Why the study?
Do calcium channel antagonists (verapamil and nifedipine) affect the vagally mediated cardiac chronotropic response in dogs?
Do calcium channel antagonists (verapamil and nifedipine) affect the vagally mediated cardiac chronotropic response in dogs?
Nifedipine and verapamil exert divergent effects on the sinoatrial chronotropic response to brief vagal stimulation in an open-chest dog model.
Nifedipine and verapamil show opposing vagal effects in dogs; should not guide clinical use and leaves open human translation.
A brief electrical stimulation of the vagus nerve may elicit a triphasic response comprising (i) an initial prolongation of the same or the next cardiac cycle, (ii) a return of the subsequent cardiac cycle to about the level prior to vagal stimulation, and (iii) a secondary prolongation of cardiac cycle length that lasts several beats. We compared the effects of two calcium channel antagonists, verapamil and nifedipine, on this triphasic response to vagal stimulation in chloralose-anesthetized, open-chest dogs. In the absence of vagal stimulation, nifedipine (doses of 10, 40, and 50 micrograms/kg for a total dose of 100 micrograms/kg, i.v.) and verapamil (two doses of 100 micrograms/kg each, i.v.) increased the cardiac cycle length (A-A interval) by 16% (429 +/- 20 to 496 +/- 21 ms) and 29% (470 +/- 33 to 605 +/- 54 ms), respectively. Nifedipine (100 micrograms/kg total) attenuated the initial vagally mediated prolongation of the A-A interval, from 474 +/- 19 to 369 +/- 42 ms above the basal A-A interval. Following the initial prolongation of the vagal effect, other A-A intervals were not affected. In contrast, verapamil potentiated the vagally mediated initial prolongation in cardiac cycle length at the first dose administered (100 micrograms/kg) from 492 +/- 17 to 561 +/- 14 ms, but other increases in dosages had no further effect. Thus these two calcium channel antagonists have different effects on the sinoatrial chronotropic responses caused by brief vagal stimulation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wallick et al. (1990) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: