Pindolol potentiates the antidepressant effect of venlafaxine by inhibiting 5-HT1A receptor in DRN neurons of mice.

INTRODUCTION: Antidepressants increase the level of 5-HT in the somatodendritic region of the serotonergic dorsal raphe nucleus (DRN) neurons in the first few days of their usage, which, in turn, inhibits the serotonergic neurons locally. Pindolol may eliminate this inhibition when used in combination with antidepressants. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We aimed to determine the effect of pindolol on 5-HT1A receptor response in the DRN neurons, using voltage clamp recordings and prove the potentiation of antidepressant effect of venlafaxine by pindolol through behavior experiments. Balb/c mice, 28-35 days-old were used. RESULTS: 5-HT application (25 µM) induced an outward current by 23.36 ± 3.79 pA at the neurons in the dorsal subnucleus of DRN. This effect was inhibited by pre-administration of WAY-100135 (21 µM) and pindolol (10 µM) separately. The current induced by 5-HT and 8-OHDPAT have no statistically significance. 8-OHDPAT (30 µM) induced a 5-HT-like outward current, which was inhibited by pre-administration of pindolol (10 µM). Combination of venlafaxine (20 mg/kg/day) and pindolol (15 mg/kg/day) significantly reduced immobilization time when compared to the control group in tail suspension test and forced swim test without any significant change in locomotor activity. Administration of venlafaxine (20 mg/kg/day) alone or pindolol (15 mg/kg/day) alone did not significantly reduce immobilization time. CONCLUSION: Pindolol has the potential to prevent the inhibition of serotonergic neurons after antidepressant use. Hence, we, for the first time, demonstrated that pindolol can potentiate antidepressant effect of venlafaxine. In the mood disorders, pindolol is likely to increase the effectiveness of antidepressant drugs when given in combination.

Is pindolol augmentation effective in depressed patients resistant to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to assess the use of pindolol augmentation in depressed patients resistant to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) therapy. METHODS: A comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, Web of Science, and PsychINFO databases from 1970 through December 2013 was conducted. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) studied on unipolar SSRI-resistant depressed adults were included. The primary outcome was mean change scores of depressive symptom on the depression rating scales, assessed with standardized mean differences. RESULTS: Five RCTs consisting of 154 patients met all inclusion and exclusion criteria. The overall pooled effect size in the primary and secondary efficacy analysis showed no significant effects of pindolol plus SSRI therapy (standardized mean difference = -0.43, p = 0.24; OR = 1.92, p = 0.39, respectively). In terms of acceptability, there was no statistical difference in either tolerability or safety between the two groups (OR = 0.46, p = 0.40; OR = 0.90, p = 0.94, respectively). These estimates remained robust through several sensitivity and subgroup analyses, except 7.5 mg-qd pindolol augmentation did show a significant benefit over 2.5-mg tid pindolol augmentation. CONCLUSIONS: Pindolol augmentation may not be suitable for treatment-resistant depression patients with SSRI-resistant depression. However, once-daily high-dose pindolol (7.5 mg qd) appears to show a promising benefit in these patients.

A Randomized Controlled Trial comparing the efficacy of low-dose amitriptyline, amitriptyline with pindolol and surrogate placebo in the treatment of chronic tension-type facial pain.

BACKGROUND: Patients often present to otolaryngologists with chronic facial pain, presumed to be of sinus origin despite normal nasal endoscopy and sinus CT. This pain has increasingly been recognized as being of neurological origin with one of the commonest underlying causes being mid-facial segmental tension-type pain (MFP) which is a version of tension-type headache affecting the midface. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: 1. To determine whether low-dose amitriptyline reduces pain scores compared to surrogate placebo in patients with chronic MFP. 2. To determine whether the addition of pindolol, a beta blocker with serotonin receptor blocking properties hastens onset of action or improves efficacy of amitriptyline. SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURE: to determine whether amitriptyline or amitriptyline with pindolol significantly reduces analgesic consumption. METHODOLOGY: Sixty two patients were randomized to three treatment groups (a) amitriptyline 10mg daily (b) amitriptyline 10mg daily with pindolol 5mg twice daily and (c) loratadine 10mg daily. Daily pain scores using a facial pain diary were recorded over eight weeks. RESULTS: At 8 weeks, pain frequency and intensity were significantly reduced in patients treated with amitriptyline and in those receiving amitriptyline with pindolol compared to surrogate placebo. Patients on the combination therapy showed significantly improved clinical outcome and significantly reduced analgesic intake compared to those on amitriptyline alone. CONCLUSION: Low dose amitriptyline is effective in the management of MFP and is enhanced by the addition of pindolol.

The anxiolytic effect of a promising quinoline containing selenium with the contribution of the serotonergic and GABAergic pathways: Modulation of parameters associated with anxiety in mice.

Recently, we demonstrated the promising anxiolytic action of 7-chloro-4-(phenylselanyl) quinoline (4-PSQ) in mice. For this reason, the objective of this study was to expand our previous findings by investigating the contribution of serotoninergic and GABAergic systems to the anxiolytic action of this compound. Pretreatment with different serotoninergic antagonists (pindolol, WAY100635 and ketanserin) blocked the anxiolytic effect caused by 4-PSQ (50 mg/kg, per oral) in the elevated plus maze (EPM) test. The contribution of the GABAergic system was investigated by pretreatment with pentylenetetrazole (a GABAA receptor antagonist) (PTZ). 4-PSQ diminished the PTZ-induced anxiety, and did not modify the locomotor, exploratory and motor activities of mice. Later, this group of animals was euthanized and the blood was removed to determine the levels of corticosterone, and cerebral cortex and hippocampus to determine the mRNA expression levels of cAMP response element binding protein (CREB), brain derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and nuclear factor kappa B (NF-κB), as well as the Na+, K+ ATPase activity and reactive species (RS) levels. 4-PSQ was able to significantly reverse the increase in RS and corticosterone levels, as well as the decrease of CREB and BDNF expression in the cerebral structures and increase of NF-κB expression in the hippocampus. Finally, 4-PSQ restored the Na+, K+ ATPase activity in the cerebral structures evaluated. Here, we showed that the modulation of serotonergic and GABAergic systems, factors related to neurogenesis, oxidative status and Na+, K+ ATPase activity contributes to the anxiolytic effect of 4-PSQ and reinforces the therapeutical potential of this compound for the treatment of anxiety.

Glomerular filtration rate after tramadol, parecoxib and pindolol following anaesthesia and analgesia in comparison with morphine in dogs.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of morphine, parecoxib, tramadol and a combination of parecoxib, tramadol and pindolol on nociceptive thresholds in awake animals and their effect on glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in dogs subjected to 30 minutes of anesthesia. ANIMALS: Eight adult mixed breed experimental dogs. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized, controlled trial. METHODS: Dogs received 0.05 mg kg(-1) acepromazine subcutaneously (SC) as anaesthetic pre-medication. Thirty to sixty minutes later, they received either tramadol 3 mg kg(-1) intravenously, (IV), parecoxib (1 mg kg(-1) IV), a combination of tramadol 3 mg kg(-1) (IV), parecoxib 1 mg kg(-1) (IV) and pindolol 5 microg kg(-1) (SC), morphine (0.1 mg kg(-1) (IV) or 0.9% saline (2 mL). Anaesthesia was then induced with IV propofol to effect (2.9 +/- 0.8 mg kg(-1)) and maintained with halothane in oxygen for 30 minutes. Systolic arterial blood pressure was maintained above 90 mmHg with IV fluids and by adjusting the inspired halothane concentration. Post-treatment nociceptive thresholds to mechanical stimuli, expressed as percent of pre-treatment values, were compared between the treatments to assess the analgesic efficacy of the drugs. Plasma iohexol clearance (ICL), a measure of GFR, was estimated both before and 24 hours after induction of anaesthesia to study the drugs' effects on renal perfusion. Nociceptive threshold and GFR data were compared using mixed model analysis in SAS 9.1. RESULTS: Both tramadol and parecoxib produced similar analgesia, which was less than that of morphine. Their combination with pindolol produced analgesia comparable with morphine. None of the test drugs, either alone or in combination, reduced GFR. CONCLUSION: Tramadol and parecoxib (either alone or in combination) can increase nociceptive thresholds in awake dogs and have minimal effects on renal perfusion in normotensive dogs subjected to anaesthesia.

The role of 5-HT1a and 5-HT2a receptors in attention and motor control: a mechanistic study in healthy volunteers.

RATIONALE: Various studies have demonstrated a modulating role for serotonin in attention. Selective serotonin inhibitors have repeatedly been shown to impair performance in sustained attention tasks. OBJECTIVES: To assess the contribution of serotonin reuptake inhibition and specific blockade of the pre-synaptic 5-HT(1a) receptor and the 5-HT(2a) receptor to deficits in attention. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was conducted according to a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled, four-way crossover design including 16 healthy volunteers. Treatments consisted of oral administration of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) escitalopram 20 mg + placebo; escitalopram 20 mg + ketanserin (5-HT(2a) antagonist), 50 mg; escitalopram 20 mg + pindolol (5-HT(1a) antagonist) 10 mg; and placebo + placebo on four separate days. A range of performance tasks were conducted to assess the subjects' attention and motor functions. RESULTS: Escitalopram administered alone impaired tracking performance in a divided attention task. The combination of escitalopram and pindolol and escitalopram and ketanserin impaired divided attention as compared to placebo. In addition, escitalopram and ketanserin impaired sustained attention. Divided attention impairment observed after combined treatments did not significantly differ from impairments after escitalopram alone. Sustained attention impairment observed after combined escitalopram and ketanserin significantly differed from escitalopram alone. CONCLUSIONS: 5HT(1a) blockade hardly affected SSRI effects on attention. Additional 5HT(2a) blockade, however, produced impairments of sustained attention and motor impulse control.

Selective verbal and spatial memory impairment after 5-HT1A and 5-HT2A receptor blockade in healthy volunteers pre-treated with an SSRI.

Serotonergic neurotransmission has been implicated in memory impairment. It is unclear however if memory performance is mediated through general 5-HT availability, through specific 5-HT receptors or both. The aim of the present study was to assess the contribution of 5-HT reuptake inhibition and specific blockade of 5-HT(1A) and 5-HT(2A) receptors to memory impairment. The study was conducted according to a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, four-way cross-over design including 16 healthy volunteers. The treatment consisted of oral administration of escitalopram 20 mg + placebo, escitalopram 20 mg + ketanserin 50 mg, escitalopram 20 mg + pindolol 10 mg and placebo on 4 separate days with a washout period of minimum 7 days. Different memory tasks were performed including verbal memory, spatial working memory and reversal learning. Escitalopram showed an impairing effect on immediate verbal recall which nearly reached statistical significance. No effects of escitalopram were found on other types of memory. In combination with pindolol, immediate verbal recall was significantly impaired. Escitalopram in combination with ketanserin impaired spatial working memory significantly. No effects were found on reversal learning. Selective impairment of immediate verbal recall after a 5-HT(1A) partial agonist and selective impairment of spatial working memory performance after 5-HT(2A) receptor antagonist, both in combination with a selective serotonergic reuptake inhibitor (escitalopram), suggests that 5-HT(1A) and 5-HT(2A) receptors are distinctly involved in verbal and spatial memory.

Pindolol augmentation of antidepressant response.

Pindolol, a partial beta-adrenoceptor/5-HT1A receptor antagonist was first used to accelerate the onset of action of antidepressant drugs in 1994. Since then, it has been used in more than a dozen controlled trials to examine whether it can reduce the lag to clinical improvement, and/or improve the clinical response in treatment-resistant patients. A recent metaanalysis concluded that pindolol accelerates the antidepressant response but does not increase the effectiveness of SSRIs in unresponsive patients. Several studies have examined the pharmacology of pindolol to clarify the neurobiological basis of its clinical action. Pindolol was initially used due to its ability to block 5-HT1A receptor-mediated responses and to enhance the neurochemical effects of SSRIs. In transfected cells, however, pindolol is a weak (20-25%) partial agonist at 5-HT1A receptors and, as such, its actions greatly depend on the system used. In line with this, other reports have also shown that pindolol can reduce serotonergic cell firing when given alone. Positron emission tomography (PET) scan studies have shown that pindolol displays a preferential occupancy of pre- vs. postsynaptic 5-HT1A receptors, although the overall occupancy is lower than desirable, which suggests that higher doses (e.g., 15 mg/day) may be more effective than the currently used 7.5 mg daily dosage. However, given the complex pharmacology of pindolol, it is hoped that new developments in this field can proceed through the use of a) selective and silent 5-HT1A receptor antagonists in combination with SSRIs, or b) dual action agents (SSRI+5-HT1A receptor blockers).

Positron emission tomography studies of human airways using an inhaled beta-adrenoceptor antagonist, S-11C-CGP 12388.

OBJECTIVES: Positron emission tomography (PET) scanning may provide information on changes in the density and affinity of airway beta-adrenoceptors in lung diseases. However, the injection of a radiolabeled beta-blocker results in a pulmonary PET signal that reflects the binding of the ligand in the alveoli and not in the airways. Better discrimination between alveolar and airway beta-adrenoceptors may be possible with an inhaled radioligand. DESIGN: A nebulizer was used to administer the antagonist S-11C-CGP12388 in aerosol form. Eight volunteers inhaled the tracer twice, at baseline and after pretreatment with a beta-adrenergic drug. In both PET scan studies, a dynamic scan of the lungs was followed by a whole-body scan to assess the inhaled dose. Pulmonary uptake was quantified using a region-of-interest-based analysis. SETTING: University hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Healthy volunteers. INTERVENTIONS: Pretreatment consisted either of inhaled salbutamol (400 microg, 20 min before the scan), or orally administered pindolol (3 x 5 mg during a period of 16 h before PET scanning). RESULTS: Drug pretreatment did not affect pulmonary deposition of the radioligand. The agonist salbutamol accelerated the monoexponential washout of 11C not only in the peripheral lung (mainly alveoli), but also in the central lung (mainly airways) and in the main bronchi. An even larger increase of the washout rate was induced by the antagonist pindolol. CONCLUSION: The similar effects of pindolol and salbutamol on tracer kinetics suggest that accelerated washout is due to the blockade of beta-adrenoceptors. Thus, the interaction of drugs with airway beta-adrenoceptors can be visualized using PET scanning and an inhaled radioligand.

A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of pindolol augmentation in depressive patients resistant to serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Grup de Recerca en Trastorns Afectius.

BACKGROUND: Pindolol has been reported to hasten the antidepressant action of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in open-label and placebo-controlled trials. Pilot studies also suggested that pindolol could augment the antidepressant response in unresponsive patients. We investigated whether the addition of pindolol can induce a rapid response in treatment-resistant patients. METHODS: After a single-blind lead-in placebo phase of 5 days to exclude placebo responders, 80 outpatients with major depression who did not respond to a minimum of 6 weeks of treatment with clomipramine hydrochloride, 150 mg/d; fluoxetine hydrochloride, 40 mg/d; fluvoxamine maleate, 200 mg/d; or paroxetine hydrochloride, 40 mg/d, were randomly assigned to additionally receive placebo (3 times daily) or pindolol (2.5 mg 3 times daily) for 10 days. The median number of ineffective treatments in the current episode was 2 (range, 1-4). Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression and Montgomery-Asberg Scale for Depression scores were used as primary measures of efficacy. RESULTS: At end point, the Hamilton and Montgomery-Asberg scores and change from baseline in Hamilton score were not significantly different in patients taking placebo or pindolol. The response rate was equal in both groups (12.5%). No differences in the clinical outcome were found when the various pretreatment subgroups were considered. At end point, the plasma concentration of pindolol was 9.9+/-5.1 ng/mL (mean +/- SD; n = 40). CONCLUSIONS: Although pindolol can accelerate the antidepressant action of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in previously untreated patients, it does not elicit a rapid clinical response in treatment-resistant patients within a 10-day period.

Evaluation of pindolol dosage in hypertension by automatic indirect BP monitoring.

Pindolol, a nonselective beta-adrenergic blocking drug, lowered systolic and diastolic BP equally well during once-daily and twice-daily dosage. Side effects were few. Absence of supine bradycardia distinguished this drug from other beta-adrenergic blockers and likely was attributable to the agent's intrinsic sympathomimetic activity. Blood pressure variability was less during therapy. Automatic indirect BP monitoring reliably confirmed office and home BP recordings and indicated good control throughout waking and sleeping periods.

Acute vasodilator action of pindolol in humans.

The local hemodynamic effect of pindolol, a nonselective beta-blocker with intrinsic sympathomimetic activity, was investigated in 17 healthy volunteers. Changes in forearm blood flow (FBF) in response to infusion of drugs into the brachial artery were measured by plethysmography. Pindolol increased FBF dose dependently to a maximal value of 62 +/- 8% (mean +/- SEM, p less than 0.001) without inducing changes in heart rate or blood pressure. For a single dose of pindolol the maximal effect on FBF was seen after approximately 4 minutes of infusion, and this effect persisted for at least 12 minutes after the infusion. The pindolol-induced increase in FBF was reduced by concomitant infusion of propranolol (p less than 0.001). Intra-arterial infusion of practolol did not influence FBF. No significant influence of pindolol was found on the vasoconstriction induced by the alpha 1-adrenergic receptor agonist methoxamine, the alpha 2-adrenergic receptor agonist BHT-933, or angiotensin II. Measurement of plasma pindolol concentrations in the venous effluent of the forearm suggested that vasodilatation occurred at drug levels within the therapeutic range. These results indicate that the beta-blocker pindolol has vasodilatory properties owing to stimulation of vascular beta 2-adrenergic receptors and that this effect may be of therapeutic relevance.

5-HT(1A) agonist potential of pindolol: electrophysiologic studies in the dorsal raphe nucleus and hippocampus.

BACKGROUND: The ability of pindolol to block 5-HT(1A) autoreceptors on serotonin-containing neurons in the raphe nuclei is thought to underlie the clinical reports of enhanced efficacy and rate of improvement in depressed patients treated with pindolol/selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) combinations. Selectivity for somatodendritic 5-HT(1A) autoreceptors is a crucial requirement, as blockade of postsynaptic 5-HT(1A) sites may jeopardize the therapeutic response. Previous investigators have probed the effects of pindolol on serotonergic dorsal raphe cell firing in animal species; here we confirm their findings and extend them to include observations on postsynaptic 5-HT(1A) receptors in the hippocampus. METHODS: Extracellular single-unit recordings were made in rats using standard electrophysiologic techniques. Firing rates of serotonin-containing neurons in the dorsal raphe nucleus and CA3 hippocampal pyramidal neurons were monitored and the effects of pindolol given alone or in combination with an SSRI (fluoxetine) or a 5-HT(1A) antagonist (WAY-100,635) were determined. RESULTS: Pindolol inhibited the firing rates of serotonergic dorsal raphe neurons in a dose-dependent manner. Recovery to baseline firing rates was gradual, but this inhibition could be acutely reversed by WAY-100,635. A range of pindolol doses failed to block the inhibitory effects of fluoxetine on dorsal raphe cell firing. In the hippocampus, pindolol also inhibited cell firing as a function of dose, although these effects were insensitive to WAY-100,635 treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The ability of pindolol to inhibit serotonergic dorsal raphe cell firing is indicative of its agonist potential and is consistent with previous studies. The lack of observable antagonism of the SSRI-induced slowing of raphe unit activity casts doubt on the suitability of this mechanism of action to account for the positive findings in clinical studies utilizing pindolol/SSRI combinations. The 5-HT(1A)-independent inhibition of hippocampal CA3 cell firing by pindolol suggests that this compound invokes multiple pharmacologic actions, all of which need to be assimilated into any proposed mechanism of action.

Factors affecting fluvoxamine antidepressant activity: influence of pindolol and 5-HTTLPR in delusional and nondelusional depression.

BACKGROUND: It has been recently reported that the short variant of the serotonin transporter (5-HTT) gene-linked functional polymorphic region (5-HTTLPR) influences the antidepressant response to certain selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. The aim of the present study was to test this finding in a sample of major and bipolar depressives, with or without psychotic features. METHODS: One hundred fifty-five inpatients were treated with fluvoxamine 300 mg and either placebo or pindolol in a double-blind design for 6 weeks. The severity of depressive symptoms was weekly assessed with the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. Allelic variation of 5-HTTLPR in each subject was determined using a polymerase chain reaction-based technique. RESULTS: 5-HTTLPR short variant was associated with a poor response to fluvoxamine treatment, independently from the recorded clinical variables. More specifically, the diagnosis, the presence of psychotic features, and the severity of depressive symptomatology did not influence this association. Conversely, pindolol augmentation may ameliorate the rate of response in 5-HTTLPR short variant subjects, thus reducing the difference in the response rate among the genotype variants. CONCLUSIONS: If confirmed, these results may improve patient care by helping the clinician to individualize treatment according to the patient's genetic 5-HTTLPR pattern.

Pindolol availability in hypertensive patients with normal and impaired renal function.

Intravenous and oral pharmacokinetics of pinlolol were studied in 18 hypertensive patients-9 with normal renal function and 9 with impaired renal function. Analysis of data showed that a linear two-compartment model was suitable to describe the pindolol kinetics. Compared with patients with normal renal function, patients with chronic renal failure exhibited: (1) unchanged transfer rate constants and distribution volumes and (2) decreased total body clearance with decreased renal clearance and unchanged nonrenal clearance. Analysis of oral data by the Loo-Riegelman method showed that the pindolol absorption kinetic was not first order. Compared with patients with normal renal function, patients with chronic renal failure exhibited decreased fraction of dose effectively absorbed and increased initial rate of absorption. The initial rate of absorption was inversely correlated with the creatinine clearance. The study disclosed evidence that absorption was modified in chronic renal failure.

Effects of pindolol on renal function II. Effects on intravenous and prolonged oral dosing.

Effects of intravenous and long-term oral dosing with pindolol on renal function were examined in eight hypertensive patients with reduced renal function. (Inulin clearance ranged from 40.5 to 84.5 ml/min/1.73 m2.) Intravenous pindolol resulted in decreased mean heart rate (74.3 to 67 bpm) and decreased mean inulin clearance (66 to 60.5 ml/min/1.73 m2.) Blood pressure and renal plasma flow did not change significantly. Long-term oral pindolol depressed blood pressure and heart rate, but mean inulin clearance was unchanged and renal blood flow and plasma volume increased. A second intravenous pindolol dose, given while the patients were receiving oral doses, resulted in nonsignificant decreases in glomerular filtration rate and renal plasma flow, but no change in blood pressure and heart rate. We conclude that prolonged pindolol dosing in patients with reduced renal function had no effect on renal function. When the drug was given intravenously there were small decreases in glomerular filtration rate and renal plasma flow.

Once-a-day pindolol in hypertension.

The possibility of using pindolol on a once-a-day schedule was investigated in the treatment of mild to moderate hypertension. Eighteen patients whose blood pressure responded satisfactorily to thrice-daily administration has a similar response to the single daily dose (p greater than 0.05). The advantages of once-daily pindolol therapy as well as some of the biochemical changes produced by the drug are commented upon.

Effects of pindolol on renal function.

Because beta blockers have been shown to reduce glomerular filtration rate (GFR), the renal effect of intravenous and prolonged oral administration of pindolol was examined in 10 patients with essential hypertension. Intravenous pindolol decreased inulin clearance from 99 to 94 ml/min/1.73 m2 (p < 0.005), and pulse rate from 75 to 69/min (p < 0.005). Blood pressure and filtration fraction were not changed. Oral pindolol (10 to 20 mg/day) for a mean of 6 mo resulted in a decrease in mean blood pressure from 124 to 111 mm Hg (p < 0.001), in mean pulse rate from 76 to 69/min (p < 0.005), and in mean plasma renin activity (PRA) from 0.9 to 0.29 ng/ml/hr (p < 0.05). Inulin clearance and filtration fraction did not change. At the end of oral therapy, intravenous pindolol induced a greater reduction in inulin clearance than in the first study. These observations indicate that intravenous pindolol induces a decrease in GFR probably secondary to hemodynamic effects. On the other hand, prolonged oral pindolol has no effect on GFR despite decreases in blood pressure, pulse rate, and PRA.

Interaction between oral verapamil and beta-blockers during submaximal exercise: relevance of ancillary properties.

The interaction between verapamil and beta-blockers may involve negative chronotropic, inotropic, and dromotropic effects. Three randomized, double-blind, crossover trials evaluated standardized submaximal exercise hemodynamics after oral verapamil (120 mg) and beta-blocker, alone and in combination, in groups of eight healthy men. The beta-blockers were propranolol (80 mg), metoprolol (100 mg), and pindolol (5 mg). During submaximal exercise, each beta-blocker produced similar reductions in heart rate. Likewise, each verapamil and beta-blocker combination caused greater decreases in heart rate and prolongation of PR interval than did either drug alone. Only the verapamil and propranolol combination produced greater reduction of systolic blood pressure and prolongation of rate-adjusted PR interval. All verapamil and beta-blocker combinations caused frequent adverse events, predominantly exercise fatigue and resting first-degree heart block. Although the verapamil and metoprolol or pindolol combinations produced lesser negative dromotropic or inotropic effects compared with verapamil and propranolol, coadministration of verapamil and any beta-blocker should be performed cautiously.