Abstract

Regression of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) is an important intermediate target for antihypertensive therapy. Thus, several trials and meta-analyses have attempted to compare the effects of different antihypertensive agents on LVH, but flawed study designs and methodologic problems have limited the utility of these studies. PRESERVE (Prospective Randomized Enalapril Study Evaluating Regression of Ventricular Enlargement), LIVE (LVH: Indapamide Sustained Release Versus Enalapril) and LIFE (Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension) represent a new generation of large well designed trials with the power to compare different antihypertensive drugs. These studies have shown that treatment regimens based on enalapril and a nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system are of similar efficacy (PRESERVE), that indapamide sustained release (SR) is superior to enalapril (LIVE), and that a regimen based on losartan is superior to a regimen based on atenolol (LIFE) in reversing hypertensive LVH. LIVE incorporated on-treatment echocardiographic quality control, with centralized readers blinded for both treatment and sequence of recording. The findings of these rigorous studies, to some extent in disagreement with results of previous meta-analyses, support the notion that antihypertensive drugs need to be judged on their individual effects on important intermediate endpoints such as LVH in well designed and adequately sized studies. However, extrapolation of the results of these studies in terms of class effects could be misleading and should be made with caution.