Proarrhythmia

Exploring the role of TRPM4 in calcium-dependent triggered activity and cardiac arrhythmias

Cardiac arrhythmias pose a major threat to a patient's health, yet prove to be often difficult to predict, prevent and treat. A key mechanism in the occurrence of arrhythmias is disturbed Ca2+ homeostasis in cardiac muscle cells. As a Ca2+-activated non-selective cation channel, TRPM4 has been linked to Ca2+-induced arrhythmias, potentially contributing to translating an increase in intracellular Ca2+ concentration into membrane depolarisation and an increase in cellular excitability. Indeed, evidence from genetically modified mice, analysis of mutations in human patients and the identification of a TRPM4 blocking compound that can be applied in vivo further underscore this hypothesis. Here, we provide an overview of these data in the context of our current understanding of Ca2+-dependent arrhythmias.

Torsade de pointes induced by intravenous amiodarone therapy accompanied by marked augmentation of the transmural dispersion of repolarization in a patient with tachycardia-induced-cardiomyopathy

We report a 77-year-old human on renal dialysis for end-stage renal disease with heart failure and atrial fibrillation (AF) complicated by a high ventricular frequency. The underlying disease was thought as tachycardia-induced-cardiomyopathy. Intravenous infusion of amiodarone was initiated, and direct current cardioversion succeeded in converting AF to sinus rhythm. Then, excessive increases in the QT and Tpeak-Tend (Tp-e) intervals were seen and hypokalemia induced by hemodialysis led to the development of numerous episodes of torsades de pointes (TdP). Magnesium repletion was effective in preventing TdP, while Tp-e intervals returned to the previous values 2 days after the discontinuation of amiodarone.

Exercise-induced ventricular tachycardia in a case with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy taking cibenzoline

We report a 17‐year‐old woman with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) successfully resuscitated from ventricular fibrillation while taking cibenzoline. During exercise–stress testing before implanting an implantable cardioverter–defibrillator, ventricular tachycardia was induced and thought to be a proarrhythmia due to the use‐dependent effect of the Na channel blockade with cibenzoline. In patients with arrhythmogenic substrates such as HCM, it is critical to pay attention to the proarrhythmic effects of class I antiarrhythmic drugs while increasing heart rate.

A systematic strategy for estimating hERG block potency and its implications in a new cardiac safety paradigm

Introduction

hERG block potency is widely used to calculate a drug's safety margin against its torsadogenic potential. Previous studies are confounded by use of different patch clamp electrophysiology protocols and a lack of statistical quantification of experimental variability. Since the new cardiac safety paradigm being discussed by the International Council for Harmonisation promotes a tighter integration of nonclinical and clinical data for torsadogenic risk assessment, a more systematic approach to estimate the hERG block potency and safety margin is needed.

Methods

A cross-industry study was performed to collect hERG data on 28 drugs with known torsadogenic risk using a standardized experimental protocol. A Bayesian hierarchical modeling (BHM) approach was used to assess the hERG block potency of these drugs by quantifying both the inter-site and intra-site variability. A modeling and simulation study was also done to evaluate protocol-dependent changes in hERG potency estimates.

Results

A systematic approach to estimate hERG block potency is established. The impact of choosing a safety margin threshold on torsadogenic risk evaluation is explored based on the posterior distributions of hERG potency estimated by this method. The modeling and simulation results suggest any potency estimate is specific to the protocol used.

Discussion

This methodology can estimate hERG block potency specific to a given voltage protocol. The relationship between safety margin thresholds and torsadogenic risk predictivity suggests the threshold should be tailored to each specific context of use, and safety margin evaluation may need to be integrated with other information to form a more comprehensive risk assessment.

•

hERG potency/safety margin is a widely used nonclinical cardiac safety strategy.

•

A new regulatory paradigm promotes the integration of nonclinical and clinical data.

•

Lack of uncertainty quantification hindered using hERG potency in the new paradigm.

•

A systematic method was established to address this limitation.

•

Analysis supports using different safety margin thresholds in different context.

Antiarrhythmics for maintaining sinus rhythm after cardioversion of atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation is the most frequent sustained arrhythmia. Atrial fibrillation often recurs after restoration of normal sinus rhythm. Antiarrhythmic drugs have been widely used to prevent recurrence. This is an update of a review previously published in 2006, 2012 and 2015.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of long-term treatment with antiarrhythmic drugs on death, stroke, drug adverse effects and recurrence of atrial fibrillation in people who had recovered sinus rhythm after having atrial fibrillation.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated the searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase in January 2019, and ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP in February 2019. We checked the reference lists of retrieved articles, recent reviews and meta-analyses.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two authors independently selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any antiarrhythmic drug with a control (no treatment, placebo, drugs for rate control) or with another antiarrhythmic drug in adults who had atrial fibrillation and in whom sinus rhythm was restored, spontaneously or by any intervention. We excluded postoperative atrial fibrillation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed quality and extracted data. We pooled studies, if appropriate, using Mantel-Haenszel risk ratios (RR), with 95% confidence intervals (CI). All results were calculated at one year of follow-up or the nearest time point.

MAIN RESULTS

This update included one new study (100 participants) and excluded one previously included study because of double publication. Finally, we included 59 RCTs comprising 20,981 participants studying quinidine, disopyramide, propafenone, flecainide, metoprolol, amiodarone, dofetilide, dronedarone and sotalol. Overall, mean follow-up was 10.2 months.All-cause mortalityHigh-certainty evidence from five RCTs indicated that treatment with sotalol was associated with a higher all-cause mortality rate compared with placebo or no treatment (RR 2.23, 95% CI 1.03 to 4.81; participants = 1882). The number need to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) for sotalol was 102 participants treated for one year to have one additional death. Low-certainty evidence from six RCTs suggested that risk of mortality may be higher in people taking quinidine (RR 2.01, 95% CI 0.84 to 4.77; participants = 1646). Moderate-certainty evidence showed increased RR for mortality but with very wide CIs for metoprolol (RR 2.02, 95% CI 0.37 to 11.05, 2 RCTs, participants = 562) and amiodarone (RR 1.66, 95% CI 0.55 to 4.99, 2 RCTs, participants = 444), compared with placebo.We found little or no difference in mortality with dofetilide (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.27; moderate-certainty evidence) or dronedarone (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.09; high-certainty evidence) compared to placebo/no treatment. There were few data on mortality for disopyramide, flecainide and propafenone, making impossible a reliable estimation for those drugs.Withdrawals due to adverse eventsAll analysed drugs increased withdrawals due to adverse effects compared to placebo or no treatment (quinidine: RR 1.56, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.78; disopyramide: RR 3.68, 95% CI 0.95 to 14.24; propafenone: RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.46; flecainide: RR 15.41, 95% CI 0.91 to 260.19; metoprolol: RR 3.47, 95% CI 1.48 to 8.15; amiodarone: RR 6.70, 95% CI 1.91 to 23.45; dofetilide: RR 1.77, 95% CI 0.75 to 4.18; dronedarone: RR 1.58, 95% CI 1.34 to 1.85; sotalol: RR 1.95, 95% CI 1.23 to 3.11). Certainty of the evidence for this outcome was low for disopyramide, amiodarone, dofetilide and flecainide; moderate to high for the remaining drugs.ProarrhythmiaVirtually all studied antiarrhythmics showed increased proarrhythmic effects (counting both tachyarrhythmias and bradyarrhythmias attributable to treatment) (quinidine: RR 2.05, 95% CI 0.95 to 4.41; disopyramide: no data; flecainide: RR 4.80, 95% CI 1.30 to 17.77; metoprolol: RR 18.14, 95% CI 2.42 to 135.66; amiodarone: RR 2.22, 95% CI 0.71 to 6.96; dofetilide: RR 5.50, 95% CI 1.33 to 22.76; dronedarone: RR 1.95, 95% CI 0.77 to 4.98; sotalol: RR 3.55, 95% CI 2.16 to 5.83); with the exception of propafenone (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.39 to 4.47) for which the certainty of evidence was very low and we were uncertain about the effect. Certainty of the evidence for this outcome for the other drugs was moderate to high.StrokeEleven studies reported stroke outcomes with quinidine, disopyramide, flecainide, amiodarone, dronedarone and sotalol. High-certainty evidence from two RCTs suggested that dronedarone may be associated with reduced risk of stroke (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.95; participants = 5872). This result is attributed to one study dominating the meta-analysis and has yet to be reproduced in other studies. There was no apparent effect on stroke rates with the other antiarrhythmics.Recurrence of atrial fibrillationModerate- to high-certainty evidence, with the exception of disopyramide which was low-certainty evidence, showed that all analysed drugs, including metoprolol, reduced recurrence of atrial fibrillation (quinidine: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.88; disopyramide: RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.01; propafenone: RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.74; flecainide: RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.77; metoprolol: RR 0.83 95% CI 0.68 to 1.02; amiodarone: RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.58; dofetilide: RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.85; dronedarone: RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.91; sotalol: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.87). Despite this reduction, atrial fibrillation still recurred in 43% to 67% of people treated with antiarrhythmics.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is high-certainty evidence of increased mortality associated with sotalol treatment, and low-certainty evidence suggesting increased mortality with quinidine, when used for maintaining sinus rhythm in people with atrial fibrillation. We found few data on mortality in people taking disopyramide, flecainide and propafenone, so it was not possible to make a reliable estimation of the mortality risk for these drugs. However, we did find moderate-certainty evidence of marked increases in proarrhythmia and adverse effects with flecainide.Overall, there is evidence showing that antiarrhythmic drugs increase adverse events, increase proarrhythmic events and some antiarrhythmics may increase mortality. Conversely, although they reduce recurrences of atrial fibrillation, there is no evidence of any benefit on other clinical outcomes, compared with placebo or no treatment.

Proarrhythmic Effects Of Antiarrhythmic Drugs: Case Study Of Flecainide Induced Ventricular Arrhythmias During Treatment Of Atrial Fibrillation

PURPOSE

Flecainide is a class 1C antiarrhythmic drug especially used for the management of supraventricular arrhythmia. Flecainide also has a recognized proarrhythmic effect in patients treated for ventricular tachycardia. It is used to treat a variety of cardiac arrhythmias including paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia and ventricular tachycardia. Flecainide has local anesthetic effects and belongs to the class 1C AADs that block sodium channels, thereby slowing conduction through the heart. It selectively increases anterograde and retrograde accessory pathway refractoriness. The action of flecainide in the heart prolongs the PR interval and widens the QRS complex. The proarrhythmic effects however noted are not widely reported.

METHOD

We report a case of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation with structurally normal heart who was treated with oral Flecainide. There were no adverse events and no QTc prolongation was noted on ECG. Despite subjective improvement a repeat Holter detected him to have multiple short non sustained ventricular arrhythmias.

RESULTS

Development of ventricular arrhythmias, salvos and non-sustained ventricular tachycardia after a month of initiation of oral flecainide detected by 24 hours ECG Holter lead to discontinuation of flecainide and subsequent early electrophysiological studies and successful ablation.

CONCLUSION

Initiation of oral Flecainide in a case of atrial fibrillation with subjective improvement and regular ECG monitoring, no QTc prolongation can still lead to development of dangerous ventricular arrhythmias. A cautious approach and thorough investigations and follow up are recommended.

Narrow therapeutic index drugs: a clinical pharmacological consideration to flecainide

Purpose

The therapeutic index (TI) is the range of doses at which a medication is effective without unacceptable adverse events. Drugs with a narrow TI (NTIDs) have a narrow window between their effective doses and those at which they produce adverse toxic effects. Generic drugs may be substituted for brand-name drugs provided that they meet the recommended bioequivalence (BE) limits. However, an appropriate range of BE for NTIDs is essential to define due to the potential for ineffectiveness or adverse events. Flecainide is an antiarrhythmic agent that has the potential to be considered an NTID. This review aims to evaluate the literature surrounding guidelines on generic substitution for NTIDs and to evaluate the evidence for flecainide to be considered an NTID.

Methods

A review of recommendations from various regulatory authorities regarding BE and NTIDs, and publications regarding the NTID characteristics of flecainide, was carried out.

Results

Regulatory authorities generally recommend reduced BE limits for NTIDs. Some, but not all, regulatory authorities specify flecainide as an NTID. The literature review demonstrated that flecainide displays NTID characteristics including a steep drug dose–response relationship for safety and efficacy, a need for therapeutic drug monitoring of pharmacokinetic (PK) or pharmacodynamics measures and intra-subject variability in its PK properties.

Conclusions

There is much evidence for flecainide to be considered an NTID based on both preclinical and clinical data. A clear understanding of the potential of proarrhythmic effects or lack of efficacy, careful patient selection and regular monitoring are essential for the safe and rational administration of flecainide.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00228-015-1832-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Antiarrhythmics for maintaining sinus rhythm after cardioversion of atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation is the most frequent sustained arrhythmia. Atrial fibrillation frequently recurs after restoration of normal sinus rhythm. Antiarrhythmic drugs have been widely used to prevent recurrence, but the effect of these drugs on mortality and other clinical outcomes is unclear. This is an update of a review previously published in 2008 and 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To determine in patients who have recovered sinus rhythm after having atrial fibrillation, the effects of long-term treatment with antiarrhythmic drugs on death, stroke, embolism, drug adverse effects and recurrence of atrial fibrillation.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated the searches of CENTRAL in The Cochrane Library (2013, Issue 12 of 12), MEDLINE (to January 2014) and EMBASE (to January 2014). The reference lists of retrieved articles, recent reviews and meta-analyses were checked.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two independent authors selected randomised controlled trials comparing any antiarrhythmic drug with a control (no treatment, placebo, drugs for rate control) or with another antiarrhythmic drug in adults who had atrial fibrillation and in whom sinus rhythm was restored. Post-operative atrial fibrillation was excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed quality and extracted data. Studies were pooled, if appropriate, using Peto odds ratio (OR). All results were calculated at one year of follow-up.

MAIN RESULTS

In this update three new studies, with 534 patients, were included making a total of 59 included studies comprising 21,305 patients. All included studies were randomised controlled trials. Allocation concealment was adequate in 17 trials, it was unclear in the remaining 42 trials. Risk of bias was assessed in all domains only in the trials included in this update.Compared with controls, class IA drugs quinidine and disopyramide (OR 2.39, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.03 to 5.59, number needed to treat to harm (NNTH) 109, 95% CI 34 to 4985) and sotalol (OR 2.23, 95% CI 1.1 to 4.50, NNTH 169, 95% CI 60 to 2068) were associated with increased all-cause mortality. Other antiarrhythmics did not seem to modify mortality, but our data could be underpowered to detect mild increases in mortality for several of the drugs studied.Several class IA (disopyramide, quinidine), IC (flecainide, propafenone) and III (amiodarone, dofetilide, dronedarone, sotalol) drugs significantly reduced recurrence of atrial fibrillation (OR 0.19 to 0.70, number needed to treat to beneft (NNTB) 3 to 16). Beta-blockers (metoprolol) also significantly reduced atrial fibrillation recurrences (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.88, NNTB 9).All analysed drugs increased withdrawals due to adverse affects and all but amiodarone, dronedarone and propafenone increased pro-arrhythmia. Only 11 trials reported data on stroke. None of them found any significant difference with the exception of a single trial than found less strokes in the group treated with dronedarone compared to placebo. This finding was not confirmed in others studies on dronedarone.We could not analyse heart failure and use of anticoagulation because few original studies reported on these measures.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Several class IA, IC and III drugs, as well as class II drugs (beta-blockers), are moderately effective in maintaining sinus rhythm after conversion of atrial fibrillation. However, they increase adverse events, including pro-arrhythmia, and some of them (disopyramide, quinidine and sotalol) may increase mortality. Possible benefits on clinically relevant outcomes (stroke, embolism, heart failure) remain to be established.

Severe iatrogenic bradycardia related to the combined use of beta-blocking agents and sodium channel blockers

Purpose

Drug-induced bradycardia is common during antiarrhythmic therapy; the major culprits are beta-blockers. However, whether other antiarrhythmic drugs are also a significant cause of this, alone or in combination with beta-blockers, is not well known.

Methods

We retrospectively investigated the records of all patients hospitalized at our institution for drug-related bradycardia from the years 2004 to 2012. Patients with cardiac disease and electrolytic or hormonal abnormalities that could cause bradyarrhythmias were excluded.

Results

Eight patients were identified (mean age, 79±5 years; range, 71–85 years; 6 women). Three patients were taking only beta-blockers (hereafter referred to as the BB group), while five patients were on both beta-blockers and Na channel blockers (hereafter referred to as the BB + Na group). Heart rates ranged from 20∼49 beats/minute on arrival. The initial electrocardiogram showed sinus bradycardia (n=6) or sinus arrest with escape beats (n=2). QRS duration was 80–100 ms. The clinical presentation of the BB + Na group was considerably worse than that of the BB group, and included cardiogenic shock and heart failure. Four of the BB + Na patients had been on their medications for over 300 days. The BB group recovered solely with drug discontinuation, while 4 of the 5 patients in the BB + Na group needed additional treatments, such as intravenous administration of atropine or adrenergic agonist and temporary pacing. Bradycardia did not recur during follow-up (median, 687 days).

Conclusion

Although wide QRS ventricular tachyarrhythmia is a better known proarrhythmic effect of Na channel blockers, life-threatening bradycardia may also occur in combination with beta-blockers in the elderly, even months after the start of medication, and at plasma concentrations that do not prolong QRS width.

Safety of flecainide

Flecainide is a class Ic antiarrhythmic agent that has an important role as part of rhythm control strategies in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Early clinical data on the use of flecainide showed an increase in arrhythmias and mortality compared with placebo in patients with a previous myocardial infarction and asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic ventricular arrhythmias. These findings only apply to a specific group of patients with left ventricular dysfunction and ischaemic heart disease, but had a negative impact on the use of class Ic antiarrhythmics across all indications and patient groups. The aim of this review was to evaluate the available safety data for flecainide in the literature and to assess its current use in patients with AF. Current European guidelines now recommend the use of flecainide in carefully selected groups of patients with AF who do not have structural heart disease. This includes for the cardioversion of recent-onset AF, pretreatment prior to direct current cardioversion, out-of-hospital acute oral therapy ('pill-in-the-pocket' approach) and for the ongoing maintenance of sinus rhythm. Potential cardiac adverse effects of flecainide include proarrhythmia, conduction abnormalities and negative inotropic effects. Dizziness is the most frequent non-cardiac side effect, followed by blurred vision and difficulty focusing; these are almost all mild, transient and tolerable. Data from recent clinical trials in patients with supraventricular arrhythmias suggest that flecainide has a good tolerability profile in groups of appropriately selected patients. Caution is required when using flecainide in patients with renal dysfunction, and there are a number of drug interactions, but these are well documented and manageable. Overall, flecainide is a good choice for the pharmacological management of AF. It has a good safety record and low incidence of adverse effects, rare end-organ toxicity and a low risk of ventricular proarrhythmia. To ensure that the benefits of treatment outweigh any potential risks, careful patient selection and monitoring is required.

Antiarrhythmics for maintaining sinus rhythm after cardioversion of atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most frequent sustained arrhythmia. AF recurs frequently after restoration of normal sinus rhythm. Antiarrhythmic drugs have been widely used to prevent recurrence, but the effect of these drugs on mortality and other clinical outcomes is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To determine, in patients who recovered sinus rhythm after AF, the effect of long-term treatment with antiarrhythmic drugs on death, stroke and embolism, adverse effects, pro-arrhythmia, and recurrence of AF.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated the searches of CENTRAL on The Cochrane Libary (Issue 1 of 4, 2010), MEDLINE (1950 to February 2010) and EMBASE (1966 to February 2010). The reference lists of retrieved articles, recent reviews and meta-analyses were checked.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two independent reviewers selected randomised controlled trials comparing any antiarrhythmic with a control (no treatment, placebo or drugs for rate control) or with another antiarrhythmic, in adults who had AF and in whom sinus rhythm was restored. Post-operative AF was excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed quality and extracted data. Studies were pooled, if appropriate, using Peto odds ratio (OR). All results were calculated at one year of follow-up.

MAIN RESULTS

In this update, 11 new studies met inclusion criteria, making a total of 56 included studies, comprising 20,771 patients. Compared with controls, class IA drugs quinidine and disopyramide (OR 2.39, 95% confidence interval (95%CI) 1.03 to 5.59, number needed to harm (NNH) 109, 95%CI 34 to 4985) and sotalol (OR 2.47, 95%CI 1.2 to 5.05, NNH 166, 95%CI 61 to 1159) were associated with increased all-cause mortality. Other antiarrhythmics did not seem to modify mortality.Several class IA (disopyramide, quinidine), IC (flecainide, propafenone) and III (amiodarone, dofetilide, dronedarone, sotalol) drugs significantly reduced recurrence of AF (OR 0.19 to 0.70, number needed to treat (NNT) 3 to 16). Beta-blockers (metoprolol) also reduced significantly AF recurrence (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.88, NNT 9).All analysed drugs increased withdrawals due to adverse affects and all but amiodarone, dronedarone and propafenone increased pro-arrhythmia. We could not analyse other outcomes because few original studies reported them.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Several class IA, IC and III drugs, as well as class II (beta-blockers), are moderately effective in maintaining sinus rhythm after conversion of atrial fibrillation. However, they increase adverse events, including pro-arrhythmia, and some of them (disopyramide, quinidine and sotalol) may increase mortality. Possible benefits on clinically relevant outcomes (stroke, embolisms, heart failure) remain to be established.

Twenty-five years in the making: flecainide is safe and effective for the management of atrial fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia in clinical practise and its prevalence is increasing. Over the last 25 years, flecainide has been used extensively worldwide, and its capacity to reduce AF symptoms and provide long-term restoration of sinus rhythm (SR) has been well documented. The increased mortality seen in patients treated with flecainide in the Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial (CAST) study, published in 1991, still deters many clinicians from using flecainide, denying many new AF patients a valuable treatment option. There is now a body of evidence that clearly demonstrates that flecainide has a favourable safety profile in AF patients without significant left ventricular disease or coronary heart disease. As a result of this evidence, flecainide is now recommended as one of the first-line treatment options for restoring and maintaining SR in patients with AF under current treatment guidelines. The objective of this article is to review the literature pertaining to the pharmacological characteristics, safety and efficacy of flecainide, and to place this drug in the context of current therapeutic management strategies for AF.

Prognosis and natural history of drug-related bradycardia

Background and Objectives

The prognosis and natural history of bradycardia related to drugs such as beta-blockers and non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers are not well known.

Subjects and Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 38 consecutive patients (age 69±11, 21 women) with drug-related bradycardia (DRB) between March 2005 and September 2007. A drug-associated etiology for the bradycardia was established based on the medical history and patient response to drug discontinuation. The mean follow-up duration was 18±8 months.

Results

The initial electrocardiogram (ECG) showed sinus bradycardia (heart rate ≤40/min) in 13 patients, sinus bradycardia with junctional escape beats in 18 patients, and third-degree atrioventricular (AV) block in seven patients. Drug discontinuation was followed by resolution of bradycardia in 60% of patients (n=23). Among them, five (17.8%) patients resumed taking the culprit medication after discharge and none developed bradycardia again. Bradycardia persisted in 10 (26.3%) patients despite drug withdrawal, and a permanent pacemaker was implanted in seven of them. Third-degree AV block, QRS width, and bradycardia requiring temporary transvenous pacing were significantly associated with the bradycardia caused by drugs.

Conclusion

Beta-blockers were the most common drugs associated with DRB. However, in one quarter of the cases the DRB was not associated with drugs; in these patients permanent pacemaker implantation should be considered.

Role of drug therapy for sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias

Antiarrhythmic drug therapy, broadly defined, is the mainstay of treatment and prevention of ventricular tachycardia (VT)/ventricular fibrillation (VF), which can lead to sudden death. This article evaluates the evidence for and appropriate use of class I antiarrhythmic drugs, class III antiarrhythmic drugs, beta-blockers, nondihydropyridine calcium-channel blockers, statins, angiotensin enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, aldosterone blockers, and digoxin for antiarrhythmic benefits in patients who have a propensity for VT/VF and therefore are at risk of sudden death.

Antiarrhythmics for maintaining sinus rhythm after cardioversion of atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most frequent sustained arrhythmia. After restoration of normal sinus rhythm, the recurrence rate of AF is high. Antiarrhythmic drugs have been widely used to prevent recurrence, but the effect of these drugs on mortality and other clinical outcomes is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To determine, in patients who recovered sinus rhythm after AF, the effect of long-term treatment with antiarrhythmic drugs on death, stroke and embolism, adverse effects, pro-arrhythmia and recurrence of AF. If several antiarrhythmics were effective our secondary aim was to compare them.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) on The Cochrane Libary (Issue 2, 2005), MEDLINE (1950 to May 2005) and EMBASE (1966 to May 2005) were searched. The reference lists of retrieved articles, recent reviews and meta-analyses were checked. No language restrictions were applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two independent reviewers selected randomised controlled trials comparing any antiarrhythmic with a control (no treatment, placebo or drugs for rate control) or with another antiarrhythmic, in adults who had AF and in whom sinus rhythm was restored. Post-operative AF was excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed quality and extracted data, on an intention-to-treat basis. Disagreements were resolved by discussion. Studies were pooled, if appropriate, using Peto odds ratio (OR).

MAIN RESULTS

45 studies met inclusion criteria, comprising 12,559 patients. All results were calculated at 1 year of follow-up. Class IA drugs (disopyramide, quinidine) were associated with increased mortality compared with controls (OR 2.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 5.59, P = 0.04, number needed to harm (NNH) 109, 95% CI 34 to 4985). Other antiarrhythmics did not modify mortality. Several class IA (disopyramide, quinidine), IC (flecainide, propafenone) and III (amiodarone, dofetilide, dronedarone, sotalol) drugs significantly reduced recurrence of AF (OR 0.19 to 0.60, number needed to treat 2 to 9), but all increased withdrawals due to adverse affects (NNH 17 to 36) and all but amiodarone and propafenone increased pro-arrhythmia (NNH 17 to 119).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Several class IA, IC and III drugs are effective in maintaining sinus rhythm but increase adverse events, including pro-arrhythmia, and disopyramide and quinidine are associated with increased mortality. Any benefit on clinically relevant outcomes (embolisms, heart failure, mortality) remains to be established.

Long-term efficacy of hybrid pharmacologic and ablation therapy in patients with pilsicainide-induced atrial flutter

BACKGROUND

Combination therapy with catheter ablation of the cavo-tricuspid isthmus and continued drug therapy, that is, "hybrid therapy," in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and drug-induced atrial flutter (AFL) is reported to be an alternative means of achieving and maintaining sinus rhythm. With respect to choosing this method among the rhythm control therapies, its long-term efficacy and the prevalence of AFL in patients with AF are very important and have not been fully elucidated.

HYPOTHESIS

The purpose of this study was to investigate the long-term effectiveness of this hybrid therapy and the dose prevalence in Ic drug-induced AFL.

METHODS

The subjects were 89 patients (aged 62.4 years, 72 men) with episodes of AF (paroxysmal type: 65, persistent type: 11, permanent type: 13). After 4 weeks of oral pilsicainide administration, the dose was increased in those with no documented AFL. The patients who experienced AFL with pilsicainide (Ic-AFL) underwent ablation.

RESULTS

Pilsicainide administration resulted in the common type AFL in 17 patients (19.1%). The pilsicainide plasma concentration in the patients with Ic-AFL was significantly higher than in those without AFL (0.79 +/- 0.41 vs. 0.51 +/- 0.24 microg/ml, respectively, p < 0.01). During a 10-54 (mean 37 +/- 14) month follow-up period, sinus rhythm was maintained in 10 of 12 patients after successful ablation followed by continued antiarrhythmic drug administration.

CONCLUSIONS

Hybrid therapy with ablation and high doses of pilsicainide was useful in maintaining sinus rhythm in some selected patients with AF and drug-induced AFL.

Pharmacologic Control of Rhythm

Of the 128 articles evaluated on the overall topic of atrial fibrillation (AF) after cardiac surgery, only 19 studies dealing with pharmacologic heart rhythm control were relevant for inclusion in this analysis, indicating the relative paucity of evidence-based studies addressing this topic. We found limited data on guiding treatment for the rhythm control of AF following cardiac surgery in patients who do not require urgent cardioversion; therefore, the choice of an antiarrhythmic drug needs to be guided by patient characteristics. Based on limited available evidence, amiodarone is recommended for pharmacologic conversion of postoperative AF and AFL in patients with depressed left ventricular function who do not need urgent electrical cardioversion. This recommendation is made largely because of the effectiveness of amiodarone and also because of its relatively favorable side-effects profile. Sotalol and class 1A antiarrhythmic drugs are reasonable choices for patients with coronary artery disease who do not have congestive heart failure. There are currently no definitive data to guide the decision about the duration of antiarrhythmic drug therapy for patients with AF following cardiac surgery. Most protocols continue therapy with the antiarrhythmic drug for 4 to 6 weeks following surgery, but evidence from randomized studies is lacking.

Serial antiarrhythmic therapy: role of amiodarone in prevention of atrial fibrillation recurrence--a lesson from the HOT CAFE Polish Study

Antiarrhythmic drug prophylaxis is known to improve long-term success of electrical cardioversion (CV) in persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). This prospective study evaluates the efficacy of sequential antiarrhythmic drug therapy in sinus rhythm (SR) maintenance after successful elective CV in patients with persistent nonvalvular AF.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred and twenty-eight patients (61+/-8 years old) with persistent AF underwent CV. Mean AF duration preceding CV was 268+/-99 days. Following SR restoration, patients were treated sequentially with either of the following antiarrhythmic drugs: propafenone, sotalol or disopyramide. Where arrhythmia recurred, patients received another CV and a new drug from the range defined above. Where such treatment failed, patients were loaded with 14.0- to 16.0-gram doses of amiodarone and a third CV was performed. If the first CV failed to restore SR, patients received a loading dose of amiodarone followed by another CV. When successful, amiodarone was administered on continuous basis.

RESULTS

The first CV proved successful in 55.5% of patients. During 1-year of follow-up, 31 patients (43.7%) presented with SR were treated with one antiarrhythmic agent (median does not exist). Application of the second drug proved to be effective in 6 patients (15.0%; median 13 days). Amiodarone was administered as the third antiarrhythmic agent to patients who had AF recurrence on the first two antiarrhythmic agents (propafenone, sotalol or disopyramide). It proved to be effective in 18 patients (52.9%; median does not exist) remaining free from AF for a period of 1 year as of commencement of the sequential antiarrhythmic therapy. Fifty-seven patients, in whom the first CV was ineffective, received amiodarone. During the loading period, SR was restored in 7 patients (12.3%). The remaining 50 patients underwent repeated CV, with SR restored in 37 (74.0%) of them. Long-term amiodarone treatment maintained SR in 30 (68.2%) patients during the follow-up period. Amiodarone helped to maintain SR in a total of 56.5% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Amiodarone seems to be the drug most effectively restoring and maintaining SR in patients with persistent AF resistant to CV and standard antiarrhythmic drug prophylaxis.

Pharmacological cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: current management and treatment options

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common form of arrhythmia, carrying high social costs. It is usually first seen by general practitioners or in emergency departments. Despite the availability of consensus guidelines, considerable variations exist in treatment practice, especially outside specialised cardiological settings. Cardioversion to sinus rhythm aims to: (i) restore the atrial contribution to ventricular filling/output; (ii) regularise ventricular rate; and (iii) interrupt atrial remodelling. Cardioversion always requires careful assessment of potential proarrhythmic and thromboembolic risks, and this translates into the need to personalise treatment decisions. Among the many clinical variables that affect strategy selection, time from onset is crucial. In selected patients, pharmacological cardioversion of recent-onset AF can be a safely used, feasible and effective approach, even in internal medicine and emergency departments. In most cases of recent-onset AF, pharmacological cardioversion provides an important--and probably more cost effective--alternative to electrical cardioversion, which can then be employed as a second-line therapy for nonresponders. Class IC agents (flecainide or propafenone), which can be safely used in hospitalised patients with recent-onset AF without left ventricular dysfunction, can provide rapid conversion to sinus rhythm after either intravenous administration or oral loading. Although intravenous amiodarone requires longer conversion times, it is still the standard treatment for patients with heart failure. Ibutilide also provides good conversion rates and could be used for AF patients with left ventricular dysfunction (were it not for high costs). For long-lasting AF most pharmacological treatments have only limited efficacy and electrical cardioversion remains the gold standard in this setting. However, a widely used strategy involves pretreatment with amiodarone in the weeks before planned electrical cardioversion: this provides optimal prophylaxis and can sometimes even restore sinus rhythm. Dofetilide may also be capable of restoring sinus rhythm in up to 25-30% of patients and can be used in patients with heart failure. The potential risk of proarrhythmia increases the need for careful therapeutic decision making and management of pharmacological cardioversion. The results of recent trials (AFFIRM [Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management] and RACE [Rate Control versus Electrical Cardioversion for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation]) on rate versus rhythm control strategies in the long term have led to a generalised shift in interest towards rate control. Although carefully designed studies are required to better define the role of pharmacological rhythm control in specific AF settings, this alternative option remains a recommendable strategy for many patients, especially those in acute care.

Drug-induced atrial fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained rhythm disorder observed in clinical practice and predominantly associated with cardiovascular disorders such as coronary heart disease and hypertension. However, several classes of drugs may induce AF in patients without apparent heart disease or may precipitate the onset of AF in patients with preexisting heart disease. We reviewed the literature on drug-induced AF, using the PubMed/Medline and Micromedex databases and lateral references. Successively, we discuss the potential role in the onset of AF of cardiovascular drugs, respiratory system drugs, cytostatics, central nervous system drugs, genitourinary system drugs, and some miscellaneous agents. Drug-induced AF may play a role in only a minority of the patients presenting with AF. Nevertheless, it is important to recognize drugs or other agents as a potential cause, especially in the elderly, because increasing age is associated with multiple drug use and a high incidence of AF. This may contribute to timely diagnosis and management of drug-induced AF.

Limitations to antiarrhythmic drug use in patients with atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Of the antiarrhythmic agents currently marketed in Canada, 5 are commonly used to treat atrial fibrillation (AF). The impact of contraindications, warnings and precautions for the use of these drugs in patients with AF is not known. We evaluated the proportion of patients with AF for whom contraindications, warnings and/or precautions might limit the use of these commonly prescribed drugs and the proportion of patients actually receiving antiarrhythmic drugs despite the presence of contraindications and/or warnings.

METHODS

A total of 723 patients with electrocardiographically confirmed, new-onset paroxysmal AF who were enrolled in the Canadian Registry of Atrial Fibrillation were used in this analysis. The 1996 Compendium of Pharmaceuticals and Specialties was used to obtain contraindications, warnings and precautions for use of 5 antiarrhythmic drugs: flecainide, quinidine, sotalol, amiodarone and propafenone. Proportions of patients with contraindications, warnings and/or precautions for use of any of these drugs owing to comorbid conditions or concomitant drug therapy were calculated, regardless of whether the drugs had been prescribed. We then calculated the proportion of patients taking each antiarrhythmic drug at 3 months despite contraindications and/or warnings.

RESULTS

At baseline, when conditions for contraindications and warnings were combined, 414 (57%), 235 (33%), 327 (45%), 285 (39%) and 272 (38%) patients had restrictions for the use of flecainide, quinidine, sotalol, amiodarone and propafenone respectively. Among 465 patients actually taking these medications at 3-month follow-up, 33.3% (2/6), 83.3% (40/48), 36.4% (92/253), 64.1% (25/39) and 34.5% (41/119) respectively had contraindications and/or warnings against their use. The burden of comorbid disease among patients with AF was noteworthy: 404 (56%) had structural heart disease, which included 227 (31%) with ischemic heart disease, 158 (22%) with left ventricular systolic dysfunction and 106 (15%) with heart failure.

INTERPRETATION

The high burden of comorbid disease and concomitant drug use in a large proportion of patients with AF limits the suitability of existing antiarrhythmic drugs. Over one-third of patients with new-onset AF received antiarrhythmic drugs despite the presence of contraindications or warnings. Although such restrictions may not preclude the use of these drugs, the results demonstrate the need for new antiarrhythmic drugs with fewer limitations.

Rate control vs rhythm control in patients with nonvalvular persistent atrial fibrillation: the results of the Polish How to Treat Chronic Atrial Fibrillation (HOT CAFE) Study

STUDY OBJECTIVES

The relative risks and benefits of strategies of rate control vs rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) remain to be fully explored.

DESIGN

The How to Treat Chronic Atrial Fibrillation (HOT CAFE) Polish trial was designed to evaluate in a randomized, multicenter, and prospective manner the feasibility and long-term outcomes of rate control vs rhythm control strategies in patients with persistent AF.

PATIENTS

Our study population comprised 205 patients (134 men and 71 women; mean [+/- SD] age, 60.8 +/- 11.2 years) with a mean AF duration of 273.7 +/- 112.4 days. The mean observation period was 1.7 +/- 0.4 years. One hundred one patients were randomly assigned to the rate control group and received rate-slowing therapy guided by repeated 24-h Holter monitoring. Direct current cardioversion and atrioventricular junctional ablation with pacemaker placement were alternative nonpharmacologic strategies for patients with tachycardia that was resistant to medical therapy. One hundred four patients were randomized to sinus rhythm restoration and maintenance using serial cardioversion supported by a predefined stepwise antiarrhythmic drug regimen (ie, disopyramide, propafenone, sotalol, and amiodarone). In both groups, thromboembolic prophylaxis followed current guidelines.

MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS

At the end of follow-up, 63.5% of patients in the rhythm control arm remained in sinus rhythm. No significant differences in the composite end point (ie, all-cause mortality, number of thromboembolic events, or major bleeding) were found between the rate control group and the rhythm control group (odds ratio, 1.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.28 to 22.3; p > 0.71). The incidence of hospital admissions was much lower in the rate control arm (12% vs 74%, respectively; p < 0.001). New York Heart Association functional class improved in both study groups, while mean exercise tolerance, as measured by the maximal treadmill workload, improved only in the rhythm control group (5.2 +/- 5.1 vs 7.6 +/- 3.3 metabolic equivalents, respectively; p < 0.001). The rhythm control strategy led to an increased mean left ventricular fractional shortening (29 +/- 7% vs 31 +/- 7%, respectively; p < 0.01). One episode of pulmonary embolism occurred in the rate control group despite oral anticoagulation therapy, while three patients in the rhythm control arm of the study experienced ischemic strokes (not significant).

CONCLUSIONS

The Polish HOT CAFE study revealed no significant differences in major end points between the rate control group and the rhythm control group.

Management of atrial fibrillation in the post-cardiac surgery setting

New onset postcardiac surgery AF is a prevalent problem associated with increased morbidity, hospital expense, and length of stay. Those agents that inhibit beta-adrenergic receptors (class II beta-blockers, sotalol, and amiodarone) have been demonstrated to be successful prophylaxis against postoperative AF. Furthermore, those therapies that do not inhibit beta-receptors are not effective prophylactic agents. Until comparative trials demonstrate a significant reduction in postoperative AF without additional adverse effects for sotalol or amiodarone compared with beta-blockers, class II beta-blockers are the preferred prophylactic therapy. If patients are deemed unable to take beta-blockers, amiodarone is likely the best alternative. Although prophylaxis against postoperative AF seems prudent, the impact of prophylactic therapy on length of stay and hospital costs has not been a primary objective of any randomized trial. Furthermore, no studies have compared prophylactic therapy for every patient versus therapy only for those patients who experience AF after heart surgery. In the absence of data from randomized clinical trials, postoperative AF should be managed in a similar fashion to clinical AF with attention to rate control, anticoagulation, and restoration of sinus rhythm.

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.

[Consensus document for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation in hospital emergency departments]

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most prevalent arrhythmia in hospital emergency departments and is a serious disease associated with a twofold increase in morbidity and a high mortality rate. However, the management of AF in this scenario is variable and frequently inadequate. This is probably a consequence of the diverse clinical aspects and therapeutic options to consider in the management of patients with AF. Therefore, implementation of specific, coordinated management strategies by the different care providers involved is needed to improve the quality of care and optimize the use of human and material resources. This document presents the guidelines recommended by the Spanish Society of Cardiology (SEC) and the Spanish Society of Emergency Medicine (SEMES) for the management of AF in hospital emergency departments. These guidelines are based on published scientific evidence and are applicable to most emergency departments in Spain. Specific management strategies are proposed for the conversion and maintenance of sinus rhythm, heart rate control during AF, prophylaxis for thrombi and emboli, and hospital admission and discharge protocols.

Comparison of the effects of four antiarrhythmic treatments for familial ventricular arrhythmias in Boxers

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of 4 antiarrhythmic treatment protocols on number of ventricular premature complexes (VPC), severity of arrhythmia, heart rate (HR), and number of syncopal episodes in Boxers with ventricular tachyarrhythmias.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled clinical trial.

ANIMALS

49 Boxers.

PROCEDURE

Dogs with > 500 VPC/24 h via 24-hour ambulatory ECG (AECG) were treated with atenolol (n = 11), procainamide (11), sotalol (16), or mexiletine and atenolol (11) for 21 to 28 days. Results of pre- and posttreatment AECG were compared with regard to number of VPC/24 h; maximum, mean, and minimum HR; severity of arrhythmia; and occurrence of syncope.

RESULTS

Significant differences between pre- and posttreatment number of VPC, severity of arrhythmia, HR variables, or occurrence of syncope were not observed in dogs treated with atenolol or procainamide. Significant reductions in number of VPC, severity of arrythmia, and maximum and mean HR were observed in dogs treated with mexiletine-atenolol or sotalol; occurrence of syncope was not significantly different between these 2 treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Treatment with sotalol or mexiletine-atenolol was well tolerated and efficacious. Treatment with procainamide or atenolol was not effective.

Life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias due to transient or correctable causes: high risk for death in follow-up

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated the prognosis of patients resuscitated from ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) with a transient or correctable cause suspected as the cause of the VT/VF.

BACKGROUND

Patients resuscitated from VT/VF in whom a transient or correctable cause has been identified are thought to be at low risk for recurrence and often receive no primary treatment for their arrhythmias.

METHODS

In the Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) trial, patients with a potentially transient or correctable cause of VT/VF were not eligible for randomization. The mortality of these patients was compared with the mortality of patients with a known high risk of recurrence of VT/VF in the AVID registry.

RESULTS

Compared with patients having high risk VT/VF, those with a transient or correctable cause for their presenting VT/VF were younger and had a higher left ventricular ejection fraction. These patients were more often treated with revascularization as the primary therapy, more commonly received a beta-blocker, less often required therapy for congestive heart failure and less commonly received either an antiarrhythmic drug or an implantable cardioverter defibrillator. Nevertheless, subsequent mortality of patients with a transient or correctable cause of VT/VF was no different or perhaps even worse than that of the primary VT/VF population.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients identified with a transient or correctable cause for their VT/VF remain at high risk for death. Further research is needed to define truly reversible causes of VT/VF. Meanwhile, these patients may require more aggressive evaluation, treatment and follow-up than is currently practiced.

Cardiac arrhythmias: drugs and devices

This review focuses on the important role played by the various types of remedial therapy in the prevention and treatment of perioperative cardiac arrhythmias. It discusses the new concepts of arrhythmogenesis and pro-arrhythmia; the long QT interval syndrome; newer, more selective class 3 antiarrhythmic drugs; cardiac rhythm management devices; drugs or devices used as prophylaxis for postoperative atrial arrhythmias; intravenous amiodarone for destabilizing ventricular arrhythmias; and preoperative potassium imbalance.

T Wave Alternans for Predicting Adverse Effects of Amiodarone in a Patient With Dilated Cardiomyopathy

An implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) was used in a 62-year-old man with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) because of hemodynamically intolerable ventricular tachycardia (VT). Amiodarone was administered after a second episode of ICD discharge. Three weeks later, incessant VT appeared, and DC discharge failed to terminate it. Microvolt T wave alternans (TWA), measured by a spectral method, was observed in this patient with and without amiodarone administration. The onset heart rate with TWA was lower and the alternans voltage was higher with amiodarone than without it. The effects of amiodarone appeared to be related to the exacerbation of VT and an increased defibrillation threshold. TWA might be useful in predicting the proarrhythmic effects of amiodarone in similar cases.

Syncope in patients with atrial flutter during treatment with class Ic antiarrhythmic drugs

We describe 2 atrial flutter (AFL) patients with syncope during treatment with class Ic antiarrhythmic drugs. During the syncope, 1:1 atrioventricular (AV) conduction during AFL preceded a wide QRS tachycardia. The class Ic drugs, flecainide and pilsicainide, slowed the atrial rate, resulting in AFL with 1:1 AV conduction, and the width of the QRS complexes became wider during the tachycardia. Syncope was abolished after successful radiofrequency catheter ablation of the AFL. These potential proarrhythmic effects of the class Ic drugs should be taken into account in AFL patients, and concomitant use of beta-blocking agents would be critical to prevent proarrhythmias.

Cost effectiveness of therapies for atrial fibrillation. A review

Atrial fibrillation is the most common supraventricular tachyarrhythmia encountered in clinical practice, affecting over 5% of persons over the age of 65 years. A common pathophysiological mechanism for arrhythmia development is atrial distention and fibrosis induced by hypertension, coronary artery disease or ventricular dysfunction. Less frequently, atrial fibrillation is caused by mitral stenosis or other provocative factors such as thyrotoxicosis, pericarditis or alcohol intoxication. Depending on the extent of associated cardiovascular disease, atrial fibrillation may produce haemodynamic compromise, or symptoms such as palpitations, fatigue, chest pain or dyspnoea. Arrhythmia-induced atrial stasis can precipitate clot formation and the potential for subsequent thromboembolism. Comprehensive management of atrial fibrillation requires a multifaceted approach directed at controlling symptoms, protecting the patient from ischaemic stroke or peripheral embolism and possible conversion to or maintenance of sinus rhythm. Numerous randomised trials have demonstrated the efficacy of warfarin--and less so aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid)--in reducing the risk of embolic events. Furthermore, therapeutic strategies exist that can favourably modify symptoms by restoring and maintaining sinus rhythm with cardioversion and antiarrhythmic prophylaxis. However, the risks and benefits of various treatments is highly dependent on patient-specific features, emphasising the need for an individualised approach. This article reviews the findings of cost-effectiveness studies published over the past decade that have evaluated different components of treatment strategies for atrial fibrillation. These studies demonstrate the economic attractiveness of acute management options, long term warfarin prophylaxis, telemetry-guided initiation of antiarrhythmic therapy, approaches to restore and maintain sinus rhythm, and the potential role of transoesophageal echocardiographic screening for atrial thrombus prior to pharmacological or electrical cardioversion. Further, we discuss the merits and limitations of the cost-effectiveness analyses in the context of overall treatment strategies. Finally, we identify areas that will require additional research to achieve the goal of effective and economically efficient management of atrial fibrillation.

Atrial Fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation will present the most significant arrhythmia management challenge for clinicians in the new millennium, particularly as the percentage of elderly patients and longevity increase worldwide. The clinical manifestations of the arrhythmia are wide ranging: paroxysmal to permanent modes of occurrence and asymptomatic to severely symptomatic presentations. Perhaps most important, the major risks of atrial fibrillation are stroke and death. Current therapies remain heavily focused on pharmacologic efforts to reduce the severity of primary symptoms and to prevent stroke and other thromboembolic complications by means of anticoagulation. It has not yet been proven that prevention of atrial fibrillation will prolong survival, however. Nonpharmacologic therapies remain under intense basic and clinical investigation as promising means to improve outcome further for patients suffering from atrial fibrillation.