Trial reportBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2001
Contrasting effects of verapamil and amlodipine on cardiovascular stress responses in hypertension.
Trial report in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-acting dihydropyridine calcium-channel blockers and sympathetic nervous system activity in hypertension: a literature review comparing amlodipine and nifedipine GITS.Blood pressure · 2012Pooled it
- Verapamil chronicles: advances from cardiovascular to pancreatic β-cell protection.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Review
- Comparative effects of calcium and potassium channel modulators on ischemia/reperfusion injury in the isolated rat heart.Molecular and cellular biochemistry · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo compare the effects of two long-acting calcium antagonists of different types on cardiovascular stress responses in hypertension.
methodsOne-hundred and forty-five patients with mild to moderate hypertension and a mean (+/- s.e.mean) age of 51 +/- 0.9 years received for 8 weeks the phenylalkylamine verapamil sustained release (240 mg) and the dihydropyridine amlodipine (5 mg) in a double-blind cross-over design, both after 4 weeks of placebo. Blood pressure, heart rate and plasma noradrenaline were monitored during 3 min of sustained isometric handgrip and 2 min of cold pressor.
resultsBlood pressure was equally reduced by both drugs. After 3 min handgrip, systolic blood pressure, heart rate and rate-pressure product were lower with verapamil compared with amlodipine. Verapamil attenuated the increases in systolic blood pressure (25 +/- 2 vs 30 +/- 2 mmHg, difference 4.6, 95% CI (1.0, 8.1), P < 0.01) and rate-pressure product (3.1 +/- 0.2 vs 3.6 +/- 0.3 x 10(3) mmHg x beats min(-1), difference 0.5, 95% CI (0.1, 0.9), P < 0.01) during handgrip compared with amlodipine. Similar results were observed during cold pressor. Plasma noradrenaline levels were lower with verapamil compared with amlodipine at rest and after both tests, but the increases in plasma noradrenaline were not significantly different.
conclusionsVerapamil is more effective in reducing blood pressure and rate-pressure product responses to stress compared with amlodipine. Although plasma noradrenaline is lower with verapamil at rest and after stress, the increase during stress is not different.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.