查詢結果分析
相關文獻
- 從ABCD及FACET臨床試驗談鈣離子阻斷劑在糖尿病病人的使用
- 鈣離子阻斷劑會增加心血管疾病之罹病率嗎?
- Comparison of Antihypertensive Effects of Nicardipine with Nitroglycerin for Perioperative Hypertension
- 鈣離子阻斷劑與高血壓治療
- RevMan統合分析Nifedipine與Amlodipine
- 鈣離子阻斷劑用於治療高血壓的選擇
- 慢性腎疾患者高血壓病例之用藥討論
- AROTINOLOL治療原發性高血壓的臨床研究
- 運動對高血壓的影響
- Unexpected Pheochromocytoma--A Case Report of Anesthesia in a Uremic Patient
頁籤選單縮合
| 題 名 | RevMan統合分析Nifedipine與Amlodipine=Comparison of Nifedipine with Amlodipine(EBM)--A Meta-Analysis |
|---|---|
| 作 者 | 張益通; 蔡崇弘; | 書刊名 | 藥學雜誌 |
| 卷 期 | 30:4=121 2014.12[民103.12] |
| 頁 次 | 頁31-38 |
| 分類號 | 415.382、415.382 |
| 關鍵詞 | 高血壓; 鈣離子阻斷劑; Dihydropyridine; Amlodipine; Nifedipine; Calcium channel blocks; |
| 語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
| 中文摘要 | 根據國內藥品使用量統計,降血壓藥用量統計最高。由於高血壓是引起中風和冠 狀動脈心臟病的重要原因,必須長期控制,因此在高齡化社會降血壓藥的使用量相 對地就非常大!而鈣離子阻斷劑 Norvasc 連續幾年高居榜首,另一藥物 Adalat 使用量 僅次之。Adalat 劑型設計上為外表使用科技薄膜,利用雷射孔持續釋放出有效成分, 達到長效緩釋穩定控制血壓的功能,藥動學上應比 Norvasc 較佳,但實際處方數量反 而是 Norvasc 比較多。因此希望藉由實證來確定其藥效差異,提供臨床指引。文獻蒐 尋方法是利用線上醫學資料庫 OVID Medline、PubMed 等蒐尋,經過文獻的評讀,加 以篩選適當之文獻資料,再以統合分析軟體分析結果。最後總共納入11個隨機對照試 驗,運用統合分析軟體 RevMan 來分析。結果顯示藥品在下降收縮壓及舒張壓由森林 圖比較,最終結果跨越無效中線,表示藥品對於血壓的下降率差異不大,兩種鈣離子 阻斷劑對於高血壓患者收縮壓或舒張壓的下降皆是有效且效果相似的,結論對於臨床 上用藥建議是有所幫助的,效果比較相同之下,用藥上就可考量其它方面,例如劑型 使用上或患者耐受性等,讓我們選擇對患者最佳的醫療照護。 |
| 英文摘要 | According to statistics, the blood pressure lowering drugs is the best selling drug in Taiwan. Hypertension is the important cause of stroke and coronary heart disease, Norvasc topped the list for several years, another calcium channel blocker - adalat OROS was the next best. Dosage form design technology for the adalat film, using laser hole to sustained release of active ingredients and achieve long-term controlling blood pressure-stable. Pharmacokinetics should be better than Norvasc, but the actual prescribing is reverse. Literature search for evidence-based medicine approach to online databases of OVID Medline, PubMed and through the literature appraisal to filter appropriate documentation, then meta-analysis software to analyze the results. Finally we included 11 randomized controlled clinical trials into our study, compared the anti-hypertensive effect between amlodipine and nifedipine, and use the meta-analysis software “RevMan software” to get the survey results. Regarding to lowering the systolic and diastolic blood pressure, the forest plot across the broken center line revealed that lowering the systolic blood pressure had no significant difference between amlodipine and nifedipine. We could find that the decline in systolic or diastolic blood pressure between amlodipine and nifedipine had similar antihypertensive effect. It is helpful for clinical prescription proposal. Based on the similar antihypertensive effect, we should consider other factors like dosage form and patient's tolerance. It can be applied to clinical decision-making to choose a optimal calcium channel blocker. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。