Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Braz. j. otorhinolaryngol. (Impr.) ; 83(6): 619-626, Nov.-Dec. 2017. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS | ID: biblio-889326

ABSTRACT

Abstract Introduction: Antibiotics are frequently used for the treatment of rhinosinusitis. Concerns have been raised regarding the adverse effects of antibiotics and growing resistance. The lack of development of new antibiotic compounds has increased the necessity for exploration of non-antibiotic compounds that have antibacterial activity. Amlodipine is a non-antibiotic compound with anti-inflammatory activity. Objective: In this study we aimed to investigate the potential role of amlodipine in the treatment of rhinosinusitis by evaluating its effects on tissue oxidative status, mucosal histology and inflammation. Methods: Fifteen adult albino guinea pigs were inoculated with Staphylococcus aureus and treated with saline, cefazolin sodium, or amlodipine for 7 days. The control group was composed by five healthy guinea pigs. Animals were sacrificed after the treatment. Histopathological changes were identified using Hematoxylin-Eosin staining. Inflammation was assessed by Polymorphonuclear Leukocyte infiltration density. Tissue levels of antioxidants (superoxide dismutase, glutathione) and an oxidative product (malondialdehyde) were determined. Results: In rhinosinusitis induced animals, amlodipine reduced loss of cilia, lamina propria edema and collagen deposition compared to placebo (saline) and although not superior to cefazolin, amlodipine decreased polymorphonuclear leukocyte infiltration. The superoxide dismutase activity and glutathione levels were reduced, whereas the malondialdehyde levels were increased significantly in all three-treatment groups compared to the control group. Amlodipine treated group showed significantly increased superoxide dismutase and glutathione levels and decreased malondialdehyde levels compared to all treatment groups. Conclusion: The non-antibiotic compound amlodipine may have a role in acute rhinosinusitis treatment through tissue protective, antioxidant and anti-inflammatory mechanisms.


Resumo Introdução: Antibióticos são frequentemente usados para o tratamento de rinossinusite. Questões têm sido levantadas sobre os efeitos adversos dos antibióticos e a resistência crescente. A falta de desenvolvimento de novos compostos antibióticos aumentou a necessidade da exploração de compostos não antibióticos que têm atividade antibacteriana. A amlodipina é um composto não antibiótico com atividade anti-inflamatória. Objetivo: O objetivo desse estudo foi investigar o papel potencial da amlodipina no tratamento da rinossinusite, avaliando seus efeitos sobre o estado oxidativo do tecido, histologia da mucosa e inflamação. Método: Quinze cobaias albinas adultas foram inoculadas com Staphylococcus aureus e tratadas com solução salina, cefazolina ou amlodipina durante sete dias. O grupo controle incluiu cinco cobaias saudáveis. Os animais foram sacrificados após o tratamento. Alterações histopatológicas foram identificadas com a coloração de hematoxilina-eosina. A inflamação foi avaliada pela densidade de infiltração de leucócitos polimorfonucleares. Foram determinados os níveis teciduais de antioxidantes (superóxido dismutase, glutationa) e um produto de oxidação (malondialdeído). Resultados: Em animais com rinossinusite induzida, a amlodipina reduziu a perda dos cílios, edema da lâmina própria e deposição de colágeno em comparação com o grupo placebo (solução salina) e embora não seja superior à cefazolina, a amlodipina diminuiu a infiltração de leucócitos polimorfonucleares. Os níveis de atividade da superóxido dismutase e glutationa foram reduzidos, enquanto os níveis de malondialdeído aumentaram significativamente nos três grupos de tratamento em comparação ao grupo controle. O grupo tratado com amlodipina apresentou aumento significante dos níveis de superóxido dismutase e glutationa e diminuição dos níveis de malondialdeído em comparação com todos os grupos de tratamento. Conclusão: O composto não antibiótico amlodipina pode ter um papel no tratamento da rinossinusite aguda através de mecanismos protetores de tecido, antioxidantes e anti-inflamatórios.


Subject(s)
Animals , Sinusitis/drug therapy , Rhinitis/drug therapy , Amlodipine/pharmacology , Anti-Inflammatory Agents/pharmacology , Reference Values , Staphylococcus aureus , Superoxide Dismutase/analysis , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay , Random Allocation , Cefazolin/therapeutic use , Cefazolin/pharmacology , Reproducibility of Results , Treatment Outcome , Amlodipine/therapeutic use , Glutathione/analysis , Glutathione/drug effects , Guinea Pigs , Malondialdehyde/analysis , Anti-Inflammatory Agents/therapeutic use , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Anti-Bacterial Agents/pharmacology , Nasal Mucosa/drug effects , Nasal Mucosa/pathology
2.
Invest. clín ; 51(1): 77-86, Mar. 2010. tab
Article in English | LILACS | ID: lil-574081

ABSTRACT

Calcium channel blockers, β adrenergic receptor blockers and Na/K ATPase inhibitors are widely used drugs, mainly for cardiovascular diseases. Their pharmacological targets are not restricted to the cardivascular tissue, nociceptive system structures also express similar targets, which strongly suggests a direct effect on pain sensation. To evaluate the pain intensity changes in outpatient groups, who receive these drugs as a therapy, a cross-sectional sampled, randomized patient groups receiving the calcium channel blocker amlodipine for blood hypertension (n=45), β adrenergic receptor blockers (propranolol, atenolol or pindolol; n=40) for blood hypertension, or digoxin (n=40) for heart failure, were compared to an aparently healthy volunteers control group (n=60). A calibrated noxious pressure of 890 g/mm² was applied for 5 seconds on the patient’s sternum. Subjective pain intensity was reported by the visual analog scale (VAS, 0 to 10). Pain modulation system was evaluated by the application of a second stimulus with a 5 minutes delay. The analgesic effect of the β blockers group (propanolol, atenolol, pindolol) was dosage-dependant (-36.8 percent; P=0.0000003), without differences among them. The calcium channel blocker amlodipine showed lower pain scores (-50.6 percent; P=0.0000003) than β-receptor blockers (P=0.0000003). Digoxin presented the highest pain scores (+56.5 percent; P=0.0000003). All pain scores for the second stimulus were lower than the first stimulus and were differentially affected by β-blockers (atenolol, pindolol and propanolol) and calcium channel blocker (amlodipine), but not by digoxin. These results suggest the influence of widely clinically used cardiovascular drugs on nociception.


Los bloqueadores de los canales de calcio, los bloqueadores de los receptores β adrenérgicos y los inhibidores de la ATPasa Na/K son medicamentos ampliamente usados en enfermedades cardiovasculares. Sus blancos farmacológicos no se restringen al tejido cardiovascular, el sistema nervioso nociceptivo expresa blancos similares, lo que sugiere fuertemente un efecto directo en la sensación del dolor. El objetivo del presente estudio fue evaluar los cambios en la intensidad del dolor en grupos de pacientes ambulatorios que reciban estos medicamentos como terapia. Grupos aleatorios de pacientes que reciben el bloqueador de canales de calcio amlodipina contra la hipertensión arterial (n=45), bloqueadores de receptores β adrenérgicos (propranolol, atenolol or pindolol; n=40) contra la hipertensión arterial o digoxina (n=40) por insuficiencia cardíaca fueron comparados con un grupo control de voluntarios aparentemente sanos (n=60). A todos los grupos se les aplicó una presión nociva calibrada de 890 g/mm² durante 5 segundos sobre el esternón. El paciente reportó la intensidad subjetiva del dolor mediante la escala visual análoga (VAS). El sistema de modulación descendente del dolor fue evaluado mediante la aplicación del mismo estímulo 5 minutos después del primero. Se determinó un efecto analgésico en el grupo de β bloqueantes (propanolol, atenolol, pindolol) dosis dependiente (-36,8 por ciento; P=0,0000003) sin mostrar diferencias entre ellos. El bloqueador de canales de calcio amlodipina mostró un efecto analgésico (-50,6 por ciento; P=0,0000003) que fue mayor que el de los β bloqueantes (P=0,0000003). El grupo con digoxina expresó un efecto hiperalgésico (+56,5 por ciento; P=0,0000003). Todos los valores de dolor para el segundo estímulo fueron menores que para el primero y fueron diferencialmente afectados por los β bloqueantes (atenolol, pindolol and propanolol) y por la amlodipina pero no por la digoxina. Estos...


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Atenolol/therapeutic use , Cardiovascular Diseases , Digoxin/therapeutic use , Pain Measurement , Pindolol/therapeutic use , Propranolol/therapeutic use , Cardiovascular Agents/analysis , Bleaching Agents
3.
Rev. Fac. Med. (Caracas) ; 31(1): 45-51, jun. 2008. ilus, tab
Article in Spanish | LILACS | ID: lil-631539

ABSTRACT

La hipertensión arterial afecta aproximadamente 50 millones de individuos en Estados Unidos de América y un mil millones de individuos en el resto del mundo, afectando de un 15 por ciento a 30 por ciento de la población mundial, y es uno de los factores predictivos de enfermedad cardiovascular más importantes, por lo tanto su control es indispensable. Este estudio comparó la acción antihipertensiva de la combinación hidroclorotiazida/bisoprolol con la combinación enalapril/amlodipina en pacientes con diagnóstico de hipertensión arterial no controlada. Métodos: Se realizó un ensayo clínico controlado aleatorizado en pacientes hipertensos con edades comprendidas entre 30 y 65 años con diagnóstico de hipertensión arterial con o sin tratamiento. Fueron distribuidos en dos grupos de 10 pacientes; uno recibió tratamiento con hidroclorotiazida/bisoprolol y el otro con enalapril/amlodipina bajo un protocolo de ajuste de dosis según metas de PA para 4 semanas. Resultados: Ambas combinaciones redujeron significativamente los valores de presión arterial a las 4 semanas (P=< 0,0001). Sin embargo, el efecto antihipertensivo de la combinación hidroclorotiazida/Bisoprolol fue superior para la reducción de la presión diastólica (P= 0,025), y el alcance de la meta de 120/70 mmHg (90 por ciento vs. 50 por ciento). Conclusión: La utilización de la combinación hidroclorotiazida / bisoprolol tiene mayor número de beneficios que los observados con la combinación enalapril / amlodipina en el manejo de la hipertensión arterial no controlada


The High Blood Pressure affects around 50 millions people in the EE.UU of America and a thousand million people all around the world, affecting 15 percent to 30 percent of the world’s population, and is one of the most important predictive factors of cardiovascular disease; therefore its control is essential. This study compared the antihypertensive action of the combination Hydrochlorothiazide/Bisoprolol with the combination Enalapril/Amlodipine in patients with uncontrolled High Blood Pressure diagnosis. Methods: We performed a randomized, controlled, clinical essay, in patients with High Blood Pressure between 30 and 65 years old, with High Blood Pressure previous diagnosis under treatment or not. They were distributed into two groups of 10 patients each one; one group received Hydrochlorothiazide/Bisoprolol, and the other one, received Enalapril/Amlodipine under a standardized regimen of titration according to BP goals during 4 weeks. Results: Both combinations reduced significantly BP values at 4 weeks of treatment (P= <0.0001). However, the antihypertensive effect of the combination Hydrochlorothiazide/Bisoprolol was superior in the reduction of diastolic values of BP (P= 0,025), and the reach of the 120/70 mmHg goal (90 percent vs. 50 percent). Conclusions: the use of the combination Hydrochlorothiazide/Bisoprolol is related to a higher number of benefits than the use of the combination Enalapril/Amlodipine in the management of patients with uncontrolled High Blood Pressure diagnosis


Subject(s)
Humans , Bisoprolol/therapeutic use , Enalapril/therapeutic use , Hydrochlorothiazide/therapeutic use , Hypertension/drug therapy , Hypertension/therapy , Blood Pressure
4.
Arq. bras. cardiol ; 60(5): 361-367, maio 1993. tab
Article in Portuguese | LILACS | ID: lil-126198

ABSTRACT

Objetivo - Avaliar a eficácia anti-hipertensiva e tolerabilidade da amlopidina em dose única diária administrada nos períodos matutino e vespertino. Métodos - Foram avaliados 15 pacientes hipertensos através de estudo aberto, näo comparativo de 18 semanas de duraçäo. Todos os participantes foram submetidos a retirada de outras drogas anti-hipertensivas (wash-out) durante 2 semanas. Após este período, aqueles que apresentaram níveis pressóricos de acordo com os critérios de inclusäo, iniciaram o tratamento com amlopidina 5mg, titulada até um máximo de 10mg. Atingida a dose ideal, os pacientes permaneceram 8 semanas em fase de manutençäo, usando-se a amlopidina às 8h e às 20h. Resultados - A maioria dos pacientes (n=9;60//) necessitou apenas 5mg e os dados de 24h revelaram as seguintes médias de pressäo arterial sistólica (em mmHg): V2 (final do wash-out) = 149,3 ñ 4,8; V3 (dose matutina) = 150,4 ñ 3,8; V4 (dose noturna) = 134,1 ñ 2,9; V5 (final do estudo) = 129,5 ñ 6,1 (ANOVA: p = 0,000; teste de Bonferroni: p < 0,05; teste t de Student" p = 0,013, comparando V2 (final do Wash-out) com V4 (dose noturna e V5 (final do estudo). As médias de pressäo diastólica foram (em mmHg): V2 (final do wash-out) = 96 ñ 3,1; V3 (dose matutina) = 96,2 ñ 2,7; V4 (dose noturna) = 81,9 ñ 2,6; V5 (final do estudo) = 77,7 ñ 7,5 (ANOVA): p = 0,000; teste de Bonferroni: p = 0,05; teste t : p =0,05. Foram verificados os seguintes percentuais de leitura sistólicas acima dos valores normais (140 mmHg = 7 às 23h; 130 mmHg = das 0 às 7h) : V2 (final do wash-out) = 73,3// de dia e 71,1// à noite; V3 (dose matutina) = 76// de dia e 75,6// à noite; V4 (dose noturna = 29,3// de dia e 39,3// à noite; 20,9// de dia e 23// à noite. Considerando os limites de diastólica para o dia, 90 mmHg e para a noite, 80 mmHg, foram verificados os seguintes percentuais de leituras de pressäo superior aos limites de normalidade: V2 (final do wash-out) = 77,8// de dia e 91,8// à noite; V3 (dose matutina) = 80// de dia e 92,6// à noite; V4 (dose noturna) = 6,7 de dia e 15,6// à noite). Três pacientes tiveram reaçöes adversas que cederam espontaneamente e/ou näo implicaram em interrupçäo do estudo. Conclusäo - A amlopidina mostrou-se eficaz e bem tolerada e a maioria dos pacientes utilizou a dose de 5mg. Em nenhum caso a droga levou à taquicardia reflexa; em nenhum caso; mesmo reduzindo a pressäo arterial eficazmente nas 24h, manteve o ritmo circadiano inalterado. Sua tomada no início da noite produz maior queda de descenso noturno que quando tomada pela manhä, näo havendo diferenças quanto aos demais períodos


Purpose - To evaluate the anti hypertensive efficacy and tolerability of amlodipine given once daily either morning and evening doses. Methods - Fifty hipertensive patients were admitted into an open non camparative 18 weeks study. All patients were submitted to wash out period of 2 weeks. Afterwards, those with BP inclusion criteria started 5mg amlodipine, which was titrated until a maximum of 10mg Upon reaching the ideal dosage, patients were kept 8 weeis with drug given at 8:00 am and then 8:00 pm. Results - The majority of patients (60%) needed only 5mg and 24 hours data revealed the following mean systolic BP: V2 (fiinal of wash-out) = 149,3 ± 4,8; V3 (morning dose) = 150,4 ± 3,8; V4 (night dose) = 134,1 ± 2,9; V5 (final of the study) = 129,5 ± 6,1 (ANOVA p= 0,000; Bonferroni test: p< 0,05; test t of Student: p= 0,13, comparing V2 (final of wash-out) with V4 (night dose) and V5 (final of study). The mean diastolic BP wore V2 ~nal of wash-out) = 96 ± 3,2 (morning dose) = 96,2 ± 2,7; V4 (night dose) = 81,9 ± 2,6; V5 (final of the study) = 77,7 ± 7,5 (ANOVA: p= 0,000; Bonferroni test : p= <0,05; test t: p=0,05). The following systolic percentage over normal values were observed (140 mmHg from 7:00 am to 11:00 pm; 130 mmHg from midnight to 7:00 am): V2 (final of wash-out) = 73,3% during the day and 71,1% at night; V3 (morning dose) = 76% in the morning and 75,6% at night; V4 (night dose) = 29,3% during the day and 39,3% at night; 20,9% during the day and 23% at night. Considering the limits of diurnal diastolic BP 90 mmHg and nocturnal, 80 mmHg, the following percentage of readings over normal limits were observed: V2 (final of wash-out) = 77,8% during the day and 91,8% at night; V3 (morning dose) = 80% during the day and 92,6% at night; V4 (night dose) = 6,7% during the day and 15,6% at night. Three patients presented adverse events, which disappeared spontaneously and discontinuation of treatment was not necessary. Conclusion - Amlodipine was considered effective and well tolerated and the majority of patients needed only 5mg daily and no reflex tachicardia was observed. Amlodipine effectively reduced BP throughout 24h and the circadian rhythm kept unaltered and the evening administration led to a greater nocturnal fall than the morning administration. The remaining periods did not show differences


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Middle Aged , Circadian Rhythm , Amlodipine/therapeutic use , Hypertension/drug therapy , Arterial Pressure , Amlodipine/pharmacology , Ambulatory Care , Hypertension/physiopathology , Monitoring, Physiologic
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL