The New England Journal of Medicine
e-mail icon  FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |    Advanced Search
Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe
 
A correction has been published: N Engl J Med 1995;332(21):1455.

Original Article
PreviousPrevious
Volume 330:1036-1040 April 14, 1994 Number 15
NextNext

Preserved Endothelium-Dependent Vasodilatation in Patients with Essential Hypertension
John R. Cockcroft, Philip J. Chowienczyk, Nigel Benjamin, and James M. Ritter

 

This Article
-Abstract

Commentary
-Letters

Tools and Services
-Add to Personal Archive
-Add to Citation Manager
-Notify a Friend
-E-mail When Cited

More Information
-Related Article
-PubMed Citation
ABSTRACT

Background Previous studies suggest that vascular endothelial function may be impaired in essential hypertension. Although muscarinic agonists dilate blood vessels by releasing an endothelium-derived relaxing factor closely related to nitric oxide, nitroprusside dilates vessels by a mechanism that is independent of the endothelium. The finding of an impaired response to muscarinic agonists but a normal response to nitroprusside in patients with hypertension has suggested that endothelial function is abnormal in hypertension.

Methods We reassessed this issue by measuring forearm blood flow by plethysmography during the infusion of vasodilators into the brachial arteries of 95 subjects: 37 normotensive controls (mean [±SE] arterial blood pressure, 92 ±1 mm Hg) and 58 patients with essential hypertension (mean arterial blood pressure, 121 ±1 mm Hg).

Results In an initial study, vascular responses to the vasodilators carbachol and nitroprusside were similar in normotensive controls (n = 19) and hypertensive patients (n = 17). We wondered whether this might be attributable to the use of previously untreated patients or to the choice of carbachol as the muscarinic agonist. However, we found that the vasodilator responses to nitroprusside, acetylcholine, carbachol, and isoproterenol were also similar in separate groups of normotensive controls (n = 18) and hypertensive subjects, whether the subjects had never been treated for hypertension (n = 24) or had had therapy withheld for two weeks (n = 17). The 95 percent confidence intervals for the difference between the controls and hypertensive patients in the ratio of endothelium-dependent vasodilatation induced by acetylcholine or carbachol to endothelium-independent vasodilatation induced by nitroprusside were -14 to +23 percent for acetylcholine and -13 to +12 percent for carbachol.

Conclusions In contrast to previous studies, our findings suggest that selective impairment of the responsiveness of the forearm vasculature to muscarinic agonists is not universal in patients with essential hypertension. .


Acetylcholine relaxes intact blood vessels by means of muscarinic receptors that stimulate the synthesis and release of an endothelium-derived relaxing factor (EDRF)1. EDRF is identical to nitric oxide2,3 or very closely related to it. Nitric oxide activates soluble guanylyl cyclase, increasing the levels of cytoplasmic cyclic 3'5'-guanosine monophosphate4 and thereby reducing calcium flux and causing vascular relaxation5,6. Nitroprusside causes endothelium-independent vasodilatation through the same effector pathway by providing an inorganic source of nitric oxide7. There is considerable evidence that the release of EDRF or nitric oxide is abnormal in animal models of hypertension,8,9,10,11,12,13,14 but this point remains controversial15. The role of EDRF or nitric oxide has been investigated in essential hypertension in humans by comparing the vasodilator responses to the administration of acetylcholine and of nitroprusside into the brachial or coronary arteries16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25. These studies reported that patients with hypertension had reduced responses to acetylcholine as compared with those to nitroprusside.

In the current study, we reassessed this question. In contrast to previous studies, we found no such difference between normotensive subjects and hypertensive patients in forearm vascular responses to the muscarinic agonists carbachol and acetylcholine as compared with the responses to the endothelium-independent vasodilator nitroprusside.

Methods

Subjects

The population for each study consisted of healthy normotensive subjects who were employees of London University or of the Trustee Savings Bank and otherwise healthy patients with uncomplicated essential hypertension who were attending Guy's Hospital hypertension clinic. The normotensive subjects had a systolic blood pressure of less than 140 mm Hg and a diastolic blood pressure of less than 80 mm Hg (Korotkoff phase V). Blood pressure was measured by sphygmomanometry in the physician's office with the use of standard techniques26 after each subject had been seated for five minutes. Each blood-pressure value was the mean of three readings. The patients seen at the hypertension clinic include patients with all grades of hypertension living in southeast London. Such patients are representative of hypertensive patients in this geographic area.

            First Study

Consecutively referred patients who had never been treated for hypertension and who had a diastolic blood pressure of at least 100 mm Hg at three or more office visits were considered eligible for the study. Hypertension was confirmed in each patient by ambulatory monitoring for 12 hours during which the mean diastolic blood pressure remained above 90 mm Hg. Blood pressure was measured every 30 minutes from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. with an Accutracker monitor (Suntech Medical Instruments, Raleigh, N.C.)27. Secondary causes of hypertension, metabolic abnormalities, and evidence of damage to end organs were sought by studying each patient's history and performing a physical examination and laboratory testing, including electrocardiography, urinalysis, measurements of plasma creatinine and electrolytes, and when clinically indicated, determination of urinary vanilmandelic acid excretion and renal imaging. A history was obtained for all healthy control subjects, and they also underwent a physical examination and urinalysis. All urine samples were negative for glucose. The characteristics of the study subjects are summarized in Table 1.

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 1. Characteristics of the Study Subjects.

 
            Second Study

The second study used the same inclusion and exclusion criteria as the first for normotensive controls and patients with untreated hypertension, except that an Accutracker II monitor (Suntech Medical Instruments)28 was used for the 12-hour recording period. An additional group was recruited during routine follow-up visits to the hypertension clinic, consisting of patients who had been treated with one or two antihypertensive drugs (including thiazide diuretics, {beta}-adrenoceptor antagonists, calcium-channel blockers, and angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors) that had maintained blood pressure within the normal range on repeated office visits. Each patient had originally been given a diagnosis on the basis of three or more separate office visits in which diastolic blood pressure had exceeded 100 mm Hg, and all had a mean diastolic blood pressure of more than 90 mm Hg during 12 hours of ambulatory monitoring. Patients with a history of accelerated hypertension or of other complications were excluded. The same basic information was obtained for the subjects in both studies (Table 1). In addition, the second study included measurements of fasting serum cholesterol, forearm length (from the medial epicondyle to the ulnar styloid) and circumference, and blood acetylcholinesterase activity, measured by the method of Ellman et al.29 in venous blood sampled on the day blood flow was measured in the forearm.

Experimental Protocols

Both studies were approved by the Lewisham and North Southwark Ethics Committee. Eligible subjects and patients were invited to take part, and all gave written informed consent. Subjects abstained from tobacco and alcoholic and caffeine-containing beverages during the night before the study. On the morning of the study they had a breakfast consisting of orange juice and a slice of toast. Studies were performed in a quiet clinical laboratory (the temperature was controlled within ±1 °C during each study). Blood pressure was measured in triplicate as described above after the subjects had been seated for 5 minutes and after they had been supine for 30 minutes. Forearm blood flow was measured in both arms with venous occlusion plethysmography with mercury-in-Silastic strain gauges30 that had been electrically calibrated31. The pressure of the collecting cuff was 40 mm Hg, and the occlusion pressure of the wrist cuff was 200 mm Hg or 20 mm Hg more than the systolic pressure. Blood flow was recorded for 10 of every 15 seconds. A 27-gauge unmounted steel needle (Cooper's Needle Works, Birmingham, United Kingdom) sealed with dental wax to an epidural cannula (Portex, Hythe, Kent, United Kingdom) was inserted into the subject's left brachial artery under sterile conditions; less than 1 ml of 1 percent lidocaine hydrochloride (Antigen, Roscrea, Ireland) was given to provide local anesthesia. The drugs were dissolved in 0.9 percent sodium chloride (Travenol, Thetford, United Kingdom), and saline or the drug solution was infused at a rate of 1.0 ml per minute by means of constant-rate infusion pumps (Braun, Melsungen, Germany). Basal blood flow was recorded after saline had been infused for at least six minutes. Each drug was infused for six minutes, and each infusion was separated from the next by an infusion of saline (for at least six minutes). The drugs used in the first study were sodium nitroprusside (Roche, Basel, Switzerland), at doses of 0.8 and 3.2 µg per minute, and carbachol chloride (Macarthy Medical, Romford, United Kingdom), at doses of 0.1 and 1.0 µg per minute. The drugs used in the second study were sodium nitroprusside, at doses of 3 and 10 µg per minute; acetylcholine chloride (Coopervision, Southampton, United Kingdom), at doses of 7.5 and 15 µg per minute; carbachol, at doses of 0.5 and 2.5 µg per minute; and isoproterenol sulfate (Martindale Pharmaceuticals, Romford, United Kingdom), at doses of 0.1 and 0.2 µg per minute. Forearm blood flow was measured for the final three minutes of each infusion period. The mean of the final five measurements of each recording period was used for analysis. Blood flow was expressed as milliliters of blood per minute per 100 ml of forearm volume. Forearm vascular resistance was calculated by dividing the mean arterial pressure by the forearm blood flow. All blood pressures were recorded in the noninfused arms of supine subjects by sphygmomanometry before blood flow was measured. Changes in vascular resistance were expressed as a percentage of the base-line value to take into account differences between normotensive and hypertensive subjects in resistance at base line17.

Statistical Analysis

Unless otherwise stated, values are expressed as means ±SE. Analysis of variance for repeated measures was used to test for differences in the response to drugs between the hypertensive subjects and the control subjects. Analysis of covariance was used to examine the effects of potential confounding variables. All P values are two-sided; a P value of less than 0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance. The use of different vasodilators in each subject permitted comparisons within subjects of potency, the situation in which this method is at its most powerful32. For this purpose the ratios of the responses to endothelium-dependent vasodilators (acetylcholine and carbachol) to the responses to an endothelium-independent vasodilator (nitroprusside) were calculated and expressed as percentages with 95 percent confidence intervals33.

Results

First Study

In both the subjects with hypertension and the normotensive subjects, forearm blood flow in the noninfused arm did not change significantly during the infusion of carbachol or nitroprusside, confirming that these drugs did not have a systemic effect at the doses used. Forearm blood flow and changes in vascular resistance in the infused arm are shown in Table 2. There were no significant differences in the responses to either carbachol or nitroprusside between the hypertensive subjects and the normotensive controls.

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 2. Forearm Blood Flow and Vascular Resistance during Brachial-Artery Infusion of Vasodilators in 19 Normotensive and 17 Hypertensive Subjects in the First Study.

 
Second Study

As in the first study, there were no significant changes in the three groups of subjects in forearm blood flow and vascular resistance in the noninfused arm during the infusion of vasodilators. There were no significant differences in the responses of forearm blood flow in the infused arm to nitroprusside, acetylcholine, carbachol, or isoproterenol between the normotensive controls, the hypertensive subjects who had never been treated, and the subjects with previously treated hypertension in whom antihypertensive medication had been withheld for two weeks (Table 3 and Figure 1). The changes in vascular resistance during the infusion of nitroprusside, acetylcholine, and carbachol were also similar in all three groups. The overall findings were unaltered when analysis of covariance was used to take into account differences in age, sex, and cholinesterase activity between the normotensive controls and the hypertensive subjects. The hypertensive subjects were considered as a single group in a subsequent analysis.

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 3. Forearm Blood Flow and Vascular Resistance during Brachial-Artery Infusion of Vasodilators in 18 Normotensive Subjects, 24 Subjects with Untreated Hypertension, and 17 Subjects with Previously Treated Hypertension in the Second Study.

 

View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 1. Mean (±SE) Blood Flow in the Forearm during the Infusion of Nitroprusside, Acetylcholine, Carbachol, and Isoproterenol in 18 Normotensive Controls and 41 Hypertensive Subjects.

 
The mean responses to both doses of each drug (calculated as the average of the forearm blood flow for the lower and higher dose of each drug) are shown in Figure 1. The ratio of the mean response to acetylcholine to the mean response to nitroprusside (acetylcholine response/nitroprusside response x 100 percent) was 95 percent in control subjects and 100 percent in hypertensive subjects. The 95 percent confidence interval for the difference in this ratio between control subjects and hypertensive subjects was -14 to +23 percent. The ratio of the mean response to carbachol to the mean response to nitroprusside was 98 percent in the normotensive controls and 97 percent in the subjects with hypertension (95 percent confidence interval for the difference, -13 to +12 percent).

Discussion

Despite considerable evidence that the release of EDRF and nitric oxide is abnormal in animal models of hypertension,8,9,10,11,12,13,14 a recent discussion of these findings concludes that the case for vascular endothelial dysfunction in essential hypertension is far from proved15. Most work in animals has involved examining the extent to which isolated blood vessels relax in response to acetylcholine. There is a large body of indirect evidence of various kinds of endothelial dysfunction in the large vessels of spontaneously hypertensive rats,9 New Zealand hypertensive rats,34 and rats with various forms of experimentally induced hypertension11,14. The responses of resistance vessels to acetylcholine in various animal models of hypertension have been reported to be impaired by some investigators but not by others10,35,36,37.

Previous studies have demonstrated impaired vasodilator responses to either acetylcholine or methacholine in the forearm vasculature of patients with hypertension16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23. Inhibition of nitric oxide synthase has provided evidence that basal nitric oxide-mediated vasodilatation is also abnormal in patients with hypertension19,38. However, resistance arteries from patients with essential hypertension respond normally to acetylcholine36. In contrast to all previous in vivo studies, our study demonstrated that vasodilator responses to nitroprusside and carbachol were similar in hypertensive subjects and normotensive subjects. This unexpected finding is unlikely to be accounted for by major differences in our study population. The mean (±SD) blood pressure measured by sphygmomanometry in our first group of patients with hypertension (117 ±10 mm Hg) was the same as that in patients studied by Panza et al. (117 ±7 mm Hg, also measured by sphygmomanometry)17 and similar to the blood pressure in patients included in subsequent studies by this group18,19,20. The calculation of forearm vascular resistance under these conditions is less precise than when intraarterial measurements are used; although this may result in some reduction in the power of such studies to detect differences between groups, the confidence intervals in the present study indicate that there was no substantial difference between patients and controls. The age and sex distributions were also similar to those of previous studies16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23. Our subjects were mainly white; other workers have not commented on the race of their subjects. We studied patients who had never been treated for hypertension, whereas other studies focused on patients in whom antihypertensive treatment had been withdrawn. We therefore also compared a normotensive control group with a group of hypertensive patients (treated for a mean of 5.6 years) in whom medication was withheld, as well as with another group of patients with untreated hypertension. In this part of the study we also determined the responses to acetylcholine and carbachol. There was no difference between the three groups in their responses to acetylcholine or carbachol as compared with their responses to nitroprusside.

The responses of the normotensive subjects to acetylcholine and nitroprusside were similar to those reported by other investigators16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23. The power of the present study to detect a blunting of the response to acetylcholine or carbachol relative to the response to sodium nitroprusside in hypertensive subjects is reflected by the resulting 95 percent confidence intervals of -14 to +23 percent and of -13 to +12 percent, respectively. A type II statistical error is unlikely to have resulted in our missing a true reduction of more than 14 percent in the sensitivity to acetylcholine or carbachol relative to that of sodium nitroprusside.

Acetylcholine is highly unstable in blood,39 and vasodilator responses to acetylcholine are dependent on acetylcholinesterase activity and on forearm length40. We did observe a small difference in blood cholinesterase activity between the normotensive controls and the subjects with previously treated hypertension, but not between the normotensive controls and the subjects with untreated hypertension. The difference between our findings and earlier observations16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23 could thus have arisen had there been unrecognized differences in cholinesterase activity, catheter position, or forearm length between the groups with hypertension and the control groups in these studies. Alternatively, since essential hypertension is a heterogeneous disorder, it is possible that endothelial dysfunction causes selective impairment of the responsiveness to acetylcholine in some as yet unrecognized subgroup of patients who were not represented in our group of 58 hypertensive subjects41.

Our negative findings do not argue against evidence that basal release of EDRF or nitric oxide is abnormal in the forearm vasculature in patients with hypertension19,38 but do call into question evidence of abnormal responsiveness of this vascular bed to acetylcholine or other muscarinic agonists. Selective impairment of the responsiveness of forearm vasculature to muscarinic agonists does not appear to be universal in patients with essential hypertension.

Supported by the British Heart Foundation.

We are indebted to P. Stratton for technical assistance, to S.D. Todd, R.G.N., and L. Binns, R.G.N., for nursing assistance, and to Doreen Cannon of the Trustee Savings Bank and the other employees who participated in these studies.


Source Information

From the Department of Clinical Pharmacology, United Medical and Dental School of Guy's and St. Thomas's Hospitals, University of London, London.

Address reprint requests to Professor Ritter at the Department of Clinical Pharmacology, UMDS, Medical School Building, Guy's Hospital, London SE1 9RT, United Kingdom.

References

  1. Furchgott RF, Zawadzki JV. The obligatory role of endothelial cells in the relaxation of arterial smooth muscle by acetylcholine. Nature 1980;288:373-376. [CrossRef][Medline]
  2. Ignarro LJ, Buga GM, Wood KS, Byrns RE, Chaudhuri G. Endothelium-derived relaxing factor produced and released from artery and vein is nitric oxide. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1987;84:9265-9269. [Free Full Text]
  3. Palmer RM, Ferrige AG, Moncada S. Nitric oxide release accounts for the biological activity of endothelium-derived relaxing factor. Nature 1987;327:524-526. [CrossRef][Medline]
  4. Murad F, Mittal CK, Arnold WP, Katsuki S, Kimura H. Guanylate cyclase: activation by azide, nitro compounds, nitric oxide, and hydroxyl radical and inhibition by hemoglobin and myoglobin. Adv Cyclic Nucleotide Res 1978;9:145-158. [Medline]
  5. Kobayashi S, Kanaide H, Nakamura M. Cytosolic-free calcium transients in cultured vascular smooth muscle cells: microfluorometric measurements. Science 1985;229:553-556. [Free Full Text]
  6. Collins P, Griffith TM, Henderson AH, Lewis MJ. Endothelium-derived relaxing factor alters calcium fluxes in rabbit aorta: a cyclic guanosine monophosphate-mediated effect. J Physiol (Lond) 1986;381:427-437. [Free Full Text]
  7. Smith RP, Kruszyna H. Nitroprusside produces cyanide poisoning via reaction with hemoglobin. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1974;191:557-563. [Free Full Text]
  8. Carvalho MHC, Scivoletto R, Fortes ZB, Nigro D, Cordellini S. Reactivity of aorta and mesenteric microvessels to drugs in spontaneously hypertensive rats: role of the endothelium. J Hypertens 1987;5:377-382. [CrossRef][Medline]
  9. Konishi M, Su C. Role of endothelium in dilator responses of spontaneously hypertensive rat arteries. Hypertension 1983;5:881-886. [Free Full Text]
  10. Li J, Bukoski RD. Endothelium-dependent relaxation of hypertensive resistance arteries is not impaired under all conditions. Circ Res 1993;72:290-296. [Free Full Text]
  11. Lockette W, Otsuka Y, Carretero O. The loss of endothelium-dependent vascular relaxation in hypertension. Hypertension 1986;8:Suppl II:II-61. 
  12. Luscher TF, Vanhoutte PM. Endothelium-dependent contractions to acetylcholine in the aorta of the spontaneously hypertensive rat. Hypertension 1986;8:344-348. [Free Full Text]
  13. Shirasaki Y, Kolm P, Nickols GA, Lee TJF. Endothelial regulation of cyclic GMP and vascular responses in hypertension. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1988;245:53-58. [Free Full Text]
  14. Van de Voorde J, Leusen I. Endothelium-dependent and independent relaxation of aortic rings from hypertensive rats. Am J Physiol 1986;250:H711-H717. 
  15. Angus JA, Lew MJ. Interpretation of the acetylcholine test of endothelial cell dysfunction in hypertension. J Hypertens Suppl 1992;10:S179-S186. [Medline]
  16. Linder L, Kiowski W, Buhler FR, Luscher TF. Indirect evidence for release of endothelium-derived relaxing factor in human forearm circulation in vivo: blunted response in essential hypertension. Circulation 1990;81:1762-1767. [Free Full Text]
  17. Panza JA, Quyyumi AA, Brush JE Jr, Epstein SE. Abnormal endothelium-dependent vascular relaxation in patients with essential hypertension. N Engl J Med 1990;323:22-27. [Abstract]
  18. Panza JA, Quyyumi AA, Callahan TS, Epstein SE. Effect of antihypertensive treatment on endothelium-dependent vascular relaxation in patients with essential hypertension. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993;21:1145-1151. [Abstract]
  19. Panza JA, Casino PR, Kilcoyne CM, Quyyumi AA. Role of endothelium-derived nitric oxide in the abnormal endothelium-dependent vascular relaxation of patients with essential hypertension. Circulation 1993;87:1468-1474. [Free Full Text]
  20. Panza JA, Casino PR, Badar DM, Quyyumi AA. Effect of increased availability of endothelium-derived nitric oxide precursor on endothelium-dependent vascular relaxation in normal subjects and in patients with essential hypertension. Circulation 1993;87:1475-1481. [Free Full Text]
  21. Hirooka Y, Imaizumi T, Masaki H, et al. Captopril improves impaired endothelium-dependent vasodilation in hypertensive patients. Hypertension 1992;20:175-180. [Free Full Text]
  22. Creager MA, Roddy M-A, Coleman SM, Dzau VJ. The effect of ACE inhibition on endothelium-dependent vasodilation in hypertension. J Vasc Res 1992;29:97-98.abstract
  23. Taddei S, Virdis A, Mattei P, Salvetti A. Vasodilation to acetylcholine in primary and secondary forms of human hypertension. Hypertension 1993;21:929-933. [Free Full Text]
  24. Treasure CB, Manoukian SV, Klein JL, et al. Epicardial coronary artery responses to acetylcholine are impaired in hypertensive patients. Circ Res 1992;71:776-781. [Free Full Text]
  25. Treasure CB, Klein JL, Vita JA, et al. Hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy are associated with impaired endothelium-mediated relaxation in human coronary resistance vessels. Circulation 1993;87:86-93. [Free Full Text]
  26. Petrie JC, O'Brien ET, Littler WA, de Swiet M. Recommendations on blood pressure measurement. BMJ 1986;293:611-615.
  27. White WB, Schulman P, McCabe EJ, Nardone MB. Clinical validation of the accutracker, a novel ambulatory blood pressure monitor using R-wave gating for Korotkoff sounds. J Clin Hypertens 1987;3:500-509. [Medline]
  28. White WB, Lund-Johansen P, McCabe EJ, Omvik P. Clinical evaluation of the Accutracker II ambulatory blood pressure monitor: assessment of performance in two countries and comparison with sphygmomanometry and intra-arterial blood pressure at rest and during exercise. J Hypertens 1989;7:967-975. [CrossRef][Medline]
  29. Ellman GL, Courtney KD, Andres V Jr, Featherstone RM. A new and rapid colorimetric determination of acetylcholinesterase activity. Biochem Pharmacol 1961;7:88-95. [CrossRef][Medline]
  30. Whitney RJ. The measurement of volume changes in human limbs. J Physiol (Lond) 1953;121:1-27.
  31. Hokanson DE, Sumner DS, Strandness DE Jr. An electrically calibrated plethysmograph for direct measurement of limb blood flow. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 1975;22:25-29. [Medline]
  32. Robinson BF. Assessment of responses to drugs in forearm resistance vessels and hand veins of man: techniques and problems. In: Kuhlmann J, Wingender W, eds. Dose-response relationship of drugs. Vol. 3 of Clinical pharmacology series. Munich, Germany: W Zuckschwerdt Verlag, 1990:40-3.
  33. Matthews JNS, Altman DG, Campbell MJ, Royston P. Analysis of serial measurements in medical research. BMJ 1990;300:230-235.
  34. Winquist RJ, Bunting PB, Baskin EP, Wallace AA. Decreased endothelium-dependent relaxation in New Zealand genetic hypertensive rats. J Hypertens 1984;2:541-545. [Medline]
  35. DeMey JG, Gray SD. Endothelium-dependent reactivity in resistance vessels. Prog Appl Microcirc 1985;8:181-7.
  36. Angus JA, Dyke AC, Jennings GL, et al. Release of endothelium-derived relaxing factor from resistance arteries in hypertension. Kidney Int Suppl 1992;37:S73-S78. [Medline]
  37. Wright CE, Angus JA, Korner PI. Vascular amplifier properties in renovascular hypertension in conscious rabbits: hindquarter responses to constrictor and dilator stimuli. Hypertension 1987;9:122-131. [Free Full Text]
  38. Calver A, Collier J, Moncada S, Vallance P. Effect of local intra-arterial NG-monomethyl-L-arginine in patients with hypertension: the nitric oxide dilator mechanism appears abnormal. J Hypertens 1992;10:1025-1031. [Medline]
  39. Duff F, Greenfield ADM, Shepherd JT, Thompson ID. A quantitative study of the response to acetylcholine and histamine of the blood vessels of the human hand and forearm. J Physiol (Lond) 1953;120:160-170.
  40. Chowienczyk PJ, Cockcroft JR, Ritter JM. Blood flow responses to intra-arterial acetylcholine in man: effects of basal flow and conduit vessel length. Clin Sci (in press).
  41. Luscher TF. Heterogeneity of endothelial dysfunction in hypertension. Eur Heart J 1992;13:Suppl D:50-55.

 

This Article
-Abstract

Commentary
-Letters

Tools and Services
-Add to Personal Archive
-Add to Citation Manager
-Notify a Friend
-E-mail When Cited

More Information
-Related Article
-PubMed Citation

Related Letters:

Endothelium-Dependent Vasodilatation and Essential Hypertension
Panza J. A., Cockcroft J. R., Chowienczyk P. J., Ritter J. M.
Extract | Full Text  
N Engl J Med 1994; 331:951, Oct 6, 1994. Correspondence

This article has been cited by other articles:



HOME  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SEARCH  |  CURRENT ISSUE  |  PAST ISSUES  |  COLLECTIONS  |  PRIVACY  |  HELP  |  beta.nejm.org

Comments and questions? Please contact us.

The New England Journal of Medicine is owned, published, and copyrighted © 2008 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.