PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 1, 1984Circulation153 citations

Nifedipine and conventional therapy for unstable angina pectoris: a randomized, double-blind comparison.

View Full Paper
JMJames E. MullerZTZoltan G. TuriDPDavid L. Pearle

Key Result

Nifedipine alone was equivalent to conventional therapy for unstable angina, with no significant differences in pain relief or development of infarction (14% in both groups).

Key Points

  • This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of nifedipine compared to conventional therapy in treating unstable angina pectoris.
  • Randomized, double-blind comparison of nifedipine (14 days) versus conventional therapy (propranolol, isosorbide dinitrate) in hospitalized patients.
  • 126 patients with ischemic chest pain lasting less than 45 minutes were analyzed.
  • Life table analysis was used to assess time to pain relief and other endpoints.
  • No significant difference in pain relief time between nifedipine and conventional therapy groups.
  • Nifedipine therapy showed better effectiveness in patients previously on propranolol (p = 0.026).
  • Conventional therapy was more effective in patients not on propranolol (p < 0.001).

Study Design

Type

RCT (n=126)

Blinding

Double-blind

Randomization

randomly assigned

Structured PICO

Does nifedipine improve time to relief of pain compared to conventional therapy in patients with unstable angina pectoris?

P
Population
126 patients hospitalized in a coronary care unit for ischemic chest pain of less than 45 min duration, treated for 14 days.
I
Intervention
Nifedipine for 14 days
C
Comparator
Conventional therapy (propranolol, if not contraindicated, and isosorbide dinitrate) for 14 days
O
Outcome
Time to relief of pain as judged by life table analysispatient reported

Nifedipine alone is equivalent to conventional therapy for unstable angina overall, but is more effective when added to prior beta-blocker therapy, whereas conventional therapy is superior in patients not previously on beta-blockers.

Main Result

Absolute Event Rate: 14% vs 14%

Abstract

To characterize the potential of nifedipine in the therapy of unstable angina pectoris we implemented a blinded, randomly assigned, titrated schedule of conventional therapy (propranolol, if not contraindicated, and isosorbide dinitrate) or nifedipine for 14 days in 126 patients hospitalized in a coronary care unit for ischemic chest pain of less than 45 min duration. There were no significant differences between conventionally and nifedipine-treated patients with regard to (1) the time to relief of pain as judged by life table analysis, (2) the decrease in anginal attacks per 24 hr from day 0 to day 2 (-2.5 +/- 0.4 for conventional therapy vs; -2.8 +/- 0.3 for nifedipine), (3) the decrease in the number of nitroglycerin tablets consumed per 24 hr (-2.0 +/- 0.5 for conventional vs -2.1 +/- 0.4 for nifedipine therapy), (4) the percentage of patients requiring morphine on day 1 (13% for conventional vs 21% for nifedipine therapy), or (5) the percentage of patients who developed infarction (14% in both groups). Among the 27 patients who did not respond to initial conventional (n = 13) or nifedipine therapy (n = 14), five in each group became pain free when the opposite therapy (either nifedipine or conventional therapy) was added. In the subgroup of 67 patients who were receiving propranolol before randomization, addition of nifedipine was more effective in controlling pain than was an increase in conventional therapy (p = .026). In the subgroup of 59 patients not receiving prior propranolol, initiation of conventional therapy produced more rapid pain relief than initiation of nifedipine therapy alone (p less than .001), which tended to increase heart rate. Thus, for the study population as a whole therapy with nifedipine alone was equivalent to conventional therapy for unstable angina, although this overall equivalence may result from a combination of superiority of nifedipine therapy in patients previously receiving beta-blocker therapy and superiority of beta-blocker therapy in patients not previously receiving beta-blockers.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Muller et al. (1984) conducted an RCT in unstable angina pectoris (n=126). Nifedipine vs. Conventional therapy (propranolol and isosorbide dinitrate) was evaluated on development of infarction. Nifedipine alone was equivalent to conventional therapy for unstable angina, with no significant differences in pain relief or development of infarction (14% in both groups).

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a205451268695cee1e72656https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.69.4.728
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper