Single-pill combination of indapamide and perindopril: potential of practical application
Kochergina A. Kashtalap V (2024). Single-pill combination of indapamide and perindopril: potential of practical application. Russian Journal of Cardiology, 29(3), 5831. https://doi.org/10.15829/1560-4071-2024-5831
- Overall rating
-
(5.0) 1 review
- Authors
- A. M. Kochergina, V. V. Kashtalap
- Journal
- Russian Journal of Cardiology
- First published
- 2024
- Number of citations
- 1
- Type
- Journal Article
Abstract
The effectiveness of blood pressure control can be increased with the use of single-pill combinations. When choosing an agent, the evidence of its components should be focused. The selection criteria are not only the direct effects of reducing blood pressure, but also organ protection and the impact on prognosis. Perindopril and indapamide have many years of experience in use in a wide range of patients and are used with the same effectiveness in the treatment of hypertension in young and elderly patients, in normal-weight and obese people, as tools for the primary prevention of myocardial infarction and stroke, and also as a way to prevent recurrent events.The article provides data on the advantages of perindopril and indapamide, the potential of its single-pill combination, the pleiotropic and organ protective properties of this drug. We systematized results of related studies and reflected the main conclusions. Attention is paid to the latest data on the long-term effect of indapamide therapy on the risk of cardiovascular events.
Reviews
Informative Title
Methods
Statistical Analysis
Data Presentation
Discussion
Limitations
Data Available
This is a narrative review / expert opinion on the single-pill combination of indapamide and perindopril. Assessed within its genre, the title is appropriate and non-misleading; the data are logically structured, with key trials presented consistently; the discussion is clinically oriented and supports the role of the combination in hypertension management. As a reader, I found the paper useful: it answers practical clinical questions and summarises the evidence in an accessible way. Scientifically, the paper has limitations: no formal literature search strategy, no dedicated «Limitations» section, and no quantitative synthesis. This is typical for a narrative review but reduces methodological rigour. Sponsorship by the manufacturer should also be considered. Nevertheless, within its stated genre, the article achieves its goal of informing clinicians. Therefore, I rate it «5 stars» based on its high practical value and clear presentation.