Current status of calcium channel blockers in patients with cardiovascular disease

Freher, Mark; Challapalli, Sridevi; Pinto, Jack V.; Schwartz, Janice B.; Bonow, Robert O.; Gheorgiade, Mihai

doi:10.1016/s0146-2806(99)90000-2

Cited by 13 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 307 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In an observational study of more than 9000 patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension, the overall incidence of adverse effects of lercanidipine was relatively low, at 6.5%.28 The most frequently reported adverse effects in this study were headache (2.9%), ankle edema 0.2%), flushing (1.1%), and dizziness (0.6%). Results were similar in a subgroup of 1267 patients who had experienced adverse effects to other drugs including angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, diuretics, l3-blockers,and others prior to lercanidipine initiation.…”

Section: Adverse Effectsmentioning

confidence: 62%

Lercanidipine in the Treatment of Hypertension

Beckey

Lundy²,

Lutfi³

2007

Ann Pharmacother

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Adverse Effectsmentioning

confidence: 62%

Lercanidipine in the Treatment of Hypertension

Beckey

Lundy²,

Lutfi³

2007

Ann Pharmacother

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Interpretation is complicated by the heterogeneous properties of different CCB classes and by the development of physiologically distinct long-acting preparations. While the subject has been reviewed lately, [22][23] to our knowledge no recent work has approached the data from a detailed epidemiologic perspective. In this article, we review the literature reporting on the major outcomes above-selected from a systematic search of MEDLINE articles and their reference sections-paying particular attention to study methodology.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Epidemiologic Review of the Calcium Channel Blocker Drugs

Kizer¹,

Kimmel²

2001

Arch Intern Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the setting of soaring popularity, postmarketing studies of calcium channel blockers came to suggest an increase in a variety of major adverse end points. The evidence, however, was largely observational, and large-scale trials capable of addressing the concerns were wanting. Clinical trials now support the safety and efficacy of the long-acting dihydropyridines for patients with both uncomplicated and diabetic hypertension, although conventional therapies and, in the latter case, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors have superior proof of benefit. By contrast, short-acting dihydropyridines should be avoided. In the acute coronary syndromes, beta-blockers remain the treatment of choice; the evidence for nondihydropyridines remains inconclusive. Stable angina calls for beta-blockers as first-line therapy and nondihydropyridines as second-line therapy, whereas in ventricular dysfunction, safety data for nondihydropyridines are lacking. Initial reports of cancer, bleeding, and suicide have been contradicted by subsequent data, making the associations uncertain or unlikely. Remaining questions await completion of ongoing trials to better define the indications for these agents.

show abstract