Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0012833 (dizziness)
 9,689 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

The pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, and adverse effects of three calcium-channel blocking agents--verapamil, nifedipine, and diltiazem--are reviewed. Verapamil, nifedipine, and diltiazem are absorbed well after oral dosing, but absolute bioavailability of each is reduced substantially by a first-pass effect. Each drug is metabolized extensively (verapamil and diltiazem to moderately active metabolites) by the liver. A substantial percentage of each drug is bound to plasma proteins, but the binding is of clinical importance only for nifedipine (92--98% protein bound). Intravenous verapamil has become the agent of first choice for treatment of acute paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia (PSVT); use of chronic oral verapamil therapy for prophylaxis remains controversial. Verapamil and diltiazem have been evaluated with mixed results for atrial flutter and fibrillation. For treatment of myocardial ischemia, calcium-channel blockers may be of some value (possibly in combination with nitrates of B blockers). All three agents have been studied in patients with exertional angina with good results. Calcium-channel blockers appear to be equal with nitrates for treatment of variant angina. Patients with hypertropic cardiomyopathy have been treated with verapamil and nifedipine with promising results. Nifedipine has been effective for treatment of essential hypertension. Adverse effects of calcium-channel blockers have been relatively minor or infrequent. Diltiazem overall has the best side-effect profile, with adverse effects causing discontinuation of therapy in about 2--10% of patients; verapamil in intermediate (8--10%) and nifedipine the worst (17%) in this respect. The most common side effects generally are fatigue, headache, dizziness, skin rash, and peripheral edema. While they generally should be reserved for patients in whom more conventional therapy has failed (except those with PSVT), calcium-channel blockers appear to have a valid role as reserve agents for exertional and variant angina, cardiomyopathy, and hypertension.
 ...
PMID:Update on calcium-channel blocking agents. 635 66

A multicenter, double-blind study was performed to compare the antianginal efficacy and safety of the new dihydropyridine calcium antagonist amlodipine with the benzothiazepine calcium antagonist diltiazem in patients with stable exertional angina pectoris. Following a 2-week placebo run-in period, 39 patients were randomized to receive amlodipine (2.5-10 mg once daily) and 41 patients to receive diltiazem (60-120 mg three times daily) in an 8-week double-blind treatment phase. The study used standardized bicycle exercise testing as a primary efficacy assessment. Patients also recorded angina frequency and nitroglycerin (NTG) tablet consumption/ week. Treatment with amlodipine and diltiazem resulted in an improvement in total exercise time, time to angina and total work, mean ST-segment deviation at maximum common load, median number of angina attacks/week, and NTG tablet consumption/week. The incidence and severity of possibly treatment-related side effects and laboratory test abnormalities were comparable for both drugs. The most frequently reported side effects were dizziness, headache, peripheral edema, and nausea. Two patients withdrew from diltiazem treatment due to pruritus in one case and severe headache and moderate dyspnea in the other. No amlodipine-treated patients withdrew due to side effects. In conclusion, this study demonstrated that the antianginal efficacy and tolerability of amlodipine is equivalent to diltiazem, but amlodipine has the advantage of once-daily dosing.
 ...
PMID:An 8-week double-blind study of amlodipine and diltiazem in patients with stable exertional angina pectoris. 1629 11