Comparative Efficacy of Nebivolol and Bisoprolol in Terms of Impact on Central Blood Pressure and Elastic Properties of the Arteries in Patients with Mild to Moderate Hypertension

Yu.N. Sirenko, O.L. Rekovets, S.N. Kushnir, K.V. Mikheyeva, A.S. Dobrokhod, Ye.A. Torbas


Background. Nowadays search for novel facilities for cardiovascular risk reduction in general population is widely discussed. In many randomized trials the value of arterial wall stiffness in worsening prognosis for cardiac patients was demonstrated. Therefore, based on these considerations, therapy, consisting of beta-blockers with vasodilatation properties, perhaps, may have most significant effect in terms of prevention of major cardiovascular events.
However these properties of the main representatives of beta-blockers have not been studied enough. On the one hand, this is due to that fact that most of the controlled trials were carried out using low-selective beta-blocker atenolol. On the other hand, there are only few studies that compare the efficacy of different beta-blockers with one another.
Aim. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of bisoprolol and nebivolol in improving the elastic properties of arteries.
Materials and Methods. We observed 40 patients with mild to moderate hypertension (24 men, 16 women). All patients were divided into 2 groups of therapy with nebivolol (n = 20) and with bisoprolol (n = 20). If target blood pressure was not achieved hydrochlorothiazide was added. The routine examination at baseline and after 6 months of follow-up included office systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) blood pressure measurement, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, central blood pressure measurement, evaluation of pulse wave velocity (PWV), heart rate (HR) and the lipids levels.
Results. After analysis of all data it was established that office SBP and DBP decreased significantly in patients both with and moderate hypertension in nebivolol group. At the end of the follow-up period there was a significant reduction in office SBP and DBP in both groups (30.5/15.95 mmHg in nebivolol group and 30.35/17.65 mmHg in bisoprolol group). Office HR decreased in groups by 10.40 and 7.85 bpm respectively. This significant decrease in office BP can be explained by the fact that in case of failure of target BP levels achievement after 1 month of therapy, second drug hydrochlorothiazide was added.
Level of central SBP was significantly reduced in both groups, but in nebivolol group this reduction was significantly greater compared with bisoprolol one — 17.55 ± 3.86 and 8.67 ± 1.57 mmHg respectively. The difference in the achievement of the central SBP was 8.88 mmHg (p < 0.05). We have also noted improved elastic properties of the arteries due to reduction of PWV in the two groups both in conducting and muscular arteries. However, the difference had been observed in the dynamics of PWV while analyzing the groups separately. Thus, in nebivolol group a significant decrease in PWV in conducting arteries has been revealed — by 1.61 m/s. In bisoprolol group PWVe reduction by 1 m/s has been also observed, but it was not significant (probably due to the small number of observations).
Conclusion. In the same reduction of office and ambulatory BP, in nebivolol group central aortal pressure decreased more significantly than in bisoprolol group, perhaps, due to vasodilatation properties of nebivolol. Pulse wave velocity decreased significantly only in nebivolol group.


arterial hypertension; nebivolol; bisoprolol; central blood presure; pulse wave velocity


Маликов М. Жесткость сосудов как универсальный фактор риска у пациентов с артериальной гипертензией // Здоровье Украины. — 2012. — № 25. — С. 52-53.

Радченко А.Д., Михеева К.В., Сиренко Ю.Н. и др. Клиническое исследование ЭЛИЗА. Результаты 6-месячного наблюдения. — Донецк: Издательский дом «Заславский», 2011. — 64 с.

Agabiti-Rosei E., Porteri E., Rizzoni D. et al. Arterial stiffness, hypertension, and rational use of nebivolol // Vasc. Health Risk Manag. — 2009. — Vol. 5. — P. 353-360.

Bavry A.A., Anderson R.D., Gong Y. et al. Outcomes Among hypertensive patients with concomitant peripheral and coronary artery disease: findings from the INternational VErapamil-SR/Trandolapril STudy // Hypertension. — 2010. — Vol. 55. — P. 48-53.

Boutouyrie P., Achouba A., Trunet P. et al. EXPLOR Trialist Group Amlodipine-valsartan combination decreases central systolic blood pressure more effectively than the amlodipine-atenolol combination: the EXPLOR study // Hypertension. — 2010. — Vol. 55. — P. 1314-1322.

Cheng H.M., Lang D., Tufanaru C. et al. Measurement accuracy of non-invasively obtained central blood pressure by applanation tonometry: A systematic review and meta-analysis // Int. J. Cardiol. — 2012, May 21.

Cockcroft J. A review of the safety and efficacy of nebivolol in the mildly hypertensive patient // Vasc. Health Risk Manag. — 2007. — Vol. 3. — P. 909-917.

Dhakam Z., Mc Eniery C.M., Yasmin et al. Atenolol and eprosartan: differential effects on central blood pressure and aortic pulse wave velocity // Am. J. Hypertens. — 2006. — Vol. 19. — P. 214-219.

Dhakam Z., Yasmin, McEniery C.M. et al. Acomparison of atenolol and nebivolol in isolatedsystolic hypertension // J. Hypertens. — 2008. — Vol. 26. — P. 351-356.

Epstein B.J., Anderson S. Discordant effects of beta-blockade on central aortic systolic and brachial systolic blood pressure: considerations beyond the cuff // Pharmacotherapy. — 2007. — Vol. 27. — P. 1322-1333.

Fujime M., Tomimatsu T., Okaue Y. et al. Central aortic blood pressure and augmentation index during normal pregnancy // Hypertens. Res. — 2012. — Vol. 35. — P. 633-638.

Kampus P., Serg M., Kals J. Differential effects of nebivolol and metoprolol on central aortic pressure and left ventricular wall thickness // Hypertension. — 2011. — Vol. 57. — P. 1122-1128.

Law M.R., Morris J.K., Wald N.J. Use of blood pressure lowering drugs in the prevention of cardiovascular disease: meta-analysis of 147 randomised trials in the context of expectations from prospective epidemiological studies // BMJ. — 2009. — Vol. 19. — P. 338:b1665.

Mackenzie I.S., McEniery C.M., Dhakam Z. et al. Comparison of the effects of antihypertensive agents on central blood pressure and arterial stiffness in isolated systolic hypertension // Hypertension. — 2009. — Vol. 54. — P. 409-413.

Mahmud A., Feely J. Beta-blockers reduce aortic stiffness in hypertension but nebivolol, not atenolol, reduces wave reflection // Am. J. Hypertens. — 2008. — Vol. 21. — P. 663-667.

Manisty C.H., Hughes A.D. Meta-analysis of the comparative effects of different classes of antihypertensive agents on brachial and central systolic blood pressure, and augmentation index // Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. — 2013. — Vol. 75. — P. 79-92.

Manisty C.H., Zambanini A., Parker K.H. et al. Differences in the magnitude of wave reflection account for differential effects of amlodipine- versus atenolol-based regimens on central blood pressure: an Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcome Trial substudy // Hypertension. — 2009. — Vol. 54. — P. 724-730.

Ong K.T., Delerme S., Pannier B. et al. Aortic stiffness is reduced beyond blood pressure lowering by short-term and long-term antihypertensive treatment: a meta-analysis of individual data in 294 patients // J. Hypertens. — 2011. — Vol. 29. — P. 1034-1042.

Safar M.E. Effect of angiotensin II blockade on central blood pressure and arterial stiffness in subjects with hypertension // Int. J. Nephrol. Renovasc. Dis. — 2010. — Vol. 3. — P. 167-173.

Sharman J.E., Marwick T.H., Abhayaratna W.P et al. Rationale and design of a randomized study to determine the value of central Blood Pressure for GUIDing managEment of hypertension: the BP GUIDE study // Am. Heart J. — 2012. — Vol. 163. — P. 761-767.

Soanker R., Naidu M.U., Raju S.B. et al. Effect of beta-1-blocker, nebivolol, on central aortic pressure and arterial stiffness in patients with essential hypertension // Indian J. Pharmacol. — 2012. — Vol. 44. — P. 407-411.

Takami T., Saito Y. Effects of Azelnidipine plus OlmesaRTAn versus amlodipine plus olmesartan on central blood pressure and left ventricular mass index: the AORTA study // Vasc. Health Risk Manag. — 2011. — Vol. 7. — P. 383-390.

Tomlinson L.A., Selvarajah V., Wilkinson I.B. Rate-limiting step: can different effects of antihypertensives on central blood pressure be translated into outcomes? // Hypertension. — 2011. — Vol. 57. — P. 1047-1048.

Vitale C., Marazzi G., Iellamo F. et al. Effects of nebivolol or irbesartan in combination with hydrochlorothiazide on vascular functions in newly-diagnosed hypertensive patients: the NINFE (Nebivololo, Irbesartan Nella Funzione Endoteliale) study // Int. J. Cardiol. — 2012. — Vol. 8. — Vol. 155. — P. 279-284.

Wang K.L., Cheng H.M., Chuang S.Y. et al. Central or peripheral systolic or pulse pressure: which best relates to target organs and future mortality? // J. Hypertens. — 2009. — Vol. 27. — P. 461-467.

Williams B., Lacy P.S., Thom S.M. et al. CAFE Investigators; Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial Investigators; CAFE Steering Committee and Writing Committee Differential impact of blood pressure-lowering drugs on central aortic pressure and clinical outcomes: principal results of the Conduit Artery Function Evaluation (CAFE) study // Circulation. — 2006. — Vol. 113. — P. 1213-1225.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2016 HYPERTENSION

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.


© Publishing House Zaslavsky, 1997-2017


 Яндекс.МетрикаSeo анализ сайта Рейтинг