Skip to main content
Log in

1,4-Dihydropyridines versus beta-blockers for hypertension: Are either safe for the heart?

  • Editorial: Focus on Calcium Antagonists
  • Published:
Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Fast-absorbed and short-acting dihydropyridines (e.g., nifedipine capsules) cause intermittent hemodynamic effects associated with sympathetic hyperactivity. In contrast, long-acting dihydropyridines, such as nifedipine GITS and amlodipine, provide, during chronic treatment, stable hemodynamic effects with little or no activation of the sympathetic nervous system. This markedly different pattern of hemodynamic changes may explain why the short-acting drugs cause little to no regression of left ventricular hypertrophy, may make angina worse, and may negatively affect cardiac outcome, whereas the long-acting drugs decrease LV mass as anticipated from the fall in blood pressure and, at least in stable coronary artery disease, produce an outcome comparable with beta-blockers. In hypertension, beta-blocker treatment appears to be associated with a short fall in positive outcome, perhaps in part related to increased rates of sudden death. Such an adverse outcome may also be due to sympathetic hyperactivity, possibly during treatment via cardiac alpha-receptors, but also during the common short periods of noncompliance due to actual increased sympathetic responses. For both drug classes, we suggest that long-acting agents be considered, providing therapeutic coverage well beyond the normal dosing interval.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  1. Jaglal SB, Tu JV, Naylor CD. Higher in-hospital mortality in female patients following coronary artery bypass surgery: A population-based study. Clin Invest Med 1995;18: 99–107.

    Google Scholar 

  2. MRC Working Party. Medical Research Council Trial of treatment of hypertension in older adults: Principal results. Br Med J 1992;304:405–412.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Stone PH, Muller JE, Turi ZG, et al. Efficacy of nifedipine therapy in patients with refractory angina pectoris: Significance of the presence of coronary vasospasm. Am Heart J 1983;106:644–652.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Boden WE, Korr KS, Bough EW. Nifedipine-induced hypotension and myocardial ischemia in refractory angina pectoris. JAMA 1985:253:1131–1135.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Held PH, Yusuf S, Furberg CD. Calcium channel blockers in acute myocardial infarction and unstable angina: An overview. Br Med J 1989;299:1187–1190.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Goldbourt U, Behar S, Reicher-Reiss H, et al. Early administration of nifedipine in suspected acute myocardial infarction: The secondary prevention reinfarction Israel nifedipine trial 2 study. Arch Intern Med 1993;153:345–353.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Muller JE, Morrison J, Stone PH, Rude Re, et al. Nifedipine therapy for patients with threatened and acute myocardial infarction: A randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled comparison. Circulation 1984;69:740–747.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Lichtlen PR, Hugenholtz PG, Rafflenbeul W, et al. Retardation of angiographic progression of coronary artery disease by nifedipine. Results of the International Nifedipine Trial on Antiatherosclerotic Therapy (INTACT). Lancet 1990;335:1109–1113.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Waters D, Lesperance J, Francetich M, et al. A controlled clinical trial to assess the effect of a calcium channel blocker on the progression of coronary atherosclerosis. Circulation 1990;82:1940–1953.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Opie LH, Messerli FH. Nifedipine and mortality. Grave defects in the dossier. Circulation 1995;92:1068–1073.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Yusuf S, Held PH, Furberg CD. Update of effects of calcium antagonists in myocardial infarction or angina in light of the Second Danish Verapamil Infarction Trial (DAVIT-II) and other recent studies. Am J Cardiol 1991;67: 1295–1297.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Furberg CD, Psaty BM. Calcium antagonists: Not appropriate as first line antihypertensive agents. Am J Hypertension 1996;9:122–125.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Psaty BM, Heckbert SR, Koepsell TD, et al. The risk of myocardial infarction associated with antihypertensive drug therapies. JAMA 1995;274:620–625.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Pahor M, Guralnik JM, Corti M-C, et al. Long-term survival and use of antihypertensive medications in older persons. J Am Geriatr Soc 1995;43:1191–1197.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Ruzicka M, Leenen FHH. Relevance of intermittent increases in sympathetic activity for adverse outcome on short acting calcium antagonists. In: Laragh J.H. and Brenner, B.M. eds. Hypertension: Pathophysiology, Diagnosis and Management, 2nd ed. 1995;2815–2825.

  16. Ruzicka M, Leenen FHH. Relevance of 24 H blood pressure profile and sympathetic activity for outcome on short versus long-acting 1,4-dihydropyridines. Am J Hypertens 1996;9: 86–94.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Furberg CD, Psaty BM, Meyer JV.Nifedipine. Dose-related increase in mortality in patients with coronary heart disease. Circulation 1995;92:1326–1331.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Savonitto S, Ardissino D, Egstrup K, et al. Combination therapy with metoprolol and nifedipine versus monotherapy in patients with stable angina pectoris. Results of the international multicenter angina exercise (IMAGE) study. J Am Coll Cardiol 1996;27:311–316.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Fox KM, Mulcahy D, Findlay I, Ford I, Dargie HJ, on behalf of the TIBET study group: The Total Ischaemic Burden European Trial (TIBET). Effects of atenolol, nifedipine SR and their combination on the exercise test and the total ischaemic burden in 608 patients with stable angina. Eur Heart J 1996;17:96–103.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Dargie HJ, Ford I, Fox KM, on behalf of the TIBET study group. Total Ischaemic Burden European Trial (TIBET). Effects of ischaemia and treatment with atenolol, nifedipine SRS and their combination on outcome in patients with chronic stable angina. Eur Heart J 1996;17:104–112.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Neaton JD, Grimm RH, Prineas RJ, Stamler J, et al. Treatment of mild hypertension study. Final results. JAMA 1993;270:713–724.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Aursnes I, Litleskare I, Froyland H, Abdelnoor M: Association between various drugs used for hypertension and risk of acute myocardial infarction. Blood Pressure 1995;4: 157–163.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Cruickshank JM, Lewis J, Moore V, et al. Reversibility of left ventricular hypertrophy by differeing types of antihypertensive therapy. J Hum Hypertens 1992;6:85–90.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Middlemost SJ, Sack M, Davis J, et al. Effects of long-acting nifedipine on casual office blood pressure measurements, 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure profiles, exercise parameters and left ventricular mass and function in black patients with mild to moderate systemic hypertension. Am J Cardiol 1992;70:474–478.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Fagard R, Lunen P, Staessen J, Thijs L, Amery A. Mechanical and other factors relating to left ventricular hypertrophy. Blood Pressure 1994;3 (Suppl 1):5–10.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Beard K, Bulpitt C, Mascie-Taylor H, O'Malley K, Sever P, Webb S. Management of elderly patients with sustained hypertension. Br Med J 1992;4:412–416.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Lever AF, Ramsay LE. Treatment of hypertension in the elderly. J Hypertens 1995;13:571–579.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Siscovick DS, Raghunathan TE, Psaty BM, et al. Diuretic therapy and the risk of primary cardiac arrest. N Engl J Med 1994;330:1852–1857.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Hoes AW, Grobbee DE, Lubsen J, et al. Diuretics, β-blockers and the risk for sudden cardiac death in hypertensive patients. Ann Intern Med 1995;123:481–487.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Olsson G, Tuomilehto J, Berglund G, Elmfeldt D, et al. Primary prevention of sudden cardiovascular death in hypertensive patients. Mortality results from the MAPHY study. Am J Hypertension 1991;4:151–158.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Julius S. Sympathetic hyperactivity and coronary risk in hypertension. Hypertension 1993;21:886–893.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Leenen FHH, Holliwell DL. Antihypertensive effect of felodipine associated with persistent sympathetic activation and minimal regression of left ventricular hypertrophy. Am J Cardiol 1992;69:639–645.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Lindquist M, Kahan T, Melcher A, et al. Acute and chronic calcium antagonist treatment elevates sympathetic activity in primary hypertension. Hypertension 1994;24:287–296.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Leenen FHH, Fourney A. Comparison of effects of amlodipine vs. diltiazem on 24 hour blood pressure, plasma catecholamines and left ventricular mass. Am J Cardiol 1996, in press.

  35. Reeves RA, Boer WH, Deleve L, Leenen FHH. Beta-blockade disappearance rate predicts beta-adrenergic hypersensitivity. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1989;46:279–290.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Houston MC, Hodge R. Beta-adrenergic blocker withdrawal syndromes in hypertension and other cardiovascular diseases. Am Heart J 1988;116:515–523.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Gallagher EJ, Viscoli CM, Horwitz RI. The relationship of treatment adherence to the risk of death after myocardial infarction in women. JAMA 1993;270:742–744.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Psaty BM, Koepsell TD, Wagner EH, et al. The relative risk of incident coronary heart disease associated with recently stopping the use of β-blockers. JAMA 1990;263: 1653–1657.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Leenen FHH. Therapeutic coverage and end-organ protection in hypertension. Clin Cardiol 1996, in press.

  40. Jicks H, Dervy LE, Gurewich V, Vasilakis C. The risk of myocardial infarction associated with antihypertensive drug treatment in persons with uncomplicated essential hypertension. Pharmacotherapy 1996;16:321–326.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Leenen, F.H.H. 1,4-Dihydropyridines versus beta-blockers for hypertension: Are either safe for the heart?. Cardiovasc Drug Ther 10, 397–402 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00051102

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00051102

Key Words

Navigation