Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Postgraduate Medical Journal logoLink to Postgraduate Medical Journal
. 1993 Feb;69(808):117–120. doi: 10.1136/pgmj.69.808.117

Comparison of nisoldipine and nifedipine as additional treatment in hypertension inadequately controlled by atenolol.

B I Hoffbrand 1, K A Earle 1, J G Nievel 1, L J Restrick 1, N J Simmonds 1
PMCID: PMC2399621  PMID: 8506191

Abstract

Twenty-eight patients (11 Caucasian, 17 black) whose blood pressure was more than 160/96 mmHg after 4 weeks on placebo added to atenolol 100 mg/day were randomly given, in addition, nisoldipine 10 mg or nifedipine 20 mg each twice a day for 8 weeks in a double-blind cross-over study. There was a statistically significant (P < 0.001) fall in blood pressure with no change in heart rate, both supine and erect, on both drugs. There were no significant differences between nisoldipine and nifedipine. Adverse effects were recorded in 15%, 17% and 35% of the patients available for safety comparison for placebo, nisoldipine and nifedipine, respectively. There were no significant differences between the black and Caucasian patients in blood pressure responses, although the study had only a low power to detect these. However, the fasting serum triglyceride levels at the end of both calcium antagonist treatment periods were highly significantly lower in the black patients compared with the Caucasian patients. Nisoldipine, which has a higher coronary vascular selectivity and less negative inotropism than nifedipine, is as effective and as well tolerated as nifedipine in patients whose hypertension is inadequately controlled on atenolol. It may have a special role in hypertensive patients with impaired left ventricular function.

Full text

PDF
117

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Calcium antagonist caution. Lancet. 1991 Apr 13;337(8746):885–886. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Clarke C. W., Kubik M. M. Nifedipine and nisoldipine in hypertensive diabetics. J Hum Hypertens. 1991 Dec;5(6):517–522. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Kazda S., Garthoff B., Meyer H., Schlossmann K., Stoepel K., Towart R., Vater W., Wehinger E. Pharmacology of a new calcium antagonistic compound, isobutyl methyl 1,4-dihydro-2,6-dimethyl-4(2-nitrophenyl)-3,5-pyridinedicarboxylate (Nisoldipine, Bay k 5552). Arzneimittelforschung. 1980;30(12):2144–2162. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Kiowski W., Erne P., Pfisterer M., Mueller J., Buehler F. R., Burkart F. Arterial vasodilator, systemic and coronary hemodynamic effects of nisoldipine in congestive heart failure secondary to ischemic or dilated cardiomyopathy. Am J Cardiol. 1987 May 1;59(12):1118–1125. doi: 10.1016/0002-9149(87)90859-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Krone W., Nägele H. Metabolic changes during antihypertensive therapies. J Hum Hypertens. 1989 Dec;3 (Suppl 2):69–74. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Lam J., Chaitman B. R., Crean P., Blum R., Waters D. D. A dose-ranging, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial of nisoldipine in effort angina: duration and extent of antianginal effects. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1985 Aug;6(2):447–452. doi: 10.1016/s0735-1097(85)80184-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Maxwell G. M., Crompton S., Rencis V. Effect of nisoldipine upon the general and coronary hemodynamics of the anesthetized dog. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 1982 May-Jun;4(3):393–397. doi: 10.1097/00005344-198205000-00009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Omvik P., Lund-Johansen P., Haugland H. Nisoldipine. Central haemodynamics at rest and during exercise in essential hypertension: acute and chronic studies. J Hypertens. 1988 Feb;6(2):95–103. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Pasanisi F., Meredith P. A., Reid J. L. The pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of a new calcium antagonist nisoldipine in normotensive and hypertensive subjects. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1985;29(1):21–24. doi: 10.1007/BF00547363. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Ramsay L. E., Waller P. C. Rapid development of tolerance to the antihypertensive effect of nisoldipine. J Hum Hypertens. 1988 Mar;1(4):277–280. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Warltier D. C., Meils C. M., Gross G. J., Brooks H. L. Blood flow in normal and acutely ischemic myocardium after verapamil, diltiazem and nisoldipine (Bay k 5552), a new dihydropyridine calcium antagonist. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1981 Jul;218(1):296–302. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Zing W., Ferguson R. K., Vlasses P. H. Calcium antagonists in elderly and black hypertensive patients. Therapeutic controversies. Arch Intern Med. 1991 Nov;151(11):2154–2162. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Zusman R., Christensen D., Federman E., Kochar M. S., McCarron D., Porush J. G., Spitalewitz S. Comparison of nifedipine and propranolol used in combination with diuretics for the treatment of hypertension. Am J Med. 1987 Mar 30;82(3B):37–41. doi: 10.1016/0002-9343(87)90209-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Postgraduate Medical Journal are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES