Academic Journals Database
Disseminating quality controlled scientific knowledge

The comparative cost-efficacy analysis of various antihypertensive therapies

Author(s): S.V. Malchikova | E.I. Tarlovskaya

Journal: Racionalʹnaâ Farmakoterapiâ v Kardiologii
ISSN 1819-6446

Volume: 5;
Issue: 5;
Start page: 35;
Date: 2009;
Original page

Keywords: combined therapy | arterial hypertension | cost-efficacy analysis.

Aim. To perform the comparative cost-efficacy analysis of various antihypertensive therapies in hypertensives patients.Material and methods. 140 hypertensive patients with history of ineffective antihypertensive therapy were randomized in to 4 groups, 35 patients in each one. Patients of Group A received indapamide retard plus perindopril; group B - indapamide retard plus amlodipine; group C - amlodipine plus lisinopril; group D - amlodipine plus bisoprolol. The Russian version of general questionnaire MOS-SF-36 was applied for quality of a life estimated. Endothelium function was evaluated with B-mode ultrasonography (Acuson 128 ХР/10).Albuminuria level was detected by immunoturbometric method (Integra-700, Roche).Results. The drug combination B had the least cost. The drug combination C was the most effective. The drug combination C was the most economically rational. The drug combination A was the least economically rational for BP reduction. However the drug combination A was comparable with drug combination C in effects on quality of life and on endothelium function, and it was the most economically rational for albuminuria reduction.Conclusion. Indapamide retard plus perindopril combination is the most economically rational in patients with target-organ lesions (nephropathy). Lisinopril plus amlodipine combination is economically rational in patients without target-organ lesions.
Why do you need a reservation system?      Affiliate Program