Response of angina and ischemia to long-term treatment in patients with chronic stable angina: a double-blind randomized individualized dosing trial of nifedipine, propranolol and their combination.

Seventy-four patients with chronic stable mild angina, mild coronary artery disease (83% had one- or two-vessel disease) and normal left ventricular function were studied to measure the response of treadmill exercise performance and painful and silent ischemia in the ambulatory setting to randomly assigned treatment with nifedipine or propranolol and their combination; titration to maximal tolerated dosages was performed in double-blind manner. At 3 months both nifedipine and propranolol reduced the weekly angina rate (p less than 0.05); during treadmill exercise testing, increases (p less than 0.05) were noted in time to angina and total exercise time and decreases in maximal ST depression at the end of exercise. There were no differences between the responses to nifedipine and propranolol and no significant additional changes were seen after another 3 months of therapy. The combination of nifedipine and propranolol reduced the number of patients with angina on exercise treadmill testing from 64% to 38% (p less than 0.05). During ambulatory electrocardiographic monitoring before treatment, there were 1.4 +/- 2.4 (mean +/- SD) episodes/24 h of painful ischemia and a very low silent ischemia frequency: mean 1.1 +/- 2.7 episodes/24 h, mean duration 16 +/- 25 min/24 h. Treatment with propranolol and nifedipine resulted in reduction of episodes and duration of painful and painless ischemia; approximately 77% of patients were free of all ischemic episodes. It is concluded that patients with chronic stable mild angina have a low incidence of silent ischemia. Nifedipine or propranolol alone, titrated to individualized maximally tolerated dosages, are equally effective in long-term control of painful and painless ischemia, anginal episodes and exercise-induced ischemia.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Frequency and duration of silent myocardial ischemia in patients with unstable angina before and after intensive medical therapy.

Frequency and duration of silent myocardial ischemia (SMI) on Holter recording were determined in 20 patients with unstable angina before and after 4 weeks of intensive triple drug therapy with oral nitrates (20-80 mg daily), betablocker (metoprolol 100-200 mg/day) and calcium channel blocker (nifedipine 40-80 mg/day). The number of ischemic episodes decreased from 445 (409 silent) to 149 (140 silent) (p less than 0.001), and mean duration of silent and symptomatic ischemia per patient decreased from 5.9 +/- 3.3 minutes to 2.4 +/- 2.6 minutes (p less than 0.001) and 4.1 +/- 5.5 minutes to 1.4 +/- 2.8 minutes (p less than 0.001) respectively. Intensive medical therapy is effective in ameliorating SMI in patients with unstable angina.     

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of tissue plasminogen activator in unstable angina

Angiographic, angioscopic and pathologic reports have recently demonstrated a high incidence of intracoronary thrombus in patients with unstable angina. To determine if thrombolysis could be beneficial when combined with maximal medical therapy, 40 patients with rest angina, angiographically documented coronary artery disease and pacing-induced ischemia were randomly assigned to intravenous recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator (rt-PA, 150 mg/8 h) or placebo in a prospective double-blind trial. All patients received nitrates, a beta-adrenergic blocking agent, a calcium channel blocker, aspirin and heparin. Pacing thresholds for ischemia and quantitative coronary stenosis were measured before and after infusion of the study medication. Intracoronary thrombus was identified angiographically before infusion of the study medication in 16 patients; 7 received rt-PA and 9 received placebo. The ischemic pacing threshold in patients treated with rt-PA increased from 112 +/- 4 beats/min at baseline to 127 +/- 5 beats/min (p = 0.007) by the end of the infusion versus an insignificant change in patients who received placebo (from 116 +/- 4 to 119 +/- 4 beats/min, p = NS). In patients with intracoronary thrombus, the ischemic pacing threshold increased 26 +/- 7 beats/min with rt-PA treatment versus 0 +/- 3 beats/min with placebo (p = 0.004). In contrast, in patients without thrombus, there was no difference in ischemic pacing threshold increments between treatment groups (7 +/- 11 beats/min for rt-PA versus 6 +/- 5 beats/min for placebo, p = NS).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Nifedipine and conventional therapy for unstable angina pectoris: a randomized, double-blind comparison

To characterize the potential of nifedipine in the therapy of unstable angina pectoris we implemented a blinded, randomly assigned, titrated schedule of conventional therapy (propranolol, if not contraindicated, and isosorbide dinitrate) or nifedipine for 14 days in 126 patients hospitalized in a coronary care unit for ischemic chest pain of less than 45 min duration. There were no significant differences between conventionally and nifedipine-treated patients with regard to (1) the time to relief of pain as judged by life table analysis, (2) the decrease in anginal attacks per 24 hr from day 0 to day 2 (-2.5 +/- 0.4 for conventional therapy vs; -2.8 +/- 0.3 for nifedipine), (3) the decrease in the number of nitroglycerin tablets consumed per 24 hr (-2.0 +/- 0.5 for conventional vs -2.1 +/- 0.4 for nifedipine therapy), (4) the percentage of patients requiring morphine on day 1 (13% for conventional vs 21% for nifedipine therapy), or (5) the percentage of patients who developed infarction (14% in both groups). Among the 27 patients who did not respond to initial conventional (n = 13) or nifedipine therapy (n = 14), five in each group became pain free when the opposite therapy (either nifedipine or conventional therapy) was added. In the subgroup of 67 patients who were receiving propranolol before randomization, addition of nifedipine was more effective in controlling pain than was an increase in conventional therapy (p = .026). In the subgroup of 59 patients not receiving prior propranolol, initiation of conventional therapy produced more rapid pain relief than initiation of nifedipine therapy alone (p less than .001), which tended to increase heart rate. Thus, for the study population as a whole therapy with nifedipine alone was equivalent to conventional therapy for unstable angina, although this overall equivalence may result from a combination of superiority of nifedipine therapy in patients previously receiving beta-blocker therapy and superiority of beta-blocker therapy in patients not previously receiving beta-blockers.     

Safety of acute calcium antagonist withdrawal: studies in patients with unstable angina withdrawn from nifedipine

The acute effects of nifedipine withdrawal were studied in 81 patients with angina at rest who had completed a prospective, double-blind, randomized trial of nifedipine versus placebo. Thirty-nine of the 81 patients (group 1) were withdrawn from nifedipine or placebo at the time of coronary artery bypass surgery for uncontrolled angina or left main coronary artery disease. When the patients withdrawn from nifedipine were compared with those withdrawn from placebo, no significant differences were seen in the incidence of hypotension, myocardial infarction, significant arrhythmias or vasopressor or vasodilator requirements during the perioperative period. Forty-two patients (group 2) completed 2 years on a protocol consisting of nitrates and propranolol, in addition to nifedipine or placebo. These patients were hospitalized for a controlled withdrawal of the study drug (nifedipine or placebo), and no significant difference was noted in either exercise performance on serial treadmill testing or the number or duration of episodes of ischemic ST-segment changes during continuous electrocardiographic monitoring. Eight patients continued to experience occasional episodes of angina at rest. Angina at rest recurred during the withdrawal period in 5 of these 8 patients. Four of these 5 patients were withdrawn from nifedipine. Of the 34 stable patients in group 2 who were not experiencing angina at rest before withdrawal, none had angina at rest during the withdrawal study period. Thus, there were no early untoward effects of acute nifedipine withdrawal either in patients undergoing coronary bypass surgery or in stable patients on long-term medical therapy. However, patients with persistent symptoms of angina at rest may experience early recurrent ischemia upon withdrawal from nifedipine.     

"Maximal" drug therapy is not necessarily optimal in chronic angina pectoris

Beta-adrenergic blocking agents, nitrates and calcium channel antagonists are effective in treating angina pectoris, but much remains unknown about how they act in combination. Consequently, treadmill exercise was used to assess the relative efficacy of nifedipine or isosorbide dinitrate, or both, in 19 patients with stable angina receiving propranolol. Propranolol therapy was continued and either placebo, nifedipine (20 mg), isosorbide dinitrate (20 mg) or both drugs were given randomly 1 1/2 hours before exercise in a double-blind trial. In 16 patients who completed the protocol, heart rate at rest during propranolol therapy was 53.7 +/- 1.9 beats/min (mean +/- standard error of the mean); it increased 4.6 +/- 1.2 beats/min with the addition of nifedipine (p less than 0.01), but was unchanged with isosorbide dinitrate or both combined. Compared with values during treatment with propranolol alone, systolic blood pressure at rest decreased with each vasodilator individually and when combined. Rate-pressure product at maximal exercise was the same with all combinations. Exercise duration was 467 +/- 50 seconds with propranolol, increased to 556 +/- 47 seconds with isosorbide dinitrate (p less than 0.05) and to 636 +/- 50 seconds with nifedipine (p less than 0.001). Exercise duration with all three drugs was 597 +/- 47 seconds (p less than 0.01 compared with propranolol alone). The improvement with nifedipine was greater than with isosorbide dinitrate (p less than 0.05) but exercise duration was not significantly different with the combination of these drugs than when either drug was used alone.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

The efficacy of the addition of nifedipine in patients with mixed angina compared to patients with classic exertional angina: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial

Episodes of myocardial ischemia in patients with coronary artery disease may be due to transient increases in coronary vasomotor tone superimposed on a fixed atherosclerotic obstruction. The purpose of this study was to determine whether identification of the clinical pattern of angina could predict the therapeutic response to the addition of nifedipine to a regimen of beta blockers and/or long-acting nitrates. Seventy-two patients with stable exertional angina were divided into two groups: "classic exertional angina" (17 patients), defined as exertional angina with a stable threshold; and "mixed angina" (55 patients), defined as exertional angina provoked by a variable threshold and/or at least two episodes of rest angina within the 3 months prior to screening. Patients were studied with nifedipine and placebo in a 6-week, double-blind, crossover design that used serial anginal diaries, exercise treadmill tests, and 24-hour ambulatory ECG monitoring. In patients with mixed angina, nifedipine reduced the frequency of angina compared to that during placebo treatment (13.1 vs 9.9 episodes/3 weeks, p less than 0.01) and reduced nitroglycerin consumption (11.7 vs 7.5 tablets/3 weeks, p less than 0.05); while in patients with classic exertional angina, nifedipine had no symptomatic effect (7.9 vs 6.8 anginal episodes/3 weeks, NS; 6.4 vs 5.8 nitroglycerin tablets/3 weeks, NS). Patients in both groups experienced a significant decrease in the manifestations of ischemia during exercise testing. Patients with mixed angina experienced a reduction in the daily frequency of painful episodes of ST segment depression during nifedipine treatment compared to placebo (0.6 vs 0.2 episodes, p less than 0.05), but there was no effect on the frequency of episodes of silent ischemia (4.2 vs 3.4 episodes, NS). In patients with classic exertional angina, the addition of nifedipine had no effect on any measure of ambulatory ischemia. We conclude that patients with mixed angina are more likely to benefit symptomatically from the addition of nifedipine therapy than patients with classic exertional angina. The lack of a consistently preferential response to nifedipine in patients with mixed angina, however, suggests that episodic coronary vasoconstriction may not be the only mechanism responsible for ischemia in these patients, and/or that nifedipine may not necessarily provide additional therapeutic benefit beyond that conferred by a regimen of beta blockers and/or nitrates.     

Randomized double-blind comparison of metoprolol, nifedipine, and their combination in chronic stable angina: effects on total ischemic activity and heart rate at onset of ischemia

In a randomized double-blind study, treatment with either metoprolol, nifedipine, or their combination was compared for effects on ischemic variables and heart rate obtained during ambulatory monitoring in 42 patients with chronic stable angina. All patients had severe chronic stable angina of at least 6 months' duration despite medical treatment, and exhibited coronary artery stenosis of 75% in one or more coronary arteries. Metoprolol reduced the frequency of total (p less than 0.01) and asymptomatic ischemic episodes (p less than 0.05), the duration of ischemia (p less than 0.05), and the ischemic burden (p less than 0.05), which contrasted to the lack of any similar significant effect during nifedipine monotherapy. During combination therapy, there was a tendency to further improvement, which did not reach statistical significance compared with metoprolol monotherapy. Heart rate at the onset of ischemia was reduced by metoprolol therapy (p less than 0.01), indicating that metoprolol acts by reducing myocardial oxygen demand even during ischemic episodes observed in daily life, where impairments of myocardial oxygen supply are suspected. No change in heart rate at the onset of ischemia could be detected during nifedipine monotherapy. It is concluded that metoprolol monotherapy, as well as its combination with nifedipine, effectively reduces total ischemic activity compared with placebo and nifedipine monotherapy. Control of ischemic activity in chronic stable angina may have prognostic implications.     

Beneficial effects of high-dose diltiazem in patients with persistent effort angina on beta-blockers and nitrates: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled cross-over study

The effects of orally administered diltiazem combined with maximally tolerated doses of beta-blockers and nitrates were assessed in 12 patients, who during stress testing exhibited persistent effort angina and continued objective evidence for inducible myocardial ischemia. Patients performed multistage semisupine exercise on a bicycle ergometer during equilibrium-gated radionuclide angiography after consecutive 2 week treatment periods of placebo or diltiazem 90 mg qid (mean dose 340 mg/day) combined with maximally tolerated propranolol (mean dose 178 mg/day) and isosorbide dinitrate (mean dose 137 mg/day). All medications (including diltiazem or placebo) were administered four times daily for the duration of the study. Diltiazem or placebo was administered according to a double-blind design, with randomized cross-over at the end of each 2 week treatment period. The average number of angina attacks decreased during the double-blind cross-over phase of the trial (7 +/- 7 episodes/week at baseline vs 4 +/- 3 on placebo vs 2 +/- 2 on diltiazem; p = .08). Angina pectoris was abolished during peak exercise in eight of 12 patients on diltiazem (p less than .05 vs placebo). Diltiazem increased total exercise duration from 276 +/- 92 to 310 +/- 78 sec (p less than .005 vs baseline). Diltiazem likewise increased the time to onset of angina from 231 +/- 84 sec at baseline to 305 +/- 77 sec (p less than .005), as well as the time to the onset of 1 mm ischemic ST segment depression (p = .01). Diltiazem decreased heart rate at rest, during submaximal workload, and at peak exercise (p less than .05), and decreased systolic blood pressure at peak exercise only (p less than .05). A significant decline in rate-pressure product at submaximal and peak exercise was noted (p less than .05). At any given workload there was significantly less ST segment depression during submaximal (p = .05) and peak exercise (p less than .025).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Comparison of propranolol, diltiazem, and nifedipine in the treatment of ambulatory ischemia in patients with stable angina. Differential effects on ambulatory ischemia, exercise performance, and anginal symptoms. The ASIS Study Group

Episodes of transient myocardial ischemia during ambulatory activities are common in patients with stable coronary artery disease and who are often asymptomatic. Selection of therapy for episodes of asymptomatic ischemia is limited by a lack of direct comparative studies. To determine the most effective monotherapy for patients with stable angina and a high frequency of asymptomatic ischemic episodes, propranolol-LA (mean daily dose, 293 mg), diltiazem-SR (mean daily dose, 350 mg), nifedipine (mean daily dose, 79 mg) were each compared with placebo, each for 2 weeks, in a randomized, double-blinded, crossover trial. Entry criteria were a positive exercise treadmill test during placebo therapy characterized by 1.0 mm or more ST segment depression and angina pectoris, and six or more episodes of transient ST segment depression of 1.0 mm or more on a 48-hour ambulatory electrocardiogram. One hundred ninety-four patients were screened, 63 were eligible and received randomized therapy, of which 56 patients completed at least two of the four treatment periods and were included in an intent-to-treat analysis. Fifty patients completed all four treatment phases and were included in the protocol-completed analysis. Anti-ischemia efficacy was assessed by 48-hour ambulatory electrocardiographic monitoring, exercise treadmill tests, and anginal diaries. Ninety-four percent of all episodes of ambulatory ischemia were asymptomatic. Compared with placebo, only propranolol was associated with a marked reduction in all manifestations of asymptomatic ischemia during ambulatory electrocardiographic monitoring (2.3 versus 1.0 episodes/24 hr; mean duration of ischemia per 24 hours, 43.6 versus 5.7 minutes; both p less than 0.0001). Diltiazem's reduction of the frequency of episodes compared with placebo (2.3 versus 1.9 episodes/24 hr) was associated with a trend (p = 0.08) in the protocol-completed analysis and with a significant reduction in the intent-to-treat analysis (p = 0.03). Nifedipine had no significant effect on any measured variable of ambulatory ischemia. The dosages of medication used may have been excessive for some patients, and a more beneficial effect may have been evident at a lower dose. In contrast to the marked effects of the active agents on ambulatory asymptomatic ischemia, the effects on exercise performance and angina pectoris were slight. The active agents modestly improved treadmill exercise duration time until 1 mm ST segment depression (3%), and only propranolol and diltiazem had significant effects. Only diltiazem significantly prolonged the total exercise time. Anginal frequency was significantly decreased by both propranolol and diltiazem.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)     

Opposing effects of propranolol and diltiazem on the angina threshold during an exercise test in patients with syndrome X

Patients with angina pectoris, exercise induced myocardial ischemia, normal coronary arteries and no evidence of epicardial spasm, i.e. patients with syndrome x, have been suggested to haven inadequate increase in coronary blood flow during tachycardia, possibly due to a functional disorder of small coronary vessels. To evaluate the best medical management of this syndrome we studied 13 patients who showed the above set of findings. Patients were given propranolol (160 mg daily), diltiazem (360 mg daily) and placebo for 2 weeks, using a randomized single blind protocol. Upright bicycle ergometer testing was performed at the end of each period of treatment. Compared to placebo, diltiazem significantly (p less than 0.001) prolonged exercise duration (x +/- SD: 365 +/- 86 vs 303 +/- 89 sec) and time to onset of angina (358 +/- 88 vs 276 +/- 90 sec). Angina appeared in 7 patients with diltiazem vs 13 patients with placebo and occurred at a higher rate pressure product (26.3 +/- 3.5 vs 24.1 +/- 2.8 X 10(-3); p less than 0.02). Conversely, following propranolol exercise duration and time to onset of angina were unchanged and angina appeared in all patients at a lower rate pressure product (18.3 +/- 2.9 vs 24.4 +/- 3.6 X 10(-3); p less than 0.001). The most likely explanations for these findings are: propranolol counteracts beta 2-adrenergic receptors, thus further reducing coronary reserve. This may lower the anginal threshold; Diltiazem reduces smooth muscle tone in small coronary vessels. This may result in increased coronary reserve and exercise duration.     

Dissociation of exercise tolerance and total myocardial ischemic burden in chronic stable angina pectoris

Exercise treadmill tests and ambulatory monitoring were used in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, double-dummy crossover comparison of nifedipine (10 mg, 3 times daily) and transdermal nitroglycerin (15 mg). All patients (n = 20) had chronic stable angina with symptomatic and silent events. All patients had 3 episodes of angina/week and 3 episodes of ischemia/24 hr. The protocol was made up of 2 weeks of placebo followed by 2 weeks of active drug, then crossed over for 2 weeks of placebo followed by the other active drug. At the end of each 2-week period, patients had ambulatory monitoring and exercise treadmill testing. All ambulatory monitoring reports were read blind and entered into an independent data base. The results were the following: on transdermal nitroglycerin, the duration of ischemia decreased by 57% from 140 min/24 hr to 60 min/24 hr (p = 0.0054). The exercise time increased by 5.5% from 4.8 to 5.0 minutes (p = 0.16). With nifedipine, the duration of ischemia decreased by 22% from 175 min/24 hr to 137 min/24 hr (p = 0.16). The exercise tolerance time increased by 13% from 4.5 to 5.0 minutes (p = 0.0264). Nifedipine increased exercise time without altering total ischemic time, while transdermal nitroglycerin decreased total ischemic time without increasing exercise time. Thus, changes in exercise time do not necessarily predict changes in total ischemic time.     

Effect of nifedipine on recurrent stenosis after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty

This double-blind, randomized study evaluated the effect of nifedipine on restenosis after coronary angioplasty. Two hundred forty-one patients with dilation of 271 coronary sites were randomized at the time of hospital discharge to receive nifedipine, 10 mg (123 patients), or placebo (118 patients) four times daily for 6 months. No patient was known to have coronary artery spasm. The mean duration of therapy was 4.4 +/- 2 (mean +/- SD) months for nifedipine and 4.3 +/- 2 months for placebo. A restudy angiogram was available in 100 patients (81%) in the nifedipine group and 98 patients (83%) in the placebo group. A recurrent coronary stenosis was noted in 28% of patients in the nifedipine group and in 29.5% of those in the placebo group (p = NS). The mean diameter stenosis was 36.4 +/- 23% for the nifedipine group and 36.7 +/- 23% for the placebo group (p = NS). By pill count, 78% of patients receiving nifedipine and 82% of those receiving placebo complied with the study drug regimen. Coronary stenosis recurred in 33% of patients in the placebo group and in 29% of patients in the nifedipine group who complied with the regimen and had angiograms (p = NS). In conclusion, the study did not demonstrate a significant beneficial effect of nifedipine on the incidence of recurrent stenosis after successful percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty.     

Acute nifedipine withdrawal: consequences of preoperative and late cessation of therapy in patients with prior unstable angina

Reports of acute ischemic events after withdrawal of calcium antagonist therapy in outpatients and during bypass surgery in patients with prior angina at rest prompted the examination of the effect of nifedipine withdrawal in 81 patients who had completed a prospective, double-blind randomized trial of nifedipine versus placebo for rest angina. Thirty-nine patients underwent bypass surgery for uncontrolled angina or left main coronary artery disease. No significant difference between patients withdrawn from nifedipine or placebo was seen in the incidence of perioperative myocardial infarction, hypotension requiring intraaortic balloon counterpulsation, vasopressor or vasodilator requirements or incidence of significant arrhythmias. An additional 42 patients had completed 2 years on a protocol consisting of nitrates and propranolol in addition to nifedipine or placebo. During a mean of 66 hours of continuous monitoring after withdrawal of nifedipine or placebo, heart rate and blood pressure were unchanged. A worsening of previously present angina at rest occurred in five patients who had continued to experience rest angina before drug withdrawal, four of whom were withdrawn from nifedipine. No patient with class I to III angina experienced new onset of rest angina during drug withdrawal. No patient experienced myocardial infarction. There was no significant difference between patients withdrawn from nifedipine or placebo in the duration or frequency of ischemic ST changes on continuous electrocardiographic monitoring, or in duration or positive results of serial exercise treadmill testing. Thus, no early adverse effects of acute nifedipine withdrawal were found in patients with prior rest angina at the time of bypass surgery or in stable patients receiving long-term medical therapy.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

The prognostic importance of asymptomatic ischemic episodes in patients with unstable angina pectoris

Unstable angina pectoris is a high-risk ischemic disease which is characterized by recent onset of angina, a change in preexisting stable angina pattern or the occurrence of angina at rest. In a study of 70 patients with unstable angina on treatment with a triple drug regimen of nitrates, propranolol and nifedipine, 37 patients (53%) had 205 ischemic episodes, 90% of which were asymptomatic. 33 patients (47%) had no changes in the ST-segments. Between the two groups, there were no significant differences with respect to risk factors, medical treatment or coronary angiographic findings. Only the resting ejection fraction in the former group was slightly but significantly lower than in the latter group. At one month of follow-up seven patients had developed myocardial infarction, six of whom were in the group with silent ischemia. In 13 patients, due to inadequate success of medical treatment, bypass surgery or PTCA was performed; ten of these were from the group with silent ischemia. Of patients with silent ischemia, those with episodes totaling more than 60 minutes per 24 hours had the worst outcome. Multivariate analysis showed that, with respect to prognosis, the most important parameter was silent ischemia followed by angina pectoris.     

Safety and efficacy of esmolol for unstable angina pectoris

Esmolol is a rapidly metabolized cardioselective beta-adrenergic blocker that provides steady state beta-adrenergic blockade when administered by continuous intravenous infusion. To determine the efficacy of esmolol in the management of unstable angina, 23 patients with known coronary artery disease, who averaged 3.7 +/- 2.7 daily episodes of chest pain at rest, were randomized to receive either a continuous infusion of esmolol (n = 12) or oral propranolol (n = 11), as an adjunct to concomitant antianginal therapy. Patients with systolic blood pressure less than 110 mm Hg, heart rate less than 60 beats/min or known contraindications to beta blockade were excluded. Esmolol was titrated in a step-wise fashion from 2 to 24 mg/min at 5-minute intervals up to a 30% reduction in heart rate and systolic blood pressure double-product. The propranolol dose was increased every 6 hours by 50 to 100% to achieve a similar reduction in heart rate and blood pressure. When compared with their 24-hour baseline periods, both groups achieved a significant reduction in episodes of chest pain, from 4.6 +/- 3.3 to 1.4 +/- 1.5 in the esmolol group (p less than 0.02) and 2.6 +/- 1.4 to 1.0 +/- 1.5 in the propranolol group (p less than 0.02) during the subsequent study period. The cardiac event rate and incidence of drug side effects were similar between the 2 groups; however, side effects seen with esmolol did not require treatment after drug discontinuation. Thus, maximally tolerated beta blockade is an effective therapy for unstable angina.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Superior efficacy of propranolol versus nifedipine in double-component angina, as related to different influences on coronary vasomotility

PURPOSE: In 24 patients with stable spontaneous and effort-related angina, ischemic episodes at rest were not preceded by changes in circulatory variables (heart rate, systemic and pulmonary arterial pressures) that may raise the myocardial oxygen consumption. We interpreted these episodes as caused by critical and reversible coronary flow reduction at the site of a stenotic lesion, and evaluated the clinical efficacy of nifedipine and propranolol in the treatment of this condition. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study was randomized, placebo-controlled, and crossover in design. Nineteen of the 24 subjects were men (mean group age, 59 years; range, 47 to 65 years). The study consisted of four four-day periods. The first and the fourth periods, during which patients received placebo, were single-blind. The treatment consisted of 80 mg of propranolol or 20 mg of nifedipine administered four times daily. The second and the third periods, during which patients received propranolol or nifedipine crossing over to the alternative drug in the next period, were double-blind and separated by a 24-hour interval. RESULTS: Propranolol fully abolished or reduced the number of spontaneous ischemic episodes in a significantly larger proportion of patients than did nifedipine; it was also effective in several cases in which nifedipine had failed or had even caused a paradoxic effect. Quantitative angiographic evaluation of the influences of nifedipine (Group 1, 12 patients, 10 mg sublingually) and propranolol (Group 2, 12 patients, 0.1 mg/kg intravenously) on the residual lumen diameter of one significant coronary stenosis in each patient showed that (1) after nifedipine, the lumen was unchanged in one, augmented in seven, and reduced in four cases; (2) variations ranged between +1.59 and -1.2 mm, and their direction correlated closely with the influence of oral nifedipine on the episodes of spontaneous ischemia; and (3) in no case did treatment with propranolol vary the stenosis lumen by more than 0.3 mm. CONCLUSION: In this form of angina, a number of lesions seem to offer a compliant substrate for vasomotion and, possibly, for critical changes in flow. The vasomotor influences of nifedipine on these lesions are variable as well as the efficacy of the drug on the manifestations of ischemia at rest. Propranolol produces no important variations of the coronary stenotic lesions, causes a decrease of heart rate that facilitates coronary flow in diastole, and reduces the baseline metabolic demand of the heart so that the threshold of ischemia during critical reduction of coronary flow may become elevated.     

Treatment of angina at rest with nifedipine: A short-term controlled study

The effectiveness of nifedipine in treating angina pectoris at rest was evaluated in 14 patients with frequent ischemic episodes associated with S-T segment elevation or depression. The trial consisted of (1) a 48 hour control period; (2) a placebo period and a period of treatment with nifedipine of 48 hours each; and (3) a second placebo period and a second period of treatment with nifedipine of 24 hours each. The efficacy of treatment was evaluated by continuous electrocardiographic recording to detect painless ischemic episodes. During coronary angiography coronary spasm was demonstrated in five patients. The ergonovine maleate test was positive in seven of eight patients.No statistically significant difference was found in the mean daily number of ischemic episodes between the control period and the first placebo period, or between the control and the second placebo periods. Nifedipine produced a highly significant reduction in the mean daily number of episodes compared with the response to placebo during the first as well as the second period. Nifedipine is effective in angina at rest caused by coronary arterial spasm. The prevention of ischemia may be related to the ability of nifedipine to decrease calcium-dependent coronary muscle tone and to prevent coronary spasm.     

Use of captopril as an isolated agent for the management of stable angina pectoris--a double blind randomised trial.

In this double blind randomised placebo controlled study, we investigated the antianginal efficacy of oral captopril in 33 patients of angiographically documented coronary artery disease (chronic stable angina). Apart from sublingual nitrates, all other antianginal drugs were withdrawn. Patients were then evaluated both subjectively by questionnaire and objectively by treadmill stress test. No patient had more than mild hypertension and all patients had good left ventricular function. One group of patients received oral captopril while the other group was given placebo. A repeat assessment was done after six weeks and the results compared with baseline. Anginal attacks decreased from 20.11 +/- 1.86 per week on placebo to 9.92 +/- 1.38 (p < 0.01) on captopril as also the number of sublingual nitrates (18.84 +/- 3.01 to 11.14 +/- 2.94, p < 0.01). Assessment by the treadmill stress test showed that in comparison to the pretreatment test, captopril therapy resulted in a significantly increased exercise duration (6.26 +/- 0.21 to 6.98 +/- 0.31 minutes, p < 0.05), total work done (6.76 +/- 0.26 METS to 7.48 +/- 0.29 METS, p < 0.05). In addition there was a significant increase in time to angina (6.16 +/- 0.18 to 6.85 +/- 0.24 min, p < 0.05) and time to 1mm ST depression (5.18 +/- 0.26 to 6.46 +/- 0.30 min, p < 0.01). We conclude that captopril is an effective monotherapy for patients with chronic stable angina and has both antianginal as well as anti-ischemic effects, possibly secondary to direct coronary vasodilation.     

Comparison of verapamil and propranolol therapy for angina pectoris at rest: a randomized, multiple-crossover, controlled trial in the coronary care unit

The effects of oral verapamil (V), 400 mg/day, oral propranolol (P), 300 mg/day, and placebo were compared in 10 patients admitted to the coronary care unit because of frequent attacks of angina at rest. Testing was done according to a randomized, double-blind, multiple-crossover, placebo-controlled trial, consisting of 8 consecutive 48-hour treatment periods with V or P or placebo. Three patients had variant angina, 5 had episodes of both ST-segment elevation and depression and 2 had only ST-segment depression. One patient had no critical coronary stenoses, 1 had 1-vessel disease, 7 had 2-vessel disease and 1 had 3-vessel disease. Electrocardiographic monitoring and tape recording were continued during the 16 days of the trial. A total of 1,602 episodes of transient diagnostic ST shift were recorded during the trial (1,309 episodes of ST-segment elevation, 293 of ST-segment depression); 43% were painless. Mean blood levels of V and P at the end of the active phases were 161 +/- 89 and 120 +/- 45 ng/ml, respectively. In the group as a whole, the average number of diagnostic ischemic ST-segment shifts per 24 hours was significantly reduced relative to corresponding placebo periods during V (2.6 +/- 2.4 vs 11.9 +/- 8.6; p less than 0.01) but not during P treatment (11.9 +/- 8.6 vs 12.0 +/- 7.3). Similar statistically significant reductions were observed in the number of anginal attacks and nitroglycerin tablets consumed. Considering individual patients, V reduced ischemic episodes during both active phases in all patients, whereas P was effective only in 1.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)