A15456 Efficacy of Cilnidipin vs. Amlodipin on microalbuminuria in hypertensive patients- clinical experience

Abstract

Objectives: 1. To find the efficacy of cilnidipin vs. amlodipin on microalbuminuria in hypertensive patients 2. To evaluate changes in hypertension, s. uric acid level and presence of ankle edema on patients on cilnidipin vs. amlodipin. Methods: A retrospective analysis of our clinical data from jan-2017 till feb-2018 was carried out. Inclusion criteria: Ø Hypertension 3–5 years Ø age: 50–70 years Ø no monotherapy – either cilnidipin or amlodipin Exclusion criteria: established CVD, acute illness. Patients were analyzed & grouped according to the inclusion criteria and statically evaluated to find the objectives. Patient who were detected with microalbuminuria & were on amlodipin were shifted to cilnidipin and followed up after 1 month. Results: 476 patient were found who matched the inclusion criteria (M = 261 F = 215) Patients on cilnidipin at baseline = 290 (F = 143; F = 147) Patients on amlodipin at baseline = 186 (F = 79; M = 107) Patients with microalbuminuria shifted from amlodipin to cilnidipin = 113 (F = 39; M = 74) These patients (n = 91- F = 17; M = 42) when followed up further after 1 month for microalbuminuria showed improvement (n = 59) or absence (n = 32) of albuminuria. Patients on amlodipin also had s/e of ankle edema (n = 41) vs. those on cilnidipin (n = 27). S.uric acid was evaluated in the patients shifted from amlodipin to cilnidipin & it showed non-significant improvement. Improvement in blood pressure values is almost the same in both groups of patient. Conclusion: Based on our clinical experience, we could affirm the fact that although amlodipin is an effective hypertensive agent. Cilnidipin has an additional benefit of improvement in microalbuminuria, which makes it the preferred choice in patients.