Effect of indapamide/perindopril fixed-dose combination on 24-hour blood pressure and cognitive functions in treatment-naive middle-aged patients with essential arterial hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: to investigate the effect of indapamide/perindopril fixed-dose combination (FC) on 24-hour blood pressure (BP) and cognitive functions in antihypertensive treatment-naive middle-aged patients with uncomplicated grade 1–2 essential arterial hypertension (EAH) . Patients and methods. The open prospective study enrolled 25 patients (9 men and 16 women) aged 40–59 years with a diastolic BP of 90–109 mm Hg and/or a systolic BP of 140–179 mm Hg, as evidenced by routine measurements. As starting antihypertensive therapy, the patients received indapamide 1.25/perindopril 5 mg FC once daily in the morning; if necessary, after 2 weeks (if the routine blood pressure was ≥140/90 mm Hg) they took indapamide 2.5/perindopril 10 mg once daily in the morning. The follow-up period was 14–16 weeks. Before and at the end of the follow-up, the patients underwent 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) and evaluation of cognitive functions using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), ten-words test (immediate and delayed word recall), verbal association test (literal and categorical associations), number connecting test (Trail making test (TMT), part A and numbers and letters connecting test (TMT) part B), and Stroop test. Results. At the end of the follow-up period, treatment with indapamide/perindopril fixed-dose combination showed a statistically significant reduction in BPs, as evidenced by routine measurements and ABPM (during 24-hour, and awake and sleep periods); a statistically significant cognitive improvement: an increase in the number of the so-called words in the ten-words test during both immediate (from 5.5±1.6 6.5±1.5 words; p=0.02 vs baseline) and delayed (from 6.2±1.7 to 7.4±1.4 words; p=vs baseline) recalls, a decrease in the performance time of TMTB (from 112.6±42.5 to 90.4±28.4 sec; p=0.02) and Stroop test Part 3 (from 135.5±50.1 to 112.6±19.6 sec; p=0.02), and a larger number of called words in the categorical associations test (from 6.5±2.4 to 8.1±2.9 words; p=0.02). Conclusion. The results obtained indicate that in treatment-naive middle-aged patients with EAH, indapamide/perindopril fixed-dose combination assures an effective reduction in BPs, as evidenced by routine measurements and ABPM, also improves cognitive functions, particularly attention, information processing speed, semantic memory, cognitive flexibility, and short-term and long-term memory.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".