Publications (3)7.21 Total impact
-
Article: Hypertension and migraine comorbidity: prevalence and risk of cerebrovascular events: evidence from a large, multicenter, cross-sectional survey in Italy (MIRACLES study).
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To estimate the prevalence of hypertension-migraine comorbidity; to determine their demographic and clinical characteristics versus patients with hypertension or migraine alone; and to see whether a history of cerebrovascular events was more common in the comorbidity group. The MIRACLES, multicenter, cross-sectional, survey included 2973 patients with a known diagnosis of hypertension or migraine in a general practitioner setting in Italy. Five hundred and seventeen patients (17%) suffered from hypertension-migraine comorbidity, whereas 1271 (43%) suffered from hypertension only, and 1185 (40%) from migraine only. In the comorbidity group, the onset of comorbidity occurred at about 45 years of age, with migraine starting significantly later than in the migraine-only group, and hypertension significantly before than in the hypertension-only group; a familial history of both hypertension and migraine had a significantly higher frequency as compared with the hypertension and migraine group. Compared to hypertension (3.1%) and migraine (0.7%), the comorbidity group had a higher prevalence (4.4%) of history of cerebrovascular events, with an odds ratio of a predicted history of stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA) of 1.76 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01-3.07] compared to the hypertension group. In patients without other recognized risk factors for stroke, stroke/TIA occurred more frequently in the comorbidity group, compared to the hypertension group. In the age range 40-49 years, prevalence of history of stroke/TIA was five-fold greater (4.8% in comorbidity vs. 0.9% in hypertension group). This cross-sectional study indicates that the prevalence of comorbidity hypertension-migraine is substantial and that patients with comorbidity have a higher probability of history of cerebrovascular events, compared to hypertensive patients.Journal of hypertension 02/2011; 29(2):309-18. · 4.02 Impact Factor -
Article: Ambulatory monitoring of systolic hypertension in the elderly: Eprosartan/hydrochlorothiazide compared with losartan/hydrochlorothiazide (INSIST trial).
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Systolic hypertension is very common in the elderly and is strongly associated with the risk of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events. The control of systolic hypertension is difficult and most patients require combination antihypertensive therapy. Few data are available regarding the efficacy of angiotensin II receptor antagonists on systolic hypertension of the elderly. The aim of this double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, parallel-group, multicenter study was to assess the efficacy of eprosartan 600 mg in combination with hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 12.5 mg in comparison with losartan 50 mg in combination with HCTZ 12.5 mg, in reducing blood pressure in elderly patients with grade 2 systolic hypertension who did not optimally respond to eprosartan or losartan monotherapy. After a 3-week placebo wash-out, 155 patients with an Office trough sitting systolic blood pressure (Office sitSBP) >or=160 mmHg and <180 mmHg were randomized to eprosartan 600 mg (n=78) or losartan 50 mg (n=77) once daily for 6 weeks. In patients not optimally responding to monotherapy (Office sitSBP>or=130 mmHg) 12.5 mg HCTZ was added as fixed combination once daily for 6 weeks. A 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) was performed at the end of wash-out and at the end of the fixed-combination period. No statistically significant difference was found between eprosartan/HCTZ and losartan/HCTZ on the primary endpoint (24-hour ABPM SBP) with an adjusted mean difference between treatments of 3.1 mmHg (95% CI: -0.32-6.59). However, the mean 24-hour ABPM SBP significantly decreased by 16.7 mmHg with eprosartan/HCTZ and 20.3 mmHg with losartan/HCTZ (P<0.001 vs. baseline). The mean Office sitSBP significantly decreased by 28.7 mmHg and 29.6 mmHg respectively, with eprosartan/HCTZ and losartan/HCTZ (P<0.001 vs.baseline and vs. monotherapy). In this study, eprosartan/HCTZ did not demonstrate to be superior to losartan/HCTZ in reducing ABPM systolic hypertension in the elderly.Advances in Therapy 06/2010; 27(6):365-80. · 2.11 Impact Factor -
Article: Double-blind, randomized, multicenter study comparing the effect of betahistine and flunarizine on the dizziness handicap in patients with recurrent vestibular vertigo.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The aim of this double-blind, randomized, multicenter study was to compare the efficacy of betahistine dihydrochloride (BH) and flunarizine (FL) using the Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI), a validated self-assessment questionnaire that has not previously been used in a clinical trial to evaluate antivertigo drugs. Patients with recurrent vertigo of peripheral vestibular origin and who were severely handicapped by vertigo were randomized to an 8-week course of treatment with oral BH 48 mg daily or oral FL 10 mg daily. The efficacy endpoints were the total DHI score and the physical, functional and emotional subscores. Fifty-two patients completed the study. After 8 weeks of treatment the mean total DHI score and the physical subscore were significantly lower in the BH group compared to the FL group (7.5 and 3.6 points, respectively). The mean total DHI score as well as the three subscores decreased significantly after 4 and 8 weeks in both treatment groups. This study showed that at 8 weeks BH is significantly more effective than FL in terms of improving the total DHI score and the physical subscore. It was also established that the DHI is a useful and reliable method for evaluating the efficacy of antivertigo drugs.Acta Oto-Laryngologica 07/2003; 123(5):588-93. · 1.08 Impact Factor
