Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorBarzenje, Aros D
dc.contributor.authorGjesdal, Knut
dc.contributor.authorWinsvold, Bendik K S
dc.contributor.authorSmåstuen, Milada Cvancarova
dc.contributor.authorStovner, Lars Jacob
dc.contributor.authorGravdahl, Gøril Bruvik
dc.contributor.authorNilsen, Kristian Bernhard
dc.date.accessioned2020-10-13T12:41:08Z
dc.date.accessioned2021-01-19T13:02:29Z
dc.date.available2020-10-13T12:41:08Z
dc.date.available2021-01-19T13:02:29Z
dc.date.issued2020-10-07
dc.identifier.citationBarzenje, a.d., Gjesdal, K, Winsvold, B.S., Småstuen, M.C, Stovner, L.J, Gravdahl, G.b. & Nilsen, K.B. (2020). Clinical and vascular responses topropranolol and candesartan in migraine patients: A randomized controlled clinical trial. Cephalalgia Reports, 3(January-December)),1-8.en
dc.identifier.issn2515-8163
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10642/9353
dc.description.abstractBackground: Both propranolol and candesartan are prophylactic drugs for migraine, but with unknown mechanisms of action. The objectives of the present study were to investigate these drugs’ effects on arterial wall dynamics and the potential relation between their vascular and clinical effect. Methods: The study was based on data from a previously published randomized, placebo-controlled, triple-blinded, double crossover clinical trial comparing the prophylactic effects of candesartan and propranolol in 72 patients. Finapres noninvasive blood pressure curves were analyzed. On the descending limb of the pulse curve, a notch is produced by pulse wave reflection, and its relative height compared to the top of the curve (the notch ratio) was used as a marker of arterial wall stiffness. Results: Candesartan decreased the notch ratio from baseline (p ¼ 0.005), reflecting more compliant arteries and vasodilation, whereas propranolol increased the notch ratio (p ¼ 0.005), reflecting less compliant arteries and vasoconstriction. There was no difference in baseline notch ratio between clinical responders and nonresponders. Conclusion: The drugs are both efficient prophylactic medications, yet they have opposite effects on arterial wall dynamics. This suggests that drug effects other than those on arterial compliance must be responsible for their prophylactic effect in migraine.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherSAGE Publicationsen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesCephalalgia Reports;Volume 3(January-December)
dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
dc.subjectArterial compliancesen
dc.subjectDicrotic notchesen
dc.subjectProphylaxisen
dc.subjectPulse curvesen
dc.subjectVasoconstrictionen
dc.subjectVasodilationen
dc.subjectVDP::Medisinske Fag: 700::Klinisk medisinske fag: 750en
dc.titleClinical and vascular responses topropranolol and candesartan in migraine patients: A randomized controlled clinical trialen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.typePeer revieweden
dc.date.updated2020-10-13T12:41:07Z
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1177/2515816320946491
dc.identifier.cristin1839243
dc.source.journalCephalalgia Reports


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License