Surfactant-assisted dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction combined with field-amplified sample stacking in capillary electrophoresis for the determination of mexiletine and lidocaine.

A sensitive method for the determination of mexiletine and lidocaine using surfactant-assisted dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction coupled with capillary electrophoresis was developed. Triton X-100 and dichloromethane were used as the dispersive agent and extraction solvent, respectively. After the extraction, mexiletine and lidocaine were analyzed using capillary electrophoresis with ultraviolet detection. The detection sensitivity was further enhanced through the use of field-amplified sample stacking. Under optimal extraction and stacking conditions, the calibration curves were linear over a concentration range of 0.05-1.00 µM for mexiletine and 0.03-1.00 µM for lidocaine. The limits of detection (signal-to-noise ratio of 3) were 0.01 and 0.01 µM for mexiletine and lidocaine, respectively. An approximately 1141- to 1250-fold improvement in sensitivity was observed for the two analytes compared with the injection of a standard solution without the surfactant-assisted dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction and field-amplified sample stacking procedures. This developed method was successfully applied to the determination of mexiletine and lidocaine in human urine and serum samples. Both precision and accuracy for urine and serum samples were less than 8.7 and 6.7%, respectively. The recoveries of the two analytes from urine and serum samples were 54.7-64.9% and 16.1-56.5%, respectively.

Pharmacokinetic study of three cardiovascular drugs by high-performance liquid chromatography using pre-column derivatization with 9,10-anthraquinone-2-sulfonyl chloride.

A new method was developed to analyze three cardiovascular drugs in rat plasma, Mexiletine hydrochloride (MXL), Methoxamine hydrochloride (MTX), and Metaraminol bitartrate (MTR), by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) using 9,10-anthraquinone-2-sulfonyl chloride (ASC) as the derivatization reagent. The derivatization modes and conditions for this method were optimized. The quantitative analysis was achieved using a C18 column at room temperature (25 degrees C), with various volume ratios of methanol-water as the mobile phase and a detection wavelength at 256 nm. Analytical linearity was obtained for the method over the concentration range of 0.04-8.0 microg mL(-1) for all the three drugs. The lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) was 0.04 microg mL(-1). This method was successfully applied to the analysis of the three drugs in rat plasma and their pharmacokinetic studies. The t1/2 values of the three drugs in rats were found to be 5.38+/-0.61, 4.49+/-0.53, and 3.70+/-0.19 h for MXL, MTX, and MTR, respectively.

Simultaneous determination of ten antiarrhythic drugs and a metabolite in human plasma by liquid chromatography--tandem mass spectrometry.

A simple, accurate and selective LC-MS/MS method was developed and validated for simultaneous quantification of ten antiarrhythic drugs (diltiazem, amiodarone, mexiletine, propranolol, sotalol, verapamil, bisoprolol, metoprolol, atenolol, carvedilol) and a metabolite (norverapamil) in human plasma. Plasma samples were simply pretreated with acetonitrile for deproteinization. Chromatographic separation was performed on a Capcell C(18) column (50mmx2.0mm, 5microm) using a gradient mixture of acetonitrile and water (both containing 0.02% formic acid) as a mobile phase at flow rate of 0.3ml/min. The analytes were protonated in the positive electrospray ionization (ESI) interface and detected in multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) mode. Calibration curves were linear over wide ranges from sub- to over-therapeutic concentration in plasma for all analytes. Intra- and inter-batch precision of analysis was <12.0%, accuracy ranged from 90% to 110%, average recovery from 85.0% to 99.7%. The validated method was successfully applied to therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of antiarrhythic drugs in routine clinical practice.

[Determination of mexiletine in human blood by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry].

OBJECTIVE: To establish a liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method for detection of mexiletine by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry. METHODS: After simple protein precipitation of the blood sample with acetonitrile, the organic solvent layer diluted with LC mobile solvent was separated by Allure PFP Propyl column, confirmed and quantified by MS/MS in the multi-reaction monitoring (MRM) mode via positive electrospray ionization. RESULTS: Mexiletine and naloxone (internal standard) got ideal resolution under the selected analytical condition. The correlation coeficient of linear calibration curve was over 0.9999 within the mexiletine concentration range 0.02-10 microg/mL. The relative standard deviations were under 10% for intra-day and under 15% for inter-day, and the detection limit was 0.01 microg/mL. CONCLUSION: The established LC-MS/MS method is simple, rapid, sensitive, unaffected by matrix effect and appropriate for detection of mexiletine in blood in the field of therapeutic drug monitoring and forensic toxicology.

Quantitation of Flecainide, Mexiletine, Propafenone, and Amiodarone in Serum or Plasma Using Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC-MS/MS).

Flecainide, mexiletine, propafenone, and amiodarone are antiarrhythmic drugs that are used primarily in the treatment of cardiac arrhythmias. The monitoring of the use of these drugs has applications in therapeutic drug monitoring and overdose situations. LC-MS/MS is used to analyze plasma/serum extracts with loxapine as the internal standard to ensure accurate quantitation and control for any potential matrix effects. Positive ion electrospray is used to introduce the analytes into the mass spectrometer. Selected reaction monitoring of two product ions for each analyte allows for the calculation of ion ratios which ensures correct identification of each analyte, while a matrix matched calibration curve is used for quantitation.

Antiarrhythmic Mexiletine: A Review on Synthetic Routes to Racemic and Homochiral Mexiletine and its Enantioseparation.

Mexiletine is an oral class IB antiarrhythmic agent. Although it was primarily studied for the treatment of ventricular arrhythmias, it has been demonstrated to be useful also for the treatment of chronic painful diabetic neuropathy, neuropathic pain, skeletal muscle channelopathies, and recently amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. This review presents a detailed report on the different synthetic routes to racemic and homochiral mexiletine developed in the last decades, as well as analytical studies regarding enantioseparation methods and enantiomeric excess determination. Finally, some analogues of mexiletine reported in the literature, most of which along with pharmacological studies, have been mentioned.

Clinical evaluation of oral mexiletine therapy in the treatment of ventricular arrhythmias.

The effect of oral mexiletine therapy on ventricular arrhythmias was evaluated in 58 patients in whom conventional drugs had been unsuccessful. Mean daily dose of mexiletine was 652 mg (range 250 to 1,500) and mean duration of therapy was 14.4 months (range 0.1 to 34.4). Mexiletine was associated with a decrease of 52% in total premature ventricular complexes in 24 hours compared with control (6,841 +/- 1,053 [SEM] versus 3,248 +/- 734, p less than 0.005) and 19 patients (36.5%) had a greater than 83% decrease in ventricular ectopic rhythm. The drug was discontinued in 6 of these 19 patients because 5 of them (26%) experienced side effects after a mean period of 29.6 weeks (range 0.83 to 63.2) and sudden death occurred in 1 patient (5%); this indicates effective suppression of ventricular ectopic rhythm without significant side effects in 13 (25%) of 52 patients during long-term therapy. Adjustment of drug dosage to achieve therapeutic blood levels resulted in an efficacy on ventricular ectopic rhythm similar to that obtained with the maximal tolerated dose. There was no correlation between drug dose and therapeutic effectiveness. Mexiletine was associated with a 48% decrease in episodes of ventricular tachycardia (345.5 versus 179.3/24 h) and 5 of 10 patients with a history of cardiac arrest remained free of symptomatic ventricular tachyarrhythmias for 14.8 months (range 3.7 to 24.3).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Mexiletine: an effective antiarrhythmic drug for treatment of ventricular arrhythmias in congenital heart disease.

The use of antiarrhythmic drugs to suppress ventricular arrhythmias in pediatric patients with a structurally or hemodynamically abnormal heart appears to improve long-term prognosis. The previously successful use of phenytoin to treat serious ventricular arrhythmias led to the investigation for an alternative antiarrhythmic agent, in the same antiarrhythmic drug class, for those patients who develop side effects or become intolerant to phenytoin's antiarrhythmic effect. Forty-two children and young adults (age range 5 months to 34 years, mean 15.5 years) were treated with mexiletine. Arrhythmias treated were ventricular tachycardia (25), ventricular couplets (8), multiform ventricular premature beats (4) and frequent uniform ventricular premature beats (5). Anatomic diagnoses included congenital heart disease (postoperative in 26, unoperated in 2), cardiomyopathy (7), no heart disease (4) and other (3). Thirty-three patients had been previously treated with 1 to 5 (mean 1.6) antiarrhythmic drugs. In the short term, ventricular arrhythmias were effectively suppressed in 30 (71%) of all 42 patients treated. During follow-up (ranging to 42 months, median 10.6), 18 (60%) of the 30 acute responders continued to have excellent control. Early suppression of ventricular arrhythmias was more effective in patients with congenital heart disease (89%) than in those with cardiomyopathy (29%) or no heart disease (43%) (p less than 0.01). Initial complexity of ventricular ectopic activity had no effect on treatment results. Of 25 patients previously treated with phenytoin, in whom alternative antiarrhythmic therapy was required, 40% had long-term arrhythmia control when treated with mexiletine. Mexiletine therapy was terminated for side effects in only five patients (12%). Mexiletine is recommended for young patients with congenital heart disease and serious ventricular arrhythmias.

Efficacy and safety of mexiletine in the treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy. The Mexiletine Study Group.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy and safety of mexiletine in the treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 216 insulin-treated diabetes patients with painful diabetic neuropathy were randomly allocated to three dosages of mexiletine or placebo. The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain/discomfort was scored each day during daytime and nighttime, and sleeping disturbances were also recorded by the patients. Plasma levels of mexiletine and 24-h electrocardiogram (ECG) mapping were assessed before and during the 3-week study period. RESULTS: A significant reduction in sleep disturbances and pain during nighttime was observed in the group of patients taking the highest dosages (675 mg/day) of mexiletine compared with the other groups. No significant correlation was found between plasma concentration of mexiletine and the therapeutic effect or adverse events. No serious adverse events were seen. The 24-h ECG mapping did not disclose onset of significant arrhythmias in any patient. CONCLUSIONS: Mexiletine in a dosage of 675 mg daily can reduce pain caused by diabetic neuropathy, and the effect of this drug appears to have a rapid onset.

Haemodynamic effects of a new anti-arrhythmic agent, mexiletine (Kö 1173) in ischaemic heart disease.

The haemodynamic effects of mexiletine (Kö 1173) were studied in six patients. Heart rate and cardiac output remained unchanged. The systemic arterial pressure was reduced in two patients owing to a fall in the peripheral resistance. Cardiac function, assessed by means of the stroke work and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, was depressed in three patients, who all had a current or past history of severe heart failure.

Prediction of efficacy and tolerance of oral mexiletine by intravenous lidocaine application.

In a controlled crossover trial, 15 patients with frequent ventricular arrhythmias were treated with lidocaine to predict efficacy and safety of oral mexiletine. After an initial control period, patients received intravenous lidocaine (bolus infusion of 200 mg/20 min followed by 3.6 gm/24 hr and for 7 days oral mexiletine (200 mg four times a day). Efficacy was controlled by 24-hour Holter monitoring (responders = suppression of single premature ventricular beats [PVB] greater than 84% and of complex PVB greater than 90%). After lidocaine, 10 of 15 patients (67%) were responders (mean PVB reduction: 97%). After mexiletine, five of 15 patients (33%) were responders (mean PVB reduction: 81%); efficacy was closely related to the plasma concentration. When efficacy of both agents was compared, lidocaine infusion had a positive predictive value of only 50%; however, the negative predictive value was 100%. Thus in nonresponders to lidocaine, mexiletine is very likely to fail in the suppression of ventricular ectopy.

Effect of fluvoxamine on the pharmacokinetics of mexiletine in healthy Japanese men.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Fluvoxamine, a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, is known to inhibit several hepatic cytochrome P450 (CYP) isozymes, in particular CYP1A2. Mexiletine is mainly catalyzed by CYP2D6 and partially catalyzed by CYP1A2. Our objective was to study the potential pharmacokinetic interaction between fluvoxamine and mexiletine. METHODS: A randomized crossover design with two phases was used. A 7-day washout period separated the two treatment conditions. In the one phase, 6 healthy Japanese men received an oral dose of 200 mg of mexiletine alone (study 1); in the other phase, the men received fluvoxamine (50 mg twice a day) for 7 days, and on the eighth day they received oral mexiletine (200 mg) and fluvoxamine concomitantly (study 2). The concentrations of mexiletine were measured with HPLC. RESULTS: The area under the concentration-time curve and serum peak concentration of mexiletine in study 2 were significantly increased compared with those in study 1 (10.4 +/- 4.85 versus 6.70 +/- 3.21 microg x h/mL, P =.006 and 0.623 +/- 0.133 versus 0.536 +/- 0.164 microg/mL, P =.008, respectively). CONCLUSION: The effect of fluvoxamine on the mexiletine disposition is comparatively large, and when mexiletine and fluvoxamine are coadministered careful monitoring of mexiletine is needed.

Possible mechanism for pharmacokinetic interaction between lidocaine and mexiletine.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to elucidate the mechanism of pharmacokinetic interaction between lidocaine and mexiletine, because an unexpected increase in plasma lidocaine concentration accompanied by severe side effects was observed when mexiletine was administered to a patient with dilated cardiomyopathy. METHODS: Plasma concentrations of lidocaine, its major metabolites, and mexiletine were measured in a patient with dilated cardiomyopathy. The lidocaine-mexiletine interaction was evaluated by examination of the effects of mexiletine on plasma concentration and the tissue distribution of lidocaine in rabbits in vivo, as well as on the in vitro lidocaine binding to phosphatidylserine, a binding constituent for weakly basic drugs. RESULTS: Plasma lidocaine concentrations increased significantly when the oral dose of mexiletine was increased. This pharmacokinetic interaction was not attributable to a metabolic interaction as evaluated by plasma lidocaine metabolites concentrations. In rabbits, mexiletine seemed to decrease the total plasma clearance of lidocaine, resulting in increased plasma lidocaine concentrations. Mexiletine significantly reduced the tissue distribution of lidocaine to the kidneys and lungs. A strong displacing effect of mexiletine on the binding of lidocaine to phosphatidylserine was observed in vitro. CONCLUSIONS: A drug interaction derived from the displacement of lidocaine from tissue binding sites by mexiletine that resulted in the increased plasma lidocaine concentrations was shown. This observation had implications for loading doses and acute effects of lidocaine in the concurrent therapy of lidocaine and mexiletine.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interaction between mexiletine and propafenone in human beings.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Mexiletine and propafenone are often used concomitantly and are metabolized by the same cytochrome P450 isozymes, namely CYP2D6, CYP1A2, and probably CYP3A4. Our objective was to study the potential pharmacokinetic and electrophysiological interactions between mexiletine and propafenone. METHODS: Fifteen healthy volunteers, 8 extensive metabolizers and 7 poor metabolizers of CYP2D6, received oral doses of mexiletine 100 mg two times daily from day 1 to day 8 and oral doses of propafenone 150 mg two times daily from day 5 to day 12. Interdose studies were performed at steady-state on mexiletine alone (day 4), mexiletine plus propafenone (day 8), and propafenone alone (day 12). RESULTS: In subjects in the extensive metabolizer group, coadministration of propafenone decreased oral clearances of R-(-)-mexiletine (from 41+/-11 L/h to 28+/-7 L/h) and S-(+)-mexiletine (from 43+/-15 L/h to 29+/-11 L/h) to an extent such that these values were no longer different between the extensive and the poor metabolizer groups. Propafenone coadministration also decreased partial metabolic clearances of mexiletine to hydroxymethylmexiletine, p-hydroxymexiletine, and m-hydroxymexiletine in extensive metabolizers by 71%, 67%, and 73%, respectively. In contrast, propafenone did not alter the kinetics of mexiletine enantiomers in subjects in the poor metabolizer group except for a slight decrease in the formation of hydroxymethylmexiletine. Pharmacokinetic parameters of propafenone were not changed during concomitant administration of mexiletine in subjects of either phenotype. Finally, electrocardiographic parameters (QRS duration, QTc, RR, and PR intervals) were not modified during the combined administration of the drugs. CONCLUSION: Propafenone is a potent CYP2D6 inhibitor that may cause an increase in plasma concentrations of coadministered CYP2D6 substrates.

New potent mexiletine and tocainide analogues evaluated in vivo and in vitro as antimyotonic agents on the myotonic ADR mouse.

The antimyotonic activity of chiral derivatives of mexiletine and tocainide, selected as potent use-dependent blockers of skeletal muscle sodium channels, was evaluated in vivo acutely in myotonic ADR mice. The compounds had either aromatic (Me4 and Me6) or branched isopropyl groups (Me5 and To1) on the asymmetric centre, or had this latter one methylene apart from the amino group (Me2). Therapeutic doses of mexiletine (5-10 mg/kg) and tocainide (7-20 mg/kg) significantly reduced the long time of righting reflex (TRR), typical of ADR mice. Me4, Me5 and Me6 were 2-fold more potent than mexiletine. To1 fully normalised the TRR at 7 mg/kg. The electromyographic analysis confirmed a muscle-based activity for drug effectiveness on TRR. All the compounds reduced the myotonic hyperexcitability of intercostal muscle fibres when tested in vitro by current-clamp recordings, with a potency correlated with their action on sodium channels. On stimulus-evoked firing, the isopropyl analogues were 2-4-fold more potent than parent compounds, while the aromatic analogues were about 10-fold more potent than mexiletine. Patch-clamp recordings confirmed a normal-like pharmacological sensitivity of sodium channels of native ADR muscle fibres. Finally, the in vivo antimyotonic activity is due to the block of sodium channels and divergences with in vitro potency can be related to structure-based changes in drug pharmacokinetics.

Reliability of antiarrhythmic drug plasma concentration monitoring.

Measurement of drug levels is becoming increasingly popular to optimise the dosage of various drugs. In the case of antiarrhythmic drugs, the narrow therapeutic margin of most of these agents and a direct relationship between their pharmacological effects and plasma concentrations would justify more widespread use of monitoring. Optimum plasma concentration ranges have been described for lignocaine (lidocaine), procainamide, quinidine and, more recently, also for disopyramide, mexiletine, tocainide and other new antiarrhythmics. A critical analysis of the original data shows, however, that therapeutic and toxic levels are not so well defined as often assumed: small numbers of patients, marked interindividual variability, sometimes inadequate documentation of arrhythmias and lack of standardised blood sampling characterise many of these studies. Uncertainty about the reliability of concentration-effect relationships also arises when active drug metabolites are identified or there are marked concentration-dependent changes of drug protein-binding. In addition, abolition of various types of arrhythmias might require different drug concentrations. Nevertheless, therapeutic monitoring can be of practical value in patients with life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias and can also greatly facilitate dosage adjustment in cases with renal hepatic or severe cardiac failure. For a correct interpretation of drug levels, the time of blood sampling, dosage regimen, duration of treatment, pharmacokinetic principles, and the clinical condition of the patient must be taken into account. Further studies are needed to define the optimum therapeutic range for several drugs and to evaluate the usefulness of plasma concentration measurements in routine antiarrhythmic treatment.

Mexiletine, a new antiarrhythmic agent, for treatment of premature ventricular complexes.

This double-blind crossover study was designed to compare the safety and efficacy or mexiletine, a new class I antiarrhythmic agent, with those of a placebo in reducing premature ventricular complexes. Twelve patients who had a median of 294 such complexes/hour were admitted to the study. Eleven completed 4 weeks of trial with mexiletine and placebo with ambulatory electrocardiographic (Holter) recordings taken at the end of each treatment period. The doses given were designed to reduce the frequency of premature ventricular complexes by 50 percent or more from the baseline value. Mexiletine significantly reduced the rate of premature ventricular complexes by comparison with placebo (-66 percent versus 3 percent, p = 0.032). In addition, mexiletine reduced the median number/hour of ventricular couplets observed. After 4 weeks of therapy, 2, 2, 1 and 6 patients, respectively, were taking 100, 200, 300 and 400 mg of mexiletine every 8 hours. Mexiletine produced no significant change in baseline values including electrocardiographic intervals, blood pressure or heart rate. The most frequently observed adverse effects were digestive difficulties (eight patients taking mexiletine, four taking placebo) and central nervous system effects (seven taking mexiletine, five taking placebo). These data show the efficacy and safety of mexiletine in the treatment of premature ventricular complexes in a majority of patients.

Gas-chromatographic determination of mexiletine with a nitrogen-selective detector.

The authors present a procedure for the determination of mexiletine in serum. The drugs are extracted under basic conditions into n-heptane/isobutanol (96/4 by vol) and then extracted again into 1 mol/L H2SO4. The acidic solution is made basic with sodium hydroxide, reextracted with diethyl ether, and the extract evaporated. The residue is redissolved in ethanol and analyzed by gas chromatography with a nitrogen-selective detector. By use of two internal standards, diphenhydramine and p- chlorodisopyramide , concentration and instrument response are related linearly from 500 micrograms/L to 4.0 mg/L. Interferences from other drugs also are eliminated by using two internal standards. Within-run precision (CV) was 5% at the 1 and 2 mg/L concentration: between-run precision was 10% and 5% at those respective concentrations. Interference studies indicate that most commonly prescribed basic drugs will not interfere with this procedure.

Pharmacokinetics of mexiletine in the elderly.

The effect of advancing age on the kinetics of the antiarrhythmic agent mexiletine was studied by comparing various kinetic parameters calculated after administration of a single oral dose of mexiletine hydrochloride to seven elderly and eight young healthy volunteers. The rate of absorption of the drug from the gastrointestinal tract was significantly slower in the elderly (1.37 +/- 0.51 hr-1) than in the young group (2.25 +/- 0.79 hr-1). The mean values for elimination half-life and oral clearance were 12.3 +/- 3.7 hr and 10.3 +/- 5.4 mL/min/kg respectively in the young group and 14.4 +/- 4.5 hr and 8.5 +/- 2.9 mL/min/kg respectively in the elderly group. Neither of these parameters was significantly different between the two groups. The amount of mexiletine eliminated in urine up to 48 hours postdose was identical in both groups and represented less than 5% of the administered dose. It is concluded that the age-related modifications in the kinetics of mexiletine are not clinically important during chronic administration of the drug.

Lack of interaction between amiodarone and mexiletine in cardiac arrhythmia patients.

Amiodarone has pharmacokinetic interactions with various therapeutic agents, including phenytoin, flecainide, and cyclosporine. Mexiletine is metabolized by CYP2D6 and CYP1A2. The objective of this study is to evaluate the effect of amiodarone on the pharmacokinetics of mexiletine through its inhibition of various cytochrome P450 (CYP) subtypes. In a series of 181 inpatients with supraventricular tachyarrhythmias, 26 inpatients received mexiletine and amiodarone therapy (MEX + AMD group), and the others received mexiletine therapy (MEX group). In 10 inpatients of the MEX + AMD group, the mexiletine clearance (CL(MEX)/F) before and after coadministration of amiodarone was compared. CL(MEX)/F was also compared in the MEX and MEX + AMD groups after the start of amiodarone therapy. Serum mexiletine, amiodarone, and desethylamiodarone concentrations were measured by an HPLC method. The CL(MEX)/F was estimated by the Bayesian method using population pharmacokinetic analysis. There was no significant difference in CL(MEX)/F before and after 1-month coadministration of amiodarone in 10 inpatients of the MEX + AMD group. Although serum amiodarone and desethylamiodarone concentrations gradually increased with time after the start of amiodarone therapy in these patients, CL(MEX)/F showed no change at 3 and 5 months after the start of amiodarone therapy. There was no significant difference in CL(MEX)/F of the MEX group and the MEX + AMD group. The results suggest that the pharmacokinetics of mexiletine is not affected by amiodarone in patients with cardiac arrhythmias.