Thomas Stuart P, Guy Duncan, Wallace Elisabeth, Crampton Roselyn, Kijvanit Pat, Eipper Vicki, Ross David L, Cooper Mark J
Department of Cardiology, Emergency Medicine, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia.
Am Heart J. 2004 Jan;147(1):E3. doi: 10.1016/s0002-8703(03)00526-x.
Amiodarone and sotalol are commonly used for the maintenance of sinus rhythm, but the efficacy of these agents administered as high-dose infusions for rapid conversion of atrial fibrillation is unknown. Use in this context would facilitate drug initiation in patients in whom ongoing prophylactic therapy is indicated.
We assessed the efficacy and safety of rapid high-dose intravenous infusions of amiodarone and sotalol for heart rate control and rapid reversion to sinus rhythm in patients who came to the emergency department with recent-onset symptomatic atrial fibrillation. Patients (n = 140) were randomized to receive 1.5mg/kg of sotalol infused in 10 minutes, 10mg/kg of amiodarone in 30 minutes, or 500 microg of digoxin in 20 minutes. Electrical cardioversion was attempted for patients not converting to sinus rhythm within 12 hours.
The rapid infusion of sotalol or amiodarone resulted in more rapid rate control than digoxin. Each of the 3 trial strategies resulted in similar rates of pharmacological conversion to sinus rhythm (amiodarone, 51%; sotalol, 44%; digoxin, 50%; P = not significant). The overall rates of cardioversion after trial drug infusion and defibrillation were high for all groups (amiodarone, 94%; sotalol, 95%,; digoxin, 98%; P = not significant), but there was a trend toward a higher incidence of serious adverse reactions in the amiodarone group.
The rapid infusion of sotalol or amiodarone in patients with symptomatic recent-onset atrial fibrillation results in rapid control of ventricular rate. Even with high-dose rapid infusions, all 3 agents are associated with a poor overall reversion rate within 12 hours. Almost all patients were returned to sinus rhythm with a combination of pharmacological therapy and electrical cardioversion.
胺碘酮和索他洛尔常用于维持窦性心律,但这些药物大剂量静脉输注用于快速转复房颤的疗效尚不清楚。在此种情况下使用将有助于对需要持续预防性治疗的患者开始用药。
我们评估了大剂量静脉快速输注胺碘酮和索他洛尔对近期发生症状性房颤并前来急诊科就诊患者控制心率和快速恢复窦性心律的疗效和安全性。患者(n = 140)被随机分为三组,分别在10分钟内静脉输注1.5mg/kg索他洛尔、在30分钟内静脉输注10mg/kg胺碘酮或在20分钟内静脉输注500μg地高辛。对12小时内未转为窦性心律的患者尝试进行电复律。
与地高辛相比,快速输注索他洛尔或胺碘酮能更快速地控制心率。三种试验策略导致药理学转复为窦性心律的发生率相似(胺碘酮组为51%;索他洛尔组为44%;地高辛组为50%;P值无统计学意义)。所有组在试验药物输注和除颤后的总体复律率都很高(胺碘酮组为94%;索他洛尔组为95%;地高辛组为98%;P值无统计学意义),但胺碘酮组严重不良反应的发生率有升高趋势。
对近期发生症状性房颤患者快速输注索他洛尔或胺碘酮可快速控制心室率。即使大剂量快速输注,所有三种药物在12小时内的总体转复率都较低。几乎所有患者通过药物治疗和电复律相结合的方式恢复了窦性心律。