Paper Details

  1. Home
  2. Paper Details

Amlodipine versus nifedipine retard in the treatment of chronic ischemic heart disease.

Author: CardilloR, CastelliD, CircoA, MangiameliS, PlataniaF, ScaccianoceG

Clinical TrialA clinical trial is a planned study conducted on humans to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and treatment methods. It aims to explore the possibilities of new treatments and improve the health of patients.
Comparative StudyResearch that compares multiple groups/interventions to determine differences/similarities in outcomes/characteristics.
Journal ArticleAn article published in an academic or professional journal that reports original research or scholarly analysis.
Randomized Controlled TrialA clinical trial that randomly assigns participants to treatment and control groups to evaluate the effects of an intervention.

Overview

A study of 29 patients with chronic ischemic heart disease compared the effectiveness of amlodipine (a long-acting calcium channel blocker) and nifedipine (a short-acting calcium channel blocker). Both drugs significantly improved exercise tolerance, reduced angina episodes, and improved heart function. Amlodipine was more effective in delaying the onset of ST-segment deviation and achieving a longer duration of exercise compared to nifedipine. Amlodipine also had fewer side effects than nifedipine, possibly due to its longer duration of action and slower peak effect. The study concluded that amlodipine was as effective as nifedipine in reducing ischemia, but was better tolerated and easier to take due to its once-daily dosage.
Paper Details　
Original Abstract of the Article :
The efficacy of amlodipine, a long half-life dihydropyridine calcium antagonist, at the dosage of 5-10 mg/day in a single daily administration, has been compared with that of nifedipine R, a short half-life dihydropyridine, at the dosage of 20-40 mg b.i.d. in 29 patients with chronic ischemic heart ...See full text at original site
Dr.Camel IconDr.Camel's Paper Summary Blogラクダ博士について

ラクダ博士は、Health Journal が論文の内容を分かりやすく解説するために作成した架空のキャラクターです。
難解な医学論文を、専門知識のない方にも理解しやすいように、噛み砕いて説明することを目指しています。

* ラクダ博士による解説は、あくまで論文の要点をまとめたものであり、原論文の完全な代替となるものではありません。詳細な内容については、必ず原論文をご参照ください。
* ラクダ博士は架空のキャラクターであり、実際の医学研究者や医療従事者とは一切関係がありません。
* 解説の内容は Health Journal が独自に解釈・作成したものであり、原論文の著者または出版社の見解を反映するものではありません。


引用元：
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1388115

データ提供：米国国立医学図書館（NLM）

Amlodipine vs. Nifedipine Retard: A Comparative Study in Chronic Ischemic Heart Disease

This research compares the efficacy and safety of [amlodipine], a [long half-life dihydropyridine calcium antagonist], with [nifedipine R], a [short half-life dihydropyridine], in patients with [chronic ischemic heart disease]. The study employed a [randomized, crossover, single-blind design] to assess the effects of both medications on [exercise tolerance, angina frequency, and safety profile]. The results revealed that [amlodipine] demonstrated [comparable efficacy] to [nifedipine R] in improving [exercise tolerance and reducing angina frequency], with a [lower incidence of side effects]. These findings suggest that amlodipine may be a better-tolerated option for long-term management of chronic ischemic heart disease.

Exploring the Benefits of Long-Acting Calcium Channel Blockers

This research highlights the potential benefits of [long-acting calcium channel blockers] like amlodipine for managing chronic ischemic heart disease. The study suggests that these medications may be more effective and better tolerated than their short-acting counterparts.

Making Informed Decisions About Heart Disease Treatment

This research underscores the importance of carefully considering different treatment options for heart disease. By understanding the unique characteristics and potential benefits of each medication, patients can work with their doctors to make informed decisions about their care.

Dr.Camel's Conclusion

The treatment of heart disease is a journey through a vast and complex desert. This research provides valuable insights into the efficacy and safety of different calcium channel blockers, helping patients and doctors navigate this challenging terrain with greater confidence.

Date :
  1. Date Completed 1992-10-16
  2. Date Revised 2013-11-21
Further Info :

Pubmed ID

1388115

DOI: Digital Object Identifier

1388115

SNS
PICO Info
in preparation
Languages

English

Positive IndicatorAn AI analysis index that serves as a benchmark for how positive the results of the study are. Note that it is a benchmark and requires careful interpretation and consideration of different perspectives.

This site uses cookies. Visit our privacy policy page or click the link in any footer for more information and to change your preferences.