Why the study?
The comparative effects of diltiazem, verapamil, and nifedipine on sinoatrial and atrioventricular nodal function and conduction were not fully characterized in both experimental and clinical settings.
How do the calcium antagonists diltiazem, verapamil, and nifedipine compare in their effects on sinoatrial and atrioventricular nodal function?
How do the calcium antagonists diltiazem, verapamil, and nifedipine compare in their effects on sinoatrial and atrioventricular nodal function?
Diltiazem and verapamil are effective for treating AV nodal reentrant tachycardia, while nifedipine acts primarily as a vasodilator without antiarrhythmic effects.
Guides diltiazem or verapamil preference for AVNRT; leaves open updated head-to-head trials versus modern alternatives.
Diltiazem, verapamil and nifedipine suppress sinoatrial (SA) nodal function in the excised rabbit heart. Clinically, however, their suppressive effect on the SA node is modified considerably by the reflex increase in sympathetic tone as a result of the fall in blood pressure caused by the vasodilating action of the calcium antagonists. Diltiazem, verapamil and nifedipine suppress atrioventricular (AV) nodal conduction and prolong refractory periods in the excised rabbit AV node. Clinically, diltiazem and verapamil exert a similar suppressive effect on the AV node and are useful for treating and preventing AV nodal reentrant tachycardia. Nifedipine, in clinically practical doses, has no antiarrhythmic properties, probably because of reflex activation of the sympathetic system secondary to its hypotensive effect, which is greater than that of the other two calcium antagonists. Diltiazem and verapamil may sometimes worsen AV conduction, especially in patients with conduction disturbances. Nifedipine, on the other hand, can be used as a coronary vasodilator with the least untoward effect on AV conduction.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kawai et al. (1981) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: