Antiarrhythmic drug efficacy at electrophysiology testing: predictive effectiveness of procainamide and flecainide

Prospective comparison of intravenous quinidine and intravenous procainamide in patients undergoing electrophysiologic testing

BACKGROUND

Intravenous procainamide hydrochloride is frequently used in the acute care setting and during electrophysiologic testing, but intravenous quinidine gluconate is rarely used because of concerns about its safety. This study prospectively compares the hemodynamic and electrophysiologic effects of these agents in patients undergoing electrophysiologic testing.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Sixty-five consecutive patients with inducible ventricular tachyarrhythmias were prospectively treated with either intravenous quinidine gluconate or intravenous procainamide hydrochloride in an alternating unblinded fashion. The hemodynamic and electrophysiologic effects of these two drugs were compared. Seven (22%) patients assigned to intravenous quinidine gluconate and eight (24%) patients assigned to intravenous procainamide hydrochloride were rendered noninducible for ventricular tachyarrhythmias. Four (13%) patients assigned to intravenous quinidine gluconate were unable to complete the infusion compared with none (p = 0.05) assigned to intravenous procainamide hydrochloride. Otherwise, the overall hemodynamic and electrophysiologic effects of the two drugs were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous quinidine gluconate is a reasonable alternative to intravenous procainamide hydrochloride in patients requiring a parenteral type IA antiarrhythmic agent.

Parenteral antiarrhythmics for life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias

The acute management of life-threatening ventricular tachyarrhythmias often includes the use of parenteral antiarrhythmics. There are a number of agents currently available for this purpose. They are used to suppress inducible monomorphic ventricular tachycardia during programmed electrical stimulation, they terminate spontaneous sustained ventricular tachycardia, and prevent ventricular fibrillation in the setting of an acute myocardial infarction. Serious adverse reactions include proarrhythmia, hypotension, severe bradyarrhythmias, and precipitation of congestive heart failure. A comparative evaluation of intravenous antiarrhythmics is difficult due to inherent differences in the choice of agents for study, protocol design, patient population, defined endpoint, and serum drug levels. Likewise, the reported adverse reaction rates vary from 0.4% to 75%. To understand the difficulties in clinical decision-making in this problem area, particularly drug selection, we present here a review of pertinent clinical trials evaluating parenteral drug efficacy and adverse effects.

The effects of programmed ventricular stimulation on plasma procainamide levels: an experimental model

To evaluate the effects of programmed ventricular stimulation on resultant plasma concentrations of intravenously administered procainamide, drug dosing was performed with and without ventricular stimulation on two separate days (48 hours apart) in 12 dogs (13 dosing trials) at > or = 14 days after myocardial infarction (mean: 62 days). During infarct surgery, three bipolar electrodes were plunged into left ventricular epicardium, externalized, and later used for ventricular stimulation. On the first study day, procainamide was dosed to achieve two sequential plateau plasma levels (I and II), with a 20-minute equilibrium period at each plateau before ventricular stimulation. Plasma procainamide concentrations were measured before initiation of ventricular stimulation and at the completion of ventricular stimulation for each sequential plateau level. Stimulation involved delivery of one, two, and three extrastimuli at three paced cycle lengths at three left ventricular sites before procainamide dosing and at each of the two procainamide plateau levels. Three dogs were excluded from analysis due to induction of lethal ventricular arrhythmias. No ventricular arrhythmias were induced in the remaining nine animals. On the second study day, procainamide was dosed identically, but no ventricular stimulation was performed. Intravenous drug administration and collection of plasma concentration samples were performed with +/- 1 minute on both study days. Mean plasma procainamide concentrations at the end of ventricular stimulation at dosage Levels I & II were 10% and 12% greater (P < 0.02 and P < 0.005, respectively) than plasma concentrations measured at comparable times on the study day when no ventricular stimulation was performed.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Efficacy of class 1C antiarrhythmic agents in patients with inducible ventricular tachycardia refractory to therapy with class 1A antiarrhythmic drugs

The efficacy of class 1C antiarrhythmic agents was determined in 36 patients with inducible sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia during baseline electrophysiology study (EPS), who continued to have inducible monomorphic ventricular tachycardia during EPS on class 1A antiarrhythmic therapy. Of 12 patients who partially responded to class 1A drugs, 11 (91.7%) continued to have a partial response during EPS on class 1C therapy, whereas one patient did not respond. Of 24 nonresponders to class 1A therapy, 2 (8.3%) responded during EPS on class 1C therapy, 7 (29.2%) partially responded, and 15 (62.5%) did not respond. In the 24 nonresponders to class 1A therapy, 9 of 17 patients (53%) with left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) > or = 30% responded or partially responded to class 1C therapy, compared with none of 7 patients with EF < 30% (P < .05). The EPS on class 1C agents in patients who fail to respond to class 1A therapy may be warranted only in those with EF > or = 30%.

Effect of high-current stimulation in patients with sustained ventricular tachycardia rendered noninducible by antiarrhythmic drugs

Successful antiarrhythmic drug therapy for sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) is presumed to be related to effects on myocardium within the re-entrant circuit. To test the hypothesis that prevention of VT induction may be related to effects on myocardium other than that directly involved in the tachycardia circuit, high-current stimulation was used to achieve shorter coupling intervals in 22 patients with sustained uniform VT that was rendered noninducible by antiarrhythmic agents during stimulation at twice threshold. Sustained uniform VT was induced in 10 patients in response to high-current stimulation (group 1), including 4 tachycardias with the same morphology observed in the baseline study. There were no inducible arrhythmias in 12 patients (group 2). Patients were receiving several different antiarrhythmic regimens, but there was no particular drug associated with the induction of VT using high-current stimulation. There was no statistically significant difference between groups 1 and 2 in baseline VT cycle length (247 +/- 41 vs 253 +/- 44 ms), drug-induced increase in effective refractory period (20 +/- 15 vs 16 +/- 7%), QRS duration (25 +/- 10 vs 20 +/- 17%) or maximal current strength delivered (10.9 +/- 5.3 vs 9.3 +/- 4.0 mA). There was no significant difference in local activation with high-current stimulation between groups 1 and 2. In conclusion, sustained uniform VT was induced in 45% (10 of 22) of patients whose arrhythmias were rendered noninducible by antiarrhythmic agents during programmed stimulation at twice threshold.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Prolongation of ventricular refractoriness by class Ia antiarrhythmic drugs in the prevention of ventricular tachycardia induction

The effects of class la antiarrhythmic drugs (procainamide, quinidine) on the right ventricular effective refractory period (VERP) and intraventricular conduction time were assessed during serial invasive electrophysiologic studies for sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (VT). In 47 patients with remote myocardial infarction, sustained VT was inducible by up to two extrastimuli after the basic drive at one of two basic cycle lengths at the right ventricular apex. With oral drug administration, sustained VT was no longer inducible (group I) in 27 patients but remained inducible (group II) in 20 with the same protocol. Class la drugs prolonged the VERP in both groups, but there was greater lengthening when drugs were effective (e.g., +32 +/- 14 msec in group I vs +12 +/- 19 msec in group II; p less than 0.005, basic cycle length 600 to 700 msec). Prolongation of the VERP by greater than 30 msec had an 88% positive predictive value for prevention of sustained VT induction. In all except one patient in group I, drugs prolonged the VERP such that the coupling intervals that had resulted in sustained VT induction under control conditions were no longer attainable. In contrast, conduction time through the ventricle (surface QRS duration) in sinus rhythm and during right ventricular pacing was prolonged similarly regardless of efficacy (e.g., +33 +/- 21 msec vs +27 +/- 27 msec at a cycle length of 400 msec). The presence of similar plasma levels of drug did not imply equivalent prolongation of the VERP in the two groups. These results suggest that greater prolongation of the VERP by oral procainamide or quinidine correlates with drug efficacy against VT induction and is a better predictor of drug effect than achievement of a "therapeutic plasma level."

A comparison of sotalol and procainamide in symptomatic ventricular tachycardia

The effects of oral sotalol were compared with 1000 and 1500 mg of procainamide in 23 patients with sustained ventricular tachycardia. The predictive value of an induction study after procainamide was assessed. The mean age of the study group was 62 +/- 12 years, and the mean ejection fraction was 32 +/- 16%. The cycle length (CL) of the induced tachycardia, the coupling interval (CI) of the first extrastimulus (in ms), and the number of noninducible (NI) patients are given in the table below. (table; see text) One patient developed torsades during the loading period of sotalol and is included in the number requiring cardioversion (DC). Important proarrhythmic effects (spontaneous occurrence of tachycardia) were seen twice after procainamide. Induction suppression by procainamide predicted success with sotalol (p = 0.0013).

CONCLUSION

Ventricular tachycardia seems to be less often inducible after oral sotalol than after procainamide. The success of procainamide during programmed electrical stimulation predicts the same for sotalol. If ventricular tachycardia remains inducible after oral sotalol, it is faster than after procainamide but slower than the baseline tachycardia. Both drugs slightly prolong refractoriness.