Revista medica de Chile, Volumen 118, Issue 7, 2018, Pages 790-795
Identifier
dc.identifier.issn
00349887
Identifier
dc.identifier.uri
https://repositorio.uchile.cl/handle/2250/160849
Abstract
dc.description.abstract
Cerebral vasodilators (CVD) account for 1.6% of the annual expenditure on drugs in Chile. Two kinds are typified: what we have called orthodox CVD and calcium-channel blockers. They have two main uses in neurology: firstly, in acute ischaemic stroke where orthodox CVD (buflomedil, codergocrine mesylate, and nicergoline) are of no use and may even be harmful whereas calcium-channel blockers seem beneficial in neutralizing free radicals. Secondly they are used in ageing and dementia. These terms are defined and it is seen that they often end up converging. The methodology most often used in evaluating the cognitive benefits of CVD is analyzed; it is clearly plagued with subjectivity. Available literature on CVD is reviewed and no serious evidence to justify their use is found, especially in view of their cost and modest benefit accrued. A sample of the advertisements which appear in various scientific journals is scanned for VDC. It is seen that large transnationals spend 1 page in 10 of