Suppr超能文献

在等效剂量下,对于轻至中度高血压患者,伊拉地平的耐受性优于氨氯地平:一项双盲、随机、平行组研究。

At equipotent doses, isradipine is better tolerated than amlodipine in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension: a double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study.

作者信息

Hermans L, Deblander A, De Keyser P, Scheys I, Lesaffre E, Westelinck K J

机构信息

Medical Department, Sandoz Belgium, Brussels.

出版信息

Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1994 Oct;38(4):335-40. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.1994.tb04363.x.

Abstract
  1. The objective of this double-blind parallel-group study was to compare the tolerability of isradipine and amlodipine, specifically, the side-effects known to be related to the use of dihydropyridine calcium antagonists. 2. A total of 205 patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension were randomized to receive either the sustained-release (SRO) formulation of isradipine (n = 103) or amlodipine (n = 102), both at dosages of 5 mg once daily. Blood pressure measurements were taken at the end of the dosing interval to assess the antihypertensive efficacy of the two drugs. 3. Adverse reactions were assessed in two ways: a) spontaneously reported adverse events were recorded and investigated in depth for severity, duration, relation to the study drug, and outcome; b) a questionnaire was used to elicit specific adverse reactions known to be related to the use of dihydropyridine calcium antagonists which were evaluated for severity, duration, relation to the study drug, and outcome. 4. After 6 weeks of active treatment, both isradipine and amlodipine reduced mean sitting systolic/diastolic blood pressure: from 165.1/100.1 to 145.2/89.7 mm Hg with isradipine; and from 164.1/100.6 to 145.7/90.5 mm Hg with amlodipine. There was no difference in antihypertensive effect between isradipine and amlodipine (95% CI: -3.73 to 4.73 and -1.89 to 3.49 for differences in systolic and diastolic blood pressure, respectively). 5. The number of patients spontaneously reporting adverse events was significantly higher (P = 0.02; 95% CI: 3.1 to 26.7%) with amlodipine (33.3%) than with isradipine (18.4%).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
摘要
  1. 这项双盲平行组研究的目的是比较伊拉地平与氨氯地平的耐受性,具体而言,是比较已知与使用二氢吡啶类钙拮抗剂相关的副作用。2. 共有205例轻度至中度原发性高血压患者被随机分为两组,分别接受伊拉地平缓释(SRO)制剂(n = 103)或氨氯地平(n = 102)治疗,剂量均为每日5毫克一次。在给药间隔结束时测量血压,以评估两种药物的降压效果。3. 不良反应通过两种方式进行评估:a)记录自发报告的不良事件,并对其严重程度、持续时间、与研究药物的关系及转归进行深入调查;b)使用问卷来引出已知与使用二氢吡啶类钙拮抗剂相关的特定不良反应,并对其严重程度、持续时间、与研究药物的关系及转归进行评估。4. 经过6周的积极治疗,伊拉地平和氨氯地平均降低了平均坐位收缩压/舒张压:伊拉地平组从165.1/100.1毫米汞柱降至145.2/89.7毫米汞柱;氨氯地平组从164.1/100.6毫米汞柱降至145.7/90.5毫米汞柱。伊拉地平和氨氯地平的降压效果无差异(收缩压和舒张压差异的95%置信区间分别为-3.73至4.73和-1.89至3.49)。5. 自发报告不良事件的患者数量,氨氯地平组(33.3%)显著高于伊拉地平组(18.4%)(P = 0.02;95%置信区间:3.1至26.7%)。(摘要截选至250词)

相似文献

引用本文的文献

4
Eliciting adverse effects data from participants in clinical trials.从临床试验参与者中获取不良反应数据。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jan 16;1(1):MR000039. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000039.pub2.

本文引用的文献

2
Measurement of side effects of drugs.药物副作用的测量
Br Med J. 1974 Jun 29;2(5921):698-9. doi: 10.1136/bmj.2.5921.698.
3
The safety of amlodipine.氨氯地平的安全性。
Am Heart J. 1989 Nov;118(5 Pt 2):1114-9; discussion 1119-20. doi: 10.1016/0002-8703(89)90838-7.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验