studied Caucasians with type 1 diabetes: 58 with normoalbuminuria (urinary albumin <30 mg/24 h), 45 with persistent microalbuminuria (30-300 mg/24 h), and 45 with persistent macroalbuminuria (> or =300 mg/24 h). A control group consisted of 57 healthy individuals. The groups were matched by sex and duration of diabetes. In addition, U-LFABP was measured in 48 type 1 diabetic patients with diabetic nephropathy in a randomized crossover trial consisting of 2 months of treatment with 20, 40, and 60 mg lisinopril once daily in random order.. In the cross-sectional study, levels of U-LFABP were significantly higher in normoalbuminuric patients versus those in the control group (median 2.6 [interquartile range 1.3-4.1] vs. 19 [0.8-3.0] microg/g creatinine, P = 0.02) and increased with increasing levels of albuminuria (microalbuminuric group 4.2 [1.8-8.3] microg/g creatinine and nephropathy group 71.2 [8.1-123.4], P < 0.05 for all comparisons). U-LFABP correlates with the urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (R(2) = 0.54, P < 0.001). In the intervention study, all doses of lisinopril significantly reduced urinary albumin excretion rate and U-LFABP from baseline. The reductions in U-LFABP were 43, 46, and 40% with increasing doses of lisinopril (NS).. An early and progressive increase in tubulointerstitial damage as reflected by increased U-LFABP levels occurs in type 1 diabetic patients and is associated with albuminuria. Furthermore, ACE inhibition reduces the tubular and glomerular damage and dysfunction.

Topics: Adult; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Case-Control Studies; Creatinine; Cross-Sectional Studies; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetic Nephropathies; Fatty Acid-Binding Proteins; Female; Humans; Lisinopril; Male; Middle Aged

The number of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) has continuously grown worldwide. Treatment with antihypertensive agents reduces the rate of progression of CKD, however, there is still a large unmet need to develop strategies for the treatment of CKD. Although we have previously reported that the antifibrotic agent, SMP-534 inhibits the progression of CKD, it is unknown whether combination therapy with SMP-534 and antihypertensive agent shows additive effects on CKD. In present study, we examined whether combination therapy with SMP-534 and the antihypertensive agent, lisinopril is more effective than single therapy with SMP-534 or lisinopril on five-sixths nephrectomized (5/6Nx) rat model. Combination therapy with SMP-534 (50 mg/kg) and lisinopril (5 mg/kg) significantly decreased urinary albumin excretion, blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and serum creatinine and increased creatinine clearance in 5/6Nx rats. On the other hands, single treatment with SMP-534 or lisinopril did not improve renal function at this dose. In addition, combination therapy with SMP-534 and lisinopril significantly decreased extracellular matrix (ECM) accumulation in renal glomeruli and tubulointerstitial injury. These data suggest that combination therapy with an antifibrotic agent and an antihypertensive agent may offer a new therapeutic option for suppressing the progression of CKD.

Topics: Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Animals; Antihypertensive Agents; Benzamides; Blood Urea Nitrogen; Creatinine; Disease Models, Animal; Drug Therapy, Combination; Extracellular Matrix; Kidney; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Lisinopril; Male; Nephrectomy; Protective Agents; Rats; Rats, Sprague-Dawley

Topics: Albuminuria; Antihypertensive Agents; Benzimidazoles; Biphenyl Compounds; Diabetic Nephropathies; Double-Blind Method; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Hypertension; Lisinopril; Multicenter Studies as Topic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tetrazoles; Treatment Outcome

This study compared the cardiovascular and renal effects of long-term telmisartan (3 and 10 mg/kg/day)and lisinopril (10 mg/kg/day) in an animal model combining hypertension and diabetes mellitus. It was a parallel-group study of diabetic, spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHR), treated with control or active treatment for eight months. A non-diabetic SHR control group was run in parallel. Diabetes was induced by streptozotocin (45 mg/kg i.v.) in SHRs aged 9-10 weeks. Animals were treated with telmisartan (3 or 10mg/kg/day), lisinopril (10 mg/kg/day) or vehicle. Plasma glucose levels, blood pressure (BP), and urinary protein and albumin excretion were measured monthly. Telmisartan treatment significantly reduced BP of diabetic SHRs in a dose-dependent manner (p<0.05, low-dose, n= 18; p<0.01, high-dose, n=15). The BP reduction in the lisinopril group was similar to that in the telmisartan 10 mg/kg/day group. Compared with non-diabetic SHRs, untreated diabetic SHRs developed severe proteinuria and albuminuria over the experimental period (p<0.01). In diabetic SHRs, proteinuria and albuminuria were dose-dependently and significantly attenuated by treatment with telmisartan (p<0.01 with the higher dose) and lisinopril (p<0.01). Compared with the untreated diabetic SHRs, cardiac hypertrophy was significantly reduced after treatment with both doses of telmisartan and with lisinopril. Telmisartan, 10 mg/kg/day, but not lisinopril, significantly attenuated the diabetes-induced increase in glomerular volume. In conclusion, telmisartan, 10 mg/kg/day, is at least as beneficial as lisinopril, 10 mg/kg/day, in lowering BP, reducing cardiac hypertrophy and attenuating renal excretion of protein and albumin in this model.

Topics: Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Animals; Antihypertensive Agents; Benzimidazoles; Benzoates; Blood Pressure; Diabetes Mellitus, Experimental; Diabetic Angiopathies; Hyperglycemia; Hypertension; Kidney; Kidney Glomerulus; Lisinopril; Male; Organ Size; Proteinuria; Rats; Rats, Inbred SHR; Reference Values; Telmisartan

In a previous study, we demonstrated that doxazosin (DZN), an alpha(1)-adrenergic blocker, prevented proteinuria in streptozotocin diabetic rats. In this study, we investigated whether DZN would lower established proteinuria by improving glomerular sclerosis in spontaneously hypertensive corpulent rats with type 2 diabetes mellitus. DZN treatment was compared with treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, lisinopril (LIS) alone, and DZN in combination with LIS. Combination therapy was used to examine any additive effect of either drug alone in the reduction of proteinuria and glomerular sclerosis. Both male and female rats age 6 months with established proteinuria were used. The rats were allocated randomly to 1 of 4 groups: untreated, DZN treated, LIS treated, or a combination of DZN and LIS treatment. Drug treatment was continued for 16 weeks. The results show that (1) either drug alone or in combination significantly lowered systolic blood pressure; (2) DZN, LIS, or combination therapy reduced albuminuria at 16 weeks of treatment from baseline by 38.61+/-5.77%, 30.70+/-4. 21%, and 42.17+/-4.77% (mean+/-SE), respectively. No difference in albuminuria was observed among the 3 groups of rats; (3) the fractional mesangial area, which was 20.55+/-3.77% in untreated rats, was significantly reduced to 11.18+/-1.32% in DZN-treated rats, with a further reduction to 8.72+/-0.64% in LIS-treated rats and to 3.48+/-0.35% in rats treated with DZN+LIS; and (4) DZN but not LIS significantly improved plasma glucose levels in spontaneously hypertensive corpulent rats (untreated 21.06+/-0.97 mmol/L versus DZN treated 15.81+/-0.93 mmol/L or DZN+LIS treated 17.38+/-1.10 mmol/L; P<0.025 to 0.005). Thus, the data suggest that 16-week treatment with either DZN or LIS improves established proteinuria and glomerular sclerosis, but combination therapy is superior to either DZN or LIS alone in preventing glomerular sclerosis in type 2 diabetic rats with hypertension.

Topics: Albuminuria; Animals; Antihypertensive Agents; Blood Glucose; Blood Pressure; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Nephropathies; Doxazosin; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Hypertension; Kidney Glomerulus; Lisinopril; Male; Rats; Rats, Inbred SHR; Systole

Clinical studies indicate a nephro-protective effect in conjunction with the use of ACE inhibitors. This study's aim was to determine whether ACE inhibitors influence the metabolism of glomerular cells in addition to their known hemodynamic effects. Streptozotocin diabetic rats were treated with lisinopril (DLis 1.5 mg/l water), or hydralazine (Dhyd, 50 mg/l water) over 4 weeks. Untreated diabetic rats (DC) and non-diabetic rats (C) served as controls. After four weeks of treatment, urinary excretion of albumin, blood pressure and metabolic control (Glyc-Hb) were measured. After treatment glomeruli were isolated and homogenized, and beta-NAG and total proteolytic activity against azocasein were measured. Glycated hemoglobin levels were similar in all diabetic groups (DC, 12%, Dhyd, 10%; DLis 11%). Blood pressure of DLis rats (79 +/- 3 mmHg) and DHyd rats (46 +/- 2 mmHg) was lower than that of DC rats (111 +/- 3 mmHg). Urinary albumin excretion of diabetic groups was lowest in DLis. Diabetic rats showed a decrease in glomerular beta-NAG (10 vs. 60.5 U/g protein) and total proteolytic activity against azocasein (148 vs. 170 U/mg protein hour) compared to non-diabetic rats. Lisinopril increased beta-NAG (30 vs. 14 U/g protein) and total proteolytic activity (160.5 vs. 141.5 U/mg protein hour) compared with hydralazine. Our study confirms that the nephro-protective effect of ACE inhibitors is partially due to modulatory effects on the metabolism of basement membrane proteins.

Topics: Acetylglucosaminidase; Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Animals; Blood Pressure; Body Weight; Diabetes Mellitus, Experimental; Endopeptidases; Glycated Hemoglobin; Hydralazine; Kidney Glomerulus; Lisinopril; Male; Rats; Rats, Wistar; Reference Values

Chronic nephropathies are associated with enhanced renal synthesis of endothelin (ET)-1. A recent study demonstrated that an ET(A) receptor antagonist given to diabetic rats at the moment of disease induction prevented the development of renal injury. Here we investigated whether an unselective ET(A)/ET(B) receptor antagonist, PD 142,893, was renoprotective when given to streptozotocin diabetic rats when animals were already proteinuric. The effect of PD 142,893 was compared with that of an ACE inhibitor, lisinopril, known to retard progressive renal disease in experimental and human diabetes. PD 142,893 normalized systemic blood pressure, reduced urinary protein and albumin excretion, and ameliorated renal blood flow in diabetic rats, but it did not affect such parameters in control rats. Lisinopril had a renoprotective effect comparable to PD 142,893, although lisinopril controlled systemic blood pressure better. Northern blot analysis of ET-1 mRNA revealed upregulation of ET-1 gene in the diabetic kidney. Similar results were obtained by in situ hybridization in glomeruli and tubuli of diabetic rats. Both treatments remarkably attenuated exaggerated renal ET-1 gene expression. These data suggest that ET-1 is a contributory mediator of kidney damage in diabetes and indicate that ET receptor antagonists may represent a new therapeutic mean for treatment of progressive diabetic nephropathy.

Topics: Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Animals; Blood Pressure; Cohort Studies; Diabetes Mellitus, Experimental; Diabetic Nephropathies; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Endothelin Receptor Antagonists; Endothelin-1; Follow-Up Studies; In Situ Hybridization; Kidney; Lisinopril; Male; Oligopeptides; Pilot Projects; Proteinuria; Rats; Rats, Sprague-Dawley; RNA, Messenger; Time Factors

Topics: Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Blood Pressure; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetic Nephropathies; Disease Progression; Humans; Kidney; Lisinopril

Topics: Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Blood Pressure; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetic Nephropathies; Humans; Lisinopril; Research Design

Topics: Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetic Nephropathies; Disease Progression; Humans; Lisinopril

Topics: Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Blood Pressure; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetic Nephropathies; Humans; Lisinopril

Topics: Albuminuria; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetic Nephropathies; Glomerular Filtration Rate; Humans; Hypertension; Lisinopril; Ramipril

Topics: Albuminuria; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Nephropathies; Humans; Hypertension; Lisinopril; Male; Smoking