This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

A Double-Blind Evaluation

Sheldon Sbar, MD; Robert C. Schlant, MD

JAMA. 1967;201(11):865-867.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Since Heberden's classic description of angina pectoris in 1768, a satisfactory treatment has been sought. Nitroglycerin, which is the standard treatment, may have unpleasant side effects due to vasodilatation, and its duration of action is relatively short. From the rapid turnover of a multitude of alleged long-acting coronary vasodilators marketed, it is apparent that an ideal compound which is both effective and devoid of side effects has not been found.

Fischer and Roch reported in 1951 the synthesis of a new group of compounds with two pyrimidine rings. One of these compounds, dipyridamole (Persantine), was subsequently shown to produce a significant increase in coronary blood flow¹ and an increase in intercoronary anastomoses in dogs with surgically induced coronary artery constriction.²

In patients with angina pectoris, several uncontrolled, or only partially double-blind, studies have indicated that dipyridamole produced subjective improvement.^3-6 In contrast, four double-blind studies^7-10 have indicated . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
From the Department of Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine and Grady Memorial Hospital, Atlanta. Dr. Sbar was a research fellow (cardiology) in the Department of Medicine and is currently at Tripler Army Medical Center, Hawaii.

Footnotes
Reprint requests to 69 Butler St SE, Atlanta 30303 (Dr. Schlant).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?