Why the study?
Does the combination of intravenous isosorbide dinitrate and hydralazine improve haemodynamic parameters compared to either drug alone in men with left ventricular failure complicating acute myocardial infarction?
Does the combination of intravenous isosorbide dinitrate and hydralazine improve haemodynamic parameters compared to either drug alone in men with left ventricular failure complicating acute myocardial infarction?
Combined arteriolar dilatation and venodilatation with hydralazine and isosorbide dinitrate provides greater immediate haemodynamic benefit than either agent alone in patients with left ventricular failure complicating acute myocardial infarction.
Supports combination over monotherapy in acute MI with LV failure; extends dual-vasodilator evidence beyond single agents.
A randomised between-group study of the immediate haemodynamic effects of venodilatation by intravenous isosorbide dinitrate infusion (50-200 micrograms/kg/h) and arteriolar dilatation by intravenous hydralazine bolus (0.15 mg/kg) given either in random sequence (Groups 1 and 2; n = 12) or simultaneously (Group 3; n = 6) was undertaken in 18 men with radiographic and haemodynamic evidence (left ventricular [LV] filling pressure greater than 20 mm Hg) of LV failure 6-19 h following acute myocardial infarction. Control measurements (1 h) preceded either two consecutive 90-min treatment periods (Groups 1 and 2) or a single 90-min period (Group 3). Given independently, both drugs reduced systemic arterial pressure and vascular resistance, whereas only isosorbide dinitrate reduced LV filling pressure and only hydralazine increased cardiac output and stroke volume. Isosorbide dinitrate/hydralazine in combination significantly reduced LV filling pressure, systolic and diastolic arterial pressure, and total systemic vascular resistance. Cardiac output, stroke volume, and heart rate were increased. In conclusion, combined arteriolar dilatation and venodilatation appears to be of greater haemodynamic benefit than either alone, if the fall in mean systemic pressure does not compromise peripheral perfusion.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nelson et al. (1984) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: