Revista Peruana de Cardiología : Enero - Junio 2000


REFERENCIAS BIBLIOGRÁFICAS

1. BRAUNDWALD, E.: Heart Disease. W.B. Saunders Company, 1996.
2. SASAYAMA, S. Ischaemic heart disease. European Heart Journal 1996; 17 (Suppl G): 37.

3. KISHORE, J. Calcium antagonists. Internal Medicine 1996: 44-61

4. WAGSTAFF. A.. Amlodipine. Drugs 1995; 50 (3): 560-586.

5. TOKO-OKA, T Bloqueadores de calcio de tercera generación. Blood Pressure 1996; 5 206-208.

6. NAYLER, WG. Classification and tissue selectivity of calcium antagonists. Z. Knrdiol 1990; 79 (Suppl 3): 107-111.

7. JACKSON, G. Calcium antagonists. BJCP 1996; 50(6):29 1-293

8. OPIE, L. Nifedipine and mortality. Circulation 1995; 92(5): 1068-1073.

9. DALING, J. Calcium channel blockers and cancer. American Journal of Hipertension 1996; 9(7): 713-714.

10. HORTON, R.. Spinning the risks and benefits of calcium antagonists. The Lancet 1996; 1:586.

11. MYERS, M., et al. Workshop: Trough-ta-peak ratio. American Journal of Hypertension 1996;9(10):65S-97S.

12. TZIVONI, D. Circadian variations in total ischaemia burden and ischaemia threshold. European Heart Journal 1996; 17 (Suppl G): 5963.

13. NAYLER, WG.: Amlodipine. Springer - Verlag, 1993.

14. PACKER, M., et al. Effect of Amlodipine on morbidity and mortality in severe chronic heart faiiure. NEnglJMed 1996; 335: 1107-14.

15. CORNE, R. Risk stratification in stable angina pectonis. The American Journal of Cardiology 1987; 59: 695-97.

16. STEINGART, R. The decision for revascuianizatien in the 1990s. JACC 1997; 291(5): 898-900.

17. HULTGREN, H., et al. Relation of severity of symptoms to prognosis in stable angina pectonis. Am J Cardioi 1984; 54: 988-93.

18. KANNEL, W. & FEINLEIB, M. Natural history of angina pectoris in the Framingham Study. Am J Cardiology 1972; 29(Fob): 154-163.

19. COHN, P., et al. Prognostic importance of anginal symptoms in angiographically defined coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 1981; 47 (Feb): 233-237.

20. STRAKA, R., et at. magnitude and nature of noncompliance with treatment using isosorbide dinitrate in patients with ischemic heart disease. J. Clin Pharmacol 1996; 36: 587-94.

21. REHNQVIST. N., et al. Effects of metoprolol vs verapamil in patients with stable angina pectoris (APSIS). European Heart Journal 1996; 17: 76-81.

22. RYDEN, L. & MALMBERG, K. Calcium channel blockers or beta receptor antagonists for patients with ischaemic heart disease. Eur Heart Journal 1996; 17: 1-2.

23. PARONDI, R. Coronary vascular reactivity and calcium antagonists therapy in patients with angina. J. Cardiovascular Pharmacology 1994; 24 (Suppl A): S30 - S36

24. CANALE, C., et al. Open comparative study to assess the efficacy and safety of two calcium antagonists. J. of Cardiov Pharmacology 1991; 17 (Suppl 1): S57-S60.

25. TAYLOR, S. A review of amlodipine in myocardial ischaernia. Postgrad Med J. 1991: 67 (SuppI 5): S48-S51.

26. FOLLAND, B., et al. Percutaneous translurninal coronary angioplasty versus medical therapy for stable angina pectonis. JACC 1997; 29: 1505 - 11.

27. FRISHMAN, W., et al. Diltiazem, nifedipine and their combination in patients with stable angina pectonis. Circulation 1988; 77(4): 774-786.

28. BALA SUBRAMANIAN, V., et al. Rationale for the choice of calcium antagonists in chronic stable angina. Am J Cardiology 1982; 50(Nov): 1173-1179.

29. MARCASSA, C., et al. Ischemic burden in silent and painfuL myocardial ischernia. JACC 1997; 29: 948-954.

30. LICHTLEN, P.R. The concept of total ischaernic burden: clinical significance. Eur Heart J 1996; 17 (Supp) G): 38-47.

31. DFANFLELD, J. Treatment effects an the total ischaemic burden and prognostic implications. Eur Heart J 1996; 17 (Suppl G): 64-68.

32. DETRY, J-M.R. The pathophysiology of myocardial ischaemia. Eur Heart 31996; 17 (Suppl G): 48-52.

33. GOTTLIEB, S.O. Diagnostic procedures for myocardial ischaemia. Bun Heart 3 1996; 17 (Suppl Q: 53-58.

34. PSATY, B., et at. The risk of myocardiai infarction associated with antihypertensive drug therapies. JAMA 1995; 274: 620-625.

35. FURBERG, C., Ct a!. Nifedipine: dose related increase in mortality in patients with coronary heart disease. Circulation 1995; 92: 1326-1331.

36. DAVIES, R.F., et al. Effect of amlodipine, atenolol and their combination on myocardial ischemia during treadmill exercise and ambulatory monitoring (CASIS). JACC 1995; 25: 619-625.

37. KINNARD, D., et al. Amlodipine in angina pectoris. J of Cardiovascular Pharmacology 1988; 12(Suppl7): S1 10-SI 13.

38. TAYLOR, S.H., et al. A four-week double-blind, placebocontrolled, parallel dose-response study of amlodipine in patients with stable exertional angina pectonis. American Heart Journal 1989; 118(S): 1133-1 134.

39. SINGH, S., et al. Amlodipine versus nadolol in patients with stabel angina pectoris. Am H Journal 1989; 118(5): 1137-1138.

40. VETROVEC, G.W., et al. Evaluation of the acute hemodynamic and eiectrophysiologic effects of intravenous amlodipine alone and in combination. J of Cardiov Phamacology 1993; 22(Suppl A): S29-S33.

41. DAVIES, RE. Amlodipine and atenolol, alone or in combination, for ischemia during exercise and ambulatory monitoring. J of Cardiovasc Pharmacology 1995; 26 (Suppl A): S7-S10.

42. ESTRADA, J.L. & OLIVERI, R. Long term efficacy of amlodipine, a new calcium antagonist, in patients with severe coronary artery disease. J of Cardiovasc Pharmacology 1993; 22 (Suppl A): S24-S28.

43. NAVARRO, JL., et al. Antiischemic properties of amlodipine, a new calcium antagonist, in patients with severe coronary artery disease. American Heart Journal 1989; 118(5): 1130-1132.

44. DEANFIELD, J.E. Effect of amiodipine on the total ischemic burden in patients with chronic stable angina. J of Cardiov Pharmacology 1995; 26 (Suppl A); S1-S6.

45. DEANFIELD, J.E., et al. Amlodipino reduces transient myocardiai ischemia in patients with coronary artery disease (CAPE trial). JACC 1994; 24: 1460-1467.

46. DARGIE, HI., et al. Total ischaemic burden european trial (TIBET). Eur Heart J 1996; 17:104-112.

47. MEDINA F, DEL AGUILA J, GALLARDO S, CASTRO C. Estudio clínico de eficacia y seguridad de amlodipina en hipertensión arterial. Rev Argentina Cardiol 1996, 64 (Sup IV): 18-24.

48. DEEDWANIA, P.C., et al. Amlodipine once a day in stabel angina: double-blind crossover comparison with placebo. Clinical Cardiology 1993; 16: 599-602.

49. OLIVERI, R. Long-term of amlodipine in patients with severe coronary artery disease. J of Cardiov Pharm 1993; 22(Suppl. A): S24-S28.

50. WOODMANSEY, P.A., et al. Amlodipine in patients with angina uncontrolled by atenolol. Eur J of Clinical Pharmacology 1993; 45:107-111.

51. WATANABE, K., Ct at. Efficacy of amlodipine besylate therapy for variant angina. Cardiov Drugs and Therapy 1993; 7: 923- 928.

52. TAYLOR, S.H., et al. A double blind, placebo controlled, parallel dose response study of amlodipine in stable exertional angina pectoris. J of Cardiov Pharmacology 1991;17 (Suppl 1): S46-S49.

53. McGIBNEY, D. The efficacy of amlodipine in the management of ischaernic heart disease. Postgrad Med Journal 1991; 67(Supp 3): S24-S28.

54. PERONDI, R, et al. Coronary vascular reactivityan d calcium antagonist. J of Cardiov Pharm 1994; 24(Suppl A): S30-S36.

55. SCHOOMAKER, F.W., et al. Amlodipine combined with beta blockade for chronic angina. Clinical Cardiology 1992; 15: 519-524.

56. LOUTZENHISER, R., et al. Effects of amlodipine on renal hemodinamics. Am J Card 1989; 64:1221-1281.

57. CHAHINE, RA., et at. Randomized placebo-controlled trial of amlodipine in vasospastic angina. JACC 1993; 21: 1365-1370.

58. MEHTA, JL. & LOPEZ, L.M. A double-blind evaluation of amlodipine in patients with chronic stable angina. Clinical Cardiology 1994; 17 (Suppl III): III-17-III-22.

59. SINGH, S. Long-term double blind evaluation of amlopine and nadolol in patients with stabel exertional angina pectoris. Clinical Cardiology 1993; 16: 54-58.

60. CAPONNETTO, S. et al. Open comparative study to assess the efficacy and safety of two calcium antagonists. Postg Med J 1991; 67 (Suppl 5): S54-S56.

61. CIRCO, A., et al. Amlodipine versus Nifedipine retard in the treatment of chronic ischemic heart disease. La Clínica Terapéutica 1992; 140: 43-57.

REGRESAR AL ARTÍCULO