Abstract
Several large-scale, multicenter trials have been conducted to evaluate the effects of currently available calcium channel blockers on a variety of cardiac end points in patients with myocardial infarction. Results indicate that careful subgroup stratification is necessary if morbidity and mortality are to be favorably altered. Certain groups of patients who are at high risk of recurrent myocardial infarction (MI) or death must be targeted for more aggressive diagnosis and therapy. Subset analysis of the Multicenter Diltiazem Postinfarction Trial (MDPIT) provides detailed information about diltiazem's long-term benefit following non-Q-wave or inferior Q-wave MI, and its lack of efficacy in patients with extensive or prior MI. Concerning use of beta-blockers versus calcium channel blockers as secondary prevention following acute MI, the pathogenesis, clinical course, prognosis, anatomy, and histology of non-Q-wave MI differs appreciably from Q-wave MI, and hence it is logical to assume that secondary prophylaxis post-MI should differ for non-Q-wave versus Q-wave MI. It would appear that beta-blockers (particularly those agents without intrinsic sympathomimetic activity) are best suited for secondary prevention after Q-wave MI, whereas diltiazem is the only therapy of proven benefit for use after non-Q-wave MI.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
