Chest ACCP Member Benefits
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Article Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ahmed, T.
Right arrow Articles by Danta, I.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ahmed, T.
Right arrow Articles by Danta, I.

Chest, Vol 88, 176-180, Copyright © 1985 by American College of Chest Physicians


ARTICLES

Comparative effects of oral and inhaled verapamil on antigen-induced bronchoconstriction

T Ahmed, E Russi, CS Kim and I Danta

We investigated the comparative effects of oral and inhaled verapamil on specific airway conductance (SGaw) and allergic bronchial reactivity. Ten asymptomatic subjects with ragweed hypersensitivity and a history of bronchial asthma were studied on four different days, without and with pre-treatments by oral (160 mg) or inhaled (20 mg) verapamil. Bronchial reactivity was measured as the cumulative provocative dose of ragweed antigen which caused a 35 percent decrease in SGaw, ie PD35. The amount of inhaled verapamil actually deposited in the tracheobronchial tree was estimated to be 0.56 mg. Mean SGaw was not affected by either mode of administration; mean SGaw (SE) was 0.13(.02) and 0.12(.02) L/sec-1 before and .14(.02) and 0.12(.02) L/sec- 1 after oral and inhaled verapamil, respectively. Mean (SE) PD35 was reproducible on two control days, ie 0.9(.4) and 0.8(.4) breath units, respectively. Inhaled verapamil increased mean PD35 to 18.8 (10.8) breath units (p less than 0.02), while oral verapamil had no significant effect on mean PD35. This study demonstrates that route of administration of calcium antagonist verapamil is an important factor in protection against antigen-induced bronchoconstriction. Inhalation of verapamil appears to be more effective than oral administration.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1985 by the American College of Chest Physicians.