Treatment of angina pectoris with dipyridamole: A long-term double blind study

Wirecki, M

doi:10.1016/0021-9681(67)90048-3

Cited by 22 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our favorable results were in general agreement with those of the two double‐blind studies reported by Wirecki (12) and by Becker (13). Becker obtained a higher response rate with placebo (30.8 per cent), and this may have been because all long‐acting nitrates were discontinued during the two‐month baseline period in that study, whereas we switched to the coded medications directly from the previous therapy.…”

Section: Commentsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Good results have been reported (1, 2, 8–13) in patients with angina pectoris treated for several months or longer. The incidence and severity of attacks decreased, with a concomitant reduction in the need for nitroglycerin; exercise performance improved; and the drug was generally well tolerated.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Careful examination of the negative reports shows that in most cases the dosage was too low (37.5 to 100 mg daily) and treatment too short to allow any valid conclusions about efficacy (15–17). A dosage of 150 mg daily was used in two placebo‐controlled evaluations; one (12) clearly demonstrated the efficacy of dipyridamole, but the other (14) failed to show superiority of the drug at a statistically significant level. A double‐blind trial (13) comparing a dosage of 225 mg daily with placebo, in small groups, demonstrated response differences significant at the 5% level.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Treatment of Angina Pectoris With Dipyridamole: A Double‐blind Study

Igloe¹

1970

J American Geriatrics Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a double-blind study, 48 patients (age range, 47 to 75) with angina pectoris received either dipyridamole (Persantine) (200 mg daily) or placebo for an average of five months. Nitroglycerin was taken sublingually as required for relief of acute attacks. Previous use of long-acting nitrates had produced no significant improvement.Of the 26 patients receiving dipyridamole, 21 (81 per cent) showed an overall satisfactory clinical response (marked or moderate improvement) compared to 2 (9 per cent) of the 22 receiving placebo. The difference between the two treatments was statistically significant. Evaluation of objective criteria also showed the superiority of dipyridamole. The mean improvement for drug group vs, placebo group was as follows: decrease in anginal attacks, 48/24 per cent; decrease in need for nitroglycerin, 50/18 per cent; and increase in walking distance, 84/36 per cent. In terms of subjective evaluation of anginal pain, 69 per cent of the drug group improved compared to 18 per cent of the placebo group.Two patients had reactions while taking the drug. Transient blurred vision was noted by one patient, but it did not interfere with continuation of dipyridamole. Nausea and insomnia in another patient (not in the final study group) caused cessation of therapy. No reactions were reported among the placebo patients.From the results of this controlled study it is concluded that dipyridamole, a non-nitrate coronary vasodilator, is a relatively safe and effective agent for the long-term treatment of patients with angina pectoris.

show abstract

Section: Commentsupporting

confidence: 92%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Treatment of Angina Pectoris With Dipyridamole: A Double‐blind Study

Igloe¹

1970

J American Geriatrics Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The results of clinical investigations of this treatment are, however, conflicting (1 ). Prolonged treatment for more than 3 months however, usually has a positive effect on the patient (26)(27)(28). To judge from the data obtained in the present study this effect can, at least to some degree, be the result of an improved myocardial blood supply through newly-formed vascular channels, which can be expected to require some time to develop.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Capillary Neoformation in the Heart of Dipyridamole‐treated Rats

Tornling

1982

Acta Pathologica Microbiologica Scandinavica Series A :Patholog

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tornling. G . Capillary neoformation in the heart of dipyridamole-treated rats. Acta path. microbiol. immunol. scand. Sect. A. 90: 269-27 I . 1982.Rats were given dipyridamole i.p. (3 mg/kg initial body weight) twice a day, 5 days/week for a period of 6 weeks. Morphometric analysis of the capillary network in the myocardium was performed by electron microscopy. The capillary/fibre ratio was increased by 24% when compared with shaminjected controls. The newly-formed capillaries were located in postions where they were in contact with only two muscle fibres.

show abstract

“…10, 11, 12, 13, 14° 15~ 16° 1'° 18° 19 The drawbacks of double blind double cross over study are many and have been pointed out in detail elsewhere. 10, 11, 12, 13, 14° 15~ 16° 1'° 18° 19 The drawbacks of double blind double cross over study are many and have been pointed out in detail elsewhere.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Perhexiline Maleate, a New Anti-Anginal Drug, Evaluated By "Modified Double Blind Double Cross Over Study"

et al. 1974

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Perhexiline Maleate, a new drug with the chemical name of 2(2, 2-dicyclohexylethyl) piperidine, has been recommended as a valuable drug in the management of angina pectoris. Its pharmacological actions on the heart and coronary circulation in animals have been described by Hudak et al (1970)1 and Cho et al (1970).2 Matsuo et al (1970)3 and Fiensilver et al (1970)4 studied its other pharmacological actions. The half life of this drug varies from 8 hours to many days as there is marked individual variation. Clinical trials of Perhexiline for angina have been carried out in U.S.A., Brazil and England3~ 4, 5, s, ' with promising results. This study was undertaken to evaluate this drug, specially in patients whose response to other established antianginal drugs was unsatisfactory.The double blind double cross over study as is used commonly today is highly unsatisfactory 8, 9 as can be seen by contradictory results for the same drugs by different authors. 10, 11, 12, 13, 14° 15~ 16° 1'° 18° 19 The drawbacks of double blind double cross over study are many and have been pointed out in detail elsewhere.'o It was therefore essential to modify the technique for assessment of antianginal drugs so that most of the pitfalls of the traditional method may be avoided. A modified double blind double cross over technique was therefore used to evaluate the new drug Perhexiline Maleate.MATERIAL AND METHOD 64 patients of ischaemic heart disease with intractable 21 stable angina pectoris were selected for this trial, 59 males and 5 females. Their ages ranged from 38 to 75 years (average 50). The criteria employed in making the diagnosis of angina pectoris were (a) a typical clinical history of angina pectoris with E.C.G. changes at rest or on exercise.22 (b) Relief of chest pain with glyceryl trinitrate. Those who had hypertension or congestive cardiac failure were selected only if they were well controlled.The duration of angina ranged from 6 months to 22 years (average 3 years). The patients were given a thorough clinical and laboratory check-up. They were then put on an open trial and then seen regularly at weekly or fortnightly intervals.At each visit, they reported the frequency and severity of the attacks, effort tolerance and nitroglycerine intake. All unusual symptoms or events were

show abstract

Treatment of angina pectoris with dipyridamole: A long-term double blind study

Cited by 22 publications

References 10 publications

Treatment of Angina Pectoris With Dipyridamole: A Double‐blind Study

Treatment of Angina Pectoris With Dipyridamole: A Double‐blind Study

Capillary Neoformation in the Heart of Dipyridamole‐treated Rats

Perhexiline Maleate, a New Anti-Anginal Drug, Evaluated By "Modified Double Blind Double Cross Over Study"

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About