You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 151 No. 2, FEBRUARY 1991 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  REVIEW ARTICLES
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

The Role of Calcium Channel Blockers in the Treatment of Essential Hypertension

Doyle M. Cummings, PharmD; Peter Amadio, Jr, MD; Linda Nelson, PharmD; Jill Mancini Fitzgerald, PharmD

Arch Intern Med. 1991;151(2):250-259.


Abstract

Calcium channel blockers, originally developed for the treatment of angina and supraventricular arrhythmias, have been shown to lower elevated blood pressure effectively in hypertensive patients. Verapamil, nifedipine, and diltiazem represent prototype compounds for unique chemical classes with differing pharmacologic properties. These drugs lower elevated blood pressure with efficacy comparable with other commonly used antihypertensives. Combination therapy with other agents usually results in an additive response. Side effects are usually mild and reversible and usually are an extension of the drug's pharmacologic effects. Moreover, adverse metabolic effects on lipid, glucose, or potassium levels are not common. Because of the excellent antihypertensive effects of calcium channel blockers and their potential importance in a variety of other disease states, these agents should be routinely considered for use as a first-line antihypertensive agent in appropriately selected patients with hypertension of any severity as part of a comprehensive plan to minimize cardiovascular risk.

(Arch Intern Med. 1991;151:250-259)



Author Affiliations

From the Department of Family Medicine, East Carolina University School of Medicine, Greenville, NC, and the School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC (Dr Cummings); the Departments of Family Medicine and Medicine, Jefferson Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University (Dr Amadio), and the Department of Pharmacy, Philadelphia College of Pharmacy and Science (Dr Nelson), Philadelphia, Pa; and the Department of Surgery, John Dempsey Hospital, Farmington, Conn, and the Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University of Connecticut, Storrs (Dr Fitzgerald).


Footnotes

Accepted for publication September 10, 1990.

Reprint requests to Department of Family Medicine, East Carolina University School of Medicine, Greenville, NC 27858-4354 (Dr Cummings).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Efficacy and Safety of Nifedipine Coat-Core versus Amlodipine in Patients With Mild to Moderate Essential Hypertension: Comparison of 24-Hour Mean Ambulatory Diastolic Blood Pressure
Byyny et al.
J CARDIOVASC PHARMACOL THER 1997;2:77-83.
ABSTRACT  

The Appropriate Goals of Antihypertensive Therapy: Neither Too Much Nor Too Little
Kaplan
ANN INTERN MED 1992;116:686-690.
ABSTRACT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1991 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.