***TASK***
the task is to simplify the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***INPUT***
the input is the abstract of a biomedical literature

***OUTPUT***
the output is the simplified abstract for the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***DOCUMENTATION***

***EXAMPLES***

Input: Five randomised or quasi-randomised double-blind trials fulfilled the selection criteria, but were not sufficiently comparable to undertake a meta-analysis. The drugs studied were verapamil (8 participants), diltiazem (56 participants), nifedipine (105 participants) and flunarizine (27 participants). There were limitations in the description of blinding and randomisation, and definition of outcome measures. One trial, using verapamil, showed a difference between groups in muscle force measured by ergometry, but also revealed cardiac side effects. The numbers of people included in the trials were low, and so the studies may not have included enough people for sufficient power to detect small differences in muscle force or function between placebo and control groups. In addition, calcium antagonists were in an early stage of development and some of the second generation drugs that have a better side effect profile, such as amlodipine, have not been studied. There is no evidence to show a significant beneficial effect of calcium antagonists on muscle function in DMD.
Output:

This is an updated review. In the original review original eight studies were identified and five were high enough quality to be included. In this update no new trials were identified and so five were still included in the review. These studies were of different types of calcium channel blocking drugs and measured a variety of outcomes such as muscle strength, scales of muscle function, biochemical changes in muscle and electrocardiographic findings. Only one study showed a beneficial effect, which was an increase in muscle strength, but in this study the drug used was also associated with cardiac side effects. Adverse effects noted were mostly known side effects of calcium channel blockers.  Limitations of the review were that a meta-analysis could not be done as the trials used different calcium channel blockers and measured different outcomes, and all but one of the trials included a low number of patients. In conclusion, the review did not find calcium antagonists to have a useful effect.