Document Detail


[A study to compare independent groups of patients with episodic migraine who were treated preventively with flunarizine or nadolol].
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  22362476     Owner:  NLM     Status:  In-Data-Review    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
INTRODUCTION. Flunarizine, with level of evidence A, and nadolol, with evidence level C, would be indicated as preventive treatment of migraine. Yet, no previous studies have been conducted to compare the effectiveness of the two drugs. AIM. To compare the effectiveness parameters in independent groups of patients treated preventively with one of the pharmaceuticals from the study, the same protocol being applied in both cases. PATIENTS AND METHODS. The subjects selected for the study were patients with episodic migraine (according to 2004 International Headache Society criteria) who had undergone preventive treatment for the first time, with flunarizine (5 mg/day) or nadolol (20-40 mg/day). The main effectiveness variables (reduction in the number of seizures at four months of treatment and responder rates) were analysed. RESULTS. The study included 227 patients who intended to receive treatment: 155 with flunarizine (80.5% females; mean age: 38.3 ± 12.1 years) and 72 with nadolol (63.8% females; mean age: 37.1 ± 12.0 years). The mean number of seizures prior to treatment was 6.09 ± 2.6 in the flunarizine group and 5.1 ± 1.7 in the nadolol group (p = 0.0079); at four months of treatment it was 2.61 ± 2.4 in the flunarizine group and 2.77 ± 2.4 in the nadolol group (p = NS). Percentage of reduction of migraines: 55.2% with flunarizine and 50.4% with nadolol (p = NS). The responder rate was 69% with flunarizine and 67% with nadolol (p = NS). The excellent response rate (reduction in the number of seizures by 75% or more) was 52.2% with flunarizine and 36.1% with nadolol (p = 0.0077). Percentage of adverse side effects: 48.3% with flunarizine and 25% with nadolol (p = 0.0009). The satisfaction rate was similar in both groups, 68%. CONCLUSIONS. Both flunarizine and nadolol proved to be effective in the preventive treatment of episodic migraine. Flunarizine is used more often in our milieu and was less well tolerated.
Authors:
M Gracia-Naya; M Huerta-Villanueva; C Rios; M J Garcia-Gomara; J Artal-Roy; S Sanchez-Valiente; S Santos-Lasaosa; J A Mauri-Llerda; A M Latorre-Jimenez
Publication Detail:
Type:  English Abstract; Journal Article    
Journal Detail:
Title:  Revista de neurologia     Volume:  54     ISSN:  1576-6578     ISO Abbreviation:  Rev Neurol     Publication Date:  2012 Mar 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2012-02-24     Completed Date:  -     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  7706841     Medline TA:  Rev Neurol     Country:  Spain    
Other Details:
Languages:  spa     Pagination:  277-83     Citation Subset:  IM    
Affiliation:
HUMS. Hospital Universitario Miguel Servet, 50009 Zaragoza, Espana.
Vernacular Title:
Estudio comparativo de grupos independientes de pacientes con migrana episodica tratados preventivamente con flunaricina o nadolol.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine


Previous Document:  [Perfusion computed tomography makes it possible to overcome important SITS-MOST exclusion criteria ...
Next Document:  [Anterior circulation embolic stroke secondary to thrombotic occlusion of the brachiocephalic trunk:...