Lazzara R
University of Oklahoma health Sciences Center, Cardiovascular Section, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73190, USA.
Am J Cardiol. 1996 Aug 29;78(4A):28-33. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9149(96)00450-x.
In recent years, the results of large randomized and controlled trials of antiarrhythmic agents for primary and secondary prevention of ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation have changed perceptions of the actions of antiarrhythmic agents regarding both efficacy and risk. The premature termination of the CAST trials of primary prevention in postinfarct patients highlighted the proarrhythmic risk and inefficacy of the sodium channel blockers (class I action), encainide, flecainide, and moricizine, in patients at relatively low risk for death in the long term. The excess mortality with therapy was attributed to proarrhythmia due to facilitation of reentry, especially during acute ischemia. About the same time, European trials with amiodarone, a complex agent with antiadrenergic action and powerful action to prolong refractoriness (class III action), indicated enhanced survival after infarction with amiodarone but not with agents with class I action. Recent verbal reports of larger and placebo-controlled trials (EMIAT and CAM-IAT) confirm a significant reduction in arrhythmia mortality, possibly with a favorable trend in total mortality. While an older trial with dl-sotalol (class III and beta-blocking actions) showed a trend toward improved survival after infarction, a recent trial with d-sotalol in patients with recent infarction or remote infarction and heart failure was prematurely terminated because of excess mortality attributed to proarrhythmia (torsades de pointes), indicating the importance of beta-blocking properties of a class III agent. A secondary prevention trial (ESVEM) in patients surviving an episode of VT or VF showed significant superiority of dl-sotalol compared to an array of agents that block sodium channels with respect to both efficacy and tolerance. Occurrence rates of arrhythmias treated with drugs tested for efficacy either by suppression of inducible arrhythmias or by suppression of spontaneous ectopy were higher and equivalent for both testing methods. A secondary prevention trial of amiodarone and multiple agents that block sodium channels in survivors of cardiac arrest (CASCADE) showed a significant increased efficacy of amiodarone but poorer long-term tolerance compared with the other agents. Comparative analysis of the results of the various trials suggests that class III action coupled with antiadrenergic action is more efficacious in both primary and secondary prevention of life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias and that lethal proarrhythmias may be the predominant effect in attempts at primary prevention in low-risk populations due to class I or so-called pure class III action.
近年来,用于室性心动过速和心室颤动一级和二级预防的抗心律失常药物的大型随机对照试验结果,改变了人们对抗心律失常药物在疗效和风险方面作用的认识。心肌梗死后患者一级预防的CAST试验提前终止,凸显了钠通道阻滞剂(I类作用)恩卡尼、氟卡尼和莫雷西嗪在长期死亡风险相对较低的患者中存在促心律失常风险且无效。治疗导致的额外死亡率归因于再入折返的易化作用引起的促心律失常,尤其是在急性缺血期间。大约在同一时间,欧洲使用胺碘酮(一种具有抗肾上腺素能作用和强大的延长不应期作用的复合药物,III类作用)的试验表明,胺碘酮可提高心肌梗死后的生存率,而I类作用药物则不能。近期更大规模的安慰剂对照试验(EMIAT和CAM - IAT)的口头报告证实,心律失常死亡率显著降低,总死亡率可能有良好趋势。虽然一项较早的关于dl - 索他洛尔(III类和β - 阻断作用)的试验显示心肌梗死后生存率有改善趋势,但近期一项针对近期心肌梗死或陈旧性心肌梗死及心力衰竭患者使用d - 索他洛尔的试验因促心律失常(尖端扭转型室速)导致的额外死亡率而提前终止,这表明III类药物的β - 阻断特性很重要。一项针对室性心动过速或心室颤动发作后存活患者的二级预防试验(ESVEM)显示,与一系列钠通道阻滞剂相比,dl - 索他洛尔在疗效和耐受性方面均具有显著优势。通过抑制可诱导性心律失常或抑制自发性异位搏动来测试疗效的药物治疗的心律失常发生率更高,且两种测试方法的发生率相当。一项针对心脏骤停幸存者使用胺碘酮和多种钠通道阻滞剂的二级预防试验(CASCADE)显示,与其他药物相比,胺碘酮疗效显著提高,但长期耐受性较差。对各种试验结果的比较分析表明,III类作用与抗肾上腺素能作用相结合在危及生命的室性心律失常的一级和二级预防中更有效,并且在低风险人群的一级预防尝试中,由于I类或所谓的纯III类作用,致命性促心律失常可能是主要影响。