Long-term follow-up after early intervention with intravenous diltiazem or intravenous nitroglycerin for unstable angina pectoris.

AIMS: In a double-blind randomized trial in unstable angina it was shown that intravenous diltiazem reduced ischaemic events in the first 48 h after inclusion better than intravenous nitroglycerin. The present study was performed to establish the long-term prognosis of the randomized patients, with respect to their initial treatment assignment. METHODS AND RESULTS: One year follow-up data on ischaemic end-points and anti-ischaemic medication were recorded. Results were available for all of the 121 randomized patients. One hundred and sixty-seven primary endpoint events were recorded, of which 54 occurred in the first 48 h and 113 during the follow-up. Survival analysis showed that event-free survival was significantly better in the diltiazem group (45.0%) than in the nitroglycerin group (34.4%), P=0.04. The incidence rate after 48 h and one year for cardiac death are, respectively, 0% and 4.1%. The trend in anti-ischaemic medication was higher in the nitroglycerin group. For beta-blockers, this trend became significant after 12 months (P=0.03). CONCLUSION: These results show that the initial benefit obtained by early treatment with intravenous diltiazem was preserved during the first year after the initial hospitalization, and that, despite the high risk of cardiac events in our population, the overall mortality 12 months after inclusion was low.

Randomised, double-blind trial of intravenous diltiazem versus glyceryl trinitrate for unstable angina pectoris.

The effect of dihydropyridines in patients with unstable angina is discouraging. To find out the effect of the non-dihydropyridine-like calcium-channel blocker diltiazem, a randomised, double-blind trial was conducted comparing diltiazem with glyceryl trinitrate, both given intravenously, in 129 patients with unstable angina. The endpoints were refractory angina or myocardial infarction, individually and as a composite endpoint. Refractory angina alone or together with myocardial infarction occurred significantly less commonly in the diltiazem group. While patients were on the trial drugs the numbers with refractory angina were 6 (10%) in the diltiazem group versus 17 (28%) in the glyceryl trinitrate group (relative risk 0.36, p = 0.02), and the numbers with refractory angina and myocardial infarction were 9 (15%) versus 23 (38%) (relative risk 0.40, p = 0.007). Over 48 h the number were: refractory angina 8 (13%) versus 18 (30%), relative risk 0.45, p = 0.03, and refractory angina and myocardial infarction 12 (20.0%) versus 25 (41%), relative risk 0.49, p = 0.02. Patients in the diltiazem group had better (p < 0.05) event-free survival while taking the drugs. Heart-rate pressure product was reduced significantly only by diltiazem (p < 0.05). The incidence of bradyarrhythmias did not differ significantly. Atrioventricular conduction disturbances occurred in 5 (8%) patients in the diltiazem group but were not seen in the glyceryl trinitrate group (p = 0.03). These disturbances could be reversed by decreasing the dose of the drug or withdrawing it. No temporary pacemakers were required. Headache requiring an analgesic or dose adjustment occurred significantly less in the diltiazem group: 3 (5%) versus 15 (25%), relative risk 0.20 (p < 0.004). These results indicate that intravenous diltiazem, compared with intravenous glyceryl trinitrate, significantly reduces ischaemic events and can be used safely in patients with unstable angina.

Efficacy of metoprolol and diltiazem in treating silent myocardial ischemia.

Recent studies strongly support the prognostic importance of transient silent ischemia. Because patients with silent ischemia are at higher risk of a cardiac event, they are likely to benefit not only from control of symptoms, but also from treatment directed at prevention of ischemia. The efficacy of controlled-release metoprolol 200 mg once daily and diltiazem 60 mg 4 times daily was assessed in a randomized, double-blind, crossover study in 32 patients with proven coronary artery disease, predominantly asymptomatic myocardial ischemia, positive bicycle exercise test results, and > or = 5 minutes of asymptomatic ST-segment depression on a 24-hour screening ambulatory electrocardiogram (ECG). At the beginning and at the end of both 3-week treatment periods, an exercise test was performed and a 72-hour ambulatory ECG was recorded. Both active treatment periods were preceded by a 2-week placebo phase. Both treatments effectively reduced and postponed exercise-induced ST depression and reduced the total ischemic integral on the ambulatory ECG. Only metoprolol significantly reduced the mean number of ischemic episodes (54%, p = 0.0003, vs 31% for diltiazem, p = NS) and the mean duration of ischemia (51%, p = 0.012, vs 27% for diltiazem, p = NS) compared with baseline values. Metoprolol strongly blunted the morning and afternoon peak in the circadian distribution of ischemia, whereas diltiazem did not change the circadian distribution of ischemia at all.