Neuroprotective efficacy of combined antihypertensive treatment with the inclusion of nitrendipine in patients with arterial hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aim To evaluate the efficacy of 12-months combined antihypertensive treatment with the inclusion of nitrendipine on cognitive functions in patients with arterial hypertension (AH). Material and methods Surveyed 59 patients with I – III AH degree (ESH / ESC, 2018) of both sexes. The average age of patients was 58,8 ± 11.6 years, the average duration of AH 11.1 ± 7.04 years. An average daily dose 13.18±7.4 mg of nitrendipine was prescribed to patients with AH in combination with other antihypertensive drugs. Furthermore, office systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were measured in all patients before and after 12 months treatment. Cognitive functions were evaluated using neuro-psychological tests: the Mini-Cog test (drawing a clock, reproduction of words), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), a self-assessment questionnaire of memory, attention, thinking, ability to cope with their affairs, ability to make decisions. The results are presented as M ± SD. Results Analysis of office BP indicators showed a good 12-month antihypertensive efficacy with the inclusion of Nitrendipine in patients with AH. In particular, the SBP before treatment was 157,8 ± 16,18 mm Hg, after – 125,5 ± 10,7 (p = 0,000); the DBP 96,35 ± 8,55 mm Hg versus 79,7 ± 5,9 mm Hg, respectively (p = 0,000); MBP (mean blood pressure) 116,8 ± 9,95 mm Hg versus 94,97 ± 7,09 mm Hg, respectively (p = 0,000). The analysis of influence of AHT with the inclusion of Nitrendipine on cognitive functions in patients with AH showed an increase in the total score on the Mini-Cog test: 3,83 ± 1,11 versus 4,49 ± 0,81 points (p = 0,000), mainly due to a significant improvement in the reproduction of words: 2,16 ± 0,87 versus 2,69 ± 0,62 points (p = 0,000). According to the MOCA scale, abstract thinking significantly improved: initially amounting to 1,37±0,66 points versus 1,81±0,5 points in dynamics (p=0,000), as well as delayed reproduction of words: 2,49±1,23 points initially versus 3,2±1,4 points in dynamics (p=0,004). Significant memory improvement was observed against the background of 12-month antihypertensive therapy based on nitrendipine, initially was 7,04±2.34 points against 8,22±1.24 in dynamics (p=0,000) and decision-making function was 7,8±2,2 points initially against 9,02±1,3 in dynamics (p=0,000). Conclusion Thus, high antihypertensive efficacy and improvement of cognitive functions were shown against the background of antihypertensive combination therapy with the inclusion of nitrendipine in patients with AH.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".