1989
DOI: 10.1111/j.1526-4610.1989.hed22904215.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Nifedipine Versus Propranolol for the Initial Prophylaxis of Migraine

Abstract: We conducted a randomized open-labeled study of nifedipine versus propranolol for the initial prophylaxis of migraine. Propranolol was effective in 67% of patients (12/18) and well tolerated. Nifedipine was effective in only 30% of patients (6/20). The lack of overall efficacy of nifedipine was attributable to a high incidence of side effects, including an unusual symptom complex resembling erythromelalgia. These side effects led 45% (9/20) of the nifedipine patients to withdraw from the study within two weeks… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0
2

Year Published

1990
1990
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
6
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Two comparisons with placebo yielded similar effect sizes that were statistically insignificant, but the 95% confidence intervals associated with these estimates were large and did not exclude either a clinically important benefit or harm associated with nifedipine (128, 129). Similarly ambiguous results were reported in one comparison with flunarizine (130) and two comparisons with propranolol (20, 131). One trial found that metoprolol was significantly better than nifedipine at reducing headache frequency (20).…”
Section: Clinical Trialsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Two comparisons with placebo yielded similar effect sizes that were statistically insignificant, but the 95% confidence intervals associated with these estimates were large and did not exclude either a clinically important benefit or harm associated with nifedipine (128, 129). Similarly ambiguous results were reported in one comparison with flunarizine (130) and two comparisons with propranolol (20, 131). One trial found that metoprolol was significantly better than nifedipine at reducing headache frequency (20).…”
Section: Clinical Trialsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such studies have failed to demonstrate therapeutic effects beyond placebo, e.g. for selective 5‐HT reuptake inhibitors [14], MAO‐B inhibitors [15], antiepileptic drugs such as carbamazepine [16] and lamotrigine [17], or calcium entry blockers such as nimodipine [18], nifedipine [19], and most recently cyclandelate [20]. Although the ergot alkaloid dihydroergotamine has been used for prophylactic treatment, there is no good evidence for its efficacy in this indication.…”
Section: Therapeutic Options For Prophylactic Migraine Treatmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Based on these comparative studies as well as the placebo‐controlled trials (for reviews see [24, 25]), flunarizine is considered a drug of first choice in migraine prophylaxis. In the light of the negative results with other calcium entry blockers [19, 20], it remains to be determined whether the prophylactic efficacy of flunarizine is related to its calcium entry blocking properties.…”
Section: Other Prophylactic Antimigraine Drugs In Comparison With β‐Amentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Beginning in 1981, a variety of clinical studies have demonstrated that calcium channel blockers may be effective in migraine phrophylaxis, although more recent data suggest that these drugs may not be as efficacious as initially reported. 29,30 It should also be stressed that none of these agents has been specifically approved for use in migraine in the United States. In addition, side effects can be expected to develop in up to 60% of the patients and usually consist of constipation, orthostatic hypotension and red, swollen feet.…”
Section: -Ht Receptormentioning
confidence: 99%