Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Más filtros











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Vasc Health Risk Manag ; 5(1): 429-40, 2009.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19475779

RESUMEN

Nifedipine is a dihydropyridine calcium-channel blocker (CCB) introduced approximately 30 years ago for the prophylaxis of angina symptoms, and then later utilized as an anti-hypertensive agent. In the 1990s, several meta-analyses and a case-control study were published which raised concern regarding increased mortality and increased risk for myocardial infarction with short-acting nifedipine. Further evaluation of these meta-analyses and case control study underscores some important limitations and the need to further elucidate the role of this class of medications in high-risk patients. Until 2000, there was a paucity of data on the long-term effects as well as the long-term outcomes of CCBs in the treatment of stable coronary disease or in patients with manifestations of the disease such as hypertension or angina. While it has been well established that nifedipine and other dihydropyridines lower blood pressure and improve symptoms of angina, several studies were designed to evaluate the effect of dihydropyridines on "hard" outcomes, specifically cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events. In this review, we describe the clinical studies evaluating the use of nifedipine when compared to placebo as well as other anti-hypertensive therapies in an attempt to identify the most appropriate place in therapy for this class of medications and to further clarify its utilization in high-risk patients.


Asunto(s)
Antihipertensivos/uso terapéutico , Bloqueadores de los Canales de Calcio/uso terapéutico , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/prevención & control , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/tratamiento farmacológico , Hipertensión/tratamiento farmacológico , Nifedipino/uso terapéutico , Antihipertensivos/efectos adversos , Presión Sanguínea/efectos de los fármacos , Bloqueadores de los Canales de Calcio/efectos adversos , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/etiología , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/complicaciones , Humanos , Hipertensión/complicaciones , Nifedipino/efectos adversos , Medición de Riesgo , Resultado del Tratamiento
2.
Ann Pharmacother ; 41(3): 465-73, 2007 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17341540

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To review the literature regarding the efficacy, tolerability, and utility of lercanidipine in the treatment of hypertension. DATA SOURCES: A search of the literature was performed using MEDLINE (1966-September 2006), EMBASE Drugs and Pharmacology (1980-September 2006), and Current Contents/Clinical Medicine (week 24, 2005-week 30, 2006). Package inserts from lercanidipine, nifedipine, felodipine, and amlodipine were also reviewed for comparison of adverse effects. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Articles were limited to clinical trials, abstracts, and review articles published in English. DATA SYNTHESIS: Lercanidipine is a novel dihydropyridine (DHP) calcium-channel blocker indicated for the treatment of mild-to-moderate hypertension. Although it is not yet available in the US, lercanidipine has been utilized extensively in other countries. In 2 randomized controlled trials of approximately 400 patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension, lercanidipine showed efficacy similar to that of 2 other DHPs, felodipine and slow-release nifedipine, in significantly reducing systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) after 4 weeks. In a longer trial (12 mo), lercanidipine 10 mg/day led to normalized blood pressure in 49% of patients after 4 weeks. A postmarketing trial of 9050 patients corroborated the results observed in previous clinical trials, with 64% of patients achieving a DBP of less than 90 mm Hg and 32% attaining blood pressure control (<140/90 mm Hg). In elderly patients, lercanidipine was found comparable with lacidipine and nifedipine, showing similar decreases in DBP when compared with nifedipine (-18.3 vs -17.7 mm Hg, respectively). What distinguishes lercanidipine from other members of the DHP class is its lower incidence of adverse effects, particularly edema. One study showed that fewer patients withdrew secondary to adverse drug reactions in the lercanidipine (0.9%) and nifedipine (3.8%) group compared with the felodipine (4.5%) group. Lercanidipine has also shown efficacy similar to that of other antihypertensives, including atenolol, captopril, and losartan. CONCLUSIONS: Lercanidipine may be an option in the treatment of hypertension, as current literature suggests comparable antihypertensive efficacy and better tolerability. Further randomized, double-blind clinical trials must be conducted in order to clarify its position among other antihypertensive medications.


Asunto(s)
Antihipertensivos/uso terapéutico , Dihidropiridinas/uso terapéutico , Hipertensión/tratamiento farmacológico , Antihipertensivos/efectos adversos , Antihipertensivos/farmacocinética , Bloqueadores de los Canales de Calcio/efectos adversos , Bloqueadores de los Canales de Calcio/farmacocinética , Bloqueadores de los Canales de Calcio/uso terapéutico , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Dihidropiridinas/efectos adversos , Dihidropiridinas/farmacocinética , Humanos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA