The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety profile of manidipine 20 mg with that of amlodipine 10 mg. A systematic research of quantitative data produced or published between 1995 and 2009 was performed. Head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of 12 months minimum duration reporting comparative efficacy (changes in systolic and diastolic blood pressure) and safety (total adverse events and ankle oedema), were included. Four high-quality RCTs, accounting for 838 patients (436 received manidipine and 402 received amlodipine) were included. The effi cacy of manidipine and amlodipine was statistically equivalent: effect size for DBP =−0.08 (p = 0.22) and SBP =−0.01 (p =0.83).The global safety of manidipine was signifi cantly better than amlodipine: the relative risk (RR) for adverse event was 0.69 (0.56 – 0.85), and particularly for ankle oedema RR was 0.35 (0.22 – 0.54). Publication bias was not signifi cant and the robustness of the analyses was good. These data suggest a better efficacy/safety ratio of manidipine over amlodipine
