Suppr超能文献

心肌梗死期间及之后使用的钙拮抗剂。

Calcium antagonists during and after myocardial infarction.

作者信息

Sleight P

机构信息

John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, England.

出版信息

Drugs. 1996 Feb;51(2):216-25. doi: 10.2165/00003495-199651020-00003.

Abstract

Calcium antagonists, or calcium channel entry blockers, have been advocated as cardioprotective agents in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) on the basis of animal experiments, which show that they will reduce the harmful effects of the calcium overload which follows ischaemia, particularly during reperfusion, and also that they will reduce coronary artery spasm. Unfortunately, these promising actions have not translated into clear mortality data. An overview of the large amount of data from properly randomised controlled clinical trials shows clear differences between the dihydropyridine class of calcium antagonists such as nifedipine, and the non-dihydropyridines verapamil and diltiazem. Most of the data with the former group derive from trials with short-acting formulations of nifedipine (TRENT, HINT, SPRINT-I and -II). Overall, none of these trials showed significant benefit in either AMI or post-MI prophylaxis. There was a trend for harm, with HINT stopped early because of excess reinfarction with nifedipine, compared with metoprolol. In contrast, and when taken together, the DAVIT-I and DAVIT-II studies with verapamil show significant reductions in sudden death, reinfarction and total mortality. The greatest benefit occurred in those patients with relatively good left ventricular function. Similar but less significant trends were seen in studies with diltiazem. It is clear that calcium antagonists, unlike beta-blockers, cannot be treated as a similar class. It seems likely that the adverse effects of nifedipine are related to reflex sympathetic cardiac stimulation as a result of the predominantly vasodilator action of these dihydropyridine compounds. Data on newer dihydropyridines with fewer reflex effects are awaited. In the meantime it seems sensible to use proven agents such as beta-blockers or verapamil. These data on AMI and the months following have recently been paralleled by case control studies in hypertension, which similarly have suggested harm from the use of predominantly short acting formulations of nifedipine compared with beta-blockers and which led to a warning statement by the US National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute on 1 September 1995.

摘要

钙拮抗剂,即钙通道阻滞剂,基于动物实验已被推荐作为急性心肌梗死(AMI)的心脏保护剂。动物实验表明,它们能减轻缺血后尤其是再灌注期间钙超载的有害影响,还能减少冠状动脉痉挛。遗憾的是,这些有前景的作用并未转化为明确的死亡率数据。对大量来自恰当随机对照临床试验的数据进行的综述显示,硝苯地平这类二氢吡啶类钙拮抗剂与非二氢吡啶类的维拉帕米和地尔硫䓬之间存在明显差异。前一组的大多数数据来自硝苯地平短效制剂的试验(TRENT、HINT、SPRINT - I和 - II)。总体而言,这些试验在AMI或心肌梗死后预防方面均未显示出显著益处。存在有害趋势,与美托洛尔相比,HINT因硝苯地平导致再梗死过多而提前终止。相比之下,维拉帕米的DAVIT - I和DAVIT - II研究综合来看显示猝死、再梗死和总死亡率显著降低。最大益处出现在左心室功能相对较好的患者中。地尔硫䓬的研究也出现了类似但不太显著的趋势。显然,与β受体阻滞剂不同,不能将钙拮抗剂视为同一类药物。硝苯地平的不良反应似乎与这些二氢吡啶类化合物主要的血管扩张作用导致的反射性交感神经心脏刺激有关。有待获取关于反射作用较少的新型二氢吡啶类药物的数据。与此同时,使用已证实有效的药物如β受体阻滞剂或维拉帕米似乎是明智的。最近,关于AMI及之后数月的这些数据在高血压病例对照研究中得到了印证,这些研究同样表明与β受体阻滞剂相比,主要使用硝苯地平短效制剂有害,这导致美国国立心肺血液研究所于1995年9月1日发布了一份警告声明。

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