Different effects on rat arterial pressure and heart rate when losartan is injected into the third or fourth ventricle

Cardiovascular responses to central losartan (LOS), a non-peptide angiotensin II (ANG II) receptor antagonist, were investigated by comparing the effects of LOS injection into the 3rd and 4th cerebral ventricles (3rdV, 4thV) on mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR). Adult male Holtzman rats were used (N=6 animals per group). Average basal MAP and HR were 114±3 mmHg and 343±9 bpm (N=23), respectively. LOS (50, 100 or 200 nmol/2 μl) injected into the 3rdV induced pressor (peak of 25±3 mmHg) and tachycardic (peak of 60±25 bpm) responses. LOS injected into the 4thV had no effect on MAP, but it induced bradycardia (peak of -35±15 bpm). KCl (200 nmol/2 μl) injected into the 3rdV or into the 4thV had no effect on either MAP or HR compared to 0.9% saline injection. The results indicate that LOS injected into the third ventricle acts on forebrain structures to induce its pressor and tachycardic effects and that bradycardia, likely dependent on hindbrain structures, is obtained when LOS is injected into the fourth ventricle.

Effects of intracerebroventricular injections of losartan or PD123319 on arterial pressure and heart rate of sodium replete and sodium deplete rats

Angiotensin II (Ang II) non-peptide antagonists were injected i.c.v. (6.25-200 nmol, n = 5-8 rats/group): In sodium replete rats, losartan (AT1 receptor antagonist) induced an increase in mean arterial pressure (MAP) and in heart rate (HR) by 3rd ventricular (3rdV) injection, and a weaker pressor response and bradycardia by 4th ventricular (4thV) injection. PD123319 (AT2 receptor antagonist) induced an increase in MAP and in HR by 3rdV injection, and an increase in MAP and no alteration in HR by 4thV injection. In sodium deplete (furosemide plus removal of ambient sodium for 24 h) rats, losartan induced an increase in MAP and no alteration in HR by 3rdV injection, and no alteration in MAP and bradycardia by 4thV injection. PD123319 induced an increase in MAP and in HR by 3rdV injection, and an increase in MAP and bradycardia by 4thV injection. Thus, there was no fall in MAP by central injections of Ang II antagonists. Intravenous injection of losartan, but not of PD123319, induced a fall in MAP in both sodium replete and sodium deplete animals. Therefore, losartan and PD123319 can have similar effects on MAP and HR when injected intracerebroventricularly, although some differences are also present. The bradycardia is consistent with an withdrawal of Ang II inhibitory action on baroreflex.

Efficacy and Tolerability of the Combination Valsartan/Hydrochlorothiazide Compared with Amlodipine in a Mild-to-moderately Hypertensive Brazilian Population

Most hypertensive patients need more than one drug to reach recommended blood-pressure targets. We investigated the effects on 24-h ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) of the angiotensin-receptor blocker, valsartan, in combination with hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ), compared with the calcium-channel blocker amlodipine in a Brazilian population in a multicentre, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel group, controlled study in 373 patients with essential hypertension. After a 2-week washout period, patients with a mean sitting systolic blood pressure (SBP) of 160-190 mmHg were randomized to receive either valsartan 160 mg o.d., or amlodipine 5 mg o.d. for 2 weeks and subsequently force-titrated to valsartan 160 mg/HCTZ 25 mg o.d. or amlodipine 10 mg o.d. This regimen was continued until the end of the study at week 8. The primary efficacy parameter was the change from baseline to week 8 in mean 24-h SBP. Secondary endpoints were change in mean 24-h diastolic blood pressure (DBP), tolerability and safety of treatments. Valsartan/HCTZ achieved a mean reduction in systolic ABP of -19.1 ± 11.3 mmHg compared with -20.7 ± 12.0 mmHg with amlodipine (p = 0.324 for the comparison) and in diastolic ABP by -11.1 ± 7.4 mmHg vs -11.6 ± 7.2 mmHg by amlodipine (p = 0.853 for the comparison). The valsartan/HCTZ group exhibited markedly lower rates of adverse events and discontinuations than the amlodipine group. Peripheral oedemas were far more frequent with amlodipine than with valsartan/HCTZ (1.6% with valsartan/HCTZ; 16.8% with amlodipine). Thus, the valsartan 160 mg/HCTZ 25 mg combination appears to be as efficacious as amlodipine 10 mg in this patient population but better tolerated.