• Wei Yang, Yu Jie Zhou, Yan Fu, Jian Qin, Shu Qin, Xiao Min Chen, Jin Cheng Guo, De Zhao Wang, Hong Zhan, Jing Li, Jing Yu He, and Qi Hua.
• Department of Geriatrics, Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
• Yonsei Med. J. 2017 Jan 1; 58 (1): 105-113.

PurposeUrapidil is putatively effective for patients with hypertension and acute heart failure, although randomized controlled trials thereon are lacking. We investigated the efficacy and safety of intravenous urapidil relative to that of nitroglycerin in older patients with hypertension and heart failure in a randomized controlled trial.Materials And MethodsPatients (>60 y) with hypertension and heart failure were randomly assigned to receive intravenous urapidil (n=89) or nitroglycerin (n=91) for 7 days. Hemodynamic parameters, cardiac function, and safety outcomes were compared.ResultsPatients in the urapidil group had significantly lower mean systolic blood pressure (110.1±6.5 mm Hg) than those given nitroglycerin (126.4±8.1 mm Hg, p=0.022), without changes in heart rate. Urapidil was associated with improved cardiac function as reflected by lower N terminal-pro B type natriuretic peptide after 7 days (3311.4±546.1 ng/mL vs. 4879.1±325.7 ng/mL, p=0.027) and improved left ventricular ejection fraction (62.2±3.4% vs. 51.0±2.4%, p=0.032). Patients given urapidil had fewer associated adverse events, specifically headache (p=0.025) and tachycardia (p=0.004). The one-month rehospitalization and all-cause mortality rates were similar.ConclusionIntravenous administration of urapidil, compared with nitroglycerin, was associated with better control of blood pressure and preserved cardiac function, as well as fewer adverse events, for elderly patients with hypertension and acute heart failure.

39 keywords...

hide…