Schäfer N, Belz G G, Stauch M, Schneider B
Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 1980 Sep 5;105(36):1253-8. doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1070851.
In a randomized cross-over double-blind study of 30 out-patients with true angina the efficacy of fendiline and isosorbide dinitrate (ISDN) was compared. In randomized order the patients daily took either 3 X 50 mg fendiline or 2 X 20 mg ISDN (plus 1 placebo tablet). Each treatment period lasted for six weeks. Ergometric tests were performed at the onset of the study and at intervals of three weeks. The main criterion for the efficacy of the treatment was a change in S-T segment (at 0.06 s after the QRS). With either drug there occurred a statistically significant reduction in S-T depression and in the frequency of anginal attacks during the first treatment period. But there was a difference between the two drugs: Whereas with ISDN a marked reduction in S-T segment depression was observed after three weeks, this effect slightly receded in the second part of the treatment period, while with fendiline the reduction in S-T depression continued over the entire treatment period. There was no significant difference between the two drugs as to side-effects or tolerance.
在一项针对30名真性心绞痛门诊患者的随机交叉双盲研究中,比较了芬地林和硝酸异山梨酯(ISDN)的疗效。患者按随机顺序每日服用3×50mg芬地林或2×20mg ISDN(加1片安慰剂)。每个治疗期持续六周。在研究开始时及每隔三周进行一次运动试验。治疗效果的主要标准是S-T段(QRS波后0.06秒)的变化。使用这两种药物中的任何一种,在第一个治疗期内,S-T段压低和心绞痛发作频率均出现统计学上的显著降低。但两种药物之间存在差异:使用ISDN时,三周后观察到S-T段压低明显降低,而在治疗期的第二部分,这种效果略有消退;而使用芬地林时,S-T段压低在整个治疗期持续降低。两种药物在副作用或耐受性方面没有显著差异。