4.7 Article

Head-to-head comparison of udenafil vs amlodipine in the treatment of secondary Raynaud's phenomenon: a double-blind, randomized, cross-over study

Journal

RHEUMATOLOGY
Volume 53, Issue 4, Pages 658-664

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/ket417

Keywords

Raynaud's phenomenon; udenafil; amlodipine; vasodilator; digital blood flow

Categories

Funding

  1. Dong-A Pharmaceuticals

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Methods. A total of 29 patients with secondary RP associated with connective tissue diseases were enrolled in this double-blind, randomized, cross-over study. The patients were randomized to receive udenafil 100 mg/day or amlodipine 10 mg/day for 4 weeks. After a washout period they were crossed over to the other drug for another 4 weeks. The primary outcome was RP frequency before and after treatment. The secondary outcomes were RP condition scores, RP duration, number of digital ulcers, HAQ, physician global assessment and digital artery flow before and after treatment. Results. Amlodipine and udenafil both decreased the rate of RP attack significantly. The drugs did not differ in terms of RP frequency or any of the secondary outcomes except for digital blood flow; udenafil improved it significantly better than amlodipine (P = 0.021). Udenafil was well tolerated without serious adverse effects. Conclusion. Udenafil and amlodipine have comparable efficacy in improving RP attacks. In addition, udenafil improves the blood flow in digital arteries compared with amlodipine. Trial registration. ext-link-type=uri xlink:href=www.clinicaltrials.gov xmlns:xlink=http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink>www.clinicaltrials.gov, protocol number NCT01280266.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available