Phcog.Net logo
Submit

BROWSE ALL JOURNALS

    SEE ALL 6 JOURNALS
    Journal of Pharmacology and PharmacotherapeuticsNOW IN
    Article

    Comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of ivabradine and ranolazine in patients of chronic stable angina pectoris

    Aditi Chaturvedi1★, Yogendra Singh2, Harish Chaturvedi3, Vijay Thawani1, Sakshi Singla4, Deepak Parihar1★ Corresponding author

    1. 1Department of Pharmacology, Veer Chandra Singh Garhwali Government Medical Sciences and Research Institute, Srikot, Uttarakhand, India.
    2. 2Fortis Escorts Heart Institute, New Delhi, India.
    3. 3Department of Anatomy, Veer Chandra Singh Garhwali Government Medical Sciences and Research Institute, Srikot, Uttarakhand, India.
    4. 4Himalyan Institute of Medical Sciences, Dehradun, India.

    CORRESPONDENCE

    Aditi Chaturvedi

    Department of Pharmacology, Veer Chandra Singh Garhwali Government Medical Sciences and Research Institute, Srikot, Uttarakhand, India.

    dtchaturvedi@yahoo.co.in

    Volume 4, Issue 1 · pp. 33–33 · PUBLISHED 2013 · DOI: 10.4103/0976-500X.107663

    View on J Pharmacol. Pharmacother. original site ↗

    ABSTRACT

    Introduction: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of Ivabradine (IVA) and Ranolazine (RAN) in chronic angina patients. Materials and Methods: This was a follow‑on, open‑label trial conducted in a tertiary care hospital of Uttarakhand. Thirty patients each taking IVA 5 mg twice daily or RAN 500 mg twice daily were distributed to the respective groups. Patients were asked to fill a pretested questionnaire on frequency of anginal attacks and adverse reactions before and 2, 4 and 8 weeks after taking the respective medicines. Their blood pressure, heart rate and routine hematological and biochemical estimations were performed at baseline and after intervention. Results were statistically analyzed using different statistical tests, with P < 0.05 considered as significant. Results: There was no significant difference in the frequency of anginal attacks per week between the groups. The adverse drug reactions (ADRs) reported in the IVA group were dizziness (30%), headache (16.6%), backache (16.6%), vertigo (13.3%), blurred vision (13.3%), muscle cramps (10%), arthralgia (10%), cough and dyspnea (6.6%), hypersensitivity rash (6.6%), fever (3.3%) and nausea (3.3%). The ADRs in the RAN group were nausea (26.6%), dizziness (23.3%), vomiting (3.3%), constipation (3.3%) and vertigo (3.3%). The blood pressure, heart rate and routine hematological and biochemical evaluations did not show any significant difference in the pre–post values. IVA significantly decreased the resting heart rate after eight weeks of intervention. Conclusions: Both antianginal agents appeared equiactive. However, RAN had a better safety and tolerability profile than IVA. Serum sickness‑like reaction was an adverse event noticed with IVA, which needs causality establishment.

    KEYWORDS

    Open in new tab

    REFERENCES

    As published

    Showing references and in-text citations exactly as published.

      Cite this article

      SELECT FORMAT

      Chaturvedi, A., Singh, Y., Chaturvedi, H., Thawani, V., Singla, S., & Parihar, D. (2013). Comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of ivabradine and ranolazine in patients of chronic stable angina pectoris. Journal of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapeutics, 4(1), 33–33. https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-500X.107663