Expedited loading with intravenous sotalol is safe and feasible-primary results of the Prospective Evaluation Analysis and Kinetics of IV Sotalol (PEAKS) Registry.

BACKGROUND: Loading of oral sotalol for atrial fibrillation requires 3 days, frequently in the hospital, to achieve steady state. The Food and Drug Administration approved loading with intravenous (IV) sotalol through model-informed development, without patient data. OBJECTIVE: We present results of the first multicenter evaluation of this recent labeling for IV sotalol. METHODS: The Prospective Evaluation Analysis and Kinetics of IV Sotalol (PEAKS) Registry was a multicenter observational registry of patients undergoing elective IV sotalol load for atrial arrhythmias. Outcomes, measured from hospital admission until first outpatient follow-up, included adverse arrhythmia events, efficacy, and length of stay. RESULTS: Of 167 consecutively enrolled patients, 23% were female; the median age was 68 (interquartile range, 61-74) years, and the median CHA2DS2-VASc score was 3 (interquartile range, 2-4). Overall, 99% were admitted for sotalol initiation (1% for dose escalation), with a target oral sotalol dose of either 80 mg twice daily (85 [51%]) or 120 mg twice daily (78 [47%]); 62 patients (37%) had an estimated creatinine clearance ≤90 mL/min. On presentation, 40% of patients were in sinus rhythm, whereas 26% underwent cardioversion before sotalol infusion. In 2 patients, sotalol infusion was stopped for bradycardia or hypotension. In 6 patients, sotalol was discontinued before discharge because of QTc prolongation (3), bradycardia (1), or recurrent atrial arrhythmia (2). The mean length of stay was 1.1 days, and 95% (n = 159) were discharged within 1 night. CONCLUSION: IV sotalol loading is safe and feasible for atrial arrhythmias, with low rates of adverse events, and yields shorter hospitalizations. More data are needed on the minimal duration required for monitoring in the hospital.

Implementation of an intravenous sotalol initiation protocol: Implications for feasibility, safety, and length of stay.

INTRODUCTION: Oral sotalol initiation requires a multiple-day, inpatient admission to monitor for QT prolongation during loading. A 1-day intravenous (IV) sotalol loading protocol was approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration in March 2020, but limited data on clinical use and administration currently exists. This study describes implementation of an IV sotalol protocol within an integrated health system, provides initial efficacy and safety outcomes, and examines length of stay (LOS) compared with oral sotalol initiation. METHODS: IV sotalol was administered according to a prespecified initiation protocol to adult patients with refractory atrial or ventricular arrhythmias. Baseline characteristics, safety and feasibility outcomes, and LOS were compared with patients receiving oral sotalol over a similar time period. RESULTS: From January 2021 to June 2022, a total of 29 patients (average age 66.0 ± 8.6 years, 27.6% women) underwent IV sotalol load and 20 patients (average age 60.4 ± 13.9 years, 65.0% women) underwent oral sotalol load. The load was successfully completed in 22/29 (75.9%) patients receiving IV sotalol and 20/20 (100%) of patients receiving oral sotalol, although 7/20 of the oral sotalol patients (35.0%) required dose reduction. Adverse events interrupting IV sotalol infusion included bradycardia (seven patients, 24.1%) and QT prolongation (three patients, 10.3%). No patients receiving IV or oral sotalol developed sustained ventricular arrhythmias before discharge. LOS for patients completing IV load was 2.6 days shorter (mean 1.0 vs. 3.6, p < .001) compared with LOS with oral load. CONCLUSION: IV sotalol loading has a safety profile that is similar to oral sotalol. It significantly shortens hospital LOS, potentially leading to large cost savings.

Model-Informed Development of Sotalol Loading and Dose Escalation Employing an Intravenous Infusion.

BACKGROUND: Sotalol is often employed to prevent recurrence of symptomatic atrial flutter/atrial fibrillation. Because sotalol can prolong the QT interval excessively causing ventricular arrhythmias, a 3-day in-hospital loading or dose escalation period is mandated with oral administration in the product label for patient safety. In patients with normal renal function, 3 days (five oral doses) are required to obtain steady state maximum sotalol concentration, which results in maximum QT prolongation. The aim of this study is to develop an intravenous to oral loading regime for sotalol therapy that reduces the 3-day in-hospital initiation or dose escalation with oral administration to 1 day without compromising patient safety. METHODS: Using model-informed drug development techniques, simulations were developed for initiation and dose escalation of sotalol therapy by employing an intravenous loading dose followed by oral sotalol administrations. RESULTS: In patients with normal renal function, an initial 1-h loading dose of intravenous sotalol followed by two oral doses in 24 h has been developed permitting attainment of three maximum serum concentrations reflecting maximum QT prolongation in a 1-day observation period. Dosing regimens for patients with impaired renal function are also developed. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with normal renal function, using an intravenous loading dose followed by oral administrations permits safe initiation or dose escalation of sotalol in 1 day instead of the 3-day dosing regimen with oral administration.

Early experience with intravenous sotalol in children with and without congenital heart disease.

BACKGROUND: Arrhythmias are common in the pediatric population. In patients unable to take oral medications or in need of acute therapy, options of intravenous (IV) antiarrhythmic medications are limited. Recently IV sotalol has become readily available, but experience in children is limited. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe our initial experience with the use of IV sotalol in the pediatric population. METHODS: A retrospective study of all pediatric patients receiving IV sotalol was performed. Patient demographic characteristics, presence of congenital heart disease, arrhythmia type, efficacy of IV sotalol use, and adverse effects were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 47 patients (26 (55%) male and 24 (51%) with congenital heart disease) received IV sotalol at a median age of 2.05 years (interquartile range 0.07-10.03 years) and a median weight of 12.8 kg (interquartile range 3.8-34.2 kg), and 13 (28%) received IV sotalol in the acute postoperative setting. Supraventricular arrhythmias occurred in 40 patients (85%) and ventricular tachycardia in 7 (15%). Among 24 patients receiving IV sotalol for an active arrhythmia, acute termination was achieved in 21 (88%). Twenty-three patients received IV sotalol as maintenance therapy for recurrent arrhythmias owing to inability to take oral antiarrhythmic medications; 19 (83%) were controlled with sotalol monotherapy. No patient required discontinuation of IV sotalol secondary to adverse effects, proarrhythmia, or QT prolongation. CONCLUSION: IV sotalol is an effective antiarrhythmic option for pediatric patients and may be an excellent agent for acute termination of active arrhythmias. It was well tolerated, with no patient requiring discontinuation secondary to adverse effects.

Intravenous Sotalol: An Under Used Treatment Strategy.

The pharmacologic treatment of arrhythmias has seen little advance over the past few years. Physicians treating life threatening or hemodynamically destabilizing arrhythmias depend almost entirely on intravenous (IV) amiodarone. This is regrettable due to the multiple toxicities of amiodarone and its long half-life. Once administered, it is a therapeutic commitment to long-term therapy. Given the very long terminal elimination half-life, treatment with amiodarone may interfere with baseline electrophysiologic studies and ablation procedures. Additionally, the side effect profile can be consequential, even with brief periods of treatment. Currently, sotalol, like amiodarone, is available in both IV and oral formulations, facilitating their use in emergency situations. IV sotalol has a rapid onset of action with linear pharmacokinetics. While sotalol's efficacy has mostly been evaluated in small clinical trials, 2 recent meta-analysis have been informative as to the utility of sotalol. Sotalol has similar efficacy as amiodarone, but has much more favorable adverse event profile. IV sotalol has been underutilized and could offer advantage in the treatment of AF for rate and rhythm control, as well in the pediatrics for treatment of supraventricular arrhythmias often resistant to other therapies.

Intravenous Sotalol - Reintroducing a Forgotten Agent to the Electrophysiology Therapeutic Arsenal.

Sotalol is a racemic mixture possessing beta-blocker and class III anti arrhythmic properties. Approved by US food and drug administration (FDA) since 2009 based on its bioequivalence with oral sotalol, clinicians are less familiar with the potential uses of the intravenous form despite its re-launch in United States in 2015. Available literature suggests that intravenous sotalol in recommended doses can be safely administered in adult and pediatric population achieving rapid reliable therapeutic plasma concentration and without additional proarrhythmic effects when compared to its oral form as well as other antiarrhythmic medications. Intravenous sotalol may have potential uses as an alternative agent for highly symptomatic atrial fibrillation post cardiac surgery as well as in life threatening ventricular arrhythmias. As with its oral form, judicious use with close attention to QTc and renal function is warranted. Further studies are needed to better understand the safety, efficacy and different dosing regimens of parenteral sotalol in adults and children.

Pediatric Dosing of Intravenous Sotalol Based on Body Surface Area in Patients with Arrhythmia.

In a recently published study, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of intravenous sotalol in pediatric patients with incessant tachyarrhythmias and we have found that intravenous sotalol is effective and safe. Our dosing regimen was based on the body weight of the patients. In the US, the recommendation for intravenous sotalol dosing in pediatric patients is based on body surface area (BSA) while taking into consideration the patients' age. The purpose of this paper is to show the correspondence of a body weight-based dosing regimen when expressed for BSA as mg/m2. We evaluated the similarity of a body weight-based dose to that calculated based on BSA using the US labeling recommendations. Of the 83 patients, 5 were newborns (age: 0-30 days), 39 infants and toddlers (age: 1-24 month), 26 young children (age: >2-6 years), 11 older children (age: 6-12 years), and 2 adolescents (age: 14 years). Each received a loading dose of 1 mg/kg intravenous sotalol administered over 10 min followed by a maintenance dose of 4.5 mg/kg/day. There was a close correlation between the sotalol loading doses calculated based on body weight and BSA across the entire age range (r = 0.977, p < 0.001). In most of the age groups, the body weight-based loading doses were lower or equal to the BSA-based doses. Only in the adolescents were the body weight-based doses higher. The maintenance doses given in our study were significantly higher than the BSA-based dose in newborns: 75 ± 6 versus 53 ± 8 mg/m2, p < 0.05; infants/toddlers: 88 ± 14 versus 77 ± 7 mg/m2, p < 0.001; younger children: 113 ± 12 versus 85 mg/m2, p < 0.001; older children: 123 ± 16 versus 85 mg/m2, p < 0.01; and adolescents 157 ± 30 versus 85.5 mg/m2. Despite the rapid administration of the loading dose and the increased maintenance doses, our body weight-based dosing regimen was safe. Only one newborn had significant adverse event (AV block) that resolved spontaneously after discontinuation of the infusion.