Reassessment of vasodilator therapy in angina: effects of oral isosorbide dinitrate and hydralazine on exercise tolerance in patients receiving propranolol

Comparison of nifedipine and isosorbide dinitrate when added to maximal propranolol therapy in stable angina pectoris

A study was performed to compare isosorbide dinitrate and nifedipine as adjunctive therapy in 14 patients with coronary artery disease and stable angina pectoris taking maximal beta-blocking drugs. Drug titration phases ensured maximal therapy of propranolol, isosorbide or nifedipine. The combination of nifedipine and propranolol was more effective than the combination of isosorbide and propranolol in reducing angina and increasing exercise capacity (323 vs 416 seconds, p less than 0.005) during exercise treadmill testing. Nifedipine produced a greater reduction in systolic blood pressure at submaximal exercise than isosorbide. Global and regional ejection fraction at rest and exercise was assessed with radionuclide ventriculography. The substitution of nifedipine for isosorbide depressed the global ejection fraction at rest (0.61 to 0.56 p less than 0.05) and produced a slight improvement in exercise ejection fraction (0.47 to 0.51, difference not significant). The decrease in ejection fraction from rest to exercise was 0.14 to 0.04 with nifedipine (p less than 0.005). The benefit of nifedipine compared with isosorbide occurred in regions with marked exercise-induced ischemia. In patients treated with maximal beta-blocking therapy, nifedipine is an effective alternative to isosorbide as a combination agent with propranolol. The salutary effects of nifedipine included afterload reduction with exercise and possible improvements in coronary blood supply.

Double-blind crossover comparison of the antianginal effects of nifedipine and isosorbide dinitrate in patients with exertional angina receiving propranolol

A double-blind crossover study was performed on 27 patients with proved fixed coronary artery disease and stable angina pectoris. The study was designed to compare the relative efficacy of two combination therapies, nifedipine plus propranolol and isosorbide dinitrate plus propranolol, in terms of antianginal response and effect on exercise tolerance by evaluation of treadmill testing. The combination of nifedipine and propranolol was superior to the combination of isosorbide and propranolol in reducing the number of anginal attacks (p = 0.03), increasing total exercise time (p less than 0.02), increasing oxygen consumption achieved at end of exercise (p less than 0.03), increasing time to onset of pain (p = 0.003) and increasing oxygen consumption achieved at onset of pain (p = 0.003). Analysis of the rate-pressure products suggests that the difference in these results may be explained by the greater effect of nifedipine on afterload reduction. Although nitroglycerin consumption was reduced from baseline levels during combination nifedipine therapy (p less than 0.001), there was no statistical difference between nifedipine combination therapy and isosorbide combination therapy. In conclusion, although both combination therapies were superior to propranolol therapy alone, the combination of nifedipine and propranolol was more effective than the combination of isosorbide and propranolol in reducing the incidence of angina and improving exercise performance. Side effects were experienced at a similar frequency during both combination therapies.

Combination therapy with isosorbide dinitrate: current status and the future

The excellent safety and predictable efficacy of isosorbide dinitrate (ISDN) have been demonstrated repeatedly during the past 25 years in a number of studies in which the agent has been used alone or in combination with other antianginal agents. Clinical studies to investigate the additive or synergistic effect of ISDN have been difficult to conduct because of the complexity of protocol design and length of studies required. However, combination therapy is well accepted in the clinical practice of medicine and cardiology and is used to obtain additive therapeutic effects while minimizing the side effects. The addition of ISDN not only to other standard and proven antianginal agents but also to calcium antagonists should prove to be a fruitful area for further clinical research benefiting patients with angina pectoris (caused by either coronary artery spasm or occlusive coronary artery disease), hypertension, and congestive heart failure. Noncardiovascular uses of ISDN may include the treatment of hyperspasticity of other smooth muscle beds, such as esophageal spasm and achalasia.

"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)

Provocation of myocardial ischemic events during initiation of vasodilator therapy for severe chronic heart failure. Clinical and hemodynamic evaluation of 52 consecutive patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy

Although hydralazine provokes myocardial ischemic events in hypertensive patients not in heart failure by producing reflex tachycardia, the frequency of and mechanisms underlying ischemic events when this drug is administered as a vasodilator agent to patients with heart failure is unknown. The responses to hydralazine in 52 consecutive patients with severe chronic heart failure secondary to coronary artery disease were reviewed. Twelve patients (23 percent) had 16 ischemic events during the initial administration of hydralazine (angina at rest in 12 and myocardial infarction in 4); these generally occurred in the absence of significant tachycardia and hypotension. Thirty-five of the 52 patients received nitroprusside (8 of whom had ischemic events with hydralazine), but this drug provoked ischemia in only 1 of the 35 although it resulted in greater decreases in systemic arterial pressure than occurred with hydralazine. In patients with ischemic event only with hydralazine, left ventricular filling pressure decreased 14.6 mm Hg with nitroprusside but only 3.9 mm Hg with hydralazine (probability [p] less than 0.01). Provocation of ischemia with hydralazine may therefore be due to the relative preservation of elevated left ventricular preload with this drug, since ischemic events are not in common with nitroprusside despite greater decreases in systemic pressures.