Division of Preventive Medicine and Education, Medical University of Gdańsk, Gdańsk, Poland.
Institute of Health Sciences, Pomeranian University in Słupsk, Słupsk, Poland.
Adv Med Sci. 2024 Sep;69(2):248-255. doi: 10.1016/j.advms.2024.04.003. Epub 2024 Apr 20.
Little is known about the effectiveness of pharmacological cardioversion (PCV) with antazoline in comparison to flecainide. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of antazoline in restoring sinus rhythm (SR) versus amiodarone, flecainide and propafenone in a group of emergency department (ED) patients.
MATERIALS/METHODS: This was a single-centre retrospective analysis of patient records from an ED in a large hospital in Poland. We analysed a total of 1878 patient records, divided based on the anti-arrhythmic drug (AAD) administered during PCV: antazoline (n = 1080), antazoline + β-blocker (n = 479), amiodarone (n = 129), flecainide (n = 102), propafenone (n = 88). Of the patients, 63.5 % were female (median 65 years, [19-100]).
The percentage of successful PCV was significantly higher in the antazoline group (84.3 %) than in the antazoline + β-blocker (75.8 %, p = 0.0001), propafenone (75.6 %, p = 0.0364) and amiodarone (68.8 %, p < 0.0001) groups. Post-hoc analysis revealed that patients who received PCV with antazoline, antazoline + β-blocker, flecainide and propafenone had significantly shorter time to SR than those who received amiodarone (p < 0.0001). Univariate regression analysis revealed that patients who underwent PCV with antazoline were almost twice as likely to return to SR compared to the other groups (p < 0.0001, OR 1.81, 95 % CI 1.44-2.27).
This is the first study comparing the effectiveness of antazoline in PCV versus flecainide in addition to the previously studied amiodarone and propafenone. Our results indicate that antazoline is more effective in restoring SR than amiodarone, flecainide and propafenone. In addition, antazoline restored SR significantly faster than amiodarone or propafenone.
与氟卡尼相比,很少有人了解抗组胺药(antazoline)在电复律中的有效性。本研究的目的是比较在一组急诊科(ED)患者中,使用抗心律失常药物(AAD)进行电复律时,阿替洛尔恢复窦性节律(SR)的效果与胺碘酮、氟卡尼和普罗帕酮的效果。
材料/方法:这是对波兰一家大型医院急诊科患者记录的单中心回顾性分析。我们共分析了 1878 例患者的记录,根据电复律期间使用的抗心律失常药物(AAD)进行分组:阿替洛尔(n=1080)、阿替洛尔+β阻滞剂(n=479)、胺碘酮(n=129)、氟卡尼(n=102)、普罗帕酮(n=88)。患者中,女性占 63.5%(中位数 65 岁,19-100 岁)。
阿替洛尔组(84.3%)的电复律成功率明显高于阿替洛尔+β阻滞剂组(75.8%,p=0.0001)、普罗帕酮组(75.6%,p=0.0364)和胺碘酮组(68.8%,p<0.0001)。事后分析显示,接受阿替洛尔、阿替洛尔+β阻滞剂、氟卡尼和普罗帕酮电复律的患者恢复 SR 的时间明显短于接受胺碘酮电复律的患者(p<0.0001)。单变量回归分析显示,与其他组相比,接受阿替洛尔电复律的患者恢复 SR 的可能性几乎高出一倍(p<0.0001,OR 1.81,95%CI 1.44-2.27)。
这是第一项比较阿替洛尔与氟卡尼在电复律中的有效性的研究,此外还研究了之前研究过的胺碘酮和普罗帕酮。我们的结果表明,阿替洛尔在恢复 SR 方面比胺碘酮、氟卡尼和普罗帕酮更有效。此外,阿替洛尔恢复 SR 的速度明显快于胺碘酮或普罗帕酮。