1991Journal of Cardiovascular PharmacologyRequires access

Long-Term Efficacy of Diltiazem Controlled Release Versus Metoprolol in Patients with Stable Angina Pectoris

H.W. Vliegen, Ernst E. van der Wall, Menco G. Niemeyer, N. J. Holwerda, Peter J. L. M. Bernink, Peter De Weerd, A. H. Bosma, L. R. van der Wieken, A. J. M. Timmermans, G. P. Molhoek, Paul Mulder

Open publisher page 7 citations

Abstract

In a randomized, double-blind, multicenter study, the efficacy of diltiazem controlled-release (CR) 120 mg b.i.d. was compared with metoprolol 100 mg b.i.d. in 56 patients with stable exertional angina pectoris. Fifty-one patients (28 receiving diltiazem CR, 23 receiving metoprolol), completed a follow-up period of 8 weeks. Thirty-nine patients (20 receiving diltiazem CR, 19 receiving metoprolol), completed a follow-up period of 32 weeks. Maximal exercise testing was performed at baseline and after 8, 20, and 32 weeks of treatment. Most exercise parameters were not significantly different between the patients on diltiazem CR and those on metoprolol. However, exercise duration was longer and maximal work load was higher in patients on diltiazem CR than in patients on metoprolol, and significant differences were observed at 20 weeks of treatment (p = 0.006 and p = 0.008, respectively). At all times during treatment, heart rate at maximal exercise and rate-pressure product at maximal exercise were significantly lower in the patients treated with metoprolol. In conclusion, monotherapy with diltiazem CR is at least as effective as monotherapy with metoprolol in patients with stable angina pectoris. As compared to metoprolol, diltiazem CR has a minor depressing effect on rate-pressure product, resulting in a favorable effect on exercise duration.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

In a randomized, double-blind, multicenter study, the efficacy of diltiazem controlled-release (CR) 120 mg b.i.d. was compared with metoprolol 100 mg b.i.d. in 56 patients with stable exertional angina pectoris. Fifty-one patients (28 receiving diltiazem CR, 23 receiving metoprolol), completed a follow-up period of 8 weeks. Thirty-nine patients (20 receiving diltiazem CR, 19 receiving metoprolol), completed a follow-up period of 32 weeks. Maximal exercise testing was performed at baseline and after 8, 20, and 32 weeks of treatment. Most exercise parameters were not significantly different between the patients on diltiazem CR and those on metoprolol. However, exercise duration was longer and maximal work load was higher in patients on diltiazem CR than in patients on metoprolol, and significant differences were observed at 20 weeks of treatment (p = 0.006 and p = 0.008, respectively). At all times during treatment, heart rate at maximal exercise and rate-pressure product at maximal exercise were significantly lower in the patients treated with metoprolol. In conclusion, monotherapy with diltiazem CR is at least as effective as monotherapy with metoprolol in patients with stable angina pectoris. As compared to metoprolol, diltiazem CR has a minor depressing effect on rate-pressure product, resulting in a favorable effect on exercise duration.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 7 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 randomized, double-blind, multicenter study, the efficacy of diltiazem controlled-release (CR) 120 mg b.i.d. was compared with metoprolol 100 mg b.i.d. in 56 patients with stable exertional angina pectoris. Fifty-one patients (28 receiving diltiazem CR, 23 receiving metoprolol), completed a follow-up period of 8 weeks. Thirty-nine patients (20 receiving diltiazem CR, 19 receiving metoprolol), completed a follow-up period of 32 weeks. Maximal exercise testing was performed at baseline and after 8, 20, and 32 weeks of treatment. Most exercise parameters were not significantly different between the patients on diltiazem CR and those on metoprolol. However, exercise duration was longer and maximal work load was higher in patients on diltiazem CR than in patients on metoprolol, and significant differences were observed at 20 weeks of treatment (p = 0.006 and p = 0.008, respectively). At all times during treatment, heart rate at maximal exercise and rate-pressure product at maximal exercise were significantly lower in the patients treated with metoprolol. In conclusion, monotherapy with diltiazem CR is at least as effective as monotherapy with metoprolol in patients with stable angina pectoris. As compared to metoprolol, diltiazem CR has a minor depressing effect on rate-pressure product, resulting in a favorable effect on exercise duration.

Key concepts: Metoprolol, Diltiazem, Medicine, Angina, Cardiology, Heart rate, Blood pressure, Internal medicine

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Long-Term Efficacy of Diltiazem Controlled Release Versus Metoprolol in Patients with Stable Angina Pectoris — Research Paper | ScholarLens