Clinical efficacy and safety of two concentrations of intravenous nicardipine hydrochloride for nicardipine-related phlebitis in patients with preeclampsia.

To evaluate the effect of two concentrations of intravenous administration of nicardipine hydrochloride on nicardipine-related phlebitis in patients with preeclampsia. A total of 100 preeclampsia patients were administered with nicardipine hydrochloride and divided into the low-concentration (LC) and high-concentration (HC) groups. The incidence and severity of phlebitis, time from treatment to onset of phlebitis, skin temperature, visual analogue scale (VAS) score, induration, and systemic adverse reactions were compared between two groups. The incidence rate of phlebitis in the LC group was 20% (10/50), significantly lower than 42% (21/50) in the HC group (P < 0.05). Ridit Analysis showed that the severity of phlebitis in the LC group was remarkably lower than that in the HC group (P < 0.05). In the LC group, the time from intravenous administration to onset of phlebitis was longer, the average skin temperature was higher, the VAS score was lower, and the indurated area was smaller than those in the HC group (all P < 0.05). Intravenous infusion of nicardipine hydrochloride with constant and low concentration reduces the incidence rate of phlebitis, prolongs the time from treatment to onset of phlebitis, alleviates the severity of phlebitis and pain, maintains skin temperature, and minimizes induration in preeclampsia patients without systemic adverse reactions.

Nicardipine Prolonged Release Implants for Prevention of Delayed Cerebral Ischemia after Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: A Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: A paucity of treatments to prevent delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) has stymied recovery after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH). Nicardipine has long been recognized as a potent cerebrovascular vasodilator with a history off-label use to prevent vasospasm and DCI. Multiple centers have developed nicardipine prolonged release implants (NPRI) that are directly applied during clip ligation to locally deliver nicardipine throughout the vasospasm window. Here we perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess whether NPRI confers protection against DCI and improves functional outcomes after aSAH. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, Ovid Embase, and Cochrane databases was performed for studies reporting the use of NPRI after aSAH published after January 1, 1980. We included all studies assessing the association of NPRI with DCI and or functional outcomes. Findings from studies with control arms were analyzed using a random effects model. A separate network meta-analysis was performed, including controlled NPRI studies, single-arm NPRI reports, and the control-arms of modern aSAH randomized clinical trials as additional comparators. RESULTS: The search identified 214 unique citations. Three studies with 284 patients met criteria for the random effects model. The pooled summary odds ratio for the association of NPRI and DCI was 0.21 (95% CI 0.09-0.49, p = 0.0002) with no difference in functional outcomes (OR 1.80, 95% CI 0.63 - 5.16, p = 0.28). 10 studies of 866 patients met criteria for the network meta-analysis. The pooled summary odds ratio for the association of NPRI and DCI was 0.30 (95% CI 0.13-0.89,p = 0.017) with a trend towards improved functional outcomes (OR 1.68, 0.63 - 4.13 95% CI, p = 0.101). CONCLUSIONS: In these meta-analyses, NPRI decreases the incidence of DCI with a non-significant trend towards improvement in functional outcomes. Randomized trials on the role of intrathecal calcium channel blockers are warranted to evaluate these observations in a prospective manner.

Blood Pressure Control in Acute Stroke: Labetalol or Nicardipine?

PURPOSE: To assess the safety and efficacy of continuous infusion (CIV)-labetalol compared to -nicardipine in controlling blood pressure (BP) in the acute stroke setting. MATERIALS: Patients were eligible if they had a diagnosis of an acute stroke and were administered either CIV-labetalol or CIV-nicardipine. Study outcomes were assessed within the first 24 h of the antihypertensive infusion. RESULTS: A total of 3,093 patients were included with 3,008 patients in the CIV-nicardipine group and 85 in the CIV-labetalol group. No significant difference was observed in percent time at goal BP between the nicardipine (82%) and labetalol (85%) groups (p = 0.351). There was also no difference in BP variability between nicardipine (37%) and labetalol (39%) groups (p = 0.433). Labetalol was found to have a shorter time to goal BP as compared to nicardipine (24 min vs. 40 min; p = 0.021). While CIV-nicardipine did have a higher incidence of tachycardia compared to labetalol (17% vs. 4%; p <0.001), the incidence of hypotension (13% vs. 15%; p = 0.620) and bradycardia (24% vs. 22%; p = 0.797) were similar. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that CIV-labetalol and CIV-nicardipine are comparable in safety and efficacy in controlling BP for patients with acute stroke.

Intensive Blood Pressure Lowering in Patients with Moderate to Severe Grade Acute Cerebral Hemorrhage: Post Hoc Analysis of Antihypertensive Treatment of Acute Cerebral Hemorrhage (ATACH)-2 Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To study the effect of intensive blood pressure reduction in patients with moderate to severe intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) within the subjects recruited in Antihypertensive Treatment of Acute Cerebral Hemorrhage 2 trial. DESIGN: Randomized, multicenter, 2 group, open-label clinical trial. SETTING: A total of 110 sites in the USA, Japan, China, Taiwan, South Korea, and Germany. PATIENTS: A total of 1,000 patients underwent randomization from May 2011 till September 2015. INTERVENTIONS: We analyzed the effect of intensive (goal 110-139 mm Hg) over standard (goal 140-179 mm Hg) systolic blood pressure (SBP) reduction using intravenous nicardipine within 4.5 h of symptom onset in moderate to severe grade subjects with ICH in a non-prespecified analysis. Moderate to severe grade was defined by Glasgow Coma Scale score <13 or baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score ≥10 or baseline intraparenchymal hemorrhage volume ≥30 mL or presence of intraventricular hemorrhage. The primary outcome was death or disability (score 4-6 on the modified Rankin scale) at 3 months after randomization ascertained by a blinded investigator. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of a total of 682 subjects who met the definition of moderate to severe grade (mean age 61.9 ± 13.1 years, 62.5% men) with a mean baseline SBP of 174.7 ± 24.8 mm Hg, the frequency of hematoma expansion was significantly lower among subjects randomized to intensive SBP reduction than among subjects randomized to standard SBP reduction (20.4 vs. 27.9%, relative risk [RR]: 0.7; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55-0.96). The primary endpoint of death or disability was observed in 52.5% (170/324) of subjects receiving intensive SBP reduction and 48.9% (163/333) of subjects receiving standard SBP reduction (RR: 1.1; 95% CI: 0.9-1.2). CONCLUSIONS: Intensive SBP lowering reduced the frequency of hematoma expansion but did not reduce the rate of death or disability in patients with moderate to severe grade ICH.

Intensive Blood-Pressure Lowering in Patients with Acute Cerebral Hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND: Limited data are available to guide the choice of a target for the systolic blood-pressure level when treating acute hypertensive response in patients with intracerebral hemorrhage. METHODS: We randomly assigned eligible participants with intracerebral hemorrhage (volume, <60 cm(3)) and a Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score of 5 or more (on a scale from 3 to 15, with lower scores indicating worse condition) to a systolic blood-pressure target of 110 to 139 mm Hg (intensive treatment) or a target of 140 to 179 mm Hg (standard treatment) in order to test the superiority of intensive reduction of systolic blood pressure to standard reduction; intravenous nicardipine to lower blood pressure was administered within 4.5 hours after symptom onset. The primary outcome was death or disability (modified Rankin scale score of 4 to 6, on a scale ranging from 0 [no symptoms] to 6 [death]) at 3 months after randomization, as ascertained by an investigator who was unaware of the treatment assignments. RESULTS: Among 1000 participants with a mean (±SD) systolic blood pressure of 200.6±27.0 mm Hg at baseline, 500 were assigned to intensive treatment and 500 to standard treatment. The mean age of the patients was 61.9 years, and 56.2% were Asian. Enrollment was stopped because of futility after a prespecified interim analysis. The primary outcome of death or disability was observed in 38.7% of the participants (186 of 481) in the intensive-treatment group and in 37.7% (181 of 480) in the standard-treatment group (relative risk, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.85 to 1.27; analysis was adjusted for age, initial GCS score, and presence or absence of intraventricular hemorrhage). Serious adverse events occurring within 72 hours after randomization that were considered by the site investigator to be related to treatment were reported in 1.6% of the patients in the intensive-treatment group and in 1.2% of those in the standard-treatment group. The rate of renal adverse events within 7 days after randomization was significantly higher in the intensive-treatment group than in the standard-treatment group (9.0% vs. 4.0%, P=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: The treatment of participants with intracerebral hemorrhage to achieve a target systolic blood pressure of 110 to 139 mm Hg did not result in a lower rate of death or disability than standard reduction to a target of 140 to 179 mm Hg. (Funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke and the National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center; ATACH-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01176565 .).

Comparison of Clevidipine and Nicardipine for Acute Blood Pressure Reduction in Patients With Stroke.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether clevidipine (CLEV) achieved faster blood pressure control compared to nicardipine (NIC) in patients presenting with either an acute ischemic stroke (AIS) or a spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational, cohort study conducted in patients with AIS or ICH admitted to the emergency department of a Comprehensive Stroke Center from November 2011 to June 2013 who received CLEV or NIC continuous infusion for acute blood pressure management. RESULTS: The study included 210 patients: 70 in the CLEV group and 140 in the NIC group. There was no difference in mean time (standard deviation [SD]) from initiation of the infusion to goal systolic blood pressure (SBP), CLEV: 50 (83) minutes versus NIC: 74 (103) minutes, P = .101. Comparison of the 2 agents within diagnosis showed no difference. Hypotension developed in 5 (7.1%) CLEV patients versus 14 (10%) NIC patients (P = .003). There was no difference in the percentage change at 2 hours; CLEV: -20% (16%) versus NIC: -16% (16%), P = .058. Mean (SD) time to alteplase administration from admission was 56 (22) minutes in the CLEV group versus 59 (25) minutes in the NIC group (P = .684). CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in the mean time from initiation of the infusion to the SBP goal between agents or in the secondary outcomes. Due to the lack of differences observed, each agent should be considered based on the patient care needs of the institution.

Nicardipine Associated Risk of Short-Term Mortality in Critically Ill Patients with Ischemic Stroke.

BACKGROUND: Hypertensive emergency is commonly associated with acute ischemic stroke and can be a predictor of poor outcome in these patients. Nicardipine and labetalol are commonly administered for the treatment of acute hypertension following stroke. Yet, data are lacking on the safety of these agents in this setting. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine all-cause in-hospital mortality, medication-related hypotensive episodes, development of hospital acquired infections and hospital length of stay between nicardipine and labetalol use for the management of hypertension after acute ischemic stroke. METHODS: This retrospective study used a prospective database of individuals admitted to the neurointensive care unit at a university-based hospital over 39 months. Patients with confirmed ischemic strokes were included in this analysis. Data were recorded for administration of nicardipine and labetalol following acute stroke. RESULTS: A total of 244 patients with acute ischemic stroke were included in this analysis (mean age, 64.3 ± 15 years; 52.2% males). Nicardipine use after acute ischemic stroke was associated with an increased risk of 30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR]: 4.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3-15.7; P = .02). A single episode of hypotension in the first 72hours of admission was also significantly associated with mortality (OR 4.35 [95% CI 1.2-14.9]; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Nicardipine was associated with an increased risk of short-term mortality after acute ischemic stroke. This may have been due to hypotension, tachycardia, or pulmonary edema which were not apparent in our study. Further studies are required to elucidate the cause of this association.

Early Achievement of Blood Pressure Lowering and Hematoma Growth in Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage: Stroke Acute Management with Urgent Risk-Factor Assessment and Improvement-Intracerebral Hemorrhage Study.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have revealed that hematoma growth mainly occurs during the first 6 h after the onset of spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). Early lowering of blood pressure (BP) may be beneficial for preventing hematoma growth. However, relationships between timing of BP lowering and hematoma growth in ICH remain unclear. We investigated associations between timing of BP lowering and hematoma growth for ICH. METHODS: The Stroke Acute Management with Urgent Risk-factor Assessment and Improvement (SAMURAI)-ICH Study was a multicenter, prospective, observational study investigating the safety and feasibility of early (within 3 h from onset) reduction of systolic BP (SBP) to < 160 mm Hg with intravenous nicardipine for acute hypertension in cases of spontaneous ICH. The present study was a post hoc analysis of the SAMURAI-ICH study. We examined relationships between time from onset, imaging, and initiation of treatment to target SBP achievement and hematoma growth (absolute growth ≥6 mL) in ICH patients. Target SBP achievement was defined as the time at which SBP first became < 160 mm Hg. RESULTS: Among 211 patients, hematoma growth was seen in 31 patients (14.7%). The time from imaging to target SBP and time from treatment to target SBP were significantly shorter in patients without hematoma growth than in those with (p = 0.043 and p = 0.032 respectively), whereas no significant difference was seen in time from onset to SBP < 160 mm Hg between groups (p = 0.177). Patients in the lower quartiles of time from imaging to target SBP and time from treatment to target SBP showed lower incidences of hematoma growth (p trend = 0.023 and 0.037 respectively). The lowest quartile of time from imaging to target SBP (< 38 min) was negatively associated with hematoma growth on multivariable logistic regression (OR 0.182; 95% CI 0.038-0.867; p = 0.032). CONCLUSIONS: Early achievement of target SBP < 160 mm Hg is associated with a lower risk of hematoma growth in ICH.

Reduction of Nicardipine-Related Phlebitis in Patients with Acute Stroke by Diluting Its Concentration.

BACKGROUND: Nicardipine is frequently used in the treatment of hypertension for patients with acute stroke; however, its dosing is complicated by a high risk of phlebitis. In the present study, we examined whether restricting nicardipine concentration under a specific value could reduce the incidence of nicardipine-related phlebitis in patients with acute stroke. METHODS: Intravenous nicardipine-related phlebitis was retrospectively analyzed. From July 2015, a simple proposition was made to dilute maximum intravenous nicardipine concentration to lower than 130 µg/mL. The maximum intravenous nicardipine concentration and the incidence of phlebitis were compared between patients treated from July 2014 to June 2015 (preproposition group) and patients treated from July 2015 to June 2016 (postproposition group). RESULTS: A total of 300 patients (preproposition group, 138; postproposition group, 162) were included. The postproposition group demonstrated significantly lower maximum intravenous nicardipine concentration (in µg/mL, 76.9, 47.6-104.5 versus 130.4, 69.8-230.8; P < .001) and incidence of phlebitis (9.9%, 16/162 vs. 30%, 42/138; P < .001) than the preproposition group. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that the maximum intravenous nicardipine concentration lower than 130 µg/mL (odds ratio [OR] .15; 95% confidence interval [CI] .06-.35; P < .001) and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale on admission (OR .95; 95% CI .91-.99; P = .007) were the statistically significant independent factors for phlebitis, which indicated the usefulness of the proposition to dilute maximum intravenous nicardipine concentration to lower than 130 µg/mL. CONCLUSIONS: The simple and appropriate proposition about nicardipine administration lowered maximum nicardipine concentration and reduced the incidence of nicardipine-related phlebitis in patients with acute stroke.

Continuous-Infusion Labetalol vs Nicardipine for Hypertension Management in Stroke Patients.

BACKGROUND: Labetalol and nicardipine are antihypertensives commonly used in the management of elevated blood pressure (BP) following an acute stroke, but there is limited evidence to suggest which agent as a continuous infusion should be used preferentially in this setting. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the safety, efficacy, and ease of administration of continuous-infusion labetalol with continuous-infusion nicardipine following an acute stroke. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study of patients with acute ischemic stroke or intracerebral hemorrhage included patients if they received either study agent within 24 hours of admission. The primary outcome was percent time spent at goal BP. Secondary outcomes included time to goal BP, the number of dose adjustments, and use of rescue antihypertensives. RESULTS: The analysis included 99 patients who received labetalol- (n = 34) or nicardipine- (n = 65) continuous infusions. Intracerebral hemorrhage was the most common stroke subset (n = 81) followed by acute ischemic stroke (n = 18). There was no statistical difference in time at goal BP (labetalol 68.0%, nicardipine 67.0%; P = .885), rescue antihypertensive use (labetalol 14.7%, nicardipine 24.6%; P = .2570), time spent 10% above or below mean systolic BP (labetalol 35.5%, nicardipine 33.5%; P = .885), time to goal BP (labetalol 81.4 minutes, nicardipine 56.3 minutes; P = .162), and mean number of dose adjustments (labetalol 5.9, nicardipine 6.9; P = .262). CONCLUSIONS: Labetalol- and nicardipine-continuous infusions were comparable in the studied safety and efficacy outcomes including time at goal and BP variability. Further prospective studies are needed to validate these safety and efficacy findings and to assess clinical outcomes.

Bradycardia caused by intravenous nicardipine in an elderly patient with acute ischemic infarct.

Nicardipine is a dihydropyridine calcium-channel blocker that is frequently used in the acute treatment of hypertension in the emergency department (ED). Reflex sympathetic tachycardia is a well-described side effect of this medication. Two experimental studies and 1 anesthesia case report, however, have previously described nicardipine-induced bradycardia as a very rare side effect. We report the case of an elderly patient with an acute ischemic stroke who developed nicardipine-induced bradycardia in the ED.

Risk Factors of Nicardipine-Related Phlebitis in Acute Stroke Patients.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Intravenous nicardipine is generally used to treat hypertension in acute stroke patients but is associated with frequent phlebitis. We aimed to identify the incidence and risk factors of phlebitis in such patients. METHODS: The incidence and risk factors of phlebitis were investigated in 358 acute stroke patients from July 2014 to June 2015. RESULTS: In total, 138 patients received intravenous nicardipine. Of 45 (12.6%) phlebitis patients in 358 acute stroke patients, 42 (93.3%) were administered nicardipine, which was significantly associated with phlebitis occurrence (P < .01). Other candidate risk factors of phlebitis of acute stroke patients in univariate analysis were intracerebral hemorrhage (P < .01), nicardipine injection to paralyzed limbs (P = .023), dilution of nicardipine with normal saline (P < .01), higher maximum flow rate of nicardipine (7.2 ± 4.1 mg/h versus 1.6 ± 3.1 mg/h; P < .01), and higher maximum concentration of nicardipine (271.5 ± 145.0 µg/mL versus 37.6 ± 75.0 µg/mL; P < .01). The only statistically significant independent factor following multivariate logistic regression analysis, according to the optimal cutoff values defined from receiver operating characteristic curve analyses, was the maximum concentration of nicardipine greater than 130 µg/mL (OR 57.9; 95% CI 21.5-156; P < .01). A gradual decline of pH below 4.3 was observed when the concentration of nicardipine solution increased to greater than or equal to 130 µg/mL in vitro. CONCLUSIONS: Nicardipine-related phlebitis is frequently observed in acute stroke patients and is significantly associated with administration of a maximum concentration of nicardipine greater than 130 µg/mL.

Off-label use of nicardipine as tocolytic and acute pulmonary oedema: a post-marketing analysis of adverse drug reaction reports in EudraVigilance.

PURPOSE: To evaluate a signal of acute pulmonary oedema (APO) due to nicardipine used off-label as tocolytic in pregnant women. METHODS: All the suspected cases of APO recorded in EudraVigilance database up to 31/01/2013 and associated with nicardipine containing medicinal products were retrieved. The Proportional Reporting Ratio was considered as measure of disproportionality. Individual cases evaluation was conducted. RESULTS: Thirty-four spontaneous cases regarding pregnancy women who experienced APO following nicardipine treatment as tocolytic were collected. The detected proportional reporting ratio was 50.96 (95% confidence interval lower bound equal to 36.75). The analysis focused on 10 serious cases. Most women, aged between 27 and 39 years, were treated with intravenous nicardipine. The most of the suspected adverse reactions occurred between 24 and 96 hours. CONCLUSIONS: A potentially causal association between APO and off-label use of nicardipine as tocolytic has been detected during a periodic signal detection activity. The Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee confirmed our findings, recommending an update of the summary of the product characteristics for medicines containing nicardipine for both intravenous and oral formulations. Then European Medicines Agency reaffirmed that nicardipine use in other indications is no longer recommended.

Bullous Eruption Associated With Dihydropyridines With Cross Reactivity.

The spectrum of cutaneous eruptions associated with dihydropyridines is extensive, varying from exanthemas to severe adverse events. We report a case of bullous eruption, one month after starting nicardipine and lercanidipine. The same symptoms recurred few days after taking nitrendipine.

Intravenous nicardipine dosing for blood pressure lowering in acute intracerebral hemorrhage: the Stroke Acute Management with Urgent Risk-factor Assessment and Improvement-Intracerebral Hemorrhage study.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous nicardipine is commonly used to reduce elevated blood pressure in acute intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). We determined factors associated with nicardipine dosing and the association of dose with clinical outcomes in hyperacute ICH. METHODS: Hyperacute (<3 hours from onset) ICH patients with initial systolic blood pressure (SBP) greater than 180 mm Hg were included. All patients initially received 5 mg/hour of intravenous nicardipine. The dose was adjusted to maintain SBP between 120 and 160 mm Hg. Associations of maximum hourly and total doses with early neurologic deterioration (END), hematoma expansion (>33%), and modified Rankin Scale score 4-6 at 3 months were assessed. RESULTS: Two hundred six patients (81 women, 65.8 ± 11.8 years) were studied. Initial SBP was 201.9 ± 15.9 mm Hg. Maximum and total nicardipine doses were 9.1 ± 4.2 mg/hour and 123.7 ± 100.2 mg/day, respectively. Multivariate analyses revealed that men (standardized regression coefficient [ß] = .20, P = .0030 for maximum dose; ß = .25, P = .0002 for total dose), age (ß = -.28, P = .0002; ß = -.25, P = .0005), and initial SBP (ß = .19, P = .0018; ß = .18, P = .0021) were independently associated with both maximum and total doses. Body weight (ß = .20, P = .0084) was independently associated with total dose. After multivariate adjustment, maximum dose (per 1 mg/hour; odds ratio [OR], 1.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-1.45) was independently, and total dose (per 10 mg/day; OR, 1.06; 95% CI, .998-1.132) tended to be independently, associated with END. Nicardipine dose was not associated with hematoma expansion or 3-month outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Nicardipine dose is roughly predictable with sex, age, body weight, and initial SBP in acute ICH. The maximum dose was associated with neurologic deterioration.

A prospective evaluation of labetalol versus nicardipine for blood pressure management in patients with acute stroke.

INTRODUCTION: Acute hypertension is common following stroke and contributes to poor outcomes. Labetalol and nicardipine are often used for acute hypertension but there are little data comparing the two. This study is to evaluate the therapeutic response and tolerability of these two agents following acute stroke. METHODS: This is a prospective, pseudo-randomized study comparing labetalol and nicardipine for blood pressure (BP) management in acute stroke patients. Patients who presented to the emergency department (ED) with confirmed hemorrhagic or ischemic stroke received either labetalol or nicardipine for 24 h from ED admission. Therapeutic response was assessed by achievement of goal BP, time spent within goal, and variability in BP. Clinical outcomes including length of stay, clinical status at discharge, and in-hospital mortality were recorded. RESULTS: 54 patients were enrolled (labetalol = 28; nicardipine = 26) with 25 ± 6 BP measurements per patient. Majority of patients had a hemorrhagic stroke and baseline characteristics were similar between groups. All patients who received nicardipine achieved goal BP compared to 17 (61 %) in the labetalol group (p < 0.001) with 89 % nicardipine-treated patients achieved goal BP within 60 min of drug initiation versus 25 % in labetalol group (p < 0.001). Nicardipine group had better maintenance of BP, a greater percentage of time spent within goal, and significantly less BP variability compared to labetalol group (p < 0.001). Less rescue antihypertensive agents were given to nicardipine group than labetalol group (p < 0.001). The incidences of adverse drug events were similar between groups and there were no differences in clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: In acutely hypertensive stroke patients, superior therapeutic response was achieved with nicardipine versus labetalol. Despite this, there was no demonstrable difference in clinical outcomes.

Hypoxia Associated With Dihydropyridine Calcium Channel Inhibitors: A Pharmacovigilance Study in VigiBase.

Due to their negative effects on hypoxic pulmonary vasoconstriction, dihydropyridine calcium channel inhibitors (DCCIs) can lead to hypoxia in patients with a pulmonary shunt. To date, only preclinical studies and case reports have focused on this potential adverse drug reaction. We aimed to assess the reporting association between DCCIs and hypoxia using the World Health Organization pharmacovigilance database (VigiBase). We performed a disproportionality analysis to evaluate the strength of the reporting association between i.v. clevidipine and nicardipine, thought to be a surrogate of patients in the intensive care unit, and hypoxia. The information component and the lower end of its 95% credibility interval were used to evaluate disproportionality. A description of the cases was made. Secondary outcomes included the association between all DCCIs and hypoxia compared with other treatments with similar indications, urapidil and labetalol, regardless of the route of administration. Association between oral nicardipine and hypoxia was also searched. A statistically significant signal of hypoxia was found for intravenous clevidipine and nicardipine. The time to onset was reported with a median of 2 days (interquartile range 1.5-4.5). Four dechallenges were performed with intravenous nicardipine, leading to the resolution of the symptoms. Regardless of the route of administration, a signal of hypoxia was also found for nimodipine but not for other drugs, including comparators. For nicardipine no signal of hypoxia was found with the oral route of administration. Our pharmacovigilance database analysis showed a significant association between the use of intravenous DCCIs and hypoxia.

Intravenous nicardipine for Japanese patients with acute intracerebral hemorrhage: an individual participant data analysis.

The effects of acute systolic blood pressure levels achieved with continuous intravenous administration of nicardipine for Japanese patients with acute intracerebral hemorrhage on clinical outcomes were determined. A systematic review and individual participant data analysis of articles were performed based on prospective studies involving adults developing hyperacute intracerebral hemorrhage who were treated with intravenous nicardipine. Outcomes included death or disability at 90 days, defined as the modified Rankin Scale score of 4-6, and hematoma expansion, defined as an increase 6 mL or more from baseline to 24 h computed tomography. Of the total 499 Japanese patients (age 64.9 ± 11.8 years, 183 women, initial BP 203.5 ± 18.3/109.1 ± 17.2 mmHg) studied, death or disability occurred in 35.6%, and hematoma expansion occurred in 15.6%. Mean hourly systolic blood pressure during the initial 24 h was positively associated with death or disability (adjusted odds ratio 1.25, 95% confidence interval 1.03-1.52 per 10 mmHg) and hematoma expansion (1.49, 1.18-1.87). These odds ratios were relatively high as compared to the reported ones for overall global patients of this individual participant data analysis [1.12 (95% confidence interval 1.00-1.26) and 1.16 (1.02-1.32), respectively]. In conclusion, lower levels of systolic blood pressure by continuous intravenous nicardipine were associated with lower risks of hematoma expansion and 90-day death or disability in Japanese patients with hyperacute intracerebral hemorrhage. The impact of systolic blood pressure lowering on better outcome seemed to be stronger in Japanese patients than the global ones.

Acute vasoreactivity testing with nicardipine in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension.

Acute vasoreactivity testing for patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) has been reported to be useful to identify patients with sustained beneficial response to oral calcium-channel blockers (CCBs), but there is a risk of exacerbation during the testing with oral CCBs. Therefore, we developed a testing method utilizing intravenous nicardipine, a short-acting CCB, and examined the safety and usefulness of acute vasoreactivity testing with nicardipine in PAH patients. Acute vasoreactivity testing with nicardipine was performed in 65 PAH patients. Nicardipine was administered by short-time continuous infusion (1 µg·kg⁻¹·min⁻¹ for 5 min and 2 µg·kg⁻¹·min⁻¹ for 5 min) followed by bolus injection (5 µg/kg). Hemodynamic responses were continuously measured using a right heart catheter. Acute responders were defined as patients who showed a decrease in mean pulmonary artery pressure of at least 10 mmHg to an absolute level below 40 mmHg with preserved or increased cardiac output. Two acute responders and sixty-three non-acute responders were identified. There was no hemodynamic instability requiring additional inotropic agents or death during the testing. Acute responders had good responses to long-term oral CCBs. The acute vasoreactivity testing with nicardipine might be safe and useful for identifying CCB responders in PAH patients.

Antihypertensive treatment of acute intracerebral hemorrhage by intravenous nicardipine hydrochloride: prospective multi-center study.

The authors performed a multicenter prospective study to evaluate the feasibility and safety of intravenous nicardipine hydrochloride for acute hypertension in patients with intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). This study included 88 patients (mean age: 58.3 yr, range 26-87 yr) with ICH and acute hypertension in 5 medical centers between August 2008 and November 2010, who were treated using intravenous nicardipine. Administration of nicardipine resulted in a decrease from mean systolic blood pressure (BP) (175.4 ± 33.7 mmHg) and diastolic BP (100.8 ± 22 mmHg) at admission to mean systolic BP (127.4 ± 16.7 mmHg) and diastolic BP (67.2 ± 12.9 mmHg) in 6 hr after infusion (P < 0.001, mixed-effect linear models). Among patients who underwent follow-up by computed tomography, hematoma expansion at 24 hr (more than 33% increase in hematoma size at 24 hr) was observed in 3 (3.4%) of 88 patients. Neurological deterioration (defined as a decrease in initial Glasgow coma scale ≥ 2) was observed in 2 (2.2%) of 88 patients during the treatment. Aggressive nicardipine treatment of acute hypertension in patients with ICH can be safe and effective with a low rate of neurological deterioration and hematoma expansion.