Treatment of hypertension with angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers and resting metabolic rate: A cross‐sectional study

Hypertension in obese and overweight patients is associated with an elevated resting metabolic rate (RMR). The aim of this study was to determine whether RMR is reduced in hypertensive patients treated with angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and blockers (ARB). The RMR was determined by...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) Conn.), 2021-12, Vol.23 (12), p.2106-2114
Hauptverfasser: Pedrianes‐Martin, Pablo B., Martin‐Rincon, Marcos, Morales‐Alamo, David, Perez‐Suarez, Ismael, Perez‐Valera, Mario, Galvan‐Alvarez, Victor, Curtelin, David, Pablos‐Velasco, Pedro, Calbet, Jose A.L.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Hypertension in obese and overweight patients is associated with an elevated resting metabolic rate (RMR). The aim of this study was to determine whether RMR is reduced in hypertensive patients treated with angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and blockers (ARB). The RMR was determined by indirect calorimetry in 174 volunteers; 93 (46.5 %) were hypertensive, of which 16 men and 13 women were treated with ACEI/ARB, while 30 men and 19 women with untreated hypertension served as a control group. Treated and untreated hypertensives had similar age, BMI, physical activity, and cardiorespiratory fitness. The RMR normalized to the lean body mass (LBM) was 15% higher in the untreated than ACEI/ARB‐treated hypertensive women (p = .003). After accounting for LBM, whole‐body fat mass, age, the double product (heart rate x systolic blood pressure), and the distance walked per day, the RMR was 2.9% lower in the patients taking ACEI/ARB (p = .26, treatment x sex interaction p = .005). LBM, age, and the double product explained 78% of the variability in RMR (R2 = 0.78, p 
ISSN:1524-6175
1751-7176
DOI:10.1111/jch.14392