Anti-anginal drugs: Systematic review and clinical implications.
Beta-blockers
Calcium channel blockers
Ivabradine
Ranolazine
Stable angina
Trimetazidine
Journal
International journal of cardiology
ISSN: 1874-1754
Titre abrégé: Int J Cardiol
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 8200291
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 05 2019
15 05 2019
Historique:
received:
18
10
2018
revised:
17
11
2018
accepted:
03
12
2018
pubmed:
13
12
2018
medline:
24
12
2019
entrez:
13
12
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The cornerstone of the treatment of patients affected by stable angina is based on drugs administration classified as first (beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, short acting nitrates) or second line treatment (long-acting nitrates, ivabradine, nicorandil, ranolazine and trimetazidine). However, few data on comparison between different classes of drugs justify that one class of drugs is superior to another. We performed a systematic review of the literature following PRISMA guidelines. i) paper published in English; ii) diagnosis of stable coronary disease; iii) randomized clinical trial; iv) comparison of two anti-angina drugs; v) a sample size >100 patients; vi) a follow-up lasting at least 2 weeks; vii) paper published after 1999, when a meta-analysis of trials comparing beta-blockers, calcium antagonists, and nitrates for stable angina of Heidenreich et al. was published. to establish whether the categorization in first and second line antianginal treatment is scientifically supported. Eleven trials fulfilled inclusion criteria. The results show that there is a paucity of data comparing the efficacy of antianginal agents. The little data available show that there are not compounds superior to others in terms of improvement in exercise test duration, frequency of anginal attacks, need for sub-lingual nitroglycerin. The categorization of antianginal drug in first and second line is not confirmed.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The cornerstone of the treatment of patients affected by stable angina is based on drugs administration classified as first (beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, short acting nitrates) or second line treatment (long-acting nitrates, ivabradine, nicorandil, ranolazine and trimetazidine). However, few data on comparison between different classes of drugs justify that one class of drugs is superior to another.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of the literature following PRISMA guidelines.
INCLUSION CRITERIA
i) paper published in English; ii) diagnosis of stable coronary disease; iii) randomized clinical trial; iv) comparison of two anti-angina drugs; v) a sample size >100 patients; vi) a follow-up lasting at least 2 weeks; vii) paper published after 1999, when a meta-analysis of trials comparing beta-blockers, calcium antagonists, and nitrates for stable angina of Heidenreich et al. was published.
OUTCOME
to establish whether the categorization in first and second line antianginal treatment is scientifically supported.
RESULTS
Eleven trials fulfilled inclusion criteria. The results show that there is a paucity of data comparing the efficacy of antianginal agents. The little data available show that there are not compounds superior to others in terms of improvement in exercise test duration, frequency of anginal attacks, need for sub-lingual nitroglycerin.
CONCLUSION
The categorization of antianginal drug in first and second line is not confirmed.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30538056
pii: S0167-5273(18)36094-7
doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2018.12.008
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Adrenergic beta-Antagonists
0
Calcium Channel Blockers
0
Vasodilator Agents
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
55-63Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.