Kudenchuk P J, Kron J, Walance C, McAnulty J H
Department of Medicine, Oregon Health Sciences University, Portland.
Am J Cardiol. 1990 Feb 15;65(7):446-52. doi: 10.1016/0002-9149(90)90808-e.
Twenty-six patients who developed their first clinical episode of sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) while taking type IA antiarrhythmic agents for more benign rhythm disturbances were rechallenged with the identical drug during electrophysiologic testing. Patients with these new drug-associated spontaneous ventricular arrhythmias often manifested a preexisting substrate for such arrhythmias: sustained VT or VF was induced in 65% of patients at baseline, and in 58% of patients when tested with their previously taken antiarrhythmic drug. Among those without inducible sustained ventricular arrhythmias in the drug-free state, 78% remained free of inducible sustained arrhythmias when tested with the same drug they had been taking at the time of the clinical arrhythmia. Even patients without a definable electrophysiologic substrate for sustained VT or VF remained at risk for arrhythmia recurrence if treated with alternative antiarrhythmic medications: 40% of such patients who continued to receive an antiarrhythmic agent different from that being administered when their clinical VT or VF occurred had recurrent spontaneous ventricular tachyarrhythmias during follow-up. Thus, patients with drug-associated clinical sustained ventricular tachycardias form a heterogenous group that should be evaluated individually and not empirically managed for a "proarrhythmic effect" simply by antiarrhythmic drug withdrawal or drug substitution.
26例患者在服用IA类抗心律失常药物治疗较为良性的心律失常时首次发生持续性室性心动过速(VT)或室颤(VF)临床发作,在电生理检查期间再次给予相同药物。这些与新药相关的自发性室性心律失常患者往往存在此类心律失常的潜在基础:65%的患者在基线时可诱发出持续性VT或VF,在使用之前服用的抗心律失常药物进行检测时,这一比例为58%。在无药物状态下不能诱发出持续性室性心律失常的患者中,78%在使用临床心律失常发作时所服用的相同药物进行检测时仍不能诱发出持续性心律失常。即使没有明确的持续性VT或VF电生理基础的患者,如果使用其他抗心律失常药物治疗,仍有心律失常复发的风险:在这些继续接受与临床VT或VF发作时所用药物不同的抗心律失常药物治疗的患者中,40%在随访期间出现复发性自发性室性快速心律失常。因此,与药物相关的临床持续性室性心动过速患者构成一个异质性群体,应进行个体化评估,而不是简单地通过停用抗心律失常药物或更换药物来经验性地处理“促心律失常作用”。