Talbert R L, Bussey H I
Clin Pharm. 1983 Sep-Oct;2(5):403-16.
The pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, and adverse effects of three calcium-channel blocking agents--verapamil, nifedipine, and diltiazem--are reviewed. Verapamil, nifedipine, and diltiazem are absorbed well after oral dosing, but absolute bioavailability of each is reduced substantially by a first-pass effect. Each drug is metabolized extensively (verapamil and diltiazem to moderately active metabolites) by the liver. A substantial percentage of each drug is bound to plasma proteins, but the binding is of clinical importance only for nifedipine (92--98% protein bound). Intravenous verapamil has become the agent of first choice for treatment of acute paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia (PSVT); use of chronic oral verapamil therapy for prophylaxis remains controversial. Verapamil and diltiazem have been evaluated with mixed results for atrial flutter and fibrillation. For treatment of myocardial ischemia, calcium-channel blockers may be of some value (possibly in combination with nitrates of B blockers). All three agents have been studied in patients with exertional angina with good results. Calcium-channel blockers appear to be equal with nitrates for treatment of variant angina. Patients with hypertropic cardiomyopathy have been treated with verapamil and nifedipine with promising results. Nifedipine has been effective for treatment of essential hypertension. Adverse effects of calcium-channel blockers have been relatively minor or infrequent. Diltiazem overall has the best side-effect profile, with adverse effects causing discontinuation of therapy in about 2--10% of patients; verapamil in intermediate (8--10%) and nifedipine the worst (17%) in this respect. The most common side effects generally are fatigue, headache, dizziness, skin rash, and peripheral edema. While they generally should be reserved for patients in whom more conventional therapy has failed (except those with PSVT), calcium-channel blockers appear to have a valid role as reserve agents for exertional and variant angina, cardiomyopathy, and hypertension.
本文综述了三种钙通道阻滞剂——维拉帕米、硝苯地平和地尔硫䓬——的药代动力学、临床疗效及不良反应。维拉帕米、硝苯地平和地尔硫䓬口服给药后吸收良好,但首过效应使其每种药物的绝对生物利用度均大幅降低。每种药物均在肝脏中广泛代谢(维拉帕米和地尔硫䓬代谢为中度活性代谢产物)。每种药物的很大一部分与血浆蛋白结合,但只有硝苯地平的蛋白结合具有临床意义(92%-98%的蛋白结合率)。静脉注射维拉帕米已成为治疗急性阵发性室上性心动过速(PSVT)的首选药物;口服维拉帕米长期预防性治疗的应用仍存在争议。维拉帕米和地尔硫䓬用于心房扑动和颤动的评估结果不一。对于心肌缺血的治疗,钙通道阻滞剂可能具有一定价值(可能与β受体阻滞剂的硝酸盐联合使用)。所有这三种药物均在劳力性心绞痛患者中进行了研究,效果良好。钙通道阻滞剂在变异型心绞痛的治疗中似乎与硝酸盐等效。肥厚型心肌病患者使用维拉帕米和硝苯地平治疗取得了有前景的结果。硝苯地平对原发性高血压的治疗有效。钙通道阻滞剂的不良反应相对较轻或不常见。总体而言,地尔硫䓬的副作用情况最佳,约2%-10%的患者因不良反应而停药;维拉帕米处于中等水平(8%-10%),硝苯地平在这方面最差(17%)。最常见的副作用通常是疲劳、头痛、头晕、皮疹和外周水肿。虽然钙通道阻滞剂通常应保留给那些更传统治疗方法失败的患者(PSVT患者除外),但它们似乎作为劳力性和变异型心绞痛、心肌病及高血压的备用药物具有合理的作用。