Suppr超能文献

静脉注射西苯唑啉与氟卡尼治疗房性心律失常的对比研究

[Comparative study of cibenzoline and flecainide administered via an intravenous route in reducing auricular arrhythmia].

作者信息

Metz D, Chapoutot L, Laudinat J M, Ehrhard V, Taupin J M, Chabert J P, Metivet F, Pollet E, Bajolet A

机构信息

Service de Cardiologie, Hôpital Robert-Debré, Reims.

出版信息

Ann Cardiol Angeiol (Paris). 1990 Jan;39(1):1-6.

PMID:2107784
Abstract

The efficacy of intravenous flecainide and cibenzoline acetate in the reduction of atrial rhythm disorders was compared in two groups of 30 patients. These arrhythmias are divided in 31 atrial fibrillation, 11 tachy-systoles, 18 atrial flutters. Parenteral administration of the anti-arrhythmic drug over a 24 hour-period is preceded by a bolus injection of 1.5 mg/kg of flecainide acetate for group I, and a bolus of 1 mg/kg of cibenzoline for group II. The overall efficacy of the two molecules is comparable (53%) as well as the reduction of the atrial fibrillations (65% vs 57%). Flecainide acetate seems more effective in treating effectively atrial tachycardias (66.6% vs 40%), and cibenzoline is more effective in the treatment of atrial flutters (54% vs 14%). The functional, electrical and haemodynamic tolerance has always been good in both group, except in 2 patients, because of the indirect pro-arrhythmic effect of cibenzoline. We are concluding that the efficacy of both molecules is satisfactory and we advocate their use, as first intention, in recent and idiopathic atrial fibrillation; it seems that cibenzoline is more effective on ischemic cardiopathies and flecainide acetate is more effective on valvular cardiopathies. Nevertheless, the possible indirect pro-arrhythmic effect, sometimes poorly tolerated in the first minutes following administration of the bolus, only on organized atrial rhythm disorder, leads us to advocate the prescription of these two drugs when attempts of transesophageal or endocardiac atrial stimulation have failed.

摘要

在两组各30例患者中比较了静脉注射氟卡尼和醋酸西苯唑啉减少房性心律失常的疗效。这些心律失常包括31例房颤、11例房性心动过速、18例房扑。在24小时内胃肠外给予抗心律失常药物之前,第一组静脉推注1.5mg/kg醋酸氟卡尼,第二组静脉推注1mg/kg西苯唑啉。两种药物的总体疗效相当(53%),减少房颤的疗效也相当(65%对57%)。醋酸氟卡尼在有效治疗房性心动过速方面似乎更有效(66.6%对40%),而西苯唑啉在治疗房扑方面更有效(54%对14%)。除2例患者外,两组患者的功能、电和血流动力学耐受性一直良好,这2例患者是由于西苯唑啉的间接促心律失常作用。我们得出结论,两种药物的疗效都令人满意,我们主张将它们作为首选用于近期发作的特发性房颤;似乎西苯唑啉对缺血性心脏病更有效,醋酸氟卡尼对瓣膜性心脏病更有效。然而,可能的间接促心律失常作用,有时在推注给药后的最初几分钟内耐受性较差,且仅发生在有组织的房性心律失常中,这使我们主张在经食管或心内膜心房刺激尝试失败时才开具这两种药物的处方。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验