Premium
Nimodipine versus terfenadine in the treatment of physical stimulus‐indueed urticaria
Author(s) -
Pigatto P. D.,
Fumagalli M.,
Bigardi A.,
Altomare G.,
Finzi A. F.
Publication year - 1990
Publication title -
allergy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.363
H-Index - 173
eISSN - 1398-9995
pISSN - 0105-4538
DOI - 10.1111/j.1398-9995.1990.tb01086.x
Subject(s) - terfenadine , nimodipine , medicine , antihistamine , dihydropyridine , pharmacology , calcium , anesthesia , stimulus (psychology) , psychology , psychotherapist
Basophil and mastocyte degranulation is calcium‐dependent. Calcium‐antagonists can inhibit synthesis of and release in vitro same mediators in various types of cells. Both immunologically stimulated and non‐immunologically stimulated release of material from basophils isolated from normal and allergic subjects can be antagonized by calcium blockers. The present study was aimed at testing the therapeutic effects and side effects of nimodipine therapy, a new dihydropyridine anti‐calcium derivative for physical stimulus induced urticaria, in camparison with a standard H 1 antihistamine therapy. The study was done in 32 outpatients who had physical stimulus‐induced urticaria: 20 patients was done in 32 ouutpatients who had physical stimulus‐induced urticaria: 20 patients received nomodipine three times a day in a daily dose of 180 mg. 12 patients were treated with terfenadine in a dose of 120 mg. In the majority of patients treated with both nimodipine and terfenadine, satisfactory clinical results were obtained after 3 weeks of therapy. There were, however significant ( P <0.05) differences in responses. Complete clearance after 3 weeks was noted in 50% patients treated with nomodipine, whereas only 16% of patients on terfenadine were completely clear, and some showed only slight improvement. The treatment was easily manageable, and with few side effects.