Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Antihypertensive Effects of Olmesartan Compared with Other Angiotensin Receptor Blockers

A Meta-Analysis

  • Original Research Article
  • Published:
American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives: Angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists (angiotensin receptor blockers [ARBs]) have been shown to be effective and well tolerated in hypertensive patients. Olmesartan is the seventh angiotensin receptor blocker licensed by the US Food and Drug Administration. The aim of this meta-analysis was to determine the efficacy and tolerability of olmesartan medoxomil in comparison with other ARBs.

Data Sources: Reports of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of olmesartan versus other ARBs were identified through a systematic search of PubMed (up to July 2010), EMBASE (1980 to July 2010), SinoMed (up to July 2010), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Cochrane Library Issue 7,2010).

Review Methods: Pertinent studies were selected through extensive searches of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and SinoMed. Two of the authors abstracted data from the identified studies independently. Criteria for inclusion in our meta-analyses were randomized clinical trials in which patients were receiving an ARB and outcome data for blood pressure reduction or the incidence of adverse events were available. Quantitative and qualitative analyses of data from all RCTs meeting the criteria were performed. Our meta-analysis was undertaken according to the Quality of Reporting Meta-analyses (QUOROM) statement.

Results: Twenty-two studies with data from 4892 patients were considered for analyses. Olmesartan provided greater diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) reductions compared with losartan (DBP: 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59, 2.62; SBP: 95% CI 0.46, 5.92). Olmesartan provided greater SBP reductions compared with valsartan (95% CI 0.29, 3.16). Similar blood pressure response rates and incidence of adverse events were found with losartan, valsartan, candesartan, and irbesartan.

Conclusion: Olmesartan provides better antihypertensive efficacy than losartan and valsartan and has no association with an increased risk of adverse events in comparison with losartan, valsartan, candesartan, and irbesartan.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Table I
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Table II
Fig. 4
Table III
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Wilkins Campbell NR, Joffres MR, et al. Blood pressure in Canadian adults. Health Rep 2010 Mar; 21 (1): 37–46

    Google Scholar 

  2. Messerli FH, Williams B, Ritz E. Essential hypertension. Lancet 2007 Aug 18; 370 (9587): 591–603

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Theodoratou D, Maniadakis N, Fragoulakis V, et al. Analysis of published economic evaluations of angiotensin receptor blockers. Hellenic J Cardiol 2009 Mar–Apr; 50 (2): 105–18

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Catanzaro DF, Frishman WH. Angiotensin receptor blockers for management of hypertension. South Med J 2010 Jul; 103 (7): 669–73

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Scott LJ, McCormack PL. Olmesartan medoxomil: a review of its use in the management of hypertension. Drugs 2008; 68 (9): 1239–72

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Zhang YW, Ding R, Wu ZG. The effects and safety of mild and moderate primary hypertension treated with olmesartan medoxomil. World Clinical Drugs 2006; 27 (10): 585–8

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Jing S, Sun NL, Ke YN. Effects and safety of mild and moderate primary hypertension treated with olmesartan medoxomil tablet. Chin J Clin Pharmaco 2006; 22 (1): 3–6

    Google Scholar 

  8. Giles TD, Oparil S, Silfani TN, et al. Comparison of increasing doses of olmesartan medoxomil, losartan potassium, and valsartan in patients with essential hypertension. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2007 Mar; 9 (3): 187–95

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Fogari R, Zoppi A, Mugellini A, et al. Hydrochlorothiazide added to valsartan is more effective than when added to olmesartan in reducing blood pressure in moderately hypertensive patients inadequately controlled by monotherapy. Adv Ther 2006 Sep–Oct; 23 (5): 680–95

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996 Feb; 17 (1): 1–12

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Zou Z, Xu F, Wang L, et al. Antihypertensive and renoprotective effects of trandolapril/verapamil combination: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Hum Hypertens 2010; 25 (3): 203–10

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, et al. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses. Lancet 1999 Nov 27; 354 (9193): 1896–900

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Higgins JPT Green S, editors. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, version 5.0.2. September 2009. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2009

  14. Lv Y, Zou Z, Chen G, et al. Amlodipine and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor combination versus amlodipine monotherapy in hypertension: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Blood Press Monit 2010; 15 (4): 195–204

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hu YR, Chen SX, Zhang J. Efficacy and safety of domestic olmesartan in treatment of mild to moderate essential hypertension. J Shanghai Jiaotong Univ (Medical Science) 2009; 29 (11): 1359–62

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. He CZ, Lei XG, Zeng ZY. Efficacy of domestic olmesartan in treatment of mild to moderate essential hypertension. Guangxi Med Univ 2008; 25 (6): 922–3

    Google Scholar 

  17. Oparil S, Williams D, Chrysant SG, et al. Comparative efficacy of olmesartan, losartan, valsartan, and irbesartan in the control of essential hypertension. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2001 Sep–Oct; 3 (5): 283–91, 318

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Giles T, Oparil S. Comparison of ascending doses of olmesartan medoxomil (o), losartan potassium (l) and valsartan (v) in patients (pts) with essential hypertension (htn). Am J Hypertens 2005; 18 (5): A56–60

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kong Y, Chu SL, Du J. Efficacy and safety of olmesartan medoxomil in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension. J Shanghai Jiaotong Univ (Medical Science) 2008; 28 (2): 180–2

    Google Scholar 

  20. Zhu JR, Cai NS, Fan WH, et al. Efficacy and safety of olmesartan medoxomil versus losartan potassium in Chinese patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension [in Chinese]. Zhonghua Xin Xue Guan Bing Za Zhi 2006 Oct; 34 (10): 877–81

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Hao TL, Zhang YZ. Effects of Olmesartan M edoxomil in Patients with Primary Hypertension and Left Ventricular Hypertrophy. Journal of Medical Forum 2010; 31 (1): 12–4, 7

    Google Scholar 

  22. Liu XF. Effects of mild and moderate primary hypertension treated with olmesartan. China modern doctor 2009; 47 (18): 228–31

    Google Scholar 

  23. Xi L, Tian F. Antihypertensive efficacy and safety of olmesartan monotherapy in isolated systolic hypertension. Chinese journal of integrative medicine on cardio-/cerebrovascular disease 2009; 7 (12): 1391–2

    Google Scholar 

  24. Brunner HR, Arakawa K. Antihypertensive efficacy of olmesartan medoxomil and candesartan cilexetil in achieving 24-hour blood pressure reductions and ambulatory blood pressure goals. Clin Drug Investig 2006; 26 (4): 185–93

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Smith DH, Dubiel R, Jones M. Use of 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring to assess antihypertensive efficacy: a comparison of olmesartan medoxomil, losartan potassium, valsartan, and irbesartan. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs 2005; 5 (1): 41–50

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. He RM, Luo XY, Cao JM, et al. Antihypertensive efficacy and safety of domestic olmesartan monotherapy in mild or moderate essential hypertension. Shanghai Med J 2007; 30 (4): 245–51

    Google Scholar 

  27. Tsutamoto T, Nishiyama K, Yamaji M, et al. Comparison of the long-term effects of candesartan and olmesartan on plasma angiotensin II and left ventricular mass index in patients with hypertension. Hypertens Res 2010 Feb; 33 (2): 118–22

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Destro M, Scabrosetti R, Vanasia A, et al. Comparative efficacy of valsartan and olmesartan in mild-to-moderate hypertension: results of 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Adv Ther 2005 Jan–Feb; 22 (1): 32–43

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Li W, Chen XL, Guan SM. Clinical efficacy and safety of olmesartan medoxomil in patients with mild to moderate primary hypertension. J Clin Cardiol (China) 2008; 24 (10): 737–9

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Li W, Chen XL, Guan SM. Efficacy and safety of olmesartan and valsartan in young and middle-aged patients. Clin Med China 2009; 25 (7): 704–5

    Google Scholar 

  31. Chen ZH, Gu Y, Liu QH, et al. Efficacy and safety of olmesartan medoxomil tablet in patients with mild to moderate primary hypertension. Chin J New Drugs Clin Rem 2007; 26 (6): 440–2

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Zhang JH, Chen SC, Zhang SZ. Effect and safety of olmesartan medoxomil on treatment of essential hypertension. China Pharmacist 2008; 11 (11): 1354–5

    Google Scholar 

  33. Conlin Pr Fau-Spence JD, Spence Jd Fau-Williams B, Williams B, Fau-Ribeiro AB, Ribeiro Ab Fau-Saito I, Saito I Fau-Benedict C, Benedict C Fau-Bunt AM, et al. Angiotensin II antagonists for hypertension: are there differences in efficacy? Am J Hypertens 2000; 13 (4 Pt 1): 418–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Ross S, Akhras K, Zhang S, et al. Discontinuation of antihypertensive drugs due to adverse events: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Pharmacotherapy 2001; 21: 940–53

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Burnier M. Angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers. Circulation 2001 Feb 13; 103 (6): 904–12

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Smith DH. Comparison of angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists in the treatment of essential hypertension. Drugs 2008; 68 (9): 1207–25

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Nixon RM, Muller E, Lowy A, et al. Valsartan vs. other angiotensin II receptor blockers in the treatment of hypertension: a meta-analytical approach. Int J Clin Pract 2009 May; 63 (5): 766–75

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by the National Nature Science Foundation of China (81000525) fund. The study was conducted, analyzed, and interpreted by the authors independently of all sponsors.

Drs Long Wang and Jian-wei Zhao contributed equally to this work.

Conflicts of interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest directly relevant to this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Company 11, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China

    Long Wang

  2. Company 17, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China

    Jian-wei Zhao

  3. Department of Stomatology, General Hospital of the Air Force of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army, Beijing, People’s Republic of China

    Bing Liu

  4. Department of Biochemical Pharmacy, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China

    Duo Shi

  5. Department of Anesthesiology, Changzheng Hospital, Second Military Medical University, 415 Fengyang Road, Shanghai, 200003, People’s Republic of China

    Zui Zou MD &  Xue-yin Shi MD

Authors
  1. Long Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jian-wei Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bing Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Duo Shi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Zui Zou MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Xue-yin Shi MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xue-yin Shi MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wang, L., Zhao, Jw., Liu, B. et al. Antihypertensive Effects of Olmesartan Compared with Other Angiotensin Receptor Blockers. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs 12, 335–344 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03261842

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03261842

Keywords

Search

Navigation