Why the study?
Does captopril improve haemodynamic responses and clinical outcomes compared to hydralazine in patients with severe congestive heart failure unresponsive to diuretics and digoxin?
Does captopril improve haemodynamic responses and clinical outcomes compared to hydralazine in patients with severe congestive heart failure unresponsive to diuretics and digoxin?
Captopril provides more definite clinical improvement than hydralazine in severe heart failure, particularly in patients who achieve significant preload reduction.
Captopril may be preferable to hydralazine in refractory HF; hypothesis-generating given small nonrandomized design.
1 Although many vasodilators are effective in the treatment of severe congestive heart failure, there have been few comparative studies of these drugs. We compared the acute haemodynamic effects of captopril and hydralazine in 11 patients with congestive cardiac failure unresponsive to diuretics and digoxin. Both drugs increased resting cardiac index, although this effect appeared more pronounced for hydralazine (33% v 23%). Captopril reduced pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (-8 mm Hg, p less than 0.01) which decreased only slightly on hydralazine. 2 Long-term treatment was then started on the dose found effective during acute administration. Each drug was given for eight weeks. Exercise tolerance improved with both drugs, the increase during the hydralazine phase correlating with the increase in cardiac index at rest (r = 0.75; p less than 0.05). Clinical improvement appeared more definite on captopril than on hydralazine, however. This improvement was maintained during the captopril phase only in those patients who had a greater than 25% reduction in pulmonary capillary wedge pressure in the acute study.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fitzgerald et al. (1982) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: