Literature DB >> 2242519

Sotalol versus quinidine for the maintenance of sinus rhythm after direct current conversion of atrial fibrillation.

S Juul-Möller1, N Edvardsson, N Rehnqvist-Ahlberg.   

Abstract

This open, parallel-group study compares quinidine and sotalol treatment for maintenance of sinus rhythm after direct current conversion of patients with chronic atrial fibrillation. The patients from 15 centers in Sweden were randomized to sotalol (98 patients) or quinidine (85 patients) after 2 hours of sinus rhythm after direct current conversion. According to primary efficacy assessment, 52% of the patients in the sotalol group and 48% of the patients in the quinidine group remained in sinus rhythm during the following 6-month treatment period (NS). Furthermore, 34% of the patients treated with sotalol and 22% of the patients treated with quinidine relapsed into atrial fibrillation (NS). Heart rate after relapsing into atrial fibrillation was higher in the patients treated with quinidine (109 beats/min) than in the patients treated with sotalol (78 beats/min, p less than 0.001). Patients treated with sotalol were found to be less symptomatic at the time of relapse compared with relapsing patients in the quinidine group. In terms of safety, more patients were withdrawn from quinidine than from sotalol treatment (26% vs. 11%, p less than 0.05), and sotalol was generally better tolerated than quinidine. Twenty-eight percent of the patients treated with sotalol and 50% of the patients treated with quinidine reported side effects (p less than 0.01). The difference was primarily a result of early (within the first month of treatment) gastrointestinal and skin side effects in the group of patients treated with quinidine.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2242519     DOI: 10.1161/01.cir.82.6.1932

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circulation        ISSN: 0009-7322            Impact factor:   29.690


  41 in total

Review 1.  In-hospital approach to newly recognized atrial fibrillation.

Authors:  C D Kimmelstiel; M Homoud; C A Clyne; M Estes III
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 2.300

Review 2.  Pharmacological control of rate and maintenance of sinus rhythm.

Authors:  M D Ezekowitz; R Lampert
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 2.300

Review 3.  A review of clinical trials assessing the efficacy and safety of newer antiarrhythmic drugs in atrial fibrillation.

Authors:  Gerald V Naccarelli; Deborah L Wolbrette; Luna Bhatta; Mazhar Khan; John Hynes; Soraya Samii; Jerry Luck
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 1.900

Review 4.  [Current strategies in the treatment of atrial fibrillation].

Authors:  Imke Drewitz; Thomas Rostock; Boris Hoffmann; Daniel Steven; Helge Servatius; Thomas Meinertz; Stephan Willems
Journal:  Med Klin (Munich)       Date:  2008-11-15

5.  New deal for old hearts.

Authors:  O M Jolobe
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1991-08-10

Review 6.  Maintaining stability of sinus rhythm in atrial fibrillation: antiarrhythmic drugs versus ablation.

Authors:  Gerald V Naccarelli; John Hynes; Deborah L Wolbrette; Luna Bhatta; Mazhar Khan; Jerry Luck
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 7.  A benefit-risk assessment of class III antiarrhythmic agents.

Authors:  Bente Brendorp; Oledyg Pedersen; Christian Torp-Pedersen; Naji Sahebzadah; Lars Køber
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 5.606

Review 8.  Emergency management of atrial fibrillation.

Authors:  A Wakai; J O O'Neill
Journal:  Postgrad Med J       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 2.401

Review 9.  Optimal management of older patients with atrial fibrillation.

Authors:  W S Aronow
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 3.923

10.  Propafenone versus disopyramide for maintenance of sinus rhythm after electrical cardioversion of chronic atrial fibrillation: a randomized, double-blind study. PRODIS Study Group.

Authors:  H J Crijns; A T Gosselink; K I Lie
Journal:  Cardiovasc Drugs Ther       Date:  1996-05       Impact factor: 3.727

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.