The Canadian journal of cardiology · 1996
PROTECT (Prospective Reinfarction Outcomes in the Thrombolytic Era Cardizem CD Trial): a randomized, double-blind clinical trial of diltiazem versus atenolol in secondary prophylaxis post non-Q wave myocardial infarction.
Клиническое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Goodman S, Hill C, Bata I, Fung A, Higginson L, Lam J, Massel D, McCans J, Nasmith J, Stanton E, Thompson C, Warnica W, Langer A
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To describe the rationale and design of the Prospective Reinfarction Outcomes in the Thrombolytic Era Cardizem CD Trial (PROTECT).
DESIGN: A multicentre, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group comparison of once daily beta-therapy versus heart rate lowering calcium channel blocker therapy, in the reduction of one-year nonfatal reinfarction and cardiovascular death (combined primary end-point) initiated 24 to 96 h post non-Q wave myocardial infarction.
SETTING: One hundred and twenty hospitals across Canada.
PATIENTS: Over 7500 women and men aged 21 years or older with enzyme-confirmed non-Q wave infarction and without significant left ventricular systolic dysfunction will be recruited over two years.
INTERVENTIONS: Once daily beta-blocker therapy (oral atenolol, 50 to 200 mg) versus once daily calcium channel blocker therapy (oral diltiazem 120 to 360 mg) with follow-up for up to three years.
CONCLUSIONS: The PROTECT will be the largest all-Canadian cardiovascular trial to date and will compare two commonly prescribed agents for secondary prophylaxis following non-Q wave infarction. The scientific question addressed by the PROTECT is of major public health importance and the results of the study will directly affect current clinical practice.
DESIGN: A multicentre, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group comparison of once daily beta-therapy versus heart rate lowering calcium channel blocker therapy, in the reduction of one-year nonfatal reinfarction and cardiovascular death (combined primary end-point) initiated 24 to 96 h post non-Q wave myocardial infarction.
SETTING: One hundred and twenty hospitals across Canada.
PATIENTS: Over 7500 women and men aged 21 years or older with enzyme-confirmed non-Q wave infarction and without significant left ventricular systolic dysfunction will be recruited over two years.
INTERVENTIONS: Once daily beta-blocker therapy (oral atenolol, 50 to 200 mg) versus once daily calcium channel blocker therapy (oral diltiazem 120 to 360 mg) with follow-up for up to three years.
CONCLUSIONS: The PROTECT will be the largest all-Canadian cardiovascular trial to date and will compare two commonly prescribed agents for secondary prophylaxis following non-Q wave infarction. The scientific question addressed by the PROTECT is of major public health importance and the results of the study will directly affect current clinical practice.