We compared the efficacy and tolerability of the lercardipine and amlodpine on intima–media thickness (IMT) in newly diagnosed hypertensive patients.Design and Method:
An open label, controlled, randomized, parallel-group study was conducted on 100 newly diagnosed hypertensive patients (blood pressure [BP] > 140/90 mmHg) from Oct 2010 to May 2012 in Eulji University Hospital. Patients were allocated randomly two groups to receive amlodipine 5–10 mg or Lercardipine10–20 mg and followed up for 2 years. The endpoint was the change from baseline of the combined mean maximum far wall IMT of carotid artery, evaluated by repeated measurement analysis of the treatment effect and adverse events after first and second years of treatment.Results:
Both lercanidipine and amlodipine were similarly able to significantly reduce mean systolic BP (SBP)/diastolic BP (DBP), mean 24hr day-time and night-time BP monitor. In particular, mean SBP/DBP was reduced from 160 ± 21/94 ± 13 mmHg to 142 ± 21/87 ± 12 mmHg in the lercanidipine group (p < 0.001 for both SBP and DBP) and from 163 ± 18/96 ± 12 mmHg to 141 ± 19/81 ± 14 mmHg in the amlodipine-treated group (p < 0.001 for both SBP and DBP). After 2 years of treatment, amlodipine decreased IMT by 0.089 mm [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.144 - 0.037]. Lecardipine decreased IMT by 0.065 mm (95% CI 0.124 - 0.010). No statistical difference was observed between the two treatments in the reduction of IMT. Both treatments achieved the greatest reduction of IMT after first and year, whereas the reduction in BP was maintained. Lercanidipine showed a better tolerability profile than amlodipine, with fewer adverse events and a lower percentage of patients suffering from peripheral edema.Conclusions:
Lercanidipine is as effective as amlodipine reduced IMT to a similar extent in newly diagnosed hypertensive patients and presents tolerablility in the adverse events.