Suppr超能文献

卡托普利与地高辛治疗冠心病合并轻度心力衰竭患者的疗效比较。一项前瞻性、双盲、安慰剂对照的多中心研究。冠心病合并心力衰竭研究组。

Captopril versus digoxin in patients with coronary artery disease and mild heart failure. A prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter study. The CADS Study Group.

作者信息

Just H, Drexler H, Taylor S H, Siegrist J, Schulgen G, Schumacher M

机构信息

Medizinische Universitätsklinik Freiburg i. Br.

出版信息

Herz. 1993 Dec;18 Suppl 1:436-43.

PMID:8125424
Abstract

We conducted a prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter trial in order to evaluate the long-term effects of captopril (50 mg/day), digoxin (0.25 mg/day) and placebo on quality of life, cardiovascular events, clinical symptoms and exercise tolerance in patients with documented myocardial infarction, resulting in regional wall motion abnormalities, and with mild heart failure (NYHA class II to III without treatment) and exercise not limited by angina. 222 patients were studied, 63 were randomized to captopril, 66 to digoxin, 67 to placebo. Follow-up was conducted for two years. Base line characteristics in the three treatment groups were similar. After one year of therapy, digoxin had significantly improved general well-being (p < 0.01 vs captopril), symptom score (p < 0.05 vs captopril and placebo), and vitality (p < 0.05 vs captopril). Digoxin improved NYHA class in 45% as compared to placebo (28%, p < 0.05). Worsening of angina was more frequent with captopril as compared to digoxin (p < 0.05). However, cardiovascular events during follow-up were lower in the captopril group as compared to placebo and digoxin (p < 0.01 captopril vs placebo). No differences between groups were observed in baseline and follow-up exercise tolerance between the three groups. Dizziness during upright tilt and cough were more frequent with captopril as compared to digoxin or placebo. After two years of follow-up (captopril n = 32, digoxin n = 29, placebo n = 27) general well-being was improved with both digoxin and captopril (p < 0.004 and p < 0.03 vs placebo).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

摘要

我们进行了一项前瞻性、双盲、安慰剂对照的多中心试验,以评估卡托普利(50毫克/天)、地高辛(0.25毫克/天)和安慰剂对有心肌梗死记录、伴有局部室壁运动异常、轻度心力衰竭(未经治疗的纽约心脏病协会II至III级)且运动不受心绞痛限制的患者的生活质量、心血管事件、临床症状和运动耐量的长期影响。研究了222例患者,63例随机分配至卡托普利组,66例至地高辛组,67例至安慰剂组。随访两年。三个治疗组的基线特征相似。治疗一年后,地高辛显著改善了总体健康状况(与卡托普利相比,p<0.01)、症状评分(与卡托普利和安慰剂相比,p<0.05)和活力(与卡托普利相比,p<0.05)。与安慰剂相比(28%,p<0.05),地高辛使45%的患者纽约心脏病协会分级得到改善。与地高辛相比,卡托普利组心绞痛恶化更为频繁(p<0.05)。然而,随访期间卡托普利组的心血管事件低于安慰剂组和地高辛组(卡托普利与安慰剂相比,p<0.01)。三组在基线和随访时的运动耐量方面未观察到差异。与地高辛或安慰剂相比,卡托普利组直立倾斜时头晕和咳嗽更为频繁。随访两年后(卡托普利组n = 32,地高辛组n = 29,安慰剂组n = 27),地高辛和卡托普利均改善了总体健康状况(与安慰剂相比,p<0.004和p<0.03)。(摘要截短于250字)

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