Effects of nisoldipine and lisinopril on left ventricular mass and function in diabetic nephropathy

Citation
L. Tarnow et al., Effects of nisoldipine and lisinopril on left ventricular mass and function in diabetic nephropathy, DIABET CARE, 22(3), 1999, pp. 491-494
Citations number
18
Categorie Soggetti
Endocrynology, Metabolism & Nutrition","Endocrinology, Nutrition & Metabolism
Journal title
DIABETES CARE
ISSN journal
01495992 → ACNP
Volume
22
Issue
3
Year of publication
1999
Pages
491 - 494
Database
ISI
SICI code
0149-5992(199903)22:3<491:EONALO>2.0.ZU;2-0
Abstract
OBJECTIVE - To compare the effects of the calcium channel blocker, nisoldip ine, and the ACE inhibitor, lisinopril, on left ventricular mass (LVM) and systolic function in type 1 diabetic patients with diabetic nephropathy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS - M-mode echocardiography was performed in 50 h ypertensive type 1 diabetic patients with diabetic nephropathy enrolled in a 1-year, randomized, double-blind, parallel study of antihypertensive trea tment with nisoldipine CC (20-40 mg/day) or lisinopril (10-20 mg/day). Ambu latory 24-h blood pressure was measured with the Takeda TM 2420 device (A & D, Tokyo, Japan) every 3 months. Three patients dropped out and seven pati ents were excluded due to technical difficulties. RESULTS - The 24-h diastolic blood pressure was reduced from 83 to 80 mmHg in the nisoldipine group (P = 0.06) and from 85 to 80 mmHg in the lisinopri l group (P = 0.02). The decline in systolic blood pressure was not signific ant with any of the two treatments, and no difference in reduction of blood pressure was seen between groups. LVM corrected for body surface area (LVM I) was comparable between groups at baseline and increased from 96 +/- 5 to 107 +/- 6 g/m(2) (mean +/- SEM; P = 0.007) in the nisoldipine group and fr om 95 +/- 4 to 103 +/- 5 g/m(2) (P = 0.03) in the lisinopril group. The mea n difference between the change in LVMI in the two groups was 2.9 (95% CI - 6.8 to 12.7) g/m(2). The prevalence of left ventricular hypertrophy rose fr om 18 (95% CI 6-30) to 30% (16-44) during the study period. A multiple line ar regression analysis revealed that after 1 year of treatment, LVMI increa sed with higher systolic blood pressure level and declining glomerular filt ration rate (R-2 = 0.25). Fractional shortening was within normal range at baseline, 42 +/- 1 vs. 41 +/- 1% with nisoldipine and lisinopril, respectiv ely and did not change during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS - Antihypertensive treatment with nisoldipine or lisinopril to bring diastolic blood pressure level within the normal target range does no t hinder a rise in LVMI in type 1 diabetic patients with diabetic nephropat hy.