Literature DB >> 2469545

Evaluation of antiarrhythmic drugs on defibrillation energy requirements in dogs. Sodium channel block and action potential prolongation.

D S Echt1, J N Black, J T Barbey, D R Coxe, E Cato.   

Abstract

Antiarrhythmic drugs have been reported to produce variable effects on defibrillation energy requirements. However, the relation between the in vitro electrophysiologic effects of these agents and the changes in defibrillation energy requirements have not been systematically examined. Therefore, we evaluated the effects of the sodium channel blocking drugs lidocaine and procainamide, the action potential prolonging drugs N-acetyl procainamide and clofilium, and the potassium current blocker cesium in acute canine models with the same internal spring and epicardial patch electrodes used in humans for ventricular defibrillation testing. Ten series of experiments were performed in 78 dogs. Nonlinear regression was used to derive curves of energy dose versus percent successful defibrillation attempts and the 50% and 90% effective energy dose for each experimental condition. Saline control experiments indicated that the preparation was stable throughout the 6-hour duration of the experiments. Lidocaine doubled the defibrillation energy requirement (p less than 0.001) at a mean plasma concentration of 8.2 micrograms/ml. The effect of lidocaine on defibrillation energy was reversible, present at therapeutic plasma concentrations, linearly related to plasma concentration (r = 0.69, p less than 0.002), and present even after only 5-second episodes of ventricular fibrillation. In contrast, procainamide had no effect on defibrillation energy at mean plasma concentrations of 8.5 and 13 micrograms/ml, even after prolonged (30-second) episodes of ventricular fibrillation, whereas N-acetyl procainamide, clofilium, and cesium all decreased the energy requirement for defibrillation by 13-27%. Moreover, with the addition of N-acetyl procainamide, there was a trend toward diminishing the increase in defibrillation energy requirement caused by lidocaine. All agents prolonged the mean ventricular fibrillation cycle length. Lidocaine shortened the QT interval, whereas all other agents increased the QT (p less than 0.05). The major electrophysiologic effect of lidocaine is of sodium channel blockade, whereas, N-acetyl procainamide, clofilium, and cesium predominantly increase the action potential duration, and procainamide exerts both effects. Thus, these data indicate that sodium channel block and action potential prolongation exert significant and antagonistic modulating effects on defibrillation energy requirements.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2469545     DOI: 10.1161/01.cir.79.5.1106

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


  15 in total

Review 1.  Interactions of antiarrhythmic drugs and implantable devices in controlling ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation.

Authors:  Yadavendra S Rajawat; Darryl Dias; Edward P Gerstenfeld; Sanjay Dixit; Bindi Shah; Andrea M Russo; Francis E Marchlinski
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 2.  Subclassification of class I antiarrhythmic drugs: enhanced relevance after CAST.

Authors:  T J Campbell
Journal:  Cardiovasc Drugs Ther       Date:  1992-10       Impact factor: 3.727

Review 3.  A prolonged QTc interval. Is it an important effect of antiarrhythmic drugs?

Authors:  F A Fish; D M Roden
Journal:  Med Toxicol Adverse Drug Exp       Date:  1989 Nov-Dec

4.  Pharmacologic enhancement of atrial electrical defibrillation efficacy: role of ibutilide.

Authors:  D S Khoury; M D Assar; H Sun
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 1.900

5.  Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium-Amiodarone, Lidocaine or Placebo Study (ROC-ALPS): Rationale and methodology behind an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest antiarrhythmic drug trial.

Authors:  Peter J Kudenchuk; Siobhan P Brown; Mohamud Daya; Laurie J Morrison; Brian E Grunau; Tom Rea; Tom Aufderheide; Judy Powell; Brian Leroux; Christian Vaillancourt; Jonathan Larsen; Lynn Wittwer; M Riccardo Colella; Shannon W Stephens; Mark Gamber; Debra Egan; Paul Dorian
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2014-03-01       Impact factor: 4.749

6.  The 1998 European Resuscitation Council guidelines for adult advanced life support. Advanced Life Support Working Group of the European Resuscitation Council.

Authors: 
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-06-20

7.  Effects of blockade of fast and slow inward current channels on ventricular fibrillation in the pig heart.

Authors:  A J Stewart; J D Allen; A B Devine; A A Adgey
Journal:  Heart       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 5.994

8.  Incidence and clinical predictors of low defibrillation safety margin at time of implantable defibrillator implantation.

Authors:  Zhongwei Cheng; Mintu Turakhia; Ronald Lo; Anurag Gupta; Paul C Zei; Henry H Hsia; Amin Al-Ahmad; Paul J Wang
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2012-03-06       Impact factor: 1.900

9.  Azimilide decreases defibrillation voltage requirements and increases spatial organization during ventricular fibrillation.

Authors:  X Q Qi; D Newman; P Dorian
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 1.900

10.  Effects of intra-resuscitation antiarrhythmic administration on rearrest occurrence and intra-resuscitation ECG characteristics in the ROC ALPS trial.

Authors:  David D Salcido; Robert H Schmicker; Noah Kime; Jason E Buick; Sheldon Cheskes; Brian Grunau; Stephanie Zellner; Dana Zive; Tom P Aufderheide; Allison C Koller; Heather Herren; Jack Nuttall; Matthew L Sundermann; James J Menegazzi
Journal:  Resuscitation       Date:  2018-05-24       Impact factor: 5.262

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.