首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>British Heart Journal >Placebo controlled trial of felodipine in patients with mild to moderate heart failure. UK Study Group.
【2h】

Placebo controlled trial of felodipine in patients with mild to moderate heart failure. UK Study Group.

机译:非洛地平对轻度至中度心力衰竭患者的安慰剂对照试验。英国研究小组。

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

OBJECTIVE--To compare the effects of felodipine and placebo in patients with New York Heart Association functional class II or III and stable congestive heart failure despite treatment with an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor, diuretic, or digoxin, or any combination of these three drugs. PATIENTS AND DESIGN--252 patients were randomised in a double blind, parallel group study after a 2-4 week placebo run-in to oral treatment with either felodipine extended release formulation or placebo 2.5-10 mg twice daily given in addition to existing background medication for a further 12 weeks. METHODS--Patients aged 18-75 years of either sex with chronic congestive heart failure due to ischaemic heart disease, hypertensive heart disease, or dilated cardiomyopathy with or without secondary mitral insufficiency that was stable during the preceding two months were included in the study. Treadmill exercise tests according to the modified Naughton protocol were performed at baseline, and after six, 11, and 12 weeks of treatment. Signs and symptoms of heart failure were assessed at every visit. Physical examination was performed and left ventricular ejection fraction measured at baseline and after 12 weeks. RESULTS--Mean (SD) baseline exercise test times increased from 434 (162) s and 480 (157) s for felodipine and placebo groups respectively to 541 (217) s and 591 (218) s at 12 weeks or the last visit. The change in exercise from baseline to last visit was 107 (141) s for patients given felodipine and 112 (128) s for those given placebo (P > 0.20). There was also no difference between treatments with respect to the other efficacy variables. There were few deaths in the study (felodipine n = 3, placebo n = 2). More patients who received felodipine were withdrawn from treatment (n = 29) than those who received placebo (n = 17). The most common adverse events of the 54 and 28 cited as reasons for withdrawal in the felodipine and placebo groups respectively were increased need for non-study heart failure treatment (n = 10; 8%)--that is, starting new medication or changes in the dosage of existing treatment for patients given felodipine, and nausea (n = 4; 3%) for those given placebo. Patients withdrawn from the study due to increased need for non-study heart failure treatment rapidly stabilised and recovered. CONCLUSION--Felodipine has not been shown to be of benefit in patients with mild to moderate heart failure.
机译:目的-比较非洛地平和安慰剂对尽管使用血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂,利尿剂或地高辛或这三种药物的任何组合进行治疗的纽约心脏协会功能性II级或III级和稳定的充血性心力衰竭患者的疗效。患者与设计-在2-4周安慰剂尝试口服非洛地平缓释制剂或安慰剂2.5-10 mg口服治疗后,除现有背景外,还将252名患者随机分为双盲,平行组研究再服药12周。方法-研究对象包括年龄在18-75岁之间,患有缺血性心脏病,高血压心脏病或扩张型心肌病,伴或不伴继发性二尖瓣关闭不全的慢性充血性心力衰竭的患者,这些患者在前两个月均稳定。在基线以及治疗6、11和12周后,根据修改后的Naughton方案进行了跑步机运动测试。每次访视时评估心力衰竭的体征和症状。进行身体检查并在基线和12周后测量左心室射血分数。结果-平均(SD)基线运动测试时间从非洛地平和安慰剂组的434(162)s和480(157)s分别增加到第12周或最后一次就诊时的541(217)s和591(218)s。接受非洛地平治疗的患者从基线到最后一次就诊的运动变化为107(141)s,接受安慰剂的患者为112(128)s(P> 0.20)。就其他功效变量而言,治疗之间也没有差异。在该研究中几乎没有死亡(非洛地平n = 3,安慰剂n = 2)。接受非洛地平治疗的患者(n = 29)比接受安慰剂治疗的患者(n = 17)更多。非洛地平组和安慰剂组分别被认为是戒断原因的54和28中最常见的不良事件是对非研究性心力衰竭治疗的需求增加(n = 10; 8%),即开始新药或更换接受非洛地平治疗的患者的现有治疗剂量,以及接受安慰剂治疗的患者的恶心(n = 4; 3%)。因对非研究性心力衰竭治疗需求增加而退出研究的患者迅速稳定并康复。结论-非洛地平尚未显示对轻度至中度心力衰竭患者有益。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号