{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.036903329322101885, 'fraction_numerical': 0.02486963497793823, 'mean_word_length': 4.882075471698113, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 1, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Effects of amlodipine and lisinopril on left ventricular mass and diastolic function in previously untreated patients with mild to moderate diastolic hypertension.

The aim of the study was to compare the effects of two long-acting antihypertensive agents, the calcium-antagonist amlodipine and the ACE inhibitor lisinopril, on left ventricular mass and diastolic filling in patients with mild to moderate diastolic hypertension from primary care centres. It is a 1-year prospective, double-blind, randomized, parallel group, comparative study. Patients between 25 and 75 years of age with untreated hypertension with elevated diastolic blood pressure (> or = 95 mmHg) on three occasions (twice on the first visit and once only on the second and third visits) were recruited from a population survey. After 4 weeks placebo run-in 71 patients were randomized to dosages of amlodipine 5-10 mg or lisinopril 10-20 mg, which were titrated on the basis of the effects on blood pressure. Fifty-nine patients completed the study period. Primary endpoints were left ventricular mass index and early to atrial peak filling velocity. Office and ambulatory blood pressure and other echocardiographic measurements were considered secondary. Decrease in blood pressure was equal for both treatment regimens. A statistically significant decrease in left ventricular mass index in both treatment groups was observed: -11.0 g/m2 (95% CI: -6.0, -16.1) in the amlodipine group and -12.6 g/m2 (95% CI: -8.2, -17.0) in the lisinopril group. The higher the baseline value of left ventricular mass before treatment, the more the decrease after treatment. Early to atrial peak filling velocity did not change significantly within the treatment groups: +0.07 (95% CI: -0.01, +0.15) in the amlodipine group and +0.01 (95% CI: -0.06, +0.08) in the lisinopril group. However, analysis of time measurements of the early peak showed significant changes for both treatment groups. No significant differences in primary and secondary endpoints between treatment groups were found. Twelve patients did not complete the study, seven in amlodipine and five in lisinopril, basically due to adverse events. The effects of amlodipine and lisinopril on left ventricular mass and early to atrial filling peak velocity after 1 year of treatment in patients with previously untreated mild to moderate hypertension are similar. Further studies are recommended, particularly with a larger sample size and a follow-up of longer duration.