Coumel P, Leclercq J F, Assayag P
Am J Cardiol. 1984 Nov 14;54(9):60D-66D. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9149(84)80288-x.
Seventy-one patients (mean age 53 years) were treated with oral propafenone, 900 mg/day, for a mean of 6.6 months. A large spectrum of arrhythmias was encountered, and particular attention was paid to their relation with the autonomic nervous system. Drug efficacy was graded from 1 (no effect) to 5 (complete control) according to the clinical result and Holter recording. This method permitted comparisons to be made between propafenone and 3 other antiarrhythmic agents: quinidine, beta-blockers and amiodarone. Among the 32 patients with supraventricular arrhythmias, 9 cases of vagally dependent atrial flutter and fibrillation were less sensitive to propafenone (mean effect 1.4) than to quinidine (mean effect 2.0) or amiodarone (mean effect 2.3). However, 8 cases of adrenergically dependent atrial tachycardia and fibrillation were more sensitive to propafenone (mean effect 4.1) than to beta blockers (3.0) or amiodarone (mean effect 3.5). In 12 cases of miscellaneous atrial arrhythmias the response to propafenone was intermediate. However, 3 patients with resistant junctional tachycardia were improved with propafenone. Among 42 ventricular arrhythmias, 5 patients with extrasystole who were responsive to quinidine (mean effect 3.8) were also improved with propafenone (mean effect 4.6). Propafenone (mean effect 4.1) was much more effective than quinidine (mean effect 2.4) in treating 8 cases of idiopathic benign ventricular tachycardia and even more successful in treating 13 cases of more severe arrhythmias in diseased hearts (propafenone's mean effect 4.1, quinidine's mean effect 1.9 and amiodarone's mean effect 1.9). Propafenone was less effective (mean effect 3.3) than amiodarone (mean effect 4.0) in 4 cases of severe, adrenergically dependent idiopathic ventricular tachycardia (VT).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
71例患者(平均年龄53岁)接受口服普罗帕酮治疗,剂量为900毫克/天,平均治疗6.6个月。遇到了各种各样的心律失常,特别关注它们与自主神经系统的关系。根据临床结果和动态心电图记录,将药物疗效从1级(无效果)到5级(完全控制)进行分级。该方法允许对普罗帕酮与其他3种抗心律失常药物进行比较:奎尼丁、β受体阻滞剂和胺碘酮。在32例室上性心律失常患者中,9例迷走神经依赖性心房扑动和颤动对普罗帕酮的敏感性(平均效果1.4)低于奎尼丁(平均效果2.0)或胺碘酮(平均效果2.3)。然而,8例肾上腺素能依赖性房性心动过速和颤动对普罗帕酮的敏感性(平均效果4.1)高于β受体阻滞剂(3.0)或胺碘酮(平均效果3.5)。在12例其他类型的房性心律失常中,对普罗帕酮的反应处于中间水平。然而,3例难治性交界性心动过速患者使用普罗帕酮后病情有所改善。在42例室性心律失常中,5例对奎尼丁有反应(平均效果3.8)的早搏患者使用普罗帕酮后也有所改善(平均效果4.6)。普罗帕酮(平均效果4.1)在治疗8例特发性良性室性心动过速方面比奎尼丁(平均效果2.4)有效得多,在治疗13例病情较重的心脏病心律失常方面甚至更成功(普罗帕酮平均效果4.1,奎尼丁平均效果1.9,胺碘酮平均效果1.9)。在4例严重的、肾上腺素能依赖性特发性室性心动过速(VT)中,普罗帕酮的效果(平均效果3.3)低于胺碘酮(平均效果4.0)。(摘要截取自250字)