Multicenter randomized trial and a systematic overview of lidocaine in acute myocardial infarction

OCT2013, an ischaemia-activated antiarrhythmic prodrug, devoid of the systemic side effects of lidocaine

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) caused by acute myocardial ischaemia and ventricular fibrillation (VF) is an unmet therapeutic need. Lidocaine suppresses ischaemia-induced VF, but its utility is limited by side effects and a narrow therapeutic index. Here, we characterise OCT2013, a putative ischaemia-activated prodrug of lidocaine.

EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH

The rat Langendorff-perfused isolated heart, anaesthetised rat and rat ventricular myocyte preparations were utilised in a series of blinded and randomised studies to investigate the antiarrhythmic effectiveness, adverse effects and mechanism of action of OCT2013, compared with lidocaine.

KEY RESULTS

In isolated hearts, OCT2013 and lidocaine prevented ischaemia-induced VF equi-effectively, but OCT2013 did not share lidocaine's adverse effects (PR widening, bradycardia and negative inotropy). In anaesthetised rats, i.v. OCT2013 and lidocaine suppressed VF and increased survival equi-effectively; OCT2013 had no effect on cardiac output even at 64 mg·kg^-1 i.v., whereas lidocaine reduced it even at 1 mg·kg^-1 . In adult rat ventricular myocytes, OCT2013 had no effect on Ca²⁺ handling, whereas lidocaine impaired it. In paced isolated hearts, lidocaine caused rate-dependent conduction slowing and block, whereas OCT2013 was inactive. However, during regional ischaemia, OCT2013 and lidocaine equi-effectively hastened conduction block. Chromatography and MS analysis revealed that OCT2013, detectable in normoxic OCT2013-perfused hearts, became undetectable during global ischaemia, with lidocaine becoming detectable.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

OCT2013 is inactive but is bio-reduced locally in ischaemic myocardium to lidocaine, acting as an ischaemia-activated and ischaemia-selective antiarrhythmic prodrug with a large therapeutic index, mimicking lidocaine's benefit without adversity.

2018 American Heart Association Focused Update on Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support Use of Antiarrhythmic Drugs During and Immediately After Cardiac Arrest: An Update to the American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care

Antiarrhythmic medications are commonly administered during and immediately after a ventricular fibrillation/pulseless ventricular tachycardia cardiac arrest. However, it is unclear whether these medications improve patient outcomes. This 2018 American Heart Association focused update on advanced cardiovascular life support guidelines summarizes the most recent published evidence for and recommendations on the use of antiarrhythmic drugs during and immediately after shock-refractory ventricular fibrillation/pulseless ventricular tachycardia cardiac arrest. This article includes the revised recommendation that providers may consider either amiodarone or lidocaine to treat shock-refractory ventricular fibrillation/pulseless ventricular tachycardia cardiac arrest.

Early recurrent arrhythmias after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest associated with obstructive coronary artery disease: Analysis of the PROCAT registry

OBJECTIVE

After out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) associated with obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD), the risk of recurrence during the early period is unclear and the indication for anti-arrhythmic treatment is debated. We assessed the incidence and predisposing factors for severe cardiac arrhythmias in this population.

DESIGN

Retrospective study in a cardiac arrest center.

SETTINGS

The primary endpoint was the occurrence of major cardiac arrhythmias from hospital admission to intensive care unit (ICU) discharge in patients admitted after an OHCA associated with obstructive CAD. A major arrhythmia was defined as any arrhythmic event (auricular or ventricular) associated with cardiac arrest recurrence and/or severe arterial hypotension. Secondary outcomes were time from ICU admission to arrhythmia occurrence and all-cause in-ICU mortality. Risk factors for recurrence of a major arrhythmia were assessed using multivariate analysis.

PATIENTS

We included all consecutive OHCA patients resuscitated from ventricular fibrillation (VF) or pulseless ventricular tachycardia (VT) as initial rhythm associated with obstructive CAD, and who had a successful primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

INTERVENTION

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Among 256 patients, a major arrhythmia occurred in 29 (11.3%), within the first 24 h in 79.3% of cases and were mostly VF (44.8%). Mortality rate was significantly increased in patients with major arrhythmia recurrence (69% vs 41%; p = 0.006). Factor significantly associated with recurrence of severe arrhythmia was male gender (OR 0.32 [0.12-0.92]; p = 0.034). Treatment with prophylactic anti-arrhythmic in the ICU was not associated with a change in the risk of recurrence (OR 0.85 [0.21-3.65], p = 0.82).

CONCLUSION

An early recurrence of major arrhythmia was observed in more than 10% of post-cardiac arrest patients. These events happened mostly within the first 24 h. The interest of prophylactic anti-arrhythmic treatment remains to be evaluated in this population.

Anti-arrhythmic drug therapy in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator recipients

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) have revolutionized the primary and secondary prevention of patients with ventricular arrhythmias. However, the adverse effects of appropriate or inappropriate shocks may require the adjunctive use of anti-arrhythmic drugs (AADs). Beta blockers are the cornerstone of pharmacological primary and secondary prevention of ventricular arrhythmias. In addition to their established efficacy at reducing the incidence of ventricular arrhythmias, beta-blockers are safe with few side effects. Amiodarone is superior to beta blockers and sotalol for the prevention of ventricular arrhythmia recurrence. However, long-term amiodarone use is associated with significant side effects that limit its utility. Sotalol and mexiletine are the main alternatives to amiodarone with a better side effect profile though they are less efficacious at preventing ventricular arrhythmia recurrence. Dofetilide, azimilide and ranolazine are emerging as therapeutic options for secondary prevention; more studies are needed to assess efficacy and safety in comparison to currently used agents. Beta blockers and amiodarone are the mainstay of therapy in patients experiencing electrical storm; their use reduces the frequency of ventricular arrhythmias and ICD intervention as well as affording time until catheter ablation can be considered.

Comprehensive review of cardiovascular toxicity of drugs and related agents

Cardiovascular diseases are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in most developed countries of the world. Pharmaceuticals, illicit drugs, and toxins can significantly contribute to the overall cardiovascular burden and thus deserve attention. The present article is a systematic overview of drugs that may induce distinct cardiovascular toxicity. The compounds are classified into agents that have significant effects on the heart, blood vessels, or both. The mechanism(s) of toxic action are discussed and treatment modalities are briefly mentioned in relevant cases. Due to the large number of clinically relevant compounds discussed, this article could be of interest to a broad audience including pharmacologists and toxicologists, pharmacists, physicians, and medicinal chemists. Particular emphasis is given to clinically relevant topics including the cardiovascular toxicity of illicit sympathomimetic drugs (e.g., cocaine, amphetamines, cathinones), drugs that prolong the QT interval, antidysrhythmic drugs, digoxin and other cardioactive steroids, beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, female hormones, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory, and anticancer compounds encompassing anthracyclines and novel targeted therapy interfering with the HER2 or the vascular endothelial growth factor pathway.

Sudden Cardiac Death in Acute Coronary Syndromes

Sudden cardiac death in acute coronary syndromes mostly results from complex ventricular arrhythmias. Although the incidence has fallen with contemporary management, they still pose a threat for many patients. Treatment consists of immediate termination by electrical cardioversion and prompt coronary revascularization for relief of ischemia. Beta-blockers administered prophylactically have a protective effect. For recurrent episodes, pharmacologic treatment consists of beta-blockers and amiodarone, or, in nonresponsive patients, lidocaine. Other antiarrhythmic drugs play only a marginal role. Catheter ablation performed in qualified centers can be effective in recurrent episodes of ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation triggered by premature ventricular contractions.

Continuous intravenous antiarrhythmic agents in the intensive care unit: strategies for safe and effective use of amiodarone, lidocaine, and procainamide

The development of cardiac arrhythmias in the intensive care unit is common and associated with poor prognoses and outcomes. Because of the complexity of patients admitted to the intensive care unit, the management of arrhythmias is often difficult and may require multiple therapeutic interventions. In order for clinicians to appropriately manage arrhythmias, a thorough understanding of all available therapies, including intravenous antiarrhythmic agents, is essential. Suitable antiarrhythmic agents for use in the critical care setting include amiodarone, lidocaine, and procainamide. While these agents can be effective in managing cardiac arrhythmias, they also possess significant disadvantages and require additional monitoring during use. Therapy with these agents is often complicated because of the presence of significant associated adverse effects, clinician unfamiliarity, variable dosing strategies, and the potential for drug-drug interactions. The purpose of this review is to discuss indications and strategies for safe and effective use of amiodarone, lidocaine, and procainamide.

A multicenter observational study of the effectiveness of antiarrhythmic agents in ventricular arrhythmias: A propensity-score adjusted analysis

Background

Ventricular tachyarrhythmias (VTs) are life-threatening events that result in hemodynamic compromise. Recurrence is common and may worsen a patient׳s clinical course despite appropriate treatment. This study aimed to examine the effectiveness of antiarrhythmic drugs for suppression of VTs.

Methods

In this cohort study, eligible patients were those who were admitted to one of the nine cardiovascular care centers and treated with continuous infusion of an antiarrhythmic drug for at least 1 h to prevent recurrence of VTs after return of spontaneous circulation. To adjust for differences in baseline characteristics among treatment groups, propensity scores for administered agents were generated and used as covariates in regression analyses.

Results

Seventy-two patients were enrolled and 67 patients were included in the final analysis. Amiodarone (n=21, 31.3%), nifekalant (n=24, 35.8%), and lidocaine (n=22, 32.8%) were administered as first-line therapy for suppression of VTs. In the adjusted analyses, the odds ratio (OR) of switching to a different drug was significantly higher in the lidocaine group (OR 37.6, 95% CI 5.1–279, p<0.001) than in the amiodarone group, but not in the nifekalant group (OR 4.1, 95% CI 0.72–23.2, p=0.11). There was no significant difference in mortality rate in the lidocaine group (OR 1.67, 95% CI 0.40–6.95, p=0.48) or the nifekalant group (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.15–4.85, p=0.89) compared with the amiodarone group.

Conclusion

Amiodarone and nifekalant are similarly effective in preventing VT recurrence, but their impact on survival rate is minimal. These data indicate that both nifekalant and amiodarone can be used for treatment of refractory VT.

Prophylactic lidocaine for myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

Coronary artery disease is a major public health problem affecting both developed and developing countries. Acute coronary syndromes include unstable angina and myocardial infarction with or without ST-segment elevation (electrocardiogram sector is higher than baseline). Ventricular arrhythmia after myocardial infarction is associated with high risk of mortality. The evidence is out of date, and considerable uncertainty remains about the effects of prophylactic use of lidocaine on all-cause mortality, in particular, in patients with suspected myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the clinical effectiveness and safety of prophylactic lidocaine in preventing death among people with myocardial infarction.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2015, Issue 3), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 13 April 2015), EMBASE (1947 to 13 April 2015) and Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) (1986 to 13 April 2015). We also searched Web of Science (1970 to 13 April 2013) and handsearched the reference lists of included papers. We applied no language restriction in the search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials assessing the effects of prophylactic lidocaine for myocardial infarction. We considered all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality and overall survival at 30 days after myocardial infarction as primary outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We performed study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction in duplicate. We estimated risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes and measured statistical heterogeneity using I(2). We used a random-effects model and conducted trial sequential analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 37 randomised controlled trials involving 11,948 participants. These trials compared lidocaine versus placebo or no intervention, disopyramide, mexiletine, tocainide, propafenone, amiodarone, dimethylammonium chloride, aprindine and pirmenol. Overall, trials were underpowered and had high risk of bias. Ninety-seven per cent of trials (36/37) were conducted without an a priori sample size estimation. Ten trials were sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry. Trials were conducted in 17 countries, and intravenous intervention was the most frequent route of administration.In trials involving participants with proven or non-proven acute myocardial infarction, lidocaine versus placebo or no intervention showed no significant differences regarding all-cause mortality (213/5879 (3.62%) vs 199/5848 (3.40%); RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.27; participants = 11727; studies = 18; I(2) = 15%); low-quality evidence), cardiac mortality (69/4184 (1.65%) vs 62/4093 (1.51%); RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.50; participants = 8277; studies = 12; I(2) = 12%; low-quality evidence) and prophylaxis of ventricular fibrillation (76/5128 (1.48%) vs 103/4987 (2.01%); RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.12; participants = 10115; studies = 16; I(2) = 18%; low-quality evidence). In terms of sinus bradycardia, lidocaine effect is imprecise compared with effects of placebo or no intervention (55/1346 (4.08%) vs 49/1203 (4.07%); RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.80; participants = 2549; studies = 8; I(2) = 21%; very low-quality evidence). In trials involving only participants with proven acute myocardial infarction, lidocaine versus placebo or no intervention showed no significant differences in all-cause mortality (148/2747 (5.39%) vs 135/2506 (5.39%); RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.30; participants = 5253; studies = 16; I(2) = 9%; low-quality evidence). No significant differences were noted between lidocaine and any other antiarrhythmic drug in terms of all-cause mortality and ventricular fibrillation. Data on overall survival 30 days after myocardial infarction were not reported. Lidocaine compared with placebo or no intervention increased risk of asystole (35/3393 (1.03%) vs 14/3443 (0.41%); RR 2.32, 95% CI 1.26 to 4.26; participants = 6826; studies = 4; I(2) = 0%; very low-quality evidence) and dizziness/drowsiness (74/1259 (5.88%) vs 16/1274 (1.26%); RR 3.85, 95% CI 2.29 to 6.47; participants = 2533; studies = 6; I(2) = 0%; low-quality evidence). Overall, safety data were poorly reported and adverse events may have been underestimated. Trial sequential analyses suggest that additional trials may not be needed for reliable conclusions to be drawn regarding these outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This Cochrane review found evidence of low quality to suggest that prophylactic lidocaine has very little or no effect on mortality or ventricular fibrillation in people with acute myocardial infarction. The safety profile is unclear. This conclusion is based on randomised controlled trials with high risk of bias. However (disregarding the risk of bias), trial sequential analysis suggests that additional trials may not be needed to disprove an intervention effect of 20% relative risk reduction. Smaller risk reductions might require additional higher trials.

Postoperative management of dogs with gastric dilatation and volvulus

The objective of the study was to review the veterinary literature for evidence-based and common clinical practice supporting the postoperative management of dogs with gastric dilatation and volvulus (GDV). GDV involves rapid accumulation of gas in the stomach, gastric volvulus, increased intragastric pressure, and decreased venous return. GDV is characterized by relative hypovolemic-distributive and cardiogenic shock, during which the whole body may be subjected to inadequate tissue perfusion and ischemia. Intensive postoperative management of the patients with GDV is essential for survival. Therapy in the postoperative period is focused on maintaining tissue perfusion along with intensive monitoring for prevention and early identification of ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI) and consequent potential complications such as hypotension, cardiac arrhythmias, acute kidney injury (AKI), gastric ulceration, electrolyte imbalances, and pain. In addition, early identification of patients in need for re-exploration owing to gastric necrosis, abdominal sepsis, or splenic thrombosis is crucial. Therapy with intravenous lidocaine may play a central role in combating IRI and cardiac arrhythmias. The most serious complications of GDV are associated with IRI and consequent systemic inflammatory response syndrome and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome. Other reported complications include hypotension, AKI, disseminated intravascular coagulation, gastric ulceration, and cardiac arrhythmias. Despite appropriate medical and surgical treatment, the reported mortality rate in dogs with GDV is high (10%-28%). Dogs with GDV that are affected with gastric necrosis or develop AKI have higher mortality rates.

Antiarrhythmic drug therapy for sustained ventricular arrhythmias complicating acute myocardial infarction

OBJECTIVE

Few data exist to guide antiarrhythmic drug therapy for sustained ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation after acute myocardial infarction. The objective of this analysis was to describe the survival of patients with sustained ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation after myocardial infarction according to antiarrhythmic drug treatment.

DESIGN AND SETTING

We conducted a retrospective analysis of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients with sustained ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation in Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries in Acute Coronary Syndromes (GUSTO) IIB and GUSTO III and compared all-cause death in patients receiving amiodarone, lidocaine, or no antiarrhythmic. We used Cox proportional-hazards modeling and inverse weighted estimators to adjust for baseline characteristics, β-blocker use, and propensity to receive antiarrhythmics. Due to nonproportional hazards for death in early follow-up (0-3 hrs after sustained ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation) compared with later follow-up (>3 hrs), we analyzed all-cause mortality using time-specific hazards.

PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS

Among 19,190 acute myocardial infarction patients, 1,126 (5.9%) developed sustained ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation and met the inclusion criteria. Patients received lidocaine (n = 664, 59.0%), amiodarone (n = 50, 4.4%), both (n = 110, 9.8%), or no antiarrhythmic (n = 302, 26.8%).

RESULTS

In the first 3 hrs after ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation, amiodarone (adjusted hazard ratio 0.39, 95% confidence interval 0.21-0.71) and lidocaine (adjusted hazard ratio 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.53-0.96) were associated with a lower hazard of death-likely evidence of survivor bias. Among patients who survived 3 hrs, amiodarone was associated with increased mortality at 30 days (adjusted hazard ratio 1.71, 95% confidence interval 1.02-2.86) and 6 months (adjusted hazard ratio 1.96, 95% confidence interval 1.21-3.16), but lidocaine was not at 30 days (adjusted hazard ratio 1.19, 95% confidence interval 0.77-1.82) or 6 months (adjusted hazard ratio 1.10, 95% confidence interval 0.73-1.66).

CONCLUSION

Among patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by sustained ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation who survive 3 hrs, amiodarone, but not lidocaine, is associated with an increased risk of death, reinforcing the need for randomized trials in this population.

Acute Antiarrhythmic Therapy of Ventricular Tachycardia and Ventricular Fibrillation

Ventricular arrhythmias (ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation) are often associated with underlying structural heart disease and require prompt assessment and treatment. Acute treatment involves initial hemodynamic stabilization of the patient followed by suppressive treatment with pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic approaches for reducing the risk of recurrence of ventricular arrhythmias and potential development of sudden cardiac death. This article reviews acute antiarrhythmic drug therapy for ventricular arrhythmias based on the clinical presentation.

Intravenous lidocaine and mexiletine in the management of trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias

Lidocaine and mexiletine are class 1B antiarrhythmic drugs that act on sodium channels. Lidocaine is also an important anesthetic and topical agent that is useful in the treatment of multiple pain disorders, and mexiletine is commonly used for neuropathic pain and myotonia. Both intravenous lidocaine and mexiletine are increasingly used to treat pain syndromes and appear to be particularly effective in neuropathic pain. This suggests a role for these agents in patients with headache disorders. This article describes the role of intravenous lidocaine and mexiletine in the management of headache and trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias based on the published literature to date and provides practical guidelines for their use.

A contribuição da medicina baseada em evidências para a introdução de novo conhecimento na prática clínica

Com a vasta produção científica e o surgimento de novas terapias e equipamentos, torna-se fundamental que o gastroenterologista lance mão de instrumentos que o auxiliem na avaliação crítica do "novo" conhecimento, que poderá ou não ser incorporado a sua prática clínica. A medicina baseada em evidências consiste neste instrumento. Associando conceitos da informática médica e da epidemiologia clínica, a medicina baseada em evidências tem como único e maior objetivo o paciente. Assim, na análise crítica do "novo conhecimento", o movimento da medicina baseada em evidências valoriza os ensaios clínicos corretamente aleatorizados, com grupo controle e casuística adequados, com desfechos claramente expostos e clinicamente válidos. Quando os resultados dos ensaios clínicos são conflitantes, o movimento valoriza o instrumento da revisão sistemática, de preferência tratada do ponto de vista estatístico, conhecida como metanálise. Utilizando estas ferramentas, torna-se mais objetiva e ética a incorporação de novos tratamentos à prática gastroenterológica.

Drug treatment and thrombolytics during cardiopulmonary resuscitation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

During cardiopulmonary resuscitation, no specific drug therapy has been shown to improve survival to hospital discharge after cardiac arrest, and only few drugs have a proven benefit for short-term survival. This article reviews recent experimental and clinical data about vasopressor, antiarrhythmic and thrombolytic agents.

RECENT FINDINGS

General use of high-dose epinephrine (>1 mg) can not be recommended, whereas it should be considered during prolonged cardiopulmonary resuscitation. No catecholamine superior to epinephrine has been identified. Arginine vasopressin has been shown to be as effective as epinephrine in patients with ventricular fibrillation and pulseless electrical activity, and may be more effective in patients presenting with asystole or as the second vasopressor (after epinephrine) in refractory cardiac arrest. Sodium bicarbonate should not be 'blindly' administered during cardiopulmonary resuscitation unless an arterial blood gas analysis can be obtained, or after prolonged unsuccessful cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Amiodarone should be preferred over lidocaine, since it may improve short-term survival. Thrombolytic therapy during cardiopulmonary resuscitation may be beneficial if a pulmonary embolism or acute myocardial infarction is suggested to be the cause of the cardiac arrest.

SUMMARY

Epinephrine still represents the first-line vasopressor during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Arginine vasopressin may be considered in patients presenting with asystole or who are unresponsive to initial treatment with epinephrine. Amiodarone should be preferred to other antiarrythmic agents in patients with cardiac arrest. Thrombolytic therapy during cardiopulmonary resuscitation is a promising new therapeutic option, but its general use in cardiac arrest cannot be recommended until the results of a large multicentre trial become available.

Arrhythmic complications of acute coronary syndromes

Cardiac arrhythmias routinely manifest during or following an acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Although the incidence of arrhythmia is directly related to the type of ACS the patient is experiencing, the clinician needs to be cautious with all patients in these categories. As an example, nearly 90% of patients who experience acute myocardial infarction (AMI) develop some cardiac rhythm abnormality and 25% have a cardiac conduction disturbance within 24 hours of infarct onset. In this patient population, the incidence of serious arrhythmias, such as ventricular fibrillation (4.5%) ,is greatest in the first hour of an AMI and declines rapidly thereafter. This article addresses the identification and treatment of arrhythmias and conduction disturbances that complicate the course of patients who have ACS, particularly AMI and thrombolysis. Emphasis is placed on mechanisms and therapeutic strategies.

Rationale--Trial to Reduce Cardiovascular Events with Aranesp Therapy (TREAT): evolving the management of cardiovascular risk in patients with chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have a high burden of mortality and cardiovascular morbidity. Additional strategies to modulate cardiovascular risk in this population are needed. Data suggest that anemia is a potent and potentially modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular disease in patients with CKD, but these data remain unsubstantiated by any randomized controlled trial (RCT). Furthermore, the clinical practice guidelines for anemia management in patients with CKD are based on limited data. The need for new RCTs to address critical knowledge deficits, particularly with regard to the impact of anemia therapy on cardiovascular disease and survival, is recognized within the guidelines and independent comprehensive reviews of the existing published trial data.

STUDY DESIGN

The Trial to Reduce Cardiovascular Events with Aranesp (Amgen Inc, Thousand Oaks, Calif) (darbepoetin alfa) Therapy (TREAT) is a 4000-patient, multicenter, double-blind RCT, designed to determine the impact of anemia therapy with darbepoetin alfa on mortality and nonfatal cardiovascular events in patients with CKD and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Subjects will be randomized in a 1:1 manner to either darbepoetin alfa therapy to a target hemoglobin (Hb) of 13 g/dL or control, consisting of placebo for Hb > or =9 g/dL or darbepoetin alfa for Hb <9 g/dL until Hb is again Hb > or =9 g/dL. TREAT is event-driven and has a composite primary end point comprising time to mortality and nonfatal cardiovascular events, including myocardial infarction, myocardial ischemia, stroke, and heart failure. TREAT will provide data that are critical to evolution of the management of cardiovascular risk in this high-risk population.

Protection against ventricular arrhythmias and cardiac death using adenosine and lidocaine during regional ischemia in the in vivo rat

Despite decades of research, there are few effective ways to treat ventricular fibrillation (VF), ventricular tachycardia (VT), or cardiac ischemia that show a significant survival benefit. Our aim was to investigate the combined therapeutic effect of two common antiarrhythmic compounds, adenosine and lidocaine (AL), on mortality, arrhythmia frequency and duration, and infarct size in the rat model of regional ischemia. Sprague-Dawley rats (n = 49) were anesthetized with pentobarbital sodium (60 mg.ml(-1).kg(-1) i.p.) and instrumented for regional coronary occlusion (30 min) and reperfusion (120 min). Heart rate, blood pressure, and a lead II electrocardiogram were recorded. Intravenous pretreatment began 5 min before ischemia and extended throughout ischemia, terminating at the start of reperfusion. After 120 min, hearts were removed for infarct size measurement. Mortality occurred in 58% of saline controls (n = 12), 50% of adenosine only (305 microg.kg(-1).min(-1), n = 8), 0% in lidocaine only (608 microg.kg(-1).min(-1), n = 8), and 0% in AL at any dose (152, 305, or 407 microg.kg(-1).min(-1) adenosine plus 608 microg.kg(-1).min(-1) lidocaine, n = 7, 8, and 6). VT occurred in 100% of saline controls (18 +/- 9 episodes), 50% of adenosine-only (11 +/- 7 episodes), 83% of lidocaine-only (23 +/- 11 episodes), 60% of low-dose AL (2 +/- 1 episodes, P < 0.05), 57% of mid-dose AL (2 +/- 1 episodes, P < 0.05), and 67% of high-dose AL rats (6 +/- 3 episodes). VF occurred in 75% of saline controls (4 +/- 3 episodes), 100% of adenosine-only-treated rats (3 +/- 2 episodes), and 33% lidocaine-only-treated rats (2 +/- 1 episodes) of the rats tested. There was no deaths and no VF in the low- and mid-dose AL-treated rats during ischemia, and only one high-dose AL-treated rat experienced VF (25.5 sec). Infarct size was lower in all AL-treated rats but only reached significance with the mid-dose treatment (saline controls 61 +/- 5% vs. 38 +/- 6%, P < 0.05). We conclude that a constant infusion of a solution containing AL virtually abolished severe arrhythmias and prevented cardiac death in an in vivo rat model of acute myocardial ischemia and reperfusion. AL combinational therapy may provide a primary prevention therapeutic window in ischemic and nonischemic regions of the heart.

Therapeutic drug monitoring of antiarrhythmic drugs

Most antiarrhythmic drugs fulfil the formal requirements for rational use of therapeutic drug monitoring, as they show highly variable plasma concentration profiles at a given dose and a direct concentration-effect relationship. Therapeutic ranges for antiarrhythmic drugs are, however, often very poorly defined. Effective drug concentrations are based on small studies or studies not designed to establish a therapeutic range, with varying dosage regimens and unstandardised sampling procedures. There are large numbers of nonresponders and considerable overlap between therapeutic and toxic concentrations. Furthermore, no study has ever shown that therapeutic drug monitoring makes a significant difference in clinical outcome. Therapeutic concentration ranges for antiarrhythmic drugs as they exist today can give an overall impression about the drug concentrations required in the majority of patients. They may also be helpful for dosage adjustment in patients with renal or hepatic failure or in patients with possible toxicological or compliance problems. Their use in optimising individual antiarrhythmic therapy, however, is very limited.

Advanced life support drugs: do they really work?

Basic life support and rapid defibrillation for ventricular fibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia are the only two interventions that have been shown unequivocally to improve survival after cardiac arrest. Several drugs are advocated to treat cardiac arrest, but despite very encouraging animal data, no drug has been reliably proven to increase survival to hospital discharge after cardiac arrest. This review focuses on recent experimental and clinical data concerning the use of vasopressin, amiodarone, magnesium, and fibrinolytics during advanced life support (ALS). Animal data indicate that, in comparison with epinephrine (adrenaline), vasopressin produces better vital organ blood flow during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). These apparent advantages have yet to be converted into improved survival in large-scale trials of cardiac arrest in humans. Data from two prospective, randomized trials suggest that amiodarone may improve short-term survival after out-of-hospital ventricular fibrillation cardiac arrest. On the basis of anecdotal data, magnesium is recommended therapy for torsades de pointes and for shock-resistant ventricular fibrillation associated with hypomagnesemia. In the past, CPR has been a contraindication to giving fibrinolytics, but several studies have demonstrated the relative safety of fibrinolysis during and after CPR. Fibrinolytics are likely to be beneficial when cardiac arrest is associated with plaque rupture and fresh coronary thrombus or massive pulmonary embolism. Fibrinolysis may also improve cerebral microcirculatory perfusion once a spontaneous circulation has been restored. A planned, prospective, randomized trial may help to define the role of fibrinolysis during out-of-hospital CPR.

TACHYARRHYTHMIAS ASSOCIATED WITH ACUTE MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION

The occurrence of tachyarrhythmias in the setting of an MI is quite common. As appropriate therapy for the MI is underway, any tachyarrhythmia should be quickly recognized, the cause determined, and appropriate therapy initiated because of instability or before the onset of a cycle of ischemia, begetting tachycardia, begetting more ischemia.

Intravenous antiarrhythmic agents

Intravenous antiarrhythmic drugs can be used as diagnostic tools; for example, adenosine can be used to reveal the underlying rhythm in narrow QRS tachycardia. Newer class III antiarrhythmic agents, like ibutilide and dofetilide, are effective at the conversion of acute atrial fibrillation; however, electrical cardioversion is still the most effective method for restoration of sinus rhythm in persistent atrial fibrillation. Lidocaine and bretylium in the treatment and prevention of ventricular tachyarrhythmia are de-emphasized because of inefficacy, safety concerns (lidocaine), or shortage of drug (bretylium). Procainamide is effective for stable ventricular tachycardia, and amiodarone is effective in the treatment of shock-refractory ventricular fibrillation. Adrenergic blockade is likely important in the management of tachyarrhythmias, particularly in electrical storm, but more data will be necessary to establish its role.