We have located links that may give you full text access.
Clinical Trial
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Efficacy and tolerability profile of nebivolol vs atenolol in mild-to-moderate essential hypertension: results of a double-blind randomized multicentre trial.
Blood Pressure. Supplement 2003 December
The objective of this 12-week double-blind randomized multicentre study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of nebivolol, a recently developed beta-blocking agent with vasodilating properties, to the classical beta-blocker atenolol. After a placebo run-in phase, 205 mild-to-moderate middle-age essential hypertensives were randomized to either nebivolol 5 mg daily (n = 105) or atenolol 100 mg daily (n = 100) over a period of 12 weeks. The primary endpoint of the study was the change in sitting systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP respectively) from baseline to week 12 of treatment. The two drugs induced similar significant antihypertensive effects, the SBP and DBP reduction amounting to -18.2 +/-14.0 and -14.6 +/-7.9 mmHg (mean +/- SD) for atenolol and -19.1 +/-12.9 and -14.8 +/- 7.1 for nebivolol (p < 0.01 for all). This was the case also for standing blood pressure. Sitting and standing heart rate values were significantly reduced by both drugs, the bradicardic response induced by nebivolol treatment being significantly less than atenolol. Distribution of responders and non- responders was similar for nebivolol and atenolol, while the former drug showed a better tolerability profile and a lower incidence of side-effects. These data provide evidence, that, for the same antihypertensive effects, nebivolol shows a better tolerability profile than atenolol and a lower incidence of adverse effects.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app