Research Journal of Pharmacology
ISSN: Online 1993-6019ISSN: Print 1815-9362
Abstract
Hypertension, a common chronic medical condition, is a leading risk factor for cardiovascular diseases and strokes. Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are commonly prescribed to manage hypertension. Telmisartan and Losartan are two widely used ARBs. This study aims to compare their efficacy in controlling blood pressure and assess their safety profiles. A Prospective observational study was conducted over a 3 months period. Adult participants with essential hypertension were randomly assigned to two treatment groups: one received Telmisartan, while the other received Losartan. The primary outcome measure was the reduction in systolic and diastolic blood pressure from baseline. Secondary endpoints included changes in lipid profiles, adverse events, and quality of life assessments. A total of 40 participants were enrolled, with 20 in each treatment group. Both Telmisartan and Losartan significantly reduced systolic and diastolic blood pressure from baseline, with no statistically significant difference between the two drugs in terms of blood pressure reduction (p>0.05). Both treatments were well‐tolerated and there were no significant differences in adverse events or discontinuations due to side effects between the two groups. Additionally, no significant differences were observed in changes in lipid profiles or quality of life assessments. This study found that Telmisartan and Losartan are equally effective in reducing blood pressure in patients with essential hypertension. Both drugs demonstrated good safety profiles, and neither exhibited superiority in terms of adverse events or effects on lipid profiles. The choice between Telmisartan and Losartan in the management of hypertension may depend on individual patient preferences, cost considerations, or other factors unrelated to efficacy or safety.
How to cite this article:
Nama Netaji. A Comparative Study of the Efficacy of Telmisartan
and Losartan in the Treatment of Hypertension.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36478/10.36478/makrjp.2024.1.45.48
URL: https://www.makhillpublications.co/view-article/1815-9362/10.36478/makrjp.2024.1.45.48