Uso de labetalol frente a nifedipino en la preeclampsia / Use of labetalol vs nifedipine in preeclampsia

Fundamento: La preeclampsia es un estado de vasoconstricción generalizado asociado a la disfunción del epitelio vascular en vez de vasodilatación propia del embarazo, caracterizada por la hipertensión proteinuria a partir de la semana 20, acompañada a veces de edemas; asimismo constituye un peligro de salud para la madre y el feto. El tratamiento clínico tradicional utiliza fármacos antihipertensivos por vía oral, entre los que se mencionan el labetalol y nifedipino de liberación prolongada. Objetivo: Analizar la efectividad del labetalol y del nifedipino como tratamiento antihipertensivo relacionado con preeclampsia. Metodología: Se recurrió a fuentes de consulta encontradas en Google Scholar, Science Direct, SciELO, Pubmed, Medes y Elsevier. De 211 fuentes se seleccionaron 31 de acuerdo con criterios de inclusión y exclusión. Conclusiones: Por consenso se ha determinado que en la mayor parte de fuentes de consulta el nifedipino por vía oral es más efectivo que el labetalol en el tratamiento de la preeclampsia.

Background: Pre-eclampsia is a generalized vasoconstriction state associated with vascular epithelial dysfunction rather than the vasodilation characteristic of pregnancy, characterized by proteinuric hypertension from the 20th week of pregnancy, sometimes associated with edema; it also causes health risks to the mother and fetus. Traditional clinical treatment uses oral antihypertensive drugs, among these labetalol and extended-release nifedipine are included. Objective: To analyze the efficacy of labetalol and nifedipine as an antihypertensive treatment in pre-eclampsia. Methodology: Reference sources found in Google Scholar, Science Direct, SciELO, Pubmed, Medes and Elsevier were used. Out of 211 sources, 31 were selected according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Conclusions: It has been determined by majority consensus that oral nifedipine is more effective than labetalol in pre-eclampsia treatment.

Parto Prematuro: Tratamiento con nifedipino versus atosiban. Revisión Bibliográfica Teórica / Preterm Labor: nifedipine vs atosiban treatment. Bilbiographic theoretical review

Introducción: La amenaza de parto pretérmino es un problema de salud pública mundial y nacional. La prematuridad viene acompañada de complicaciones como inmadurez pulmonar y lesiones del sistema nervioso central, que requieren de tratamiento oportuno.Objetivo: Establecer una comparación objetiva de los resultados del tratamiento de la ame-naza de parto prematuro, mediante el uso de Nifedipina o Atosiban, realizando una revisión teórica actualizada del tema, con el propósito de ofrecer a la comunidad científica, una he-rramienta de consulta, sobre un tema frecuente y de alto riesgo materno fetal.Materiales y Métodos: Se realizó una búsqueda bibliográfica en las bases de datos: Google Scholar, Pubmed, Wiley Online Library, Biomed, Scopus, Medes, Medline, Pro Quest, Gale, Scopus, y ScIELO, Se incluyeron artículos publicados en revistas indexadas de alto impacto, en los últimos 5 años. Se valoró la calidad de los artículos incluidos, utilizando la metodología de Sacket, y el riesgo de sesgo, según la metodología Cochrane. Resultados: Se observó un consenso entre los autores consultados en que no existen dife-rencias significativas en el efecto tocolítico de atosiban y nifedipino Conclusiones:La literatura académica parece coincidir en que la efectividad de atosiban y ni-fedipino como agentes tocolíticos es similar, con ambos medicamentos se consigue prolongar el embarazo con riesgo de parto pretérmino, que es el propósito fundamental de la tocolisis.

Background: The threat of preterm birth is a global and national public health problem. Prematurity is linked to complications such as pulmonary immaturity and central nervous system lesions, which require timely treatment. Objective: To perform an objective comparison of the results of the treatment of the threat of premature delivery, using nifedipine or atosiban, carrying out an updated theoretical review of the subject, to offer the scientific community a tool for research on a frequent subject of high maternal and fetal risk. Materials y Methods: There was a bibliographic search in specialized databases. Articles published in high impact indexed journals in the last 5 years were included. The quality of the articles included was assessed, using the Sacket methodology, and the risk of bias, accor-ding to the Cochrane methodology. Results: There was an agreement among the authors consulted there are no significant differences in the tocolytic effect of atosiban and nifedipine. Conclusions: The academic literature seems to agree that the effectiveness of atosiban and nifedipine as tocolytic agents is similar, with both drugs prolonging pregnancy with the risk of preterm delivery, which is the fundamental purpose of tocolysis.

During Pregnancy the Comparison of Hydralazine and Nifedipine for Severe Hypertension

Objective: The research paper aims at the comparison of Nifedipine and Hydralazine safety and efficacy in the hypertension management during pregnancy. Study Design: The in-hand research design is RCT (Randomized Control Trial). Place and Duration: The venue of the in-hand research paper was Mother and Child Health Unit-II which is located in Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences, Islamabad. The research commenced from 1st January, 2017 and concluded on 1st July, 2017. Methodology: The number of patients included in research paper was. These patients were diagnosed hypertension and their age was beyond twenty-eight weeks of gestation were enrolled as sample of the research paper after informed consent. Total number of patients was divided into two groups namely Nifedipine and Hydralazine groups. Patients were allocated groups randomly either Nifedipine or Hydralazine group. Before the start of treatment on the right side the blood pressure was checked in supine position, the same check was repeated at the interval of half hour continuously till two hours. Patients were also noticed for the presence of any side effect of the drugs. Results: Initial mean Blood Pressure reading was noted as 170/113 mmHg. One-hour time was effective for the control of systolic blood pressure of Nifedipine group; whereas, one and half hour was for the Hydralazine group. Both the groups were observed same time for the diastolic blood pressure that was one hour respectively for both the groups. Mean time of four and a half days was observed for the pregnancy prolongation in Nifedipine group; whereas, the same time for the Hydralazine group was two days. The p-value was significantly calculated as 0.02. Nifedipine group was treated with few doses of medication. Hydralazine group reflected association of palpitation, flushing, persistent Hypertension and tachycardia with the respective proportions of 56%, 56%, 16.7% and greater than 110 bpm (20%). No other significant difference was observed in the scaled variables of feto-maternal results with an exception of headache caused by Nifedipine in seventy-three percent of the cases after drug administration. Conclusion: In the scholastic research it is concluded that during pregnancy hypertension can best be controlled through Nifedipine in comparison with Hydralazine.

Mechanism of cornus officinalis polysaccharide on proliferation and apoptosis of gastric cancer cells / 中国药理学通报

Aim To investigate the effect of nifedipine on the formation of autophagosomes in hepatoma cell line Huh-7 and its mechanism.Methods Different concentrations of nifedipine were used to interfere with the proliferation of Huh-7 cells in vitro.The effect of nifedipine on the proliferation of Huh-7 cells was detected by cell proliferation experiment and colony formation experiment.The expressions of Beclin1 and LC3B-Ⅱ were detected by Western blot.The effect of nifedipine on the formation of autophagosomes in Huh-7 cells was observed by laser scanning confocal microscopy.Results Nifedipine significantly inhibited the proliferation of Huh-7 cells in a time-and concentration-dependent manner.The IC50 of nifedipine on day 2 was 22.7 mg·L-1.Nifedipine at the concentration of 25 mg·L-1 significantly reduced the colony formation rate of Huh-7 cells compared with the control group, and the inhibition rate of colony formation was(95.46±0.45)%.Western blot analysis showed that nifedipine significantly up-regulated the protein expression levels of Beclin1 and LC3B-Ⅱ.The amount of autophagosomes in nifedipine group cells were more than that of control group, which was observed by laser scanning confocal microscopy.Conclusions Nifedipine significantly inhibits the proliferation of Huh-7 cells and promotes the formation of autophagosomes, which may be related to the up-regulation of Beclin1 protein expression by nifedipine.

Nifedipine promotes formation of autophagosomes and enhances expression of Beclinl in hepatoma cell line Huh-7 / 中国药理学通报

Aim To investigate the effect of nifedipine on the formation of autophagosomes in hepatoma cell line Huh-7 and its mechanism.Methods Different concentrations of nifedipine were used to interfere with the proliferation of Huh-7 cells in vitro.The effect of nifedipine on the proliferation of Huh-7 cells was detected by cell proliferation experiment and colony formation experiment.The expressions of Beclin1 and LC3B-Ⅱ were detected by Western blot.The effect of nifedipine on the formation of autophagosomes in Huh-7 cells was observed by laser scanning confocal microscopy.Results Nifedipine significantly inhibited the proliferation of Huh-7 cells in a time-and concentration-dependent manner.The IC50 of nifedipine on day 2 was 22.7 mg·L-1.Nifedipine at the concentration of 25 mg·L-1 significantly reduced the colony formation rate of Huh-7 cells compared with the control group, and the inhibition rate of colony formation was(95.46±0.45)%.Western blot analysis showed that nifedipine significantly up-regulated the protein expression levels of Beclin1 and LC3B-Ⅱ.The amount of autophagosomes in nifedipine group cells were more than that of control group, which was observed by laser scanning confocal microscopy.Conclusions Nifedipine significantly inhibits the proliferation of Huh-7 cells and promotes the formation of autophagosomes, which may be related to the up-regulation of Beclin1 protein expression by nifedipine.

Subcutaneous terbutaline and oral nifedipine for intrapartum fetal resuscitation: a prospective randomized controlled study / 中华围产医学杂志

Objective:To compare the safety and efficacy of terbutaline and nifedipine for acute intrapartum fetal resuscitation (IUFR).Methods:This was a prospective randomized controlled study involving 110 pregnant women with non-reassuring fetal heart rate tracings (NRFHT) during delivery at Guangzhou Women and Children's Medical Center between January and April 2021. These women were randomly allocated to receive subcutaneous terbutaline sulphate (0.25 mg, terbutaline group) or oral nifedipine (10 mg, nifedipine group), with 55 subjects in each group. Hemodynamic parameters including blood pressure, heart rate, and oxygen saturation before and 5, 15 and 30 min after treatment as well as the success rate of intrapartum resuscitation, the onset time of medication, and the incidence of postpartum hemorrhage were analyzed using t test, Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test. Results:Two groups both showed no significant difference in the mean arterial pressure or oxygen saturation before or after treatment (all P>0.05). The heart rate was not affected in nifedipine group at any time points ( P>0.05). While the patients treated with terbutaline showed accelerated maternal heart rate 5, 15 and 30 min after administration as compared with the baseline[(97.0±20.2), (99.2±13.8), (91.8±12.6) vs (81.7±11.3) bpm, all P<0.001], but it began to decrease at 30 min, with a drop of 6.4 bpm compared with that at 15 min (95% CI: 1.5-11.2, P<0.05). None of the pregnant women had adverse reactions requiring medical intervention. The rates of successful acute resuscitation were similar in the two groups [terbutaline: 78.2% (43/55) vs nifedipine: 70.9% (39/55), χ 2= 0.77, P=0.381]. Terbutaline had a shorter onset time than nifedipine in slowing the frequency of contractions and returning fetal heart rate to class Ⅰ category [2(1-6) vs 6(1-10) min, U=2 348.50, P<0.001]. No significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of NRFHT-indicated cesarean section, assisted vaginal delivery, or second dose of tocolysis within 1 h (all P>0.05) nor in blood loss volume, postpartum hemorrhage rate, low Apgar score, low umbilical artery pH value (pH<7.2), neonatal asphyxia rate, or neonatal intensive care admission rate (all P>0.05). Conclusion:Terbutaline spends less time than nifedipine to take effect and may be an alternative for acute IUFR without significant adverse outcomes.

Comparative analysis of high dose methyldopa and low dose methyldopa with nifedipine in terms of blood pressure in cases of pregnancy induced hypertension

Objective: Comparison between Methyldopa and combination of Methyldopa and Nifedipine in terms of mean change in blood pressure in pregnancy induced hypertension. Material and methods: This randomized controlled was conducted at Depart Obstetrics and Gynecology DHQ Okara. Total 80 women with pregnancy induced hypertension having age range from 20-40 years and with gestational age 20-40 weeks were selected. Results: Mean age of the patients was 30.81 ± 5.670 years, mean age of patients of group A was 31.50 ± 5.809 years and mean age of group B was 30.13 ± 5.515 years. Mean gestational age was 30.17 ± 5.981 weeks, mean gestational age of patients of group A was 29.70 ± 6.329 weeks and mean gestational age of patients of group B was 6.329 ± 5.650 weeks. In group A, mean diastolic blood pressure was decrease from 101.2250 ± 4.97938 to 84.5000 ± 3.26599 and in group B from 107.7750 ± 7.18434 to 82.5000 ± 2.25320. Comparison of mean decrease in diastolic blood pressure between group A (High dose Methyldopa) and group B (Low dose Low dose Methyldopa with Nifedipine) was done. Mean decrease in diastolic blood pressure in group A was 16.72 ± 3.935 and in group B was 25.28 ± 6.876. Statistically significant difference of mean decrease in diastolic blood pressure between the both groups was noted with p value 0.000. Conclusion: Results of this study showed that Low dose Methyldopa with Nifedipine combination is more effective as compared to High dose Methyldopa to reduce diastolic blood pressure in pregnant women suffering from pregnancy induced hypertension.

A comparative study between nifedipine and isoxsuprine in the suppression of preterm labor pain

Background: A prospective study was conducted to compare the effectiveness of Nifedipine and Isoxsuprine in suppression of preterm labour pain as tocolytics drug. As preterm labour pain is major contributor for perinatal morbidity and mortality. The aims of this study were to assess the effect of nifedipine and isoxsuprine in threatened preterm labour with the aim of preventing preterm birth and its sequelae.Methods: This study was conducted on 100 patients coming to Pannadhay Rajkiya Mahila Chikitsalaya, RNT Medical College, Udaipur and attending OPD and IPD with complain of uterine contractions between 28-36 weeks of gestation.Results: Nifedipine was more effective than isoxsuprine hydrochloride as tocolytic agent.Conclusions: There is high incidence of preterm labour in India which leads to neonatal morbidity and mortality. Nifedipine is a better tocolytic drug compared to isoxsuprine hydrochloride.

Comparative maternal outcomes of oral nifedipine and intravenous labetalol for severe hypertension during pregnancy: an open label randomized controlled trial

Background: Hypertensive diseases are commonly seen during pregnancy and remain one of the leading causes of maternal morbidity and mortality. Mostly commonly preferred drugs by health care providers for treatment of severe hypertension during pregnancy are labetalol and hydralazine. However, they require proper storage, intravenous access, and adequately trained staff for usage. Oral nifedipine in contrast is easier to use and widely available.  Objective of this study was to report the efficacy and safety of oral nifedipine as compared to intravenous labetalol for treatment of severe hypertension during pregnancy.Methods: It was an open label randomized controlled trial in which 100 women with severe hypertension during pregnancy were enrolled. They were randomized to receive either incremental doses of intravenous labetalol every 20 minutes (total 300 mg) or 10 mg oral nifedipine every 20 minutes (up to 50 mg) to lower the blood pressure to safer levels.Results: Women receiving oral nifedipine took significantly less time to achieve target blood pressure [(37.6±23.3) minutes (SD) as compared to those receiving intravenous labetalol (52.0 minutes±27.95 (SD)]. Women receiving nifedipine for treatment also required significantly lesser doses to control the blood pressure [mean dose 1.8±1.1 (SD) versus 2.6±1.2 (SD) p=0.006]. There were two failures in labetalol group and one failure in nifedipine group. No serious adverse events were reported in either group.Conclusions: Oral nifedipine is equally efficacious to I.V. labetalol for treatment of severe hypertension during pregnancy and is easier to use in low resource settings.

Maternal and fetal parameters in pregnant woman undergoing tocolysis with nifedipine / Parâmetros maternos e fetais em gestante submetida a tocólise com nifedipina

Abstract Objectives: to evaluate the effects of nifedipine with tocolysis under maternal and fetal parameters. Methods: a cohort study with 40 pregnant women admitted at a high-risk pregnancy ward to inhibit premature labor between September/2010 to May/2012. Nifedipine was used as a 20mg sublingual attack dose and maintained 20mg every six and eight hours orally. The variables of the analysis were fetal heart rate (FHR), maternal heart rate (MHR), systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and amniotic fluid index (AFI). All the variables were evaluated prior to administrating nifedipine and approximately after 6 hours and every 24 hours, until hospital discharge. Results: there were no modification of the FHR (p=0.48) and the SBP (p=0.29). The MHR increased after 24 hours, but with no statistical difference (p=0.08), returning to similar levels as at admission within 48 hours. The DBP decreased at 6 (p=0.04) to 72 hours, being stable afterwards. The AFI decreased significantly at 24, 48 and 72 hours. Conclusions: the use of high doses of nifedipine with tocolysis causes a decrease of the maternal's diastolic blood pressure and consequently decreases the amniotic fluid index, but probably without any clinical repercussions.

Resumo Objetivos: avaliar os efeitos da nifedipina utilizada na tocólise sobre os parâmetros maternos e fetais. Métodos: estudo de coorte incluindo 40 gestantes admitidas na enfermaria de alto risco para inibição do trabalho de parto prematuro entre setembro/2010 a maio/2012. Utilizou-se a nifedipina sublingual na dose de ataque de 20mg e uma manutenção de 20mg por via oral a cada seis e oito horas. As variáveis avaliadas foram os batimentos cardio-fetais (BCF), frequência cardíaca materna (FCM), pressão arterial sistólica (PAS) e diastólica (PAD) e índice de líquido amniótico (ILA). Todas as variáveis foram avaliadas antes da administração da nifedipina e aproximadamente após 6h e cada 24h até alta hospitalar. Resultados: não houve modificação dos BCF (p=0,48) e da PAS (p=0,29). A FCM aumentou após 24h, mas sem significância estatística (p=0,08) retornando a níveis similares ao da admissão com 48h. A PAD diminuiua partir de 6h (p = 0,04)até 72h, mantendo-se constante. O ILA diminuiu significativamente em 24h, 48h e 72h. Conclusão: a utilização de altas doses de nifedipina para tocóliseocasio na diminuição dos níveis pressóricos diastólicos maternos e consequentemente diminuição do ILA, mas provavelmente sem repercussões clínicas.

Comparison of Efficacy of Oral and Intravenous Anti-Hypertensive Drugs in Eclampsia- A Randomized Trial.

Eclampsia increases the risk for both mother and foetus. The treatment aims to quickly bring about smooth reduction in blood pressure to levels that are safe for both, but avoiding any sudden drops, that may in themselves cause dizziness or foetal distress. Hence, this study was conducted to compare the efficacy of anti-hypertensive drugs in eclampsia.METHODS80 eclampsia patients were randomized into two groups: one received oral nifedipine and other intra-venous labetalol. Nifedipine group orally received 10 mg initially with repeated doses of 20 mg every 20 minutes up to maximum of 5 doses or until the therapeutic goal was reached. The other group received intravenous labetalol 20 mg initially followed by escalating doses of 40, 80, 80, and then 80 mg every 20 minutes until therapeutic goal was achieved or for a maximum of 5 doses. Once the therapeutic goal was reached, blood pressure was measured every 20 minutes till delivery.RESULTSMean time required to reach therapeutic blood pressure goal in nifedipine, and labetalol group was 45 ± 22.98 and 59.5 ± 25.41 minutes respectively. Total dose requirement was 1.65 ± 0.57 and 2.17 ± 0.74 mg respectively. The differences between two groups were significant. There was difference in urine output between the two groups as well. In the initial two hours, there was increased urine output in nifedipine group though it was statistically not significant. After two hours till 48 hours, this increased urine output in the nifedipine group was significant (p value 0.001).CONCLUSIONSnifedipine achieved the therapeutic blood pressure goal more rapidly than labetalol.

Comparison of oral nifedipine and oral labetalol as a single drug therapy for control of blood pressure in preeclampsia

Background: Worldwide hypertension during pregnancy is a common cause of maternal and fetal morbidity and mortality. Effective control of blood pressure is one of the important steps in management of preeclampsia. Few drugs like nifedipine, labetalol, methyldopa, and hydralazine have acceptable high safety profile during pregnancy.Methods: In this study 120 antenatal women with non-severe preeclampsia were compared by giving either nifedipine or labetalol as a single drug therapy for control of blood pressure. Various parameters like control of blood pressure, side effects of drugs, gestational age at the time of delivery, mode of delivery, any complication and perinatal outcome were assessed.Results: In this study authors found that in both group, adequate control of blood pressure was achieved. This study shows slightly higher rate of pre term delivery and LSCS with labetalol and minimal side effects with nifedipine but difference in each group is insignificant.Conclusions: Labetalol and nifedipine both the drugs are equally effective in reducing blood pressure and any of it can safely be used as a first choice of drug for management of hypertension in preeclampsia and it can be decided as per clinician’s experience and familiarity with drug.

Prospective observational study to evaluate the efficacy of labetalol versus nifedipine in the management of preeclampsia

Background: Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy are the common medical disorders in pregnancy. It has effects both on expectant mother and fetus. Pre-eclampsia is a pregnancy specific multisystem disorder of unknown etiology, and accounts for 12-18% of maternal mortality. There is general consensus that maternal risk is decreased by antihypertensive treatment that lowers very high blood pressure. Objective of this study was to study the efficacy of oral labetalol versus oral Nifedipine in the management of preeclampsia in the antepartum and intrapartum period.Methods: The present study was conducted in a tertiary care centre, Chennai from October 2013 to September 2014. It was a prospective observational study done in antenatal ward and labor ward. All antenatal women diagnosed to have pre-eclampsia, irrespective of gestation are included in this study.Results: Age distribution of PIH patients and the maximum number of patients were 20-25 years of age. maximum patients of severe preeclampsia were primigravida. Both systolic and diastolic BP in the two groups (oral labetalol and oral Nifedipine groups) were not statistically significant as the p value is >0.005.Conclusions: From this study, authors found that both oral labetalol and oral nifedipine are effective and well tolerated when used for rapid control of blood pressure in severe hypertension of pregnancy.

Impact of topical nifedipine on wound healing in animal model (pig) / Impacto da nifedipina tópica na cicatrização de feridas em modelo animal (porco)

Abstract Background The human skin is an extremely sophisticated and evolved organ that covers the whole body. External agents or the patient's own diseases can cause skin injuries that can challenge healthcare professionals and impose high social, economic and emotional costs. Objectives To evaluate the impact of topical nifedipine on skin wound healing, specifically on polymorphonuclear cells, vascular proliferation, and collagen. Methods We used three pigs, and created eight injuries in the dorsal region of each animal. We applied 1%, 10%, and 20% concentration nifedipine creams to four of the wounds in animals 1, 2, and 3 respectively and treated the other twelve wounds with saline solution 0.9% only. We analyzed the presence of polymorphonuclear cells, vascular proliferation, and collagen at six different times (days 1, 3, 7, 14, 21, and 28). Results The evaluation of polymorphonuclear levels showed mild cell activity at all times in the control group, while in the nifedipine groups, marked levels were more frequent at all times during the experiment. There was a 4.84-fold increase in the chance of marked vascular proliferation (p = 0.019) and, at the same time, a decrease in collagen formation (OR 0.02 / p = 0.005) in animal 3. Conclusions Topical NFD may have an impact on skin wound healing mechanisms. Our study showed that polymorphonuclear cells and vascular proliferation increased. We also demonstrated that collagen formation decreased. Therefore, topical NFD may have a positive impact on skin wound healing. Additional studies are needed to confirm our results.

Resumo Contexto A pele humana é um órgão extremamente sofisticado e evoluído que cobre todo o corpo. As lesões cutâneas podem ser causadas por agentes externos ou pelas próprias doenças do paciente, e podem representar um desafio para os profissionais de saúde com altos custos sociais, econômicos e emocionais. Objetivos Avaliar o impacto da nifedipina tópica na cicatrização de feridas cutâneas, especialmente em relação a polimorfonucleares, proliferação vascular e colágeno. Métodos Utilizamos três porcos e realizamos oito ferimentos na região dorsal de cada animal. Aplicamos as concentrações de nifedipina creme a 1%, 10% e 20% para os animais 1, 2 e 3, respectivamente, sendo que, em quatro ferimentos, aplicamos o creme e, nos outros quatro ferimentos, apenas soro fisiológico a 0,9%. Analisamos a presença de polimorfonucleares, proliferação vascular e colágeno em seis momentos diferentes (dias 1, 3, 7, 14, 21 e 28). Resultados A avaliação dos níveis polimorfonucleares mostrou atividade celular discreta em todos os momentos no grupo controle, enquanto nos grupos nifedipina, os níveis marcados foram mais frequentes em todos os momentos do experimento. Houve aumento de 4,84 vezes na chance de uma produção marcada (p = 0,019) da proliferação vascular e, ao mesmo tempo, diminuição da formação do colágeno (odds ratio, OR 0,02; p = 0,005) no animal 3. Conclusões A nifedipina tópica pode ter impacto no mecanismo de cicatrização cutânea. Nosso estudo mostrou que há aumento dos polimorfonucleares e da proliferação vascular. Além disso, há diminuição da formação do colágeno. Assim, a nifedipina tópica pode ter impacto positivo na cicatrização das feridas cutâneas. Estudos adicionais são necessários para confirmar nossos resultados.

A comparative study of efficacy and safety of tamsulosin with nifedipine versus tamsulosin alone as medical expulsive therapy for lower ureteric stones

Background: Lower ureteric stones (LUS) comprises of 70% of ureteric stones. Spontaneous passage depends on stone size and location in ureter. Impacted calculi initiate smooth muscles contractions causing ureteric spasms. ?-1 blockers like tamsulosin and calcium channel blocker like nifedipine relaxes ureteric smooth muscle, facilitating spontaneous expulsion. Pain and discomfort associated with urolithiasis, hospitalization and surgical cost can be minimized by medical expulsive therapy. Many studies had compared efficacy of tamsulosin with nifedipine, only few have explored the combination. This study compared efficacy of nifedipine and tamsulosin versus tamsulosin alone.Methods: 64 patients with LUS (5-10 mm) were assigned into 2 groups. Group 1 received tamsulosin and nifedipine and group 2 only tamsulosin. Rate of expulsion, time to expulsion, analgesic frequency and pain VAS score were analyzed. Chi-square or Fisher’s exact test to analyze categorical data, Mann Whitney U test or unpaired t test for differences between groups and Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test for within group. A p<0.05 was statistically significant.Results: Rate of expulsion was 87.5% in group 1 and 65.6% in group 2 (p<0.05). Mean expulsion time was 6.68±1.89 days for group 1 and 8.52±2.62 in group 2 (p<0.05). Analgesic requirement was similar. Adverse effects were headache, dizziness and postural hypotension.Conclusions: Combination therapy yielded better rate of expulsion and reduction in stone expulsion time than tamsulosin alone. Thus, combination therapy can be considered for effective treatment outcomes.

Combined anticonvulsant effect of nifedipine and pentazocine in experimentally induced seizures in rats

Background: Epilepsy is one of the common disorders of human with a prevalence of approximately 1% of the total population. Majority of seizures can be controlled with available antiepileptic drugs, about 20% of them still remain resistant to treatment. Recognizing this, there is a need to develop newer antiepileptic drugs with therapeutic potential. Present work is based upon the production of convulsions by maximal electroshock in rats. Evaluation of combined anticonvulsant effect of nifedipine and pentazocine on the duration of convulsion and duration of tonic hind limb extension and recovery in rats.Methods: The study was commenced after obtaining approval from IAEC, Department of Pharmacology, Osmania Medical College, Koti, Hyderabad. All the wistar rats were induced convulsions by Maximal Electro-Shock (MES) method and rats showing tonic hind limb extension response were randomised into four groups (six animals in each group). Group 1 received distilled water, group 2 treated with nifedipine 10mg/kg BW, group 3 treated with pentazocine 30mg/kg BW and group 4 treated with both nifedipine 10mg/kg BW and pentazocine 30mg/kg BW. Drug administered by intraperitoneal route. The data analysed using ANOVA and group means with LSD Post Hoc Test. p?values <0.05 were considered as significant.Results: When nifedipine and pentazocine were combined, the mean duration of convulsions, tonic hind limb extension and recovery were significantly decreased compared to control, nifedipine and pentazocine.Conclusions: The results obtained in this study provide supporting pharmacological evidence of efficacy, possible potential benefit of combining nifedipine with pentazocine in epilepsy.

Comparative study of labetalol and nifedipine in management of non- severe preeclampsia and its fetomaternal outcome

Background: In developed countries, 16 percent of maternal deaths were attributed to hypertensive disorders. Of hypertensive disorders, the preeclampsia syndrome, either alone or superimposed on chronic hypertension, is the most dangerous. The incidence of preeclampsia in nulliparous populations ranged from 3 to 10 percent.Methods: The present study was conducted at Government Raja Mirasudhar Hospital, Thanjavur Medical College, Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu, India from October 2017 to October 2018. The study consisted of 100 antenatal women with non-severe preeclampsia. The efficacy of labetalol verses nifedipine in its management was studied along with the fetomaternal outcome.Results: In this study, in the labetalol and in the nifedipine groups adequate control of blood pressure was achieved. However, labetalol was well tolerated by our women without much side effects.Conclusions: The present study indicates both labetalol and nifedipine are equally efficacious in the control of hypertension in non-severe preeclampsia. Pathology of the disease was not altered significantly in both the groups. There was no significant difference in the neonatal outcome between the two groups.

Oral nifedipine versus intravenous labetalol for acute blood pressure control in hypertensive emergencies of pregnancy: a randomized controlled trial

Background: To compare intravenous labetalol with oral nifedipine in terms of rapidity at which they control blood pressure in acute hypertensive emergencies of pregnancy.Methods: A randomized controlled study. Pregnant women with severe gestational hypertension with BP ≥160/110 mmHg after ≥20 weeks of gestation were randomized with computer generated numbers, either to receive IV labetalol with an escalating dose of 20, 40, 80, 80 and 80 mg or nifedipine capsule orally in a dose of 10 mg every 15 minutes (upto 5 doses) until a BP of ≤150/100 mmHg is achieved. Crossover treatment was to be effected if initial treatment regimen was unsuccessful. Primary outcome was time taken and number of doses required to achieve the target BP of ≤150/100 mmHg. Secondary outcomes were volume of urine output, maternal heart rate changes, fetal heart rate abnormality, perinatal and maternal outcome and side effects.Results: Oral nifedipine achieved the target BP (≤150/100 mmHg) more rapidly in (26.25±12.60) minutes in comparison to (32.62±12.19) minutes with IV labetalol (p= 0.024). Nifedipine group also took less number of doses to achieve the target BP of (≤150/100 mmHg) mmHg than IV labetalol (1.75±0.840 vs. 2.18±0.83), p= 0.024. Volume of urine output was also significantly more in nifedipine group (94.90±1.84 ml) at 1 hour and thereafter till 24 hour of treatment in comparison to IV labetalol (41.28±2.14 ml), p= 0.000. Side effects are few and not serious. No patient required crossover treatment.Conclusions: Both the drugs are equally effective in controlling acute hypertensive emergencies of pregnancy, however oral nifedipine is more rapid in controlling severe hypertension and also it is associated with significantly increased urine output.

A randomized cross over trial of oral nifedipine and intravenous labetalol in pregnant women with severe pre-eclampsia and eclampsia

Background: The aim of treatment of severe pre-eclampsia and eclampsia is to quickly bring about a smooth reduction in blood pressure to levels that are safe for both mother and baby but avoiding any sudden drops. There are not many studies comparing nifedipine and labetalol for this purpose. Authors conducted this study with the aim of comparing their efficacy in reducing maternal blood pressure.Methods: It was a cross over trial with 30 patients in each group conducted at a tertiary care hospital. 60 pregnant women were randomized to receive nifedipine (20mg loading dose followed by 10 mg tablet, orally, up to maximum of five doses) or  intravenous labetalol  (in an escalating dose regimen of 20, 40, 80, 80 and 80 mg)  every 20 minutes until the target blood pressure of 150/100 mmHg was achieved. Crossover treatment was affected if the initial treatment regimen was unsuccessful after 20 min of the last dose of the drug in the respective groups.Results: The mean time to achieve the target blood pressure was 32.0 ±18.64 minutes (mean ± SD) in nifedipine group as compared with 37.04 ± 16.36 minutes in those receiving labetalol (P = .002). In the nifedipine group 63.3% required only one dose compared to 36.6% in the labetalol group.  Only two women in the nifedipine group required maximum number of doses that is five doses. Cross over treatment was required by 10% of patients in the labetalol group and none in the nifedipine group.Conclusions: This study shows that oral nifedipine is more effective than intravenous labetalol in rapid control of hypertension in severe pre-eclampsia and eclampsia.

Oral nifedipine versus nitroglycerine patch for tocolysis in preterm labour

Background: Preterm delivery is a major cause of neonatal mortality and morbidity. Various modalities have been used to prediction of patient at risk of preterm labor. But due to multi-factorial etiology these predictors are not always useful. Tocolysis has a major role in arresting preterm labor. The purpose of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of oral nifedipine with transdermal nitroglycerine in the inhibition of preterm labour.Methods: This single blinded randomized control trial was conducted in the labour room of department of Obstetrics and Gynecology from January 2011 to June 2012. One hundred women with singleton pregnancy between 28 weeks to 34 weeks preterm labour and no contraindication for tocolysis were enrolled in the study. After taking the informed consent subjects were randomized into two groups. Randomization was done by random number table. Fifty-one subjects in nifedipine group received oral nifedipine (Tab Depin 10mg). Forty-nine subjects receiving transdermal nitroglycerine patch (Nitroderm Patch 10) were included in NTG group. The variables analysed were delay in delivery for 48 hours, 7 days or more than 7 days, period of gestation at delivery and side effect profile of drugs.Results: The percentage of women delivering after 48hours of administration of nifedipine group (52.9%) and nitroglycerine group (53.1%). Failure of tocolysis, defined as delivery within 48 hours, with nitroglycerine group (32.7 %) was comparable to nifedipine (33.3 %). Headache was significantly higher in nitroglycerine group as compared to nifedipine group (p≤0.001). Maternal tachycardia was more common in nifedipine group compared to NTG group (p=0.001).Conclusions: Oral nifedipine and transdermal nitroglycerine have similar efficacy as tocolytic agent in patients with preterm labour.