1 Department of Cardiology at Boston Children's Hospital and the Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Charles Mackin and Elisabeth S. DeWitt contributed equally as first authors.
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol Ther. 2019 May;24(3):288-297. doi: 10.1177/1074248418810811. Epub 2018 Nov 29.
Direct comparison of the effects of antiarrhythmic agents on myocardial performance may be useful in choosing between medications in critically ill patients. Studies directly comparing multiple antiarrhythmic medications are lacking. The use of an experimental heart preparation permits examination of myocardial performance under constant loading conditions.
Hearts of Sprague Dawley rats (n = 35, 402-507 g) were explanted and cannulated in working heart model with fixed preload and afterload. Each heart was then exposed to a 3-hour infusion of procainamide (20 µg/kg/min), esmolol (100 or 200 µg/kg/min), amiodarone (10 or 20 mg/kg/d), sotalol (80 mg/m/d), or placebo infusions (n = 5 per dose). Cardiac output, contractility (dP/dT), diastolic performance (dP/dT), and heart rate were compared between groups over time by linear mixed modeling.
Compared with placebo, sotalol decreased contractility by an average of 24% ( P < .001) over the infusion period, as did amiodarone (low dose by 13%, P = .029; high dose by 14%, P = .013). Compared with placebo, mean cardiac output was significantly lower in animals treated with sotalol (by 22%, P = .016) and esmolol 200 μg/kg/min (by 23%, P = .012). Over time, amiodarone decreased cardiac output (20 mg/kg/d, β = -89 [-144, -33] μL/min decrease, P = .002) and also worsened diastolic function, decreasing dP/dT by ∼18% and 22% ( P = .032 and P = .011, low and high doses, respectively). Procainamide did not have a significant effect on any measures of systolic or diastolic performance.
In isolated hearts, amiodarone and sotalol depressed myocardial contractility, cardiac output, and diastolic function. However, procainamide did not negatively affect myocardial performance and represents a favorable agent in settings of therapeutic equivalence.
在危重病患者中,比较抗心律失常药物对心肌功能的影响可能有助于在药物选择之间进行比较。目前缺乏直接比较多种抗心律失常药物的研究。实验性心脏制剂的使用允许在恒定负荷条件下检查心肌功能。
将 Sprague Dawley 大鼠(n = 35,体重 402-507g)的心脏取出并在工作心脏模型中进行套管,该模型具有固定的前负荷和后负荷。然后,每只心脏接受 3 小时的普罗卡因胺(20μg/kg/min)、艾司洛尔(100 或 200μg/kg/min)、胺碘酮(10 或 20mg/kg/d)、索他洛尔(80mg/m/d)或安慰剂输注(每组 5 只)。通过线性混合建模比较各组在不同时间的心脏输出量、收缩性(dP/dT)、舒张性能(dP/dT)和心率。
与安慰剂相比,索他洛尔在整个输注期间平均使收缩性降低 24%(P<0.001),胺碘酮(低剂量降低 13%,P=0.029;高剂量降低 14%,P=0.013)也有同样的作用。与安慰剂相比,接受索他洛尔(降低 22%,P=0.016)和艾司洛尔 200μg/kg/min(降低 23%,P=0.012)治疗的动物的平均心脏输出量明显降低。随着时间的推移,胺碘酮降低了心脏输出量(20mg/kg/d,β=-89[-144,-33]μL/min,P=0.002),并恶化了舒张功能,使 dP/dT 降低约 18%和 22%(P=0.032 和 P=0.011,低剂量和高剂量)。普罗卡因胺对收缩性或舒张性性能的任何测量均无显著影响。
在分离的心脏中,胺碘酮和索他洛尔抑制心肌收缩力、心脏输出量和舒张功能。然而,普罗卡因胺不会对心肌功能产生负面影响,并且在治疗等效的情况下是一种有利的药物。