MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3011776360 · doi:10.1161/str.51.suppl_1.wp458

Abstract WP458: Effect of Olmesartan / Azelnidipine Combination Tablets on Ambulatory Blood Pressure and Cognitive Function in the Post-Stroke Patients

2020· article· en· W3011776360 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shuji Matsumoto

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOlmesartanAmbulatory blood pressureBlood pressureStroke (engine)AmbulatoryInternal medicineMontreal Cognitive AssessmentCardiologyCognitive impairment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and aims: In patients with severe hypertension, or history of stroke, the lower limit of cerebral blood flow (CBF) autoregulation is shifted to a higher blood pressure (BP) than in healthy subjects. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of olmesartan/azelnidipine combination (OLM/AZ) vs high-dose of olmesartan on ambulatory blood pressure (ABPM), cognitive function, and rehabilitation outcome in the post-stroke patients with hypertension. Methods: A total of 36 patients, 20 men and 16 women, aged 58-72 years, with sitting diastolic BP >90mmHg and systolic BP >140mmHg were eligible for participation in the present study. We randomly assigned 36 patients to either the OLM/AZ group or high-dose olmesartan group for 12 weeks. At the end of a 2-week wash-out period and after 12 weeks of active treatment, 24-h noninvasive ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) was performed, and cognitive function was evaluated through neuropsychological testing. In addition, rehabilitation outcome measurements were also collected during study period. Results: Both treatments significantly reduced ambulatory BP. However, the OLM/AZ produced a greater reduction in 24-h, day-time and night time ABPM values. High-dose olmesartan did not induce significant changes in any of the cognitive function test scores, whereas at 12 weeks OLM/AZ significantly improved the neuropsychological test score (Digid span test, Token test, Digital symbol test, Trail making test part A and B) (p< 0.01). Patients treated with OLM/AZ showed effective rates of improvement in hand (38.9%), upper extremities (55.6%) and lower extremities (72.2%), measured by Brunnstrom stage; these improvements were significantly different from those in high-dose olmesartan group for the total (P< 0.05) scores. Conclusions: These results suggest that in hypertensive post-stroke patients treatment with OLM/AZ produces a slightly greater reduction in ambulatory BP than high-dose olmesartan, and unlike this latter, improves some of the components of cognitive function, particularly psychomotor speed, attention and mentation. Our results suggest that OLM/AZ may improve cognitive function and rehabilitation outcome in hypertensive stroke patients in whom CBF autoregulation is impaired.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStroke→Same topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies→French-language works237,207→