4.3 Article

Nitric oxide, erectile dysfunction and beta-blocker treatment (MR NOED study): Benefit of nebivolol versus metoprolol in hypertensive men

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1440-1681.2007.04551.x

关键词

erectile function; hypertension; metoprolol; nebivolol

向作者/读者索取更多资源

1. Hypertensive men treated with beta-blockers frequently complain of erectile dysfunction. The present study investigated the effects of two beta(1)-adrenoceptor-selective antagonists, namely nebivolol and metoprolol, on erectile function in hypertensive men. 2. Male out-patients (age range 40-55 years) with newly diagnosed or existing stage 1 essential hypertension (mean seated systolic blood pressure 140-159 mmHg; diastolic blood pressure 90-99 mmHg) were enrolled in the study. All patients lived in a stable, heterosexual partnership and had no history of sexual dysfunction. After a 2 eek placebo run-in period, patients were randomized double-blind to either Treatment group A (comprising nebivolol 5 mg once daily for 12 weeks, followed by placebo for 2 weeks and then metoprolol succinate 95 mg once daily for 12 weeks) or Treatment group B (comprising metoprolol succinate 95 mg for 12 weeks, placebo for 2 weeks and then nebivolol 5 mg for 12 weeks). An international index of erectile function (IIEF) questionnaire and a diary documented patients' sexual function and activity. 3. Nebivolol and metoprolol lowered blood pressure to a similar extent. Metoprolol, but not nebivolol, significantly decreased the IIEF erectile function subscore by 0.92 in the first 8 weeks after onset of beta-blocker treatment. In contrast with metoprolol, nebivolol improved secondary sexual activity scores and other IIEF subscores. 4. Despite similar antihypertensive efficacy of the cardioselective beta(1)-adrenoceptor antagonists nebivolol and metoprolol, nebivolol may offer additional benefits by avoiding erectile dysfunction in male hypertensive patients on long-term beta-adrenoceptor antagonist therapy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据