Latest & greatest articles for nifedipine

The Trip Database is a leading resource to help health professionals find trustworthy answers to their clinical questions. Users can access the latest research evidence and guidance to answer their clinical questions. We have a large collection of systematic reviews, clinical guidelines, regulatory guidance, clinical trials and many other forms of evidence. If you wanted the latest trusted evidence on nifedipine or other clinical topics then use Trip today.

This page lists the very latest high quality evidence on nifedipine and also the most popular articles. Popularity measured by the number of times the articles have been clicked on by fellow users in the last twelve months.

What is Trip?

Trip is a clinical search engine designed to allow users to quickly and easily find and use high-quality research evidence to support their practice and/or care.

Trip has been online since 1997 and in that time has developed into the internet’s premier source of evidence-based content. Our motto is ‘Find evidence fast’ and this is something we aim to deliver for every single search.

As well as research evidence we also allow clinicians to search across other content types including images, videos, patient information leaflets, educational courses and news.

For further information on Trip click on any of the questions/sections on the left-hand side of this page. But if you still have questions please contact us via jon.brassey@tripdatabase.com

Top results for nifedipine

1. Nifedipine in the management of preterm labor: a systematic review and metaanalysis

Nifedipine in the management of preterm labor: a systematic review and metaanalysis Nifedipine in the management of preterm labor: a systematic review and metaanalysis Nifedipine in the management of preterm labor: a systematic review and metaanalysis Conde-Agudelo A, Romero R, Kusanovic JP CRD summary The review concluded that nifedipine appeared to be a more effective tocolytic agent than beta 2 -adrenergic-receptor agonists and better tolerated compared with beta 2 -adrenergic-receptor (...) agonists and magnesium sulfate in women with preterm labour. The review was generally well conducted, but the authors’ conclusions regarding magnesium sulphate may be too strong given the small number of trials included in the analyses. Authors' objectives To determine the efficacy and safety of nifedipine as a tocolytic agent in women with preterm labour. Searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), CINAHL, five registers of ongoing

Full Text available with Trip Pro

2011 DARE.

2. Hydralazine vs nifedipine for acute hypertensive emergency in pregnancy: a randomized controlled trial

Hydralazine vs nifedipine for acute hypertensive emergency in pregnancy: a randomized controlled trial There is a paucity of good quality evidence regarding the best therapeutic option for acute control of blood pressure during acute hypertensive emergency of pregnancy.We sought to compare the efficacy of intravenously administered hydralazine and oral nifedipine for acute blood pressure control in acute hypertensive emergency of pregnancy.In this double-blind, randomized, controlled trial (...) , pregnant women (≥24 weeks period of gestation) with sustained increase in systolic blood pressure of ≥160 mm Hg or diastolic blood pressure of ≥110 mm Hg were randomized to receive intravenous hydralazine injection in doses of 5, 10, 10, and 10 mg and a placebo tablet or oral nifedipine (10 mg tablet up to 4 doses) and intravenous saline injection every 20 minutes until the target blood pressure of 150 mm Hg systolic and ≤100 mm Hg diastolic was achieved. Crossover treatment was administered

2018 EvidenceUpdates

3. Nifedipine or Nifedipine Plus Indomethacin for Treatment of Acute Preterm Labor

Nifedipine or Nifedipine Plus Indomethacin for Treatment of Acute Preterm Labor Nifedipine or Nifedipine Plus Indomethacin for Treatment of Acute Preterm Labor - Full Text View - ClinicalTrials.gov Hide glossary Glossary Study record managers: refer to the if submitting registration or results information. Search for terms x × Study Record Detail Saved Studies Save this study Warning You have reached the maximum number of saved studies (100). Please remove one or more studies before adding more (...) . Nifedipine or Nifedipine Plus Indomethacin for Treatment of Acute Preterm Labor The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. of clinical studies and talk to your health care provider before participating. Read our for details. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02438371 Recruitment Status : Recruiting First Posted : May 8, 2015 Last Update Posted : November

2015 Clinical Trials

4. Labetalol Versus Nifedipine as Antihypertensive Treatment for Chronic Hypertension in Pregnancy: A Randomized Controlled Trial. (PubMed)

Labetalol Versus Nifedipine as Antihypertensive Treatment for Chronic Hypertension in Pregnancy: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Data from randomized controlled trials to guide antihypertensive agent choice for chronic hypertension in pregnancy are limited; this study aimed to compare labetalol and nifedipine, additionally assessing the impact of ethnicity on treatment efficacy. Pregnant women with chronic hypertension (12+0-27+6 weeks' gestation) were enrolled at 4 UK centers (August 2014 (...) to October 2015). Open-label first-line antihypertensive treatment was randomly assigned: labetalol- (200-1800 mg/d) or nifedipine-modified release (20-80 mg/d). Analysis included 112 women (98%) who completed the study (labetalol n=55, nifedipine n=57). Maximum blood pressure after randomization was 161/101 mm Hg with labetalol versus 163/105 mm Hg with nifedipine (mean difference systolic: 1.2 mm Hg [-4.9 to 7.2 mm Hg], diastolic: 3.3 mm Hg [-0.6 to 7.3 mm Hg]). Mean blood pressure was 134/84 mm Hg

Full Text available with Trip Pro

2017 Hypertension

5. Atosiban versus nifedipine for preterm labor: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Atosiban versus nifedipine for preterm labor: a systematic review and meta-analysis Print | PDF PROSPERO This information has been provided by the named contact for this review. CRD has accepted this information in good faith and registered the review in PROSPERO. CRD bears no responsibility or liability for the content of this registration record, any associated files or external websites. Email salutation (e.g. "Dr Smith" or "Joanne") for correspondence: Organisation web address: Timing

2018 PROSPERO

6. Comparison of Nifedipine Versus Indomethacin for Acute Preterm Labor

Comparison of Nifedipine Versus Indomethacin for Acute Preterm Labor Comparison of Nifedipine Versus Indomethacin for Acute Preterm Labor - Full Text View - ClinicalTrials.gov Hide glossary Glossary Study record managers: refer to the if submitting registration or results information. Search for terms x × Study Record Detail Saved Studies Save this study Warning You have reached the maximum number of saved studies (100). Please remove one or more studies before adding more. Comparison (...) of Nifedipine Versus Indomethacin for Acute Preterm Labor The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Read our for details. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03129945 Recruitment Status : Active, not recruiting First Posted : April 26, 2017 Last Update Posted : October 16, 2018 Sponsor: University of California, Irvine Collaborators: University of California

2015 Clinical Trials

7. Nifedipine Versus Indomethacin in the Treatment of Preterm Labour

Nifedipine Versus Indomethacin in the Treatment of Preterm Labour Nifedipine Versus Indomethacin in the Treatment of Preterm Labour - Full Text View - ClinicalTrials.gov Hide glossary Glossary Study record managers: refer to the if submitting registration or results information. Search for terms x × Study Record Detail Saved Studies Save this study Warning You have reached the maximum number of saved studies (100). Please remove one or more studies before adding more. Nifedipine Versus (...) : January 5, 2015 Sponsor: Saint Thomas Hospital, Panama Information provided by (Responsible Party): Osvaldo A. Reyes T., Saint Thomas Hospital, Panama Study Details Study Description Go to Brief Summary: The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of nifedipine versus indomethacin as tocolytic for the treatment of preterm labour with short cervix (< 2.5cms). Condition or disease Intervention/treatment Phase Obstetric Labor, Premature Drug: Nifedipine Drug: Indomethacin Phase 3 Study

2011 Clinical Trials

8. Nifedipine versus placebo in the treatment of preterm prelabor rupture of membranes: a randomized controlled trial: Assessment of perinatal outcome by use of tocolysis in early labor-APOSTEL IV trial. (PubMed)

Nifedipine versus placebo in the treatment of preterm prelabor rupture of membranes: a randomized controlled trial: Assessment of perinatal outcome by use of tocolysis in early labor-APOSTEL IV trial. Preterm birth is the most common cause of neonatal morbidity and mortality. Around one third of preterm deliveries starts with preterm prelabor rupture of membranes (PPROM). The aim of this trial was to study the effect of prolonged tocolysis with nifedipine versus placebo in women with PPROM (...) on perinatal outcome and prolongation of pregnancy.The Apostel IV was a nationwide multicenter randomized placebo controlled trial. We included women with PPROM without contractions between 24(+0) and 33(+6) weeks of gestation. Participants were randomly allocated to daily 80mg nifedipine or placebo, until the start of labor, with a maximum of 18 days. The primary outcome measure was a composite of poor neonatal outcome, including perinatal death, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, periventricular leukomalacia

2016 European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology

9. Randomised controlled trial: Tamsulosin and nifedipine did not improve stone passage over placebo nor were they cost-effective in ureteric stone disease

Randomised controlled trial: Tamsulosin and nifedipine did not improve stone passage over placebo nor were they cost-effective in ureteric stone disease Tamsulosin and nifedipine did not improve stone passage over placebo nor were they cost-effective in ureteric stone disease | BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine We use cookies to improve our service and to tailor our content and advertising to you. You can manage your cookie settings via your browser at any time. To learn more about how we use cookies (...) , please see our . Log in using your username and password For personal accounts OR managers of institutional accounts Username * Password * your user name or password? Search for this keyword Search for this keyword Main menu Log in using your username and password For personal accounts OR managers of institutional accounts Username * Password * your user name or password? You are here Tamsulosin and nifedipine did not improve stone passage over placebo nor were they cost-effective in ureteric stone

2016 Evidence-Based Medicine (Requires free registration)

10. Maintenance nifedipine therapy for preterm symptomatic placenta previa: A randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. (PubMed)

Maintenance nifedipine therapy for preterm symptomatic placenta previa: A randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. To assess the impact of maintenance nifedipine therapy on pregnancy duration in women with preterm placenta previa bleeding.PPADAL was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted between 05/2008 and 05/2012 in five French hospitals. The trial included 109 women, aged ≥ 18 years, with at least one episode of placenta previa bleeding, intact (...) membranes and no other pregnancy complication, at gestational age 24 to 34 weeks and after 48 hours of complete acute tocolysis. Women were randomly allocated to receive either 20 mg of slow-release nifedipine three times daily (n = 54) or placebo (n = 55) until 36 + 6 weeks of gestation. The primary outcome for the trial was length of pregnancy measured in days after enrolment. Main secondary outcomes were rates of recurrent bleeding, cesarean delivery due to hemorrhage, blood transfusion, maternal

Full Text available with Trip Pro

2017 PLoS ONE

11. Nifedipine vs. labetalol for treatment of hypertensive crisis during pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Nifedipine vs. labetalol for treatment of hypertensive crisis during pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis Print | PDF PROSPERO This information has been provided by the named contact for this review. CRD has accepted this information in good faith and registered the review in PROSPERO. CRD bears no responsibility or liability for the content of this registration record, any associated files or external websites. Email salutation (e.g. "Dr Smith" or "Joanne") for correspondence

2014 PROSPERO

12. Comparison of the efficacy and adverse effects of nifedipine and indomethacin for the treatment of preterm labor. (PubMed)

Comparison of the efficacy and adverse effects of nifedipine and indomethacin for the treatment of preterm labor. To compare the effectiveness and adverse effects of nifedipine versus indomethacin in the treatment of preterm labor.In a randomized clinical trial, 79 women with labor pain at 26-33 weeks of gestation were treated with either oral nifedipine (n=40) or rectal indomethacin (n=39).Twenty-three (59%) women in the indomethacin group, and 10 (25%) in the nifedipine group did not respond (...) to treatment (P=0.002). None of the 16 and 30 women remaining in the indomethacin and nifedipine groups, respectively, delivered during the subsequent 48 hours. Of these remaining women, 1 (6.25%) in the indomethacin group and 4 (13.3%) in the nifedipine group delivered between 48 hours and 7 days (P=0.162). For the women who responded to treatment, the mean gestational age at time of delivery was 238.5±19.4 days and 246.4±15.4 days in the nifedipine and indomethacin groups, respectively (P=0.182

2011 International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics

13. Use of drug therapy in the management of symptomatic ureteric stones in hospitalised adults: a multicentre, placebo-controlled, randomised controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis of a calcium channel blocker (nifedipine) and an alpha-blocker (tam

Use of drug therapy in the management of symptomatic ureteric stones in hospitalised adults: a multicentre, placebo-controlled, randomised controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis of a calcium channel blocker (nifedipine) and an alpha-blocker (tam Use of drug therapy in the management of symptomatic ureteric stones in hospitalised adults: a multicentre, placebo-controlled, randomised controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis of a calcium channel blocker (nifedipine) and an alpha

2015 NIHR HTA programme

14. Morbidity and mortality in patients randomised to double-blind treatment with a long-acting calcium-channel blocker or diuretic in the International Nifedipine GITS study: Intervention as a Goal in Hypertension Treatment (INSIGHT). (PubMed)

Morbidity and mortality in patients randomised to double-blind treatment with a long-acting calcium-channel blocker or diuretic in the International Nifedipine GITS study: Intervention as a Goal in Hypertension Treatment (INSIGHT). The efficacy of antihypertensive drugs newer than diuretics and beta-blockers has not been established. We compared the effects of the calcium-channel blocker nifedipine once daily with the diuretic combination co-amilozide on cardiovascular mortality and morbidity (...) in high-risk patients with hypertension.We did a prospective, randomised, double-blind trial in Europe and Israel in 6321 patients aged 55-80 years with hypertension (blood pressure > or = 150/95 mm Hg, or > or = 160 mm Hg systolic). Patients had at least one additional cardiovascular risk factor. We randomly assigned patients nifedipine 30 mg in a long-acting gastrointestinal-transport-system (GITS) formulation (n=3157), or co-amilozide (hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg [corrected] plus amiloride 2.5 mg; n

2000 Lancet

15. Effects of nifedipine versus hydralazine on sympathetic activity and cardiac function in patients with hypertension persisting on diuretic plus beta-blocker therapy. (PubMed)

Effects of nifedipine versus hydralazine on sympathetic activity and cardiac function in patients with hypertension persisting on diuretic plus beta-blocker therapy. In patients with hypertension persisting on combined diuretic and beta-blocker therapy, the effects of an additional 9-week therapy with a calcium antagonist (nifedipine) versus a classical arterial vasodilator (hydralazine) were compared for changes in blood pressure (BP), plasma catecholamines (n = 15), and left ventricular (LV (...) ) systolic and diastolic function (n = 6). Both drugs lowered BP, but nifedipine was significantly more effective in lowering systolic BP. Hydralazine increased both supine and standing plasma norepinephrine, nifedipine increased them only in the standing position and to a lesser extent. Patients on beta1-selective (n = 5) versus nonselective (n = 10) blockade showed similar responses. Left ventricular systolic function was not affected by hydralazine, whereas nifedipine increased the rate of ejection

1990 Cardiovascular drugs and therapy / sponsored by the International Society of Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy

16. Comparison of the effects of long-acting nifedipine CR and diltiazem R in patients with vasospastic angina: Aomori coronary spastic angina study. (PubMed)

Comparison of the effects of long-acting nifedipine CR and diltiazem R in patients with vasospastic angina: Aomori coronary spastic angina study. We compared the efficacy of once-daily administration of nifedipine CR 40 mg (N) with that of twice-daily diltiazem R 100mg (D) in patients with vasospastic angina (VSA) registered in 8 cardiovascular institutes in Aomori Prefecture.VSA was diagnosed by the ischemic ST segment changes during chest pain attacks at rest and/or acetylcholine induction (...) of the attacks. One patient in each group experienced adverse effects and the drug was changed to the other.Once-daily administration of nifedipine CR was as effective as twice-daily diltiazem R in the prevention of VSA attacks.Copyright © 2010 Japanese College of Cardiology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Full Text available with Trip Pro

2010 Journal of cardiology

17. Nifedipine Treatment in Preterm Labor

Nifedipine Treatment in Preterm Labor Nifedipine Treatment in Preterm Labor - Full Text View - ClinicalTrials.gov Hide glossary Glossary Study record managers: refer to the if submitting registration or results information. Search for terms x × Study Record Detail Saved Studies Save this study Warning You have reached the maximum number of saved studies (100). Please remove one or more studies before adding more. Nifedipine Treatment in Preterm Labor The safety and scientific validity (...) Go to Brief Summary: This is a study for pregnant women who have been diagnosed with Threatened Preterm Labor. The principal aim of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of Nifedipine treatment versus Atosiban treatment over these patients' newborn babies. Condition or disease Intervention/treatment Phase Threatened Preterm Labor Drug: Nifedipine Drug: Atosiban Phase 3 Detailed Description: Preterm labor is defined as the presence of uterine contractions of sufficient frequency

2011 Clinical Trials

18. Nifedipine versus atosiban for threatened preterm birth (APOSTEL III): a multicentre, randomised controlled trial. (PubMed)

Nifedipine versus atosiban for threatened preterm birth (APOSTEL III): a multicentre, randomised controlled trial. In women with threatened preterm birth, delay of delivery by 48 h allows antenatal corticosteroids to improve neonatal outcomes. For this reason, tocolytics are often administered for 48 h; however, there is no consensus about which drug results in the best maternal and neonatal outcomes. In the APOSTEL III trial we aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of the calcium (...) -channel blocker nifedipine and the oxytocin inhibitor atosiban in women with threatened preterm birth.We did this multicentre, randomised controlled trial in ten tertiary and nine teaching hospitals in the Netherlands and Belgium. Women with threatened preterm birth (gestational age 25-34 weeks) were randomly assigned (1:1) to either oral nifedipine or intravenous atosiban for 48 h. An independent data manager used a web-based computerised programme to randomly assign women in permuted block sizes

2016 Lancet (London, England)

19. The efficacy of tamsulosin vs. nifedipine for the medical expulsive therapy of distal ureteric stones: A randomised clinical trial. (PubMed)

The efficacy of tamsulosin vs. nifedipine for the medical expulsive therapy of distal ureteric stones: A randomised clinical trial. To assess and compare, in a randomised clinical trial, the efficacy of tamsulosin and nifedipine as medical expulsive therapy for distal ureterolithiasis.In all, 128 symptomatic patients with stones in the juxtavesical tract of the ureter were randomly divided into group 1 (64 patients) receiving oral nifedipine sustained-release 30 mg/day, and group 2 (64 patients (...) -line treatment for index cases of distal ureterolithiasis with no complications. The use of tamsulosin provides better stone expulsion than does nifedipine.

Full Text available with Trip Pro

2015 Arab journal of urology

20. Nifedipine versus atosiban in the treatment of threatened preterm labour (Assessment of Perinatal Outcome after Specific Tocolysis in Early Labour: APOSTEL III-Trial). (PubMed)

Nifedipine versus atosiban in the treatment of threatened preterm labour (Assessment of Perinatal Outcome after Specific Tocolysis in Early Labour: APOSTEL III-Trial). Preterm birth is the most common cause of neonatal morbidity and mortality. Postponing delivery for 48 hours with tocolytics to allow for maternal steroid administration and antenatal transportation to a centre with neonatal intensive care unit facilities is the standard treatment for women with threatening preterm delivery (...) in most centres. However, there is controversy as to which tocolytic agent is the drug of first choice. Previous trials have focused on tocolytic efficacy and side effects, and are probably underpowered to detect clinically meaningfull differences in neonatal outcome. Thus, the current evidence is inconclusive to support a balanced recommendation for clinical practice. This multicenter randomised clinical trial aims to compare nifedipine and atosiban in terms of neonatal outcome, duration of pregnancy

Full Text available with Trip Pro

2014 BMC pregnancy and childbirth