Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

Effect of benazepril addition to amlodipine on ankle oedema and subcutaneous tissue pressure in hypertensive patients

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of benazepril addition to amlodipine antihypertensive treatment on ankle–foot volume (AFV) and pretibial subcutaneous tissue pressure (PSTP), two objective measures of ankle oedema. A total of 32 mild to moderate essential hypertensives (DBP>90 and <110 mmHg), aged 30–70 years were studied. After a 4-week placebo period, they were randomized to amlodipine 5 mg o.d. or benazepril 10 mg o.d. or amlodipine 5 mg plus benazepril 10 mg o.d. for 4 weeks, according to a crossover design. At the end of the placebo period and of each active treatment period, blood pressure,AFV and PSTP were evaluated. AFV was measured using the principle of water displacement. PSTP was assessed using a system, the subcutaneous pretibial interstitial enviroment with a water manometer. Both amlodipine and benazepril monotherapy significantly reduced SBP (−18.2±4 and −17.8±4 mmHg, respectively, P<0.01 vs baseline) and DBP (−12.1±3 and −11.7±3 mmHg, respectively, P<0.01); the reduction was increased by the combination (−24.2±5 mmHg for SBP, P<0.001 and −16.8±4 mmHg for DBP, P<0.001). Amlodipine monotherapy significantly increased both AFV (+17.1%, P<0.001 vs baseline) and PSTP (+56.6%, P<0.001 vs baseline). As compared to amlodipine alone, the combination produced a less pronounced increase in AFV (+5.5%, P<0.05 vs baseline and P<0.01 vs amlodipine) and PSTP (+20.5%, P<0.05 vs baseline and P<0.01 vs amlodipine). Ankle oedema was clinically evident in 11 patients with amlodipine monotherapy and in three patients with the combination. These results suggest that ACE-inhibitors partially counteract the microcirculatory changes responsible for Ca-antagonists-induced oedema formation.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Joint National Committee on Prevention. Detection, evaluation and treatment of high blood pressure: The sixth report of the Joint National Committee on prevention, detection, evaluation and treatment of high blood pressure. Arch Intern Med 1997; 157: 2413–2446.

  2. OMS/ISH Guidelines Committee. 1999 World Health Organization—International Society of Hypertension. Guidelines for the Management of Hypertension. J Hypertens 1999; 17: 151–183.

  3. Materson BJ et al. Single drug therapy for hypertension in men. N Engl J Med 1993; 328: 914–921.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Sica DA . Fixed-dose combination antihypertensive drugs. Do they have a role in rational therapy? Drugs 1994; 48: 16–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Waeber B, Brunner HR . Combination antihypertensive therapy: does it have a role in rational therapy? Am J Hypertens 1997; 10: 131S–137S.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Messerli FH . Combinations in the treatment of hypertension: ACE-inhibitors and Calcium-antagonists. Am J Hypertens 1999; 12: 868–908.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Kaplan NM . Low-dose combination therapy: the rationalization for an ACE inhibitor and a calcium channel blocker in higher risk patients. Am J Hypertens 2001; 14: 8S–11S.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Guazzi MD et al. Calcium channel blockade with nifedipine and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibition with captopril in the therapy of patients with severe primary hypertension. Circulation 1984; 80: 279–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kuschnir E, Acuna E, Sevilla D . Treatment of patients with essential hypertension: amlodipine 5 mg/benazepril 20 mg compared with amlodipine 5 mg, benazepril 20 mg and placebo. Clin Ther 1996; 18: 1213–1223.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Gradman AH et al, for the Enalapril-Felodipine ER Factorial Study Group (1997). Combined enalapril and felodipine extended release (ER) for systemic hypertension. Am J Cardiol 1997; 79: 431–435.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Messerli FH, Oparil S, Feng Z . Comparison of efficacy and side effects of combination therapy of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (benazepril) with calcium antagonist (either nifedipine or amlodipine) versus high dose calcium antagonist monotherapy for systemic hypertension. Am J Cardiol 2000; 86: 1182–1187.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Gustafsson D . Microvascular mechanisms involved in calcium antagonist edema formation. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1987; 10 (Suppl 1): S121–S131.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Salmasi AM, Belcaro G, Nicolaides AN . Impaired venoarteriolar reflex as a possible cause for nifedipine-induced ankle oedema. Int J Cardiol 1991; 30: 303–307.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Messerli FH . Vasodilatory edema: a common side effect of antihypertensive therapy. Am J Hypertens 2001; 14: 978–979.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Gustafsson D, Grande PO, Borgstrom P, Lindberg L . Effects of calcium antagonists on myogenic and neurogenic control of resistance and capacitance vessels in cat muscle. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1988; 12: 413–422.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Pedrinelli R, Dell’Olmo G, Melillo E, Mariani M . Amlodipine, enalapril and dependent leg edema in essential hypertension. Hypertension 2000; 35: 621–625.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. van Hamersvelt HW et al. Oedema formation with the vasodilators nifedipine and diazoxide: direct local effect or sodium retention? J Hypertens 1996; 14: 1041–1045.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lauderer A . Die Gewebspannung in ihren Einfluss anf die Örtliche Blut -vud Lymphbewegung. Leipzig: Fogel FCW, P. 174.

  19. Burch GE, Sodeman WA . The estimation of subcutaneous pressure by direct method. J Clin Invest 1937; 16: 845–850.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Malamani V . Modificazioni della pressione dei tessuti nell’edema provocato. Boll Soc Ital Biol Sper 1947; 23: 125–131.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Malamani V . La pressione dei tessuti. Pavia, Italy: Tipografia Popolare 485, 1957.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Weir M, Rosenberger C, Fink JC . Pilot study to evaluate a water displacement tecnique to compare effects of diuretics and ACE inhibitors to alleviate lower extremity edema due to dihydropyrisine calcium antagonists. Am J Hypertens 2001; 14: 963–968.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Fogari R et al. Comparative effect of lercanidipine and nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system on ankle volume and subcutaneous interstitial pressure in hypertensive patients: a double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study. Curr Ther Res 2000; 61: 850–862.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R Fogari.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fogari, R., Malamani, G., Zoppi, A. et al. Effect of benazepril addition to amlodipine on ankle oedema and subcutaneous tissue pressure in hypertensive patients. J Hum Hypertens 17, 207–212 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.jhh.1001533

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.jhh.1001533

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links