Literature DB >> 12670638

Old and new antiarrhythmic drugs for converting and maintaining sinus rhythm in atrial fibrillation: comparative efficacy and results of trials.

Gerald V Naccarelli1, Deborah L Wolbrette, Mazhar Khan, Luna Bhatta, John Hynes, Soraya Samii, Jerry Luck.   

Abstract

In managing atrial fibrillation (AF), the main therapeutic strategies include rate control, termination of the arrhythmia, and the prevention of recurrences and thromboembolic events. Safety and efficacy considerations are important in optimizing the choice of an antiarrhythmic drug for the treatment of AF. Recently approved antiarrhythmics, such as dofetilide, and promising investigational drugs, such as azimilide and dronedarone, may change the treatment landscape for AF. For medical conversion of recent-onset AF, class IC antiarrhythmic drugs, administered as an oral bolus, have been demonstrated to be the most efficacious pharmacologic conversion agents. Intravenous ibutilide and oral dofetilide both have efficacies superior to placebo in controlled trials for converting persistent AF. Comparative trials in paroxysmal AF have demonstrated that flecainide, propafenone, quinidine, and sotalol are equally effective in preventing recurrences of AF. Amiodarone has been demonstrated to be more efficacious than propafenone or sotalol in the Canadian Trial of Atrial Fibrillation. In persistent AF, twice-daily dofetilide has been shown to be as or more effective than low-dose sotalol given twice daily for the maintenance of sinus rhythm in patients with AF. Trials have demonstrated that subjective adverse effects are less frequent with class IC drugs, sotalol, and dofetilide compared with such drugs as quinidine. In patients without structural heart disease, flecainide, propafenone, and D,L-sotalol are the initial drugs of choice, given their reasonable efficacy, low incidence of subjective side effects, and lack of significant end-organ toxicity. Treating AF in patients with left ventricular dysfunction can be difficult because of associated electrophysiologic derangements, potential proarrhythmic concerns, and negative inotropic effects of antiarrhythmics. Some data exist suggesting that angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers can prevent AF either by preventing atrial dilation and stretch-induced arrhythmias or by blocking the renin-angiotensin system. In post-myocardial infarction patients, D,L-sotalol, dofetilide, and amiodarone-and in congestive heart failure patients, amiodarone and dofetilide-have demonstrated neutral effects on survival in controlled trials. In the Congestive Heart Failure Survival Trial of Antiarrhythmic Therapy (CHF-STAT), amiodarone lowered the frequency of AF development and improved left ventricular ejection fraction over time. In CHF-STAT, there was lower mortality in patients who converted from AF to sinus rhythm. Dofetilide decreased rehospitalization for congestive heart failure in the Danish Investigations of Arrhythmia and Mortality on Dofetilide (DIAMOND) trials. Neutral effects on survival and favorable hemodynamics have positioned amiodarone and dofetilide as the antiarrhythmics of choice in patients with left ventricular dysfunction. In post-myocardial infarction patients, sotalol is an additional agent to consider for treatment of AF in this setting.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12670638     DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9149(02)03375-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Cardiol        ISSN: 0002-9149            Impact factor:   2.778


  21 in total

Review 1.  Chaos in the genesis and maintenance of cardiac arrhythmias.

Authors:  Zhilin Qu
Journal:  Prog Biophys Mol Biol       Date:  2010-11-13       Impact factor: 3.667

2.  Nonlinear and Stochastic Dynamics in the Heart.

Authors:  Zhilin Qu; Gang Hu; Alan Garfinkel; James N Weiss
Journal:  Phys Rep       Date:  2014-10-10       Impact factor: 25.600

Review 3.  Safety of flecainide.

Authors:  Juan Tamargo; Alessandro Capucci; Philippe Mabo
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2012-04-01       Impact factor: 5.606

4.  Rate versus rhythm control strategies for AF.

Authors:  Brian Olshansky
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2005-10

5.  Effects of ajmaline on contraction patterns of isolated rat gastric antrum and portal vein smooth muscle strips and on neurogenic relaxations of gastric fundus.

Authors:  Robert Patejdl; Alina Gromann; Dietmar Bänsch; Thomas Noack
Journal:  Pflugers Arch       Date:  2019-05-02       Impact factor: 3.657

6.  Role of Bi-Atrial Pacing In Slowing The Progression of Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation To Permanent Atrial Fibrillation.

Authors:  Raffaele Corbisiero; Kathleen Zazzali; David Muller
Journal:  J Atr Fibrillation       Date:  2013-12-31

7.  NORMAL QUALITY OF LIFE AFTER THE COX MAZE PROCEDURE FOR ATRIAL FIBRILLATION.

Authors:  Spencer J Melby; Andreas Zierer; Jordon G Lubahn; Marci S Bailey; James L Cox; Richard B Schuessler; Ralph J Damiano
Journal:  Innovations (Phila)       Date:  2008-05-01

Review 8.  [Dronedarone: the new antiarrythmic agent?].

Authors:  J Brachmann; A-M Sinha
Journal:  Herzschrittmacherther Elektrophysiol       Date:  2009-06

Review 9.  New approaches to managing nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: what are the thromboembolic implications?

Authors:  Peter J Kudenchuk
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 2.300

10.  Role of late sodium current in modulating the proarrhythmic and antiarrhythmic effects of quinidine.

Authors:  Lin Wu; Donglin Guo; Hong Li; James Hackett; Gan-Xin Yan; Zhen Jiao; Charles Antzelevitch; John C Shryock; Luiz Belardinelli
Journal:  Heart Rhythm       Date:  2008-09-06       Impact factor: 6.343

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.