Donate Help Contact The AHA Sign In Home
American Heart Association
Circulation
Search: search_blue_button Advanced Search
Circulation. 1984;69:382-390

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Urquhart, J.
Right arrow Articles by Epstein, S. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Urquhart, J.
Right arrow Articles by Epstein, S. E.

Circulation, Vol 69, 382-390, Copyright © 1984 by American Heart Association


ARTICLES

Comparative effects of verapamil, diltiazem, and nifedipine on hemodynamics and left ventricular function during acute myocardial ischemia in dogs

J Urquhart, RE Patterson, SL Bacharach, MV Green, EH Speir, R Aamodt and SE Epstein

The calcium channel-blocking drugs verapamil, diltiazem, and nifedipine are being used with increasing frequency in patients with angina pectoris due to coronary artery disease. Although each of these agents possesses negative inotropic potential, their relative effects on myocardial function in relation to their vasodilator potencies are unknown. We understood to study this in 20 conscious dogs that had partial occlusions of their circumflex coronary arteries during therapy with placebo, verapamil, nifedipine, or diltiazem. Myocardial blood flow was measured by use of microspheres, and left ventricular function was measured by radionuclide angiography. Drug effects were compared at doses causing equal decreases in mean arterial pressure and coronary vascular resistance of nonischemic myocardium. Global ejection fraction and ejection fraction of the ischemic region were significantly decreased by verapamil (p less than .01) and increased by nifedipine (p less than .001); diltiazem caused no significant changes. Verapamil significantly increased peak diastolic filling rate (p less than .001); nifedipine also increased diastolic filling rate, but only at doses that markedly decreased mean arterial pressure and coronary vascular resistance. The effect of diltiazem on diastolic filling rate was not significantly different than placebo. For doses causing an equal decrease in mean arterial pressure, verapamil decreased heart rate (p less than .001), and diltiazem and nifedipine increased heart rate (p less than .001). We conclude that the relative potencies of these three calcium channel blocking agents on left ventricular systolic and diastolic function during myocardial ischemia are different when compared with their relative vasodilator potencies. These differences may have important clinical implications.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
JNMHome page
L. M. Riou, C. Ghezzi, G. Vanzetto, A. Broisat, J.-P. Mathieu, R. Bontron, R. Pasqualini, and D. Fagret
Verapamil Does Not Inhibit 99mTcN-NOET Uptake In Situ in Normal or Ischemic Canine Myocardium
J. Nucl. Med., June 1, 2003; 44(6): 981 - 987.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]