This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in this journal

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

We read with much interest the thorough review article by Kizer and Kimmel¹ on the epidemiologic evidence on calcium antagonists. In our opinion, the paragraph addressing the "major hemorrhage" issue might convey a misguided message to the reader. In particular, our study² on the in-hospital variations in hemoglobin levels was not focused on major hemorrhage, as the outcome variable was a decrease in the hemoglobin level of greater than 1.2 g/dL. Noticeably, that study found an independent association between use of calcium antagonists and the incident decrease in hemoglobin levels among patients with a definite diagnosis and/or treatment for peptic disease (odds ratio [OR] = 1.67; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.26-2.22), but not among other participants (OR = 1.02; 95% CI = 0.82-1.25). These figures correspond (as Table 7 in the article by Kizer and Kimmel should have depicted adjusted relative risks [RRs]) to RRs of 1.50 (95% CI . . . [Full Text of this Article]

RELATED ARTICLE

Epidemiologic Review of the Calcium Channel Blocker Drugs: An Up-to-date Perspective on the Proposed Hazards
Jorge R. Kizer and Stephen E. Kimmel
Arch Intern Med. 2001;161(9):1145-1158.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT