ALBERT

All Library Books, journals and Electronic Records Telegrafenberg

feed icon rss

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    Electronic Resource
    Electronic Resource
    Springer
    European journal of clinical pharmacology 39 (1990), S. 427-433 
    ISSN: 1432-1041
    Keywords: Hypertension ; diltiazem ; metoprolol ; adverse effects ; multicentre study group
    Source: Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2000
    Topics: Chemistry and Pharmacology , Medicine
    Notes: Summary A double-blind, parallel-group multicentre study has been done to compare the antihypertensive properties, effects on serum lipoproteins and adverse effect profiles of diltiazem and metoprolol given as monotherapy to primary hypertensive patients. 128 patients were included from 10 participating centers. Following a placebo wash-out period of 5 weeks, patients were randomized either to diltiazem or metoprolol treatment according to a forced titration regimen. Each dose was given for a 4-week period in a stepwise regimen. A total of 119 patients, 59 and 60 in the two groups, completed the study. Supine and standing BPs were reduced in a similar, dose-dependent fashion by diltiazem and metoprolol. In the former supine BP fell from 161/101 to 151/91 mm Hg at the highest dose level. In the latter patients, supine BP at the highest dose level was reduced from 161/102 to 155/94 mm Hg. Target pressures (DBP ≤ 90 mm Hg and/or DBP reduction of ≥ 10%) were reached in 63% and 48% of the patients, respectively. HDL-cholesterol was increased in diltiazem-treated patients and decreased in those on metoprolol. Otherwise, serum lipoproteins did not differ significantly between treatments. The incidence and severity of dose-dependent adverse effects did not differ significantly between treatments, although moderate to distressing side effects were reported more commonly by metoprolol-treated patients. Ankle oedema and breathlessness tended to be more common on diltiazem therapy, while tiredness, increased sweating and sleep disturbances appeared to be experienced more frequently by metoprolol-treated patients. Thus, when given as monotherapy, the daily dose-ranges for a comperable reduction in BP were 120–360 mg diltiazem and 50–200 mg metoprolol. Within those dose-ranges, the antihypertensive efficacy and the overall incidence of adverse effects did not differ between the treatments. As monotherapies, diltiazem and metoprolol are both suitable for the management of mild to moderate hypertension.
    Type of Medium: Electronic Resource
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    Electronic Resource
    Electronic Resource
    Springer
    European journal of clinical pharmacology 40 (1991), S. 453-460 
    ISSN: 1432-1041
    Keywords: Diltiazem ; metoprolol ; quality of life ; hypertension ; multicentre study ; adverse effects
    Source: Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2000
    Topics: Chemistry and Pharmacology , Medicine
    Notes: Summary General well-being, adverse effects and antihypertensive efficacy have been investigated in a double blind, parallel-group, dose-response multicentre study of diltiazem and metoprolol monotherapy for hypertension. 128 patients with primary hypertension were included from 10 participating centres. The patients were randomized to receive oral diltiazem 120–240–360 mg/day or metoprolol 50–100–200 mg/day. Each dose was given for a 4-week period as a forced titration regime. In all 119 patients, 59 and 60, respectively, on diltiazem and metoprolol completed the study protocol. There were dose-dependent reductions in supine and standing blood pressures (BP) after both diltiazem and metoprolol therapy. In the diltiazem group, supine BP was reduced by 10 (11)/10 (6) mm Hg (SBP/DBP) at the highest dose level, and the corresponding values for the metoprolol group were 7 (16)/8 (9) mm Hg (SBP/DBP). Target pressures (DBP ≤ 90 mm Hg and/or a reduction in DBP of ≥ 10%) were reached in 63% and 48% of the patients, respectively. The incidence and severity of dose-dependent adverse effects, as evaluated by spontaneous reports or open and direct questioning, did not differ between treatments. Subjective well-being, evaluated by a self-administered questionnaire, the MSE-profile, did not differ significantly between diltiazem and metoprolol therapy. However, after an initial slight deterioration, contentment and vitality tended to improve with increasing doses of diltiazem, while a dose-related deterioration in these variables was observed on metoprolol therapy. At the highest dose levels, contentment and vitality tended to be better in the diltiazem than the metoprolol group. Thus, diltiazem and metoprolol in daily doses of 120–360 mg and 50–200 mg, respectively, produce comparable and parallel reductions in supine and standing BP. However, while subjective well-being tended to improve with increasing doses of diltiazem, there was a negative trend for metoprolol. It is concluded that diltiazem, given as monotherapy to hypertensive patients, does not impair subjective well-being.
    Type of Medium: Electronic Resource
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...