Suppr超能文献

硝苯地平渗透泵片与非洛地平缓释片的交叉比较及24小时动态血压盲法评估

Cross-over comparison of nifedipine Oros and felodipine extended release with blind 24 h ambulatory blood pressure assessments.

作者信息

Taverner D, Marley J, Tonkin A L

机构信息

Department of Clinical and Experimental Pharmacology, University of Adelaide, Australia.

出版信息

Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol. 1999 Nov;26(11):909-13. doi: 10.1046/j.1440-1681.1999.03164.x.

Abstract
  1. The aim of the present study was to compare the efficacy of nifedipine Oros and felodipine extended release (ER) in controlling 24 h ambulatory blood pressures (ABP) in hypertensive patients. 2. The study was a randomized cross-over design with a 2 week open placebo run-in phase and two observer-blind treatment periods. 3. Subjects were males and females, aged between 18 and 65 years, suffering from mild to moderate essential hypertension with a sitting mean diastolic blood pressure (DBP) within the range of 95-114 mmHg. Twenty-three subjects were randomized to treatment; 15 patients completed the study. 4. Treatment intervention was 2 weeks of placebo followed by either 30 mg nifedipine OROS once daily or 5 mg felodipine ER once daily for 6 weeks, which was titrated up to 60 mg nifedipine OROS daily or 10 mg felodipine ER daily after 2 weeks of treatment on the lower doses if the DBP was > 90 mmHg. The main outcome measure was 24 h ABP after 6 weeks of active treatment, evaluated by an independent observer blinded as to treatment allocation. 5. Compared with placebo, mean (+/- SD) 24 h DBP was reduced by 6.2 +/- 6.8 and 5.2 +/- 5.1 mmHg after nifedipine and felodipine, respectively. The 24 h mean systolic blood pressure (SBP) fell by 11.8 +/- 10.9 and 10.1 +/- 8.2 mmHg for nifedipine and felodipine, respectively, compared with placebo. There were no significant differences between the two active treatments in the reduction of DBP or SBP during the 24 h period, daytime or night-time. 6. Similar antihypertensive effects are achieved with nifedipine Oros and felodipine ER when doses are individually titrated, with no significant differences between the two treatments.
摘要
  1. 本研究的目的是比较硝苯地平渗透泵片和非洛地平缓释片在控制高血压患者24小时动态血压(ABP)方面的疗效。2. 该研究采用随机交叉设计,有2周的开放安慰剂导入期和两个观察者盲法治疗期。3. 受试者为年龄在18至65岁之间的男性和女性,患有轻度至中度原发性高血压,坐位平均舒张压(DBP)在95 - 114 mmHg范围内。23名受试者被随机分配接受治疗;15名患者完成了研究。4. 治疗干预为2周安慰剂治疗,随后每日一次服用30 mg硝苯地平渗透泵片或每日一次服用5 mg非洛地平缓释片,持续6周。如果舒张压> 90 mmHg,在较低剂量治疗2周后,将硝苯地平渗透泵片剂量滴定至每日60 mg或非洛地平缓释片剂量滴定至每日10 mg。主要结局指标是积极治疗6周后的24小时ABP,由对治疗分配不知情的独立观察者进行评估。5. 与安慰剂相比,硝苯地平和非洛地平治疗后24小时平均(±标准差)DBP分别降低了6.2±6.8 mmHg和5.2±5.1 mmHg。与安慰剂相比,硝苯地平和非洛地平治疗后24小时平均收缩压(SBP)分别下降了11.8±10.9 mmHg和10.1±8.2 mmHg。两种活性治疗在24小时期间、白天或夜间降低DBP或SBP方面无显著差异。6. 当剂量单独滴定时,硝苯地平渗透泵片和非洛地平缓释片具有相似的降压效果,两种治疗之间无显著差异。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验