1994PubMedRequires access

[Intravenous urapidil versus sublingual nifedipine in the treatment of hypertensive emergencies].

Michael M. Hirschl, D Seilder, Andrea Zeiner, A Wagner, G Heinz, Fritz Sterz, A.N. Laggner

Open publisher page 1 citations

Abstract

In a 6-month prospective study, the efficacy and safety of urapidil and nifedipine in an out-patient population with hypertensive urgencies (systolic blood pressure > 200 mmHg; diastolic blood pressure > 110 mmHg) was investigated. Response to treatment was defined as a stable reduction of systolic blood pressure below 180 mmHg and diastolic blood pressure below 100 mmHg 15 minutes after application of a single dose of either 25 mg urapidil intravenously (N = 26) or 10 mg nifedipine sublingually (N = 27). If the blood pressure was still elevated, a second dose of 10 mg nifedipine or 12.5 mg urapidil was given, and blood pressure response was evaluated 15 minutes after application of the second dose according to the aforementioned criterias. After the first application of nifedipine, 19 (70%) responders have been observed. Eight patients needed an additional 10 mg of nifedipine. In four of these patients, no reduction of blood pressure was observed after a second dose of nifedipine. In contrast, 24 (92%) patients responded well to the first application of 25 mg of urapidil. Two patients required a second dose of 12.5 mg of urapidil, but no nonresponder to urapidil was observed. No severe side-effects were noted in both groups. Intravenous urapidil is a highly effective drug in the treatment of hypertensive urgencies and is more effective than sublingual nifedipine, because the number of patients treated successfully was significantly higher.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

In a 6-month prospective study, the efficacy and safety of urapidil and nifedipine in an out-patient population with hypertensive urgencies (systolic blood pressure > 200 mmHg; diastolic blood pressure > 110 mmHg) was investigated. Response to treatment was defined as a stable reduction of systolic blood pressure below 180 mmHg and diastolic blood pressure below 100 mmHg 15 minutes after application of a single dose of either 25 mg urapidil intravenously (N = 26) or 10 mg nifedipine sublingually (N = 27). If the blood pressure was still elevated, a second dose of 10 mg nifedipine or 12.5 mg urapidil was given, and blood pressure response was evaluated 15 minutes after application of the second dose according to the aforementioned criterias. After the first application of nifedipine, 19 (70%) responders have been observed. Eight patients needed an additional 10 mg of nifedipine. In four of these patients, no reduction of blood pressure was observed after a second dose of nifedipine. In contrast, 24 (92%) patients responded well to the first application of 25 mg of urapidil. Two patients required a second dose of 12.5 mg of urapidil, but no nonresponder to urapidil was observed. No severe side-effects were noted in both groups. Intravenous urapidil is a highly effective drug in the treatment of hypertensive urgencies and is more effective than sublingual nifedipine, because the number of patients treated successfully was significantly higher.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

In a 6-month prospective study, the efficacy and safety of urapidil and nifedipine in an out-patient population with hypertensive urgencies (systolic blood pressure > 200 mmHg; diastolic blood pressure > 110 mmHg) was investigated. Response to treatment was defined as a stable reduction of systolic blood pressure below 180 mmHg and diastolic blood pressure below 100 mmHg 15 minutes after application of a single dose of either 25 mg urapidil intravenously (N = 26) or 10 mg nifedipine sublingually (N = 27). If the blood pressure was still elevated, a second dose of 10 mg nifedipine or 12.5 mg urapidil was given, and blood pressure response was evaluated 15 minutes after application of the second dose according to the aforementioned criterias. After the first application of nifedipine, 19 (70%) responders have been observed. Eight patients needed an additional 10 mg of nifedipine. In four of these patients, no reduction of blood pressure was observed after a second dose of nifedipine. In contrast, 24 (92%) patients responded well to the first application of 25 mg of urapidil. Two patients required a second dose of 12.5 mg of urapidil, but no nonresponder to urapidil was observed. No severe side-effects were noted in both groups. Intravenous urapidil is a highly effective drug in the treatment of hypertensive urgencies and is more effective than sublingual nifedipine, because the number of patients treated successfully was significantly higher.

Key concepts: Urapidil, Nifedipine, Medicine, Blood pressure, Anesthesia, Sublingual administration, Population, Diastole

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
[Intravenous urapidil versus sublingual nifedipine in the treatment of hypertensive emergencies]. — Research Paper | ScholarLens