Propafenone versus amiodarone for supraventricular arrhythmias in septic shock: a randomised controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Acute onset supraventricular arrhythmias can contribute to haemodynamic compromise in septic shock. Both amiodarone and propafenone are available interventions, but their clinical effects have not yet been directly compared. METHODS: In this two-centre, prospective controlled parallel group double blind trial we recruited 209 septic shock patients with new-onset arrhythmia and a left ventricular ejection fraction above 35%. The patients were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive either intravenous propafenone (70 mg bolus followed by 400-840 mg/24 h) or amiodarone (300 mg bolus followed by 600-1800 mg/24 h). The primary outcomes were the proportion of patients who had sinus rhythm 24 h after the start of the infusion, time to restoration of the first sinus rhythm and the proportion of patients with arrhythmia recurrence. RESULTS: Out of 209 randomized patients, 200 (96%) received the study drug. After 24 h, 77 (72.8%) and 71 (67.3%) were in sinus rhythm (p = 0.4), restored after a median of 3.7 h (95% CI 2.3-6.8) and 7.3 h (95% CI 5-11), p = 0.02, with propafenone and amiodarone, respectively. The arrhythmia recurred in 54 (52%) patients treated with propafenone and in 80 (76%) with amiodarone, p < 0.001. Patients with a dilated left atrium had better rhythm control with amiodarone (6.4 h (95% CI 3.5; 14.1) until cardioversion vs 18 h (95% CI 2.8; 24.7) in propafenone, p = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Propafenone does not provide better rhythm control at 24 h yet offers faster cardioversion with fewer arrhythmia recurrences than with amiodarone, especially in patients with a non-dilated left atrium. No differences between propafenone and amiodarone on the prespecified short- and long-term outcomes were observed.

Early initiation of anti-relapse antiarrhythmic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation and flutter after pharmacological cardioversion with refralon.

Aim      Evaluating the efficacy and safety of early administration of antirecurrence antiarrhythmic therapy (AAT) following restoration of sinus rhythm (SR) with refralon.Aim      Evaluating the efficacy and safety of early administration of antirecurrence antiarrhythmic therapy (AAT) following restoration of sinus rhythm (SR) with refralon.Material and methods  The study included 247 patients with atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter (AF/AFL) (142 men) who underwent pharmacological cardioversion (PCV) with refralon. A 4-step schedule of drug administration was used (successive intravenous infusions at doses of 5, 5, 10, and 10 µg/kg; maximum total dose was 30 µg/kg). Patients who recovered SR and had no contraindications were prescribed antirecurrence AAT in the early (≤24 h; n=101) or delayed (≥24 h; n=95) period. Lappaconitine hydrobromide, propafenone, and sotalol were administered orally as the antirecurrence therapy. The decision on the time of initiating ATT and the choice of the drug and its dose was taken by the attending physician individually. The safety criteria included a prolonged PQ interval >200 ms; second- or third-degree atrioventricular block; QRS complex duration >120 ms; QT prolongation >500 ms; and heartbeat pauses >3 s. The efficacy criteria included the absence of sustained recurrence of AF/AFL after initiation of AAT and the duration of hospitalization after PCV. Patients were followed up during the study until they were discharged from the hospital.Results SR was recovered in 229 (92.7 %) patients. In the group of early AAT initiation, a PQ duration >200 ms was observed in 8 (7.9 %) patients, whereas in the group of delayed AAT initiation, in 7 patients (7.4 %; p=1.000). A wide QRS complex >120 ms was recorded in 1 (1.1 %) patient of the delayed AAT initiation group and in none of the patients of the early AAT initiation group (p=0.485). Ventricular arrhythmogenic effects and QT prolongation >500 ms were not detected in any patient. Numbers of early AF recurrence did not differ in the groups of early and delayed AAT initiation: 6 (5.9 %) vs. 5 (5.3 %), respectively (p=1.000). Median duration of hospitalization after PCV was 4 days in the group of early AAT initiation and 5 days in the group of delayed AAT initiation (р=0.009).Conclusion      Early initiation of the refralon AAT does not increase the risk of drug adverse effects and reduces the duration of stay in the hospital.

Clinical and economic outcomes associated with use of anti-arrhythmic drugs versus ablation in atrial fibrillation.

Aim: To evaluate the clinical and economic impact of antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) compared with ablation both as individual treatments and as combination therapy without/with considering the order of treatment among patients with atrial fibrillation (AFib). Materials & methods: A budget impact model over a one-year time horizon was developed to assess the economic impact of AADs (amiodarone, dofetilide, dronedarone, flecainide, propafenone, sotalol, and as a group) versus ablation across three scenarios: direct comparisons of individual treatments, non-temporal combinations, and temporal combinations. The economic analysis was conducted in accordance with CHEERS guidance as per current model objectives. Results are reported as costs per patient per year (PPPY). The impact of individual parameters was evaluated using one-way sensitivity analysis (OWSA). Results: In direct comparisons, ablation had the highest annual medication/procedure cost ($29,432), followed by dofetilide ($7661), dronedarone ($6451), sotalol ($4552), propafenone ($3044), flecainide ($2563), and amiodarone ($2538). Flecainide had the highest costs for long-term clinical outcomes ($22,964), followed by dofetilide ($17,462), sotalol ($15,030), amiodarone ($12,450), dronedarone ($10,424), propafenone ($7678) and ablation ($9948). In the non-temporal scenario, total costs incurred for AADs (group) + ablation ($17,278) were lower compared with ablation alone ($39,380). In the temporal scenario, AADs (group) before ablation resulted in PPPY cost savings of ($22,858) compared with AADs (group) after ablation ($19,958). Key factors in OWSA were ablation costs, the proportion of patients having reablation, and withdrawal due to adverse events. Conclusion: Utilization of AADs as individual treatment or in combination with ablation demonstrated comparable clinical benefits along with costs savings in patients with AFib.

Cardiovascular outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation concomitantly treated with antiarrhythmic drugs and non-vitamin k antagonist oral anticoagulants.

AIMS: Limited data compared antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) with concomitant non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation patients, hence the aim of the study. METHODS AND RESULTS: National health insurance database were retrieved during 2012-17 for study. We excluded patients not taking AADs, bradycardia, heart block, heart failure admission, mitral stenosis, prosthetic valve, incomplete demographic data, and follow-up <3 months. Outcomes were compared in Protocol 1, dronedarone vs. non-dronedarone; Protocol 2, dronedarone vs. amiodarone; and Protocol 3, dronedarone vs. propafenone. Outcomes were acute myocardial infarction (AMI), ischaemic stroke/systemic embolism, intracranial haemorrhage (ICH), major bleeding, cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, and major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) (including AMI, ischaemic stroke, and cardiovascular death). In Protocol 1, 2298 dronedarone users and 6984 non-dronedarone users (amiodarone = 4844; propafenone = 1914; flecainide = 75; sotalol = 61) were analysed. Dronedarone was associated with lower ICH (HR = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.38-0.99, P = 0.0436), cardiovascular death (HR = 0.24, 95% CI = 0.16-0.37, P < 0.0001), all-cause mortality (HR = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.27-0.42, P < 0.0001), and MACE (HR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.45-0.70, P < 0.0001). In Protocol 2, 2231 dronedarone users and 6693 amiodarone users were analysed. Dronedarone was associated with significantly lower ICH (HR = 0.53, 95%=CI 0.33-0.84, P = 0.0078), cardiovascular death (HR = 0.20, 95% CI = 0.13-0.31, P < 0.0001), all-cause mortality (HR 0.27, 95% CI 0.22-0.34, P < 0.0001), and MACE (HR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.43-0.66, P < 0.0001), compared with amiodarone. In Protocol 3, 812 dronedarone users and 2436 propafenone users were analysed. There were no differences between two drugs for primary and secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: The use of dronedarone with NOACs was associated with cardiovascular benefits in an Asian population, compared with non-dronedarone AADs and amiodarone.

An open-label randomized noninferior study of generic name and brand name of propafenone for rhythm control in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Propafenone is a class IC antiarrhythmic agent that is commonly used as the first-line therapy for patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) in Taiwan. This study compared the efficacy and safety of generic (Rhynorm) and brand name (Rytmonorm) propafenone for rhythm control of paroxysmal AF in Taiwan. METHODS: This was an open-label randomized multicenter noninferior study conducted in Taiwan. We enrolled 76 patients with AF. To investigate the efficacy of propafenone, we used a wearable electrocardiogram (ECG) event recorder to evaluate the daily burden of AF episodes in patients for 24 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the frequency of AF with clinical significance, which was indicated by AF duration ≥30 seconds. The safety endpoints included proarrhythmic or hemodynamic adverse events. RESULT: To analyze the efficacy and safety of these agents, 71 patients (five patients with screen failure) were randomized to two groups, specifically a Rhynorm group (n = 37) and a Rytmonorm group (n = 34), for 24 weeks of the treatment period. The baseline patient characteristics were comparable between the groups. However, the Rhynorm group was older (65.4 ± 8.40 vs 59.8 ± 10.8 years; p = 0.02). The primary efficacy endpoint at week 24 decreased by 4.76% ± 18.5% (from 24.3% ± 33.9% to 19.0% ± 28.7%; p = 0.13) in the Rhynorm group and by 3.27% ± 15.2% (from 16.9% ± 26.4% to 13.6% ± 19.2%; p = 0.22) in the Rytmonorm group, with an intergroup difference of 1.5% ± 17.0%; p = 0.71. This finding indicates that Rhynorm is not inferior to Rytmonorm ( p = 0.023 for noninferiority). The safety profile of the agents was comparable between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Our results verified that Rhynorm was noninferior to Rytmonorm in terms of efficacy and safety for treating paroxysmal AF in Taiwan ( ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03674658).

Effect of Rythmol (propafenone HCl) administration during pregnancy in Wistar rats.

Propafenone is a well-known Class 1C antiarrhythmic agent that has sodium channel blocking properties as well as the ability to block 13 other channels and a modest calcium antagonistic effect. Propafenone has a profound electrophysiologic effect on auxiliary atrioventricular circuits and in patients with atrioventricular nodal reentry tachycardia can obstruct conduction in the fast conducting pathway. Furthermore, propafenone is less likely than other Class 1C drugs to cause proarrhythmia. However, although this medicine can pass through the placenta, the effects during pregnancy remain unknown. Here, we investigated the potential teratogenic and genotoxic effects of Rythmol during rat development. Pregnant Wistar rats received 46.25 mg/kg body weight of propafenone daily by gavage from Gestation Day (GD) 5 to GD 19. At GD 20, the dams were dissected, and their fetuses were assessed via morphologic, skeletal, and histologic investigation. In addition, a comet assay was used to measure DNA impairment of fetal skull osteocytes and hepatic cells. The study showed that propafenone treatment of pregnant rats led to a marked decrease in gravid uterine weight, number of implants/litter, number of viable fetuses, and bodyweight of fetuses but a clear increase in placental weight and placental index in the treated group. Frequent morphologic abnormalities and severe ossification deficiency in the cranium bones were observed in the treatment group. Various histopathological changes were observed in the liver, kidney, and brain tissues of maternally treated fetuses. Similarly, propafenone induced DNA damage to examined samples. Thus, our study indicates that propafenone may be embryotoxic in humans.

Propafenone use in coronary artery disease patients undergoing atrial fibrillation ablation.

BACKGROUND: Antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) are frequently used after atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. Class IC AAD use after AF ablation in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) is uncertain. The aim was to evaluate propafenone use in CAD patients undergoing AF ablation and to compare propafenone with amiodarone regarding ventricular arrhythmia and mortality. METHODS: In this retrospective, longitudinal cohort study, consecutive patients with mild to moderate CAD, undergoing AF ablation and receiving either propafenone (study group, n = 263) or amiodarone (control group, n = 499) in the blanking period, were included. After propensity score matching, 212 patients in each group were compared for the primary outcome defined as a composite of ventricular arrhythmic events, which included sudden cardiac death, sustained ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation, or non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT). Cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular mortality were evaluated as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Baseline variables of the study and control groups were well matched after propensity score matching. At 12-month follow up, 20 patients (4.7%) (11 in propafenone group and 9 in amiodarone group) experienced the primary outcome measure of NSVT (Gray test p = 0.645). No sustained ventricular tachycardia, ventricular fibrillation, sudden cardiac death, or cardiovascular mortality were observed. On multivariable competing analysis, age and diabetes but not propafenone use (hazard ratio 1.017; p = 0.804) were found to be independent and significant predictors of the primary outcome measure. CONCLUSION: Propafenone use after AF ablation in patients with mild to moderate CAD had a safety profile similar to amiodarone and was not associated with major arrhythmic events.

Efficacy and speed of conversion of recent onset atrial fibrillation using oral propafenone versus parenteral amiodarone: A randomized controlled comparative study.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation is the most commonly encountered arrhythmia. Several antiarrhythmic agents are effective in restoring and maintaining sinus rhythm. AIM OF THE WORK: To compare the efficacy and rapidity of conversion of recent onset atrial fibrillation using oral propafenone versus intravenous infusion of amiodarone. METHODS: The study included 200 patients with recent onset atrial fibrillation. Patients were equally divided into 2 groups; group A where intravenous infusion amiodarone was given and group B where oral propafenone was administrated. The effectiveness and the time needed for conversion of atrial fibrillation to sinus rhythm were compared in both groups. RESULTS: The success of conversion of atrial fibrillation to sinus rhythm was 83% in group A and 85% in group B, p-value = 0.699. The time elapsed from drug administration till conversion of atrial fibrillation was 9.07 ± 5.04 hours in group A versus 3.9 ± 1.54 hours in group B, p-value = 0.001. In both groups, patients who showed failed conversion had a significantly larger left atrial diameter and a significantly higher high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) level. CONCLUSION: Oral propafenone was faster than parenteral amiodarone in the conversion of recent onset atrial fibrillation to sinus rhythm. Patients with failed conversion had a bigger left atrial diameter and a higher hsCRP when compared to patients with successful conversion.

Antiarrhythmic Medication in Neonates and Infants with Supraventricular Tachycardia.

Supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) is the most common arrhythmia in neonates and infants, and pharmacological therapy is recommended to prevent recurrent episodes. This retrospective study aims to describe and analyze the practice patterns, effectiveness, and outcome of drug therapy for SVT in patients within the first year of life. Among the 67 patients analyzed, 48 presented with atrioventricular re-entrant tachycardia, 18 with focal atrial, and one with atrioventricular nodal re-entrant. Fetal tachycardia was reported in 27%. Antiarrhythmic treatment consisted of beta-receptor blocking agents in 42 patients, propafenone in 20, amiodarone in 20, and digoxin in 5. Arrhythmia control was achieved with single drug therapy in 70% of the patients, 21% needed dual therapy, and 6% triple. Propafenone was discontinued in 7 infants due to widening of the QRS complex. After 12 months (6-60), 75% of surviving patients were tachycardia-free and discontinued prophylactic treatment. Patients with fetal tachycardia had a significantly higher risk of persistent tachycardia (p: 0.007). Prophylactic antiarrhythmic medication for SVT in infancy is safe and well tolerated. Arrhythmia control is often achieved with single medication, and after cessation, most patients are free of arrhythmias. Infants with SVT and a history of fetal tachycardia are more prone to suffer from persistent SVT and relapses after cessation of prophylactic antiarrhythmic medication than infants with the first episode of SVT after birth.

Efficacy and safety of antazoline for cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: propensity score matching analysis of a multicenter registry (CANT II Study).

INTRODUCTION: Due to safety concerns about available antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs), reliable agents for termination of atrial fibrillation (AF) are requisite. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of antazoline, a first­generation antihistamine, for cardioversion of recent­onset AF in the setting of an emergency department. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicenter, retrospective registry covered 1365 patients (median [interquartile range] age, 69.0 [61.0-76.0] years, 53.1% men) with new­onset AF submitted to urgent pharmacological cardioversion. AAD allocation was performed by the attending physician: antazoline alone was utilized in 600 patients (44%), amiodarone in 287 (21%), propafenone in 150 (11%), and ≥2 AADs in 328 patients (24%). Antazoline in monotherapy or combination was administered to 897 patients (65.7%). Matched antazoline and nonantazoline groups were identified using propensity score matching (PSM, n = 330). The primary end point was return to sinus rhythm within 12 hours after initiation of the treatment. RESULTS: Before PSM, antazoline alone was superior to amiodarone (78.3% vs 66.9%; relative risk [RR], 1.17; 95% CI, 1.07-1.28; P <0.001) and comparable to propafenone (78.3% vs 72.7%; RR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.97-1.20; P = 0.14) in terms of rhythm conversion rate. In the post­PSM population, the rhythm conversion rate was higher among patients receiving antazoline alone than in the nonantazoline group (84.2% vs 66.7%; RR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.11-1.43; P <0.001), and the risk of adverse events was comparable (P = 0.2). CONCLUSIONS: Antazoline appears to be an efficacious agent for termination of AF in real­world setting. Randomized controlled trials are required to evaluate its safety in specific patient populations.

Reappraising the role of class Ic antiarrhythmics in atrial fibrillation.

PURPOSE: The objective of the present systematic review was to compare the effectiveness and safety of class Ic agents for cardioversion of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF), in patients with and without structural heart disease (SHD). METHODS: We focused on RCTs enrolling at least 50 adult patients with electrocardiogram-documented paroxysmal AF that compared either two pharmacological class Ic cardioversion agents (flecainide, propafenone), regardless of study design (parallel or crossover). We searched MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Initial search was performed from inception to 15 July 2021 with no language restrictions. RESULTS: Intravenous flecainide is the most effective option for pharmacologic cardioversion of AF since only 2 patients need to be treated in order to cardiovert one more within 4 h. Most importantly, class Ic agents appear to be safe in the context of pharmacologic cardioversion of AF irrespective of the presence of SHD, pointing towards a possible reappraisal of the role in this setting. CONCLUSION: We suggest that class Ic agents (with flecainide appearing to be more effective) should be used for pharmacologic cardioversion in stable AF patients presenting in emergency department with unknown medical history, after excluding severe cardiac disease through a bedside examination. REGISTRATION NUMBER (DOI): Available in https://osf.io/apwt7/ , https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/APWT7.

Atrial resting membrane potential confers sodium current sensitivity to propafenone, flecainide and dronedarone.

BACKGROUND: Although atrial fibrillation ablation is increasingly used for rhythm control therapy, antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) are commonly used, either alone or in combination with ablation. The effectiveness of AADs is highly variable. Previous work from our group suggests that alterations in atrial resting membrane potential (RMP) induced by low Pitx2 expression could explain the variable effect of flecainide. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess whether alterations in atrial/cardiac RMP modify the effectiveness of multiple clinically used AADs. METHODS: The sodium channel blocking effects of propafenone (300 nM, 1 µM), flecainide (1 µM), and dronedarone (5 µM, 10 µM) were measured in human stem cell-derived cardiac myocytes, HEK293 expressing human NaV1.5, primary murine atrial cardiac myocytes, and murine hearts with reduced Pitx2c. RESULTS: A more positive atrial RMP delayed INa recovery, slowed channel inactivation, and decreased peak action potential (AP) upstroke velocity. All 3 AADs displayed enhanced sodium channel block at more positive atrial RMPs. Dronedarone was the most sensitive to changes in atrial RMP. Dronedarone caused greater reductions in AP amplitude and peak AP upstroke velocity at more positive RMPs. Dronedarone evoked greater prolongation of the atrial effective refractory period and postrepolarization refractoriness in murine Langendorff-perfused Pitx2c+/- hearts, which have a more positive RMP compared to wild type. CONCLUSION: Atrial RMP modifies the effectiveness of several clinically used AADs. Dronedarone is more sensitive to changes in atrial RMP than flecainide or propafenone. Identifying and modifying atrial RMP may offer a novel approach to enhancing the effectiveness of AADs or personalizing AAD selection.

In Silico Assessment of Class I Antiarrhythmic Drug Effects on Pitx2-Induced Atrial Fibrillation: Insights from Populations of Electrophysiological Models of Human Atrial Cells and Tissues.

Electrical remodelling as a result of homeodomain transcription factor 2 (Pitx2)-dependent gene regulation was linked to atrial fibrillation (AF) and AF patients with single nucleotide polymorphisms at chromosome 4q25 responded favorably to class I antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs). The possible reasons behind this remain elusive. The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of the AADs disopyramide, quinidine, and propafenone on human atrial arrhythmias mediated by Pitx2-induced remodelling, from a single cell to the tissue level, using drug binding models with multi-channel pharmacology. Experimentally calibrated populations of human atrial action po-tential (AP) models in both sinus rhythm (SR) and Pitx2-induced AF conditions were constructed by using two distinct models to represent morphological subtypes of AP. Multi-channel pharmaco-logical effects of disopyramide, quinidine, and propafenone on ionic currents were considered. Simulated results showed that Pitx2-induced remodelling increased maximum upstroke velocity (dVdtmax), and decreased AP duration (APD), conduction velocity (CV), and wavelength (WL). At the concentrations tested in this study, these AADs decreased dVdtmax and CV and prolonged APD in the setting of Pitx2-induced AF. Our findings of alterations in WL indicated that disopyramide may be more effective against Pitx2-induced AF than propafenone and quinidine by prolonging WL.

Safety and Effectiveness of Rivaroxaban in Combination with Various Antiarrhythmic Drugs in Patients with Non-Permanent Atrial Fibrillation.

INTRODUCTION: Rivaroxaban reduces the risk of thromboembolism in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients, who often also receive antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) to maintain sinus rhythm. Current guidelines contraindicate concomitant use of rivaroxaban with the popular AAD dronedarone, despite little data demonstrating interactions with AADs. This study investigates the outcomes of concomitant rivaroxaban and AAD drug use in a real-world cohort. METHODS: This retrospective study included 1777 non-permanent AF patients taking rivaroxaban for ≥ 1 month between 2011 and 2016 from a multicenter cohort in Taiwan, and compared concomitant AAD use against clinical outcome endpoints for safety, effectiveness, and major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Multivariate Cox proportional hazard analyses were used to evaluate the association between concomitant AAD use and outcomes. RESULTS: Patients were divided into rivaroxaban alone (n = 1205) and with concomitant amiodarone (n = 177), dronedarone (n = 231), or propafenone (n = 164) groups. The proportion of patients using rivaroxaban 10 mg was highest in the concomitant dronedarone group: rivaroxaban alone, 53.6%; with amiodarone, 57.6%; with dronedarone, 77.1%; and with propafenone, 46.3% (p < 0.001). The cumulative incidences of safety (p = 0.892), effectiveness (p = 0.336), and MACE (p = 0.674) were similar between the four groups; however, there were significantly fewer new systemic thromboembolisms in the dronedarone group: rivaroxaban alone, 2.5%; with amiodarone, 0.6%; with dronedarone, 0%; and with propafenone, 1.2% (p = 0.029). The all-cause death rate was also lowest in the dronedarone group: rivaroxaban alone, 9.0%; with amiodarone, 9.6%; with dronedarone, 3.0%; and with propafenone: 6.1% (p = 0.013). After covariate adjustment, there were no differences in the safety, effectiveness, and MACE endpoints between patients receiving or not receiving AADs. CONCLUSION: Concomitant use of rivaroxaban with AADs appears to be well tolerated, warranting further investigation into the apparent benefits of a reduced dose of rivaroxaban combined with dronedarone.

Effect of CYP2D6 genetic polymorphism on peak propafenone concentration: no significant effect of CYP2D6*10.

Aim: The study aims to investigate the clinical implication of nonfunctional poor metabolizer (PM) alleles and intermediate metabolizer (IM) alleles of CYP2D6, including the CYP2D6*10 allele which shows substrate-dependent decrease in enzymatic activity, in antiarrhythmic therapy using propafenone. Materials & methods: We examined serum propafenone concentrations and metabolic ratio, which was expressed as serum concentrations of propafenone to 5-hydroxypropafenone, in 66 Japanese patients with tachyarrhythmias. Results: The peak propafenone concentration and metabolic ratio in CYP2D6 PM allele carriers were higher than those in extensive metabolizer (EM)/EM, EM/IM and IM/IM genotype groups. Conclusion: Results suggest that CYP2D6 PM alleles affect peak propafenone concentration, but the CYP2D6 IM allele CYP2D6*10 has no clinical implication in propafenone dosing.

Supraventricular tachyarrhythmias during the intrauterine, neonatal, and infant period: A 10-year population-based study.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to evaluate the incidence, type, and management of supraventricular tachyarrhythmias (SVT) during the first year of life in a retrospective, population-based, single-center study during a 10-year period. METHODS: The analyzed patient cohort is based on data from the only specialized center managing all cases of neonatal and infant SVTs between 2009 and 2018 in the Slovak Republic (5.5 million population). A total of 116 consecutive patients <366 days old were included in the study. RESULTS: Calculated SVT incidence ratio was 1:4500 in the first year of life. AV reentry tachycardia was the leading arrhythmia (49%). SVT in this specific population was frequently a transient problem with spontaneous resolution in 87% of patients during a median 3-year follow up. Congenital heart disease was common (16%). Intrauterine treatment by drugs administered to mother was safe and effective in preventing unnecessary cesarean deliveries. In arrhythmia termination, amiodarone and propafenone were equally safe and effective, with possible more favorable pharmacodynamics of the former. For prophylactic treatment, sotalol and propafenone were equally safe and effective and became the preferred basis of long-term drug therapy in our center. However, this therapy requires intensive monitoring during its initiation. CONCLUSION: The prognosis of SVT in the first year of life is good: with optimized pharmacological treatment, the need for early catheter ablation and mortality rate are low (<1%) and there is a high rate of spontaneous arrhythmia resolution. Heart failure is a possible predictor of arrhythmia persistence with need for ablation in later life.

Efficacy and safety of 1C class antiarrhythmic agent (propafenone) for supraventricular arrhythmias in septic shock compared to amiodarone: protocol of a prospective randomised double-blind study.

INTRODUCTION: Supraventricular arrhythmias contribute to haemodynamic compromise in septic shock. A retrospective study generated the hypothesis that propafenone could be more effective than amiodarone in achieving and maintaining sinus rhythm (SR). Certain echocardiographic parameters may predict a successful cardioversion and help in the decision on rhythm or rate control strategy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The trial includes septic shock patients with new-onset arrhythmia, but without severe impairment of the left ventricular ejection fraction. After baseline echocardiography, the patient is randomised to receive a bolus and maintenance dose of either amiodarone or propafenone. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients that have achieved rhythm control at 24 hours after the start of the infusion. The secondary outcomes are the percentages of patients that needed rescue treatments (DC cardioversion or unblinding and crossover of the antiarrhythmics), the recurrence of arrhythmias, intensive care unit mortality, 28-day and 1-year mortality. In the posthoc analysis, we separately assess subgroups of patients with pulmonary hypertension and right ventricular dysfunction. In the exploratory part of the study, we assess whether the presence of a transmitral diastolic A wave and its higher velocity-time integral is predictive for the sustainability of mechanical SR and whether the indexed left atrial endsystolic volume is predictive of recurrent arrhythmia. Considering that the restoration of SR within 24 hours occurred in 74% of the amiodarone-treated patients and in 89% of the patients treated with propafenone, we plan to include 200 patients to have an 80% chance to demonstrate the superiority of propafenone at p=0.05. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial is recruiting patients according to its second protocol version approved by the University Hospital Ethical Board on the 6 October 2017 (No. 1691/16S-IV). The results will be disseminated through peer reviewed publications and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03029169.

Treatment with verapamil for restoration of sinus rhythm in atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular response: A case report.

RATIONALE: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common arrhythmia disease that can cause thromboembolic disease and/or heart failure, resulting in increased mortality. Propafenone, amiodarone, and flecainide are recommended for converting AF to sinus rhythm. Beta blockers, verapamil, diltiazem, and digoxin are recommended for controlling AF with fast ventricular rate (VR). In this case report, we found that verapamil successfully converted AF into sinus rhythm. PATIENT CONCERNS: A 92-year-old woman presented with fast VR AF with a history of coronary heart disease, hypertension, and diabetes. DIAGNOSES: Verapamil can successfully convert AF into sinus rhythm. INTERVENTIONS AND OUTCOMES: The patient was treated with amiodarone or propafenone, yet still had AF. After stopping amiodarone and propafenone, the patient was given verapamil to control the VR, and following 9 days of treatment the patient switched to sinus rhythm. When verapamil treatment was stopped, the patient experienced AF recurrence. Upon receiving verapamil again, the AF again converted into sinus rhythm. LESSONS: For the treatment of AF, nondihydropyridine calcium antagonists can be tried in the absence of antiarrhythmic drugs.

Arritmias na sala de emergência e UTI. Taquicardias de QRS estreito: fundamentos para a abordagem / Arrythmias in the emergency room and ICU Narrow QRS rachycardias: bases for clinical approach

As taquicardias de QRS estreito apresentam origem supraventricular. O histórico clínico, exame físico e eletrocardiograma na sala de emergência constituem-se nas principais ferramentas para o tratamento do quadro. As taquicardias que apresentam instabilidade hemodinâmica devem ser, imediatamente, revertidas através de cardioversão elétrica sincronizada. Aquelas que se apresentam como estáveis hemodinamicamente podem, se regulares, ser tratadas através de manobras vagais ou através do uso de fármacos endovenosos. Se irregulares, podem caracterizar fibrilação e flutter atrial, sendo, então, avaliados a duração do episódio e o risco de tromboembolismo para determinar não apenas a necessidade de anticoagulação, mas também a estratégia para tratamento do quadro, seja através do controle da frequência cardíaca ou do controle do ritmo, este último podendo ser alcançado através do uso de fármacos (propafenona oral ou amiodarona endovenosa) ou da cardioversão elétrica sincronizada. Dessa forma, o papel do clínico na sala de emergência é fundamental para garantir a condução adequada dos episódios de taquicardia supraventricular, especialmente, na prevenção ou pronta intervenção em caso de deterioração hemodinâmica relacionada ao quadro

Narrow QRS tachycardias are supraventricular in origin. The clinical history, physical exam, and electrocardiogram in the emergency room are the main tools used to manage this condition. Tachycardias that present haemodynamic instability must be promptly reverted through synchronized electrical cardioversion. Those that present haemodynamic stability may be treated with vagal maneuvers or intravenous drugs. If irregular, they may take the form of atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter, and in this case, the duration of the episode and the thromboembolic risk are evaluated to determine not only the need for anticoagulation, but also the treatment strategy, whether through heart rate or rhythm control. The latter may be achieved through the use of drugs (oral propafenone or intravenous amiodarone) or synchronized electrical cardioversion. The role of the clinician in the emergency room is therefore fundamental in ensuring adequate conduct of episodes of supraventricular tachycardia, especially in prevention or prompt intervention in case of haemodynamic deterioration related to the condition