Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Clin Pharm ; 8(10): 689-90, 1989 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-2805623
2.
Am Rev Respir Dis ; 138(6): 1532-4, 1988 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-3059899

ABSTRACT

Our study evaluated whether a dose-response relationship exists for theophylline and diaphragmatic contractility within the usual therapeutic range for theophylline. The study, involving 16 patients with mild to moderate chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, was done in a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, crossover fashion. We found no statistically significant effect of theophylline on diaphragmatic contractility at mean theophylline concentrations of 5.13, 12.07, and 18.6 micrograms/ml.


Subject(s)
Diaphragm/physiopathology , Lung Diseases, Obstructive/drug therapy , Muscle Contraction/drug effects , Theophylline/therapeutic use , Clinical Trials as Topic , Diaphragm/drug effects , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Double-Blind Method , Humans , Lung Diseases, Obstructive/blood , Lung Diseases, Obstructive/physiopathology , Placebos , Random Allocation , Theophylline/blood
3.
Drug Intell Clin Pharm ; 21(5): 427-31, 1987 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-3107960

ABSTRACT

The combination of heparin 5000 U and dihydroergotamine 0.5 mg (HDHE) was marketed in the U.S. in 1985 for prophylaxis of postoperative deep venous thrombosis (DVT). This article evaluates the efficacy, safety, and cost of HDHE for abdominal, pelvic, thoracic, and total hip surgical prophylaxis. Although several controlled trials comparing HDHE to minidose heparin (MDH) indicate superior efficacy of HDHE for nonorthopedic surgical procedures, others do not. Differences in study design and insufficient sample sizes may account for the dichotomy. In the U.S. Multicenter Trial, MDH was surprisingly ineffective for preventing radiofibrinogen uptake test-proven DVT. The apparent superiority of HDHE over MDH is therefore questionable. Ergot-related side effects have been minimized in all studies due to careful patient selection. In actual use, the potential for such side effects appears to be increased. Because twice-daily HDHE is no more effective, costs 4-11 times more, and may pose a greater risk than MDH, the authors do not recommend its use for general surgical prophylaxis. HDHE may prove to be useful in patients undergoing total hip replacement.


Subject(s)
Dihydroergotamine/administration & dosage , Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight , Heparin/administration & dosage , Postoperative Complications/prevention & control , Pulmonary Embolism/prevention & control , Thrombophlebitis/prevention & control , Adult , Clinical Trials as Topic , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Drug Combinations/administration & dosage , Hip Prosthesis , Humans , Middle Aged , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...