4.5 Article

Comparative effects of nebivolol and metoprolol on oxidative stress, insulin resistance, plasma adiponectin and soluble P-selectin levels in hypertensive patients

期刊

JOURNAL OF HYPERTENSION
卷 24, 期 3, 页码 591-596

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.hjh.0000209993.26057.de

关键词

hypertension; insulin resistance; nebivolol; oxidative stress

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives To determine the effects of nebivolol on oxidative stress, insulin resistance, adiponectin and plasma soluble P-selectin levels in hypertensive patients in comparison with metoprolol. Material and methods Eighty newly diagnosed hypertensive patients in grade 1 hypertension according to the European Society of Hypertension and European Society of Cardiology guidelines were enrolled in this prospective, blinded, randomized study. Seventy-two patients completed the study. After baseline assessment, each patient was randomly allocated to a 5 mg daily dose of nebivolol (n = 37, 20 male) or a 100 mg daily dose of metoprolol (n = 35, 18 male) and treated for 6 months. Blood pressure, heart rate, oxidative stress (malonyldialdehyde), homeostasis model assessment: insulin resistance, adiponectin and plasma soluble P-selectin levels were measured before and after treatment. Results At the end of treatment, nebivolol and metoprolol significantly decreased blood pressure and heart rate, with a more pronounced bradycardic effect of metoprolol. Nebivolol, but not metoprolol, significantly lowered oxidative stress (P = 0.03), the insulin resistance index (P = 0.003) and plasma soluble P-selectin levels (P = 0.008), and increased adiponectin levels (P = 0.04). Conclusion Nebivolol, in contrast to metoprolol, improved oxidative stress, insulin sensitivity, decreased plasma soluble P-selectin and increased adiponectin levels in hypertensive patients. These beneficial effects of nebivolol may contribute to a reduction in cardiovascular risk in hypertensive patients.

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

4.5
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