The present study aimed at establishing the CD50 and CD99 doses along with complete dose-response profile of two convulsants, namely, kainic acid and pentylenetetrazole (PTZ), in mice and evaluating the modulatory role of the cerebroselective dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker nimodipine. Kainic acid and PTZ were administered intraperitoneally in a dose range of 1-30 mg kg(-1) and 35-75 mg kg(-1), respectively. Nimodipine was administered in graded doses (1-8 mg kg(-1), i.p.) with 15 min pretreatment time against CD99 doses of both kainic acid and PTZ. The effect of nimodipine in treated groups was compared with that of vehicle in control group. The CD50 and CD99 doses for kainic acid was found to be 2.5 and 7.5 mg kg(-1), while those of PTZ were found to be 50 and 75 mg kg(-1), respectively. Pretreatment with nimodipine inhibited seizures in a dose-dependent manner, in terms of both percentage of positive responders and seizure scores against CD99 doses of both kainic acid and PTZ. The results established the protective efficacy of nimodipine against both kainic acid and PTZ-induced seizures, suggesting the role of calcium ion as a common mediator for both the types of seizures. However, further studies are necessary to ascertain the exact molecular mechanism of nimodipine.

INTRODUCTION: HTN remains one of the major preventable risk factors for coronary events, cerebral-vascular disease, heart failure, peripheral vascular disease and progression of kidney disease. Most patients with HTN will require more than one drug to achieve BP target. In addition, around 24% to 32% of patients will require a combination of more than two drugs to achieve BP targets. Combination therapy for HTN may be delivered either as free or xed drug combinations. In a free drug combination, each BP-lowering drug is administered in a separate pill, while in a xed drug combination two or more agents are combined in a single pill (SPC). SPCs may offer several advantages over free drug combinations, such as better compliance and simplicity of treatment. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Study was conducted for a span of one year. Every patient coming to medicine OPD for the treatment of hypertension, who has already been prescribed 40mg Telmisartan or 5mg amlodipine individually were included also the newly diagnosed patients for essential hypertension were included. INCLUSION CRITERIA: (a) 18- 60 years, Adults of either sex (b) Newly diagnosed patients of essential hypertension (c) Already diagnosed old patients on treatment for essential hypertension with 40mg Telmisartan or 5mg Amlodipine. EXCLUSION CRITERIA:(a) Patients with chronic diseases e.g. Diabetes mellitus, CKD & CAD(b) Pregnant & lactating females. RESULTS:Total 267 patients were enrolled in the study. Age and sex wise distribution was given in table no. 1.1. 138 patients were started on telmisartan and amlodipine free drug and 129 patients were started on telmisartan and amlodipine xed drug. Majority of patients were less than 60 years and 121(45.3%) patients were male and 146(54.7%) patients were female. 138 Patients were started on telmisartan and amlodipine free drug group. 28.3% patients were on amlodipine and 25.4% patients were on telmisartan where as 46.4% patients were not taking any antihypertensive treatment and mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure in this group was 168.3±14.2: 95.4±7.2. 129 patients were started on telmisartan and amlodipine xed dose combination. 31% patients were on amlodipine and 24.8% patients were on telmisartan where as 44.2% were not taking any drugs and mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure in this group was 167.8±15.6: 95.7±7.1. CONCLUSION: Telmisartan/amlodipine combination when administered separately at different times of the day showed good to excellent responsea

No abstract

No abstract