1-1banner
 
medpundit
 

 
Commentary on medical news by a practicing physician.
 

 
Google
  • Epocrates MedSearch Drug Lookup




  • MASTER BLOGS





    "When many cures are offered for a disease, it means the disease is not curable" -Anton Chekhov




    ''Once you tell people there's a cure for something, the more likely they are to pressure doctors to prescribe it.''
    -Robert Ehrlich, drug advertising executive.




    "Opinions are like sphincters, everyone has one." - Chris Rangel



    email: medpundit-at-ameritech.net

    or if that doesn't work try:

    medpundit-at-en.com



    Medpundit RSS


    Quirky Museums and Fun Stuff


    Who is medpundit?


    Tech Central Station Columns



    Book Reviews:
    Read the Review

    Read the Review

    Read the Review

    More Reviews

    Second Hand Book Reviews

    Review


    Medical Blogs

    rangelMD

    DB's Medical Rants

    Family Medicine Notes

    Grunt Doc

    richard[WINTERS]

    code:theWebSocket

    Psychscape

    Code Blog: Tales of a Nurse

    Feet First

    Tales of Hoffman

    The Eyes Have It

    medmusings

    SOAP Notes

    Obels

    Cut-to -Cure

    Black Triangle

    CodeBlueBlog

    Medlogs

    Kevin, M.D

    The Lingual Nerve

    Galen's Log

    EchoJournal

    Shrinkette

    Doctor Mental

    Blogborygmi

    JournalClub

    Finestkind Clinic and Fish Market

    The Examining Room of Dr. Charles

    Chronicles of a Medical Mad House

    .PARALLEL UNIVERSES.

    SoundPractice

    Medgadget
    Health Facts and Fears

    Health Policy Blogs

    The Health Care Blog

    HealthLawProf Blog

    Facts & Fears

    Personal Favorites

    The Glittering Eye

    Day by Day

    BioEdge

    The Business Word Inc.

    Point of Law

    In the Pipeline

    Cronaca

    Tim Blair

    Jane Galt

    The Truth Laid Bear

    Jim Miller

    No Watermelons Allowed

    Winds of Change

    Science Blog

    A Chequer-Board of Night and Days

    Arts & Letters Daily

    Tech Central Station

    Blogcritics

    Overlawyered.com

    Quackwatch

    Junkscience

    The Skeptic's Dictionary



    Recommended Reading

    The Doctor Stories by William Carlos Williams


    Pox Americana: The Great Smallpox Epidemic of 1775-82 by Elizabeth Fenn


    Intoxicated by My Illness by Anatole Broyard


    Raising the Dead by Richard Selzer


    Autobiography of a Face by Lucy Grealy


    The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat by Oliver Sacks


    The Sea and Poison by Shusaku Endo


    A Midwife's Tale by Laurel Thatcher Ulrich




    MEDICAL LINKS

    familydoctor.org

    American Academy of Pediatrics

    General Health Info

    Travel Advice from the CDC

    NIH Medical Library Info

     



    button

    Friday, February 14, 2003

    Battle of the Studies: Last December, a study came out in JAMA that concluded that diuretics are superior to ACE inhibitors for the treatment of hypertension. Now comes a study in this week’s New England Journal of Medicine which claims that ACE inhibitors are superior to diuretics. Both studies are well-done and well-controlled. Which to believe?

    A better question would be which media spin to believe. As pointed out in these pages, the first study really didn’t show much difference in outcomes between the two types of drugs. The same can be said of the most recent study.

    The study looked at blood pressure control in patients taking the diuretic hydrochlorothiazide and in those taking the ACE inhibitor enalapril. (Not the same drugs used in the earlier American study, by the way.) At the end of four years, here’s what they found for blood pressure readings in the two groups:

    At year 1, blood pressure had decreased by 20/9 mm Hg in the ACE-inhibitor group and 22/9 mm Hg in the diuretic group; at year 2, it had decreased by 23/10 mm Hg in the ACE-inhibitor group and 24/10 mm Hg in the diuretic group; and at year 5, it had decreased by 26/12 mm Hg in both groups.

    No difference there. But it isn’t superior blood pressure control that the authors claim for the ACE inhibitors, it’s a superiority in preventing death and heart attacks. Turns out there isn't much difference in that respect, either.

    Among the ACE-inhibitor patients, 695 out of 3044 (23%) either died or had a cardiovascular illness (heart attacks, strokes, angina requiring treatment, or heart failure) during the study. For those treated with diuretics the figure was 736 out of 3039, or 24%. Separating deaths and cardiovascular illnesses doesn't improve the numbers. Six percent of those on an ACE inhibitor died during the study, compared to seven percent of those on a diuretic. Thirteen percent of those on ACE inhibitors had a first-time cardiovascular event; fourteen percent of those on diuretics.

    That one percent difference might mean a lot to someone who deals with populations, but it doesn’t mean squat when you’re dealing with an individual patient. All things being equal, given the choice between a $5 a month pill whose users have a 24% incidence of death or cardiovascular illness, or a $34 a month pill whose users have a 23% incidence of the same, most people would choose the $5 a month prescription. (At least they would if they had to pay the bill themselves.)

    The moral of the story is that diuretics and ACE inhibitors are equivalent when it comes to their effectiveness in lowering blood pressure as well as their influence on mortality and cardiovascular morbidity. Neither study has made a strong argument to favor one drug over the other, which means that physicians should still choose blood pressure therapy based on what's best for their individual patient, not on the latest media spin of the latest study.

    UPDATE: DB has some things to say about this, too.

     

    posted by Sydney on 2/14/2003 06:11:00 AM 0 comments

    0 Comments:

    Post a Comment

    This page is powered by Blogger, the easy way to update your web site.

    Main Page

    Ads

    Home   |   Archives

    Copyright 2006