No abstract

Thromboembolic complications such as ischemic stroke and myocardial infarction are significantly more frequent in patients with arterial hypertension. From the available intervention studies, it appears that pharmacologic treatment of hypertension-at least with diuretics and beta-blockers-may more effectively protect against cerebrovascular as compared to coronary thromboembolic events. Whether other antihypertensive substances provide a more effective protection with respect to cardiac morbidity and mortality is the subject of numerous studies presently underway. These studies will help to answer the question of whether the extent of protection from coronary events during antihypertensive treatment depends on factors beyond blood pressure control. The fibrinolytic system is crucially involved in the pathogenesis of thromboembolic events. One determinant of this system is the balance between plasminogen activators (tissue-type plasminogen activator [t-PA]) and inhibitors (plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 [PAI-1]). Experimental and clinical evidence suggests that at least some of the drugs used in the treatment of hypertension may alter the activity of the fibrinolytic system. Scarce and controversial data with respect to such an interaction exist with respect to diuretics, beta-blockers, and calcium antagonists. In addition, experimental evidence demonstrates that PAI-1 is stimulated by angiotensin II (A II), whereas t-PA is activated by bradykinin. Thus, antihypertensive drugs acting within the renin angiotensin system should exert effects also within the fibrinolytic system. However, results from clinical studies with angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and A II receptor antagonists do not unequivocally support such a concept. The discrepancy in the results may, at least in part, be explained by studies performed in healthy volunteer subjects showing that ACE inhibition profoundly affected fibrinolysis only during stimulation of the renin angiotensin system by NaCL restriction.

Accumulating evidence suggests that the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may participate in the regulation of fibrinolytic function. In clinical studies, however, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and the angiotensin II receptor antagonist losartan have failed to consistently affect endogenous fibrinolysis. Because such an effect may depend on the degree of prestimulation of the RAS, we have studied parameters of fibrinolytic function in 15 healthy volunteer subjects during baseline (day 1) and after 10 days of treatment with 25 mg of hydrochlorothiazide (HCT)/day (day 11). On the last day of the study (day 12), a single oral dose of 50 mg of losartan was given to the volunteers in addition to HCT and fibrinolytic function was assessed at the peak effect of losartan (5 h later). Plasma renin activity (PRA) was significantly stimulated during diuretic treatment (1.35 +/- 0.21 v 0.34 +/- 0.06 ng mL(-1) x h(-1) [P < .001]) and further increased after losartan (6.39 +/- 1.16 ng mL(-1) x h(-1) [P < .001]). No effects of either the diuretic or losartan could be observed on tissue-type plasminogen activator (t-PA) antigen concentration and activity. However, 10 days of treatment with HCT significantly increased plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1) antigen (26.8 +/- 5.8 v 21.1 +/- 3.4 ng/mL [p = .037]). In addition, PAI-1 activity was also tentatively raised by HCT treatment (5.48 +/- 1.82 v 3.88 +/- 0.79 IU/mL [P = .067]). In spite of the marked further rise in PRA after losartan, the stimulation of PAI-1 antigen and activity was blunted by losartan (24.4 +/- 3.6 ng/mL and 4.55 +/- 0.99 IU/mL, respectively). Our results demonstrate that volume depletion induced by HCT treatment is associated with a rise in PAI-1. Acute administration of losartan is capable of blunting this effect, suggesting that the angiotensin II type 1 receptor may participate in this effect of angiotensin II.

No abstract

In conclusion, in healthy volunteer subjects, short-term infusion of Angiotensin II without and with concomitant administration of an AT1-receptor antagonist has no effect on PAI-1 activities and plasma concentrations.