SynthesisNaunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology2025
Efficacy and safety of calcium channel blockers in migraine management; a systematic review.
Synthesis in Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Therapeutic Overlap Between Bipolar Disorder and Migraine: A Systematic Review of Pharmacological Trials.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Calcium Channel Blockers in Critical Care Medicine: Current Clinical Applications and Future Investigational Perspectives.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeNumerous innovative treatment approaches have been developed to treat migraine, one of the most upsetting disorders. However, the optimal strategy for managing migraines remains unclear. The calcium channel blockers have demonstrated some positive effects on migraine attacks. In this systematic review, we tried to gather data on the efficacy and safety of these drugs to reach a more precise conclusion.
methodThe databases of PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science were searched systematically up to 1 August 2024. The risk of bias was assessed for clinical trials through the Cochrane Collaboration's tool.
resultsOut of 1903 studies, we included 40 clinical trials. Among 27 studies on flunarizine (FLU), most of them showed significantly superior effects in comparison with placebo or other agents. Sedation and weight gain were the most prevalent side effects experienced by FLU. Although three studies demonstrated positive effects of nimodipine (NIM) in migraine management, the seven remaining studies revealed controversial results. Three and one articles evaluating the efficacy and safety of nifedipine (NIF) and verapamil (VER) to other drugs, respectively, reported no special effects.
conclusionAccording to reviewed research, FLU appears to have the greatest impact on migraine episodes, whereas NIM outperforms B blockers in terms of migraine prevention. Further study is necessary to get more precise data on NIF and VER.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40580307What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.