Combine searches by placing the search numbers in the top search box and pressing the search button. An example search might look like (#1 or #2) and (#3 or #4)
Latest & greatest articles for losartan
The Trip Database is a leading resource to help health professionals find trustworthy answers to their clinical questions. Users can access the latest research evidence and guidance to answer their clinical questions. We have a large collection of systematic reviews, clinical guidelines, regulatory guidance, clinical trials and many other forms of evidence. If you wanted the latest trusted evidence on losartan or other clinical topics then use Trip today.
This page lists the very latest high quality evidence on losartan and also the most popular articles. Popularity measured by the number of times the articles have been clicked on by fellow users in the last twelve months.
What is Trip?
Trip is a clinical search engine designed to allow users to quickly and easily find and use high-quality research evidence to support their practice and/or care.
Trip has been online since 1997 and in that time has developed into the internet’s premier source of evidence-based content. Our motto is ‘Find evidence fast’ and this is something we aim to deliver for every single search.
As well as research evidence we also allow clinicians to search across other content types including images, videos, patient information leaflets, educational courses and news.
For further information on Trip click on any of the questions/sections on the left-hand side of this page. But if you still have questions please contact us via email@example.com
Losartan Versus Atenolol for Prevention of Aortic Dilation in Patients With Marfan Syndrome Beta-blockers are the standard treatment in Marfan syndrome (MFS). Recent clinical trials with limited follow-up yielded conflicting results on losartan's effectiveness in MFS.The present study aimed to evaluate the benefit of losartan compared with atenolol for the prevention of aortic dilation and complications in Marfan patients over a longer observation period (>5 years).A total of 128 patients (...) included in the previous LOAT (LOsartan vs ATenolol) clinical trial (64 in the atenolol and 64 in the losartan group) were followed up for an open-label extension of the study, with the initial treatment maintained.Mean clinical follow-up was 6.7 ± 1.5 years. A total of 9 events (14.1%) occurred in the losartan group and 12 (18.8%) in the atenolol group. Survival analysis showed no differences in the combined endpoint of need for aortic surgery, aortic dissection, or death (p = 0.462). Aortic root
Losartan Top results for losartan - Trip Database or use your Google+ account Turning Research Into Practice ALL of these words: Title only Anywhere in the document ANY of these words: Title only Anywhere in the document This EXACT phrase: Title only Anywhere in the document EXCLUDING words: Title only Anywhere in the document Timeframe: to: Combine searches by placing the search numbers in the top search box and pressing the search button. An example search might look like (#1 or #2) and (#3 (...) or #4) Loading history... Population: Intervention: Comparison: Outcome: Population: Intervention: Latest & greatest articles for losartan The Trip Database is a leading resource to help health professionals find trustworthy answers to their clinical questions. Users can access the latest research evidence and guidance to answer their clinical questions. We have a large collection of systematic reviews, clinical guidelines, regulatory guidance, clinical trials and many other forms of evidence
Effect of Losartan on Right Ventricular Dysfunction: Results From the Double-Blind, Randomized REDEFINE Trial (Right Ventricular Dysfunction in Tetralogy of Fallot: Inhibition of the Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System) in Adults With Repaired Tetralogy The effect of angiotensin II receptor blockers on right ventricular (RV) function is still unknown. Angiotensin II receptor blockers are beneficial in patients with acquired left ventricular dysfunction, and recent findings have suggested (...) a favorable effect in symptomatic patients with systemic RV dysfunction. The current study aimed to determine the effect of losartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker, on subpulmonary RV dysfunction in adults after repaired tetralogy of Fallot.The REDEFINE trial (Right Ventricular Dysfunction in Tetralogy of Fallot: Inhibition of the Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System) is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, prospective, 1:1 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Adults with repaired
Efficacy and safety of the angiotensin II receptor blocker losartan for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Print | PDF PROSPERO This information has been provided by the named contact for this review. CRD has accepted this information in good faith and registered the review in PROSPERO. CRD bears no responsibility or liability for the content of this registration record, any associated files or external websites. Email salutation (e.g. "Dr Smith" or "Joanne
Is Atenolol more effective than Losartan for the control of arterial hypertension? Print | PDF PROSPERO This information has been provided by the named contact for this review. CRD has accepted this information in good faith and registered the review in PROSPERO. CRD bears no responsibility or liability for the content of this registration record, any associated files or external websites. Email salutation (e.g. "Dr Smith" or "Joanne") for correspondence: Organisation web address: Timing
Atenolol versus losartan in children and young adults with Marfan's syndrome. Aortic-root dissection is the leading cause of death in Marfan's syndrome. Studies suggest that with regard to slowing aortic-root enlargement, losartan may be more effective than beta-blockers, the current standard therapy in most centers.We conducted a randomized trial comparing losartan with atenolol in children and young adults with Marfan's syndrome. The primary outcome was the rate of aortic-root enlargement (...) months to 25 years of age (mean [±SD] age, 11.5±6.5 years in the atenolol group and 11.0±6.2 years in the losartan group), who had an aortic-root z score greater than 3.0. The baseline-adjusted rate of change in the mean (±SE) aortic-root z score did not differ significantly between the atenolol group and the losartan group (-0.139±0.013 and -0.107±0.013 standard-deviation units per year, respectively; P=0.08). Both slopes were significantly less than zero, indicating a decrease in the aortic-root
Losartan and enalapril are comparable in reducing proteinuria in children Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II type I receptor blockers delay progression of chronic kidney disease and have antiproteinuric effects beyond their effects on blood pressure. They are routinely used in adults; however, their efficacy and safety in children, in whom the causes of chronic kidney disease are significantly different relative to adults, is uncertain. Here we assessed an open-label (...) extension of a previous 3-month blinded trial, in which the efficacy and tolerability of losartan was compared to placebo or amlodipine in 306 normotensive and hypertensive children with proteinuria. In this study, 268 children were re-randomized to losartan or enalapril and followed until 100 patients completed 3 years of follow-up for proteinuria and renal function. The least squares percent mean reduction from baseline in the urinary protein/creatinine ratio was 30.01% for losartan and 40.45
Effect of a reduction in uric acid on renal outcomes during losartan treatment: a post hoc analysis of the reduction of end points in noninsulin-dependent diabetes mellitus with the Angiotensin II Antagonist Losartan Trial. 22124433 2012 02 07 2018 12 01 1524-4563 59 1 2012 Jan Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979) Hypertension Effect of a reduction in uric acid on renal outcomes during losartan treatment: a post hoc analysis of the reduction of end points in noninsulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (...) with the Angiotensin II Antagonist Losartan Trial. e1 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.111.186064 Dhaun Neeraj N Webb David J DJ eng Letter Comment 2011 11 28 United States Hypertension 7906255 0194-911X 0 Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers 268B43MJ25 Uric Acid JMS50MPO89 Losartan IM Hypertension. 2011 Jul;58(1):2-7 21632472 Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers administration & dosage Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 blood Diabetic Nephropathies prevention & control Female Glomerular Filtration Rate drug effects Humans
Cost-effectiveness analysis of valsartan versus losartan and the effect of switching Cost-effectiveness analysis of valsartan versus losartan and the effect of switching Cost-effectiveness analysis of valsartan versus losartan and the effect of switching Baker TM, Goh J, Johnston A, Falvey H, Brede Y, Brown RE Record Status This is a critical abstract of an economic evaluation that meets the criteria for inclusion on NHS EED. Each abstract contains a brief summary of the methods, the results (...) and conclusions followed by a detailed critical assessment on the reliability of the study and the conclusions drawn. CRD summary The objective was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of valsartan, compared with losartan, and the impact of switching patients from valsartan to generic losartan, to lower blood pressure and prevent cardiovascular disease. The authors concluded that valsartan appeared to be cost-effective, compared with switching to generic losartan. Overall the quality of the study was adequate
Comparative clinical- and cost-effectiveness of candesartan and losartan in the management of hypertension and heart failure: a systematic review, meta- and cost-utility analysis The UK National Health Service (NHS) currently spends in excess of £250 million per annum on angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) for the treatment of hypertension and heart failure; with candesartan currently dominating the market. With the recent introduction of generic losartan, we set out to directly compare (...) the branded market leader to its now cheaper alternative. The primary objectives were to compare the blood pressure (BP) lowering efficacy and cardiovascular outcomes of candesartan and losartan in the treatment of essential hypertension and chronic heart failure, respectively. The secondary objective was to model their comparative incremental cost-effectiveness in a UK NHS setting. The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Cochrane Library 2009, issue 2), which contains the Hypertension
A systematic review and meta-analysis of candesartan and losartan in the management of essential hypertension Untitled Document The CRD Databases will not be available from 08:00 BST on Friday 4th October until 08:00 BST on Monday 7th October for essential maintenance. We apologise for any inconvenience.
Comparison of the efficacy of candesartan and losartan: a meta-analysis of trials in the treatment of hypertension Untitled Document The CRD Databases will not be available from 08:00 BST on Friday 4th October until 08:00 BST on Monday 7th October for essential maintenance. We apologise for any inconvenience.
Effect of the direct Renin inhibitor aliskiren, the Angiotensin receptor blocker losartan, or both on left ventricular mass in patients with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy Left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy, a marker of cardiac end-organ damage, is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system may reduce LV mass to a greater extent than other antihypertensive agents. We compared the effect (...) of aliskiren, the first orally active direct renin inhibitor, the angiotensin-receptor blocker losartan, and their combination on the reduction of LV mass in hypertensive patients.We randomized 465 patients with hypertension, increased ventricular wall thickness, and body mass index >25 kg/m(2) to receive aliskiren 300 mg, losartan 100 mg, or their combination daily for 9 months. Patients were treated to standard blood pressure targets with add-on therapy, excluding other inhibitors of the renin
Effects of high-dose versus low-dose losartan on clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure (HEAAL study): a randomised, double-blind trial. Angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) are effective treatments for patients with heart failure, but the relation between dose and clinical outcomes has not been explored. We compared the effects of high-dose versus low-dose losartan on clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure.This double-blind trial was undertaken in 255 sites in 30 countries (...) . 3846 patients with heart failure of New York Heart Association class II-IV, left-ventricular ejection fraction 40% or less, and intolerance to angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors were randomly assigned to losartan 150 mg (n=1927) or 50 mg daily (n=1919). Allocation was by block randomisation stratified by centre and presence or absence of beta-blocker therapy, and all patients and investigators were masked to assignment. The primary endpoint was death or admission for heart failure
2009LancetControlled trial quality: predicted high
Renal and retinal effects of enalapril and losartan in type 1 diabetes. Nephropathy and retinopathy remain important complications of type 1 diabetes. It is unclear whether their progression is slowed by early administration of drugs that block the renin-angiotensin system.We conducted a multicenter, controlled trial involving 285 normotensive patients with type 1 diabetes and normoalbuminuria and who were randomly assigned to receive losartan (100 mg daily), enalapril (20 mg daily), or placebo (...) the 5-year period did not differ significantly between the placebo group (0.016 units) and the enalapril group (0.005, P=0.38) or the losartan group (0.026, P=0.26), nor were there significant treatment benefits for other biopsy-assessed renal structural variables. The 5-year cumulative incidence of microalbuminuria was 6% in the placebo group; the incidence was higher with losartan (17%, P=0.01 by the log-rank test) but not with enalapril (4%, P=0.96 by the log-rank test). As compared with placebo
Effect of pentoxifylline in addition to losartan on proteinuria and GFR in CKD: a 12-month randomized trial Pentoxifylline potently inhibits cell proliferation, inflammation, and extracellular matrix accumulation. Human studies have proved its antiproteinuric effect in patients with glomerular diseases. Its benefit in addition to angiotensin receptor blockade in patients with chronic kidney disease is not clear.Randomized controlled study.85 patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate (...) (eGFR) of 10 to 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) and proteinuria with protein greater than 500 mg/g of creatinine on treatment with losartan, 100 mg/d, for longer than 6 months were screened in National Taiwan University Hospital.In the first stage (12 months), group 1 served as control and group 2 was administered pentoxifylline. In the second stage (6 months), both groups were administered pentoxifylline. The pentoxifylline dose was 400 mg twice daily for patients with eGFR of 30 to 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) or once
Effects of dietary sodium and hydrochlorothiazide on the antiproteinuric efficacy of losartan There is large interindividual variability in the antiproteinuric response to blockade of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS). A low-sodium diet or addition of diuretics enhances the effects of RAAS blockade on proteinuria and BP, but the efficacy of the combination of these interventions is unknown. Therefore, this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to determine (...) the separate and combined effects of a low-sodium diet and hydrochlorothiazide (HCT) on proteinuria and BP was performed. In 34 proteinuric patients without diabetes, mean baseline proteinuria was 3.8 g/d, and this was reduced by 22% by a low-sodium diet alone. Losartan monotherapy reduced proteinuria by 30%, and the addition of a low-sodium diet led to a total reduction by 55% and the addition of HCT to 56%. The combined addition of HCT and a low-sodium diet reduced proteinuria by 70% from baseline (all P
Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing telmisartan with losartan in the treatment of patients with hypertension Untitled Document The CRD Databases will not be available from 08:00 BST on Friday 4th October until 08:00 BST on Monday 7th October for essential maintenance. We apologise for any inconvenience.
Aliskiren combined with losartan in type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. Diabetic nephropathy is the leading cause of end-stage renal disease in developed countries. We evaluated the renoprotective effects of dual blockade of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system by adding treatment with aliskiren, an oral direct renin inhibitor, to treatment with the maximal recommended dose of losartan (100 mg daily) and optimal antihypertensive therapy in patients who had hypertension and type 2 diabetes (...) with nephropathy.We enrolled 599 patients in this multinational, randomized, double-blind study. After a 3-month, open-label, run-in period during which patients received 100 mg of losartan daily, patients were randomly assigned to receive 6 months of treatment with aliskiren (150 mg daily for 3 months, followed by an increase in dosage to 300 mg daily for another 3 months) or placebo, in addition to losartan. The primary outcome was a reduction in the ratio of albumin to creatinine, as measured in an early
Evaluation of the cost savings and clinical outcomes of switching patients from atorvastatin to simvastatin and losartan to candesartan in a primary care setting Evaluation of the cost savings and clinical outcomes of switching patients from atorvastatin to simvastatin and losartan to candesartan in a primary care setting Evaluation of the cost savings and clinical outcomes of switching patients from atorvastatin to simvastatin and losartan to candesartan in a primary care setting Usher-Smith J (...) , and from losartan to candesartan (4 mg candesartan per 25 mg losartan) for the control of hypertension. Type of intervention Treatment. Economic study type Cost-effectiveness analysis. Study population This study comprised two study populations. One was patients with a repeat prescription for atorvastatin, while the other was patients with a repeat prescription for losartan. The authors reported a variety of exclusion criteria. Setting The setting was outpatient, primary care. The economic study