No abstract

The CREATE-ECLA Randomized Controlled TrialThe CREATE-ECLA Trial Group Investigators* See also pp 427 and 489.

Objective Despite antihypertensive treatment, most hypertensive patients still have high blood pressure (BP), notably high systolic blood pressure (SBP). The EFFICIENT study examines the efficacy and acceptability of a single-pill combination of sustained-release (SR) indapamide, a thiazide-like diuretic, and amlodipine, a calcium channel blocker (CCB), in the management of hypertension.MethodsPatients who were previously uncontrolled on CCB monotherapy (BP≥140/90 mm Hg) or were previously untreated with grade 2 or 3 essential hypertension (BP≥160/100 mm Hg) received a single-pill combination tablet containing indapamide SR 1.5 mg and amlodipine 5 mg daily for 45 days, in this multicenter prospective phase 4 study. The primary outcome was mean change in BP from baseline; percentage of patients achieving BP control (BP<140/90 mm Hg) was a secondary endpoint. SBP reduction (ΔSBP) versus diastolic BP reduction (ΔDBP) was evaluated (ΔSBP/ΔDBP) from baseline to day 45. Safety and tolerability were also assessed.Results Mean baseline BP of 196 patients (mean age 52.3 years) was 160.2/97.9 mm Hg. After 45 days, mean SBP decreased by 28.5 mm Hg (95% CI, 26.4 to 30.6), while diastolic BP decreased by 15.6 mm Hg (95% CI, 14.5 to 16.7). BP control (<140/90 mm Hg) was achieved in 85% patients. ΔSBP/ΔDBP was 1.82 in the overall population. Few patients (n = 3 [2%]) reported side effects, and most (n = 194 [99%]) adhered to treatment.ConclusionIn patients who were previously uncontrolled on CCB monotherapy or untreated with grade 2 or 3 hypertension, single-pill combination indapamide SR/amlodipine reduced BP effectively—especially SBP— over 45 days, and was safe and well tolerated.Trial RegistrationClinical Trial Registry – India CTRI/2010/091/000114

This study confirms the safety and efficacy of indigenous tenecteplase in Indian patients with STEMI, including high risk subgroups. It also highlights the fact that delayed treatment denotes denial of benefits of pharmacologic reperfusion therapy.

The present paper reports differences between office blood pressure (BP) measurement (OBPM) and ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM) in a large multi-centre Indian all comers' population visiting primary care physicians. ABPM and OBPM data from 27,472 subjects (aged 51 ± 14 years, males 68.2%, treated 45.5%) were analysed and compared. Patients were classified based on the following hypertension thresholds: systolic BP (SBP) ≥ 140 and/or diastolic BP (DBP) ≥90 mmHg for OBPM, and SBP ≥ 130 and/or DBP ≥ 80 mmHg for 24-h ABPM, and SBP ≥ 120 and/or DBP ≥ 70 mmHg for night-time ABPM and SBP ≥ 135 and/or DBP ≥ 85 mmHg for daytime ABPM, all together. White coat hypertension (WCH) was seen in 12.0% (n = 3304), masked hypertension (MH) in 19.3% (n = 5293) and 55.5% (n = 15,246) had sustained hypertension. Isolated night-time hypertension (INH) was diagnosed in 11.9% (n = 3256). Untreated subjects had MH relatively more often than treated subjects (23.0% vs. 14.8%, p < 0.0001; respectively). Females had higher relative risk (RR) of having WCH than males (RR 1.16 [CI 95, 1.07-1.25], p < 0.0001). Whereas, males had higher RR of MH than females (RR 1.09 [CI 95, 1.02-1.17] p < 0.01). INH subjects had lower average systolic and diastolic dipping percentages (0.7 ± 6.6/ 2.2 ± 7.9 vs. 9.0 ± 7.3/11.9 ± 8.5, p < 0.001) than those without INH. In conclusion, for diagnosis of hypertension there was a contradiction between OBPM and ABPM in approximately one-third of all patients, and a substantial number of patients had INH. Using ABPM in routine hypertension management can lead to a reduction in burden and associated costs for Indian healthcare. Supplementary informationThe online version of this article (https://