Ventricular defibrillation in canines with chronic infarction, and effects of lidocaine and procainamide

Randomized double-blind trial of sotalol versus lignocaine in out-of-hospital refractory cardiac arrest due to ventricular tachyarrhythmia

AIM

We aimed to compare the efficacy of sotalol versus lignocaine for the treatment of patients with out-of-hospital ventricular fibrillation refractory to > or = 4 defibrillatory shocks.

BACKGROUND

The outcome of patients in ventricular fibrillation refractory to > or = 4 defibrillatory shocks is poor. In a previous randomized trial, sotalol was superior to lignocaine for acute termination of ventricular tachycardia not causing loss of consciousness.

METHODS

Patients of the Ambulance Service of New South Wales treated by paramedics with continued ventricular fibrillation despite standard resuscitation and > or = 4 defibrillatory monophasic shocks were eligible. Drug doses were sotalol 100 mg or lignocaine 100 mg, given as i.v. boluses. A further 2 min of cardiopulmonary resuscitation was given and then defibrillation was repeated twice. If this failed, half the initial dose of the trial drug was repeated and a further > or = 2 shocks were given.

RESULTS

Sixty patients were randomized to sotalol and 69 randomized to lignocaine. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the clinical characteristics of the patients or in the number of shocks received. Outcomes in the sotalol and lignocaine groups were survival to hospital admission in 7 (12%) and 16 (23%), respectively (P = 0.09), and survival to hospital discharge in 2 (3%) and 5 (7%), respectively (P = 0.33).

CONCLUSIONS

Sotalol is not superior to lignocaine for treatment of ventricular fibrillation refractory to multiple shocks. The overall outcome of this group of patients is poor regardless of the pharmacological intervention (lignocaine or sotalol).

Interactions of antiarrhythmic drugs and implantable devices in controlling ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation

Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) have proven highly successful in the treatment of life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias. Despite the efficacy of the ICD in terminating ventricular arrhythmias, antiarrhythmic drugs remain an important adjunct to ICD therapy. The use of antiarrhythmic drug therapy in combination with the ICD is synergistic in terms of beneficial effects, but also has the potential for some adverse interactions. Knowledge and recognition of these potential interactions is important for any physician managing patients with an ICD. This review summarizes the benefits and adverse effects of ICD in combination with antiarrhythmic drug therapy, and provides guidelines to ensure safe application of this hybrid therapy.

Rate dependent effects of procainamide on the threshold current for pacing in the setting of postrepolarization refractoriness in dogs

Normally, ventricular APD exceeds the VERP. However, under specific circumstances this relation may change and can become inverse. This phenomenon of postrepolarization refractoriness may be caused by a decrease in excitability. The threshold current (TC) for pacing has never been quantified as a possible explanation for these observations. Using a MAP pacing catheter in the right ventricular apex, the rate dependent behavior of TC, VERP, and APD before and after procainamide (dose 20 mg/kg in 10 min + 5 mg/min infusion) was determined in 17 dogs with chronic complete AV block. Initially, TC was determined with 0.1 mA accuracy. Using a pacing current of at least twice TC, VERP and APD showed a similar, rate dependent shortening for PCLs 800, 575, and 350 ms. Procainamide treatment led to an equal, rate independent VERP and APD increase: no post repolarization refractoriness. Subsequently, accuracy for TC determination was increased to 0.01 mA. Comparing PCLs 800 and 250 ms, TC doubled from 0.05 +/- 0.01 to 0.10 +/- 0.09 mA during control and almost tripled from 0.06 +/- 0.02 to 0.17 +/- 0.10 mA (P < 0.05) after procainamide. Using a fixed pacing current of exactly twice TC found at 800 ms PCL during control, VERP exceeded APD after procainamide treatment at 300 and 250 ms PCL: postrepolarization refractoriness. Increasing the pacing current to twice the rate dependent TC, the relation between VERP and APD normalized: no postrepolarization refractoriness. We conclude that after procainamide, rate dependent TC increase is of major importance for the phenomenon of postrepolarization refractoriness.

Lidocaine's effect on defibrillation threshold are dependent on the defibrillation electrode system: epicardial versus endocardial

INTRODUCTION

Epicardial and endocardial defibrillation electrode systems affect myocardial electrophysiology and sympathetic function differently. Thus, we postulate that antiarrhythmic drugs will interact with these electrode systems differently.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Defibrillation energy requirements (DER) at 20% (ED20), 50% (ED50), and 80% (ED80) success were measured at baseline and during lidocaine (10 mg/kg per hour) or D5W treatment for epicardial and endocardial electrodes. Pigs were randomized to treatment (lidocaine or D5W) and electrode system, which resulted in four experimental groups: (1) epicardial electrode + D5W; (2) epicardial electrode + lidocaine; (3) endocardial electrode + D5W; and (4) endocardial electrode + lidocaine. ED50 DER (mean +/- SEM) values at baseline for groups 1-4 were 10.6+/-1, 8.5+/-1, 12.6+/-1, and 12.3+/-1 J, respectively. DER values for groups 1 and 3 during D5W were similar to baseline. Conversely, lidocaine increased ED50 DER values from 8.5+/-1 to 13.5+/-2 J (P < 0.05) in group 2 animals (epicardial electrodes). When lidocaine was administered to group 4 animals (endocardial electrodes), however, ED50 DER values remained similar to baseline values (12.3+/-1 to 14.3+/-2 J, P = NS). Lidocaine increased ED50 DER values by 59% with the epicardial electrode system, which was significantly greater than the 16% increase with the endocardial electrode system (P < 0.05). Electrophysiologic response and electrode impedance were similar between electrode systems.

CONCLUSION

Lidocaine increases DER values to a greater extent when using epicardial versus endocardial electrode system. Thus, drug-device interactions are dependent on the electrode system. These data suggest that the electrophysiologic milieu created by endocardial defibrillation mitigates the effects that lidocaine has on DER values.

ICD-antiarrhythmic drug and ICD-pacemaker interactions

Antiarrhythmic drugs and separate bradycardia pacing systems are prescribed commonly in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs). Adverse effects of antiarrhythmic drugs on ICD function and adverse interactions between ICDs and pacemakers have been documented. The effect of antiarrhythmic drugs on the defibrillation threshold (DFT) in patients has not been well assessed. Most studies have been performed in animal models in which cardiac function was normal and drug doses were supraphysiologic. In addition, most studies have utilized monophasic defibrillation shock waveforms and epicardial lead systems. Despite the lack of clinical data applicable to current defibrillation systems, it appears that chronic amiodarone administration causes a significant DFT increase. In addition, antiarrhythmic drugs can influence antitachycardia pacing and tachycardia sensing. Defibrillation shocks can cause transient failure of pacemaker sensing and pacing, and cause spurious pacemaker reprogramming. Pacemaker function can result in ICD oversensing, leading to inappropriate therapy, or cause ICD undersensing, potentially resulting in failure to deliver therapy during ventricular fibrillation. The susceptibility of an ICD to undersensing appears related to the amplitude of the pacing stimulus artifact recorded by the ICD rate-sensing circuit and to the characteristics of the fibrillation electrogram. Preliminary data suggest that undersensing of ventricular fibrillation by current ICDs is an unlikely event.

Impact of pulse characteristics on atrial defibrillation energy requirements

In summary, many issues pertaining to pulse characteristics and atrial defibrillation remain unsolved. Perhaps the most burning questions are whether a further reduction in atrial defibrillation energy requirements can be achieved by the combination of biphasic waveforms with dual pathway sequential shocks to produce a more homogenous distribution of charge, whether right and left atrial polarity of the first phase of asymmetrical biphasic shocks can reduce energy requirements in individual patients and whether the delivery of very long biphasic shocks (possibly > 20 msec) can reduce the discomfort of shorter shocks by decreasing the peak current density. Only then will the wide-spread acceptance of the implantable atrial defibrillator become closer to reality.

Interactions between drugs and devices: experimental and clinical studies

It is important to understand the potential interactions between the implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) and antiarrhythmic therapy in patients who receive pharmacologic therapy as an adjunct to ICD therapy. In our cohort of 101 patients, antiarrhythmic agents were prescribed in 67% of the patients during long-term therapy for the following reasons: to suppress ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation episodes (50%), to lower the rate of ventricular tachycardia (19%), to prevent supraventricular tachyarrhythmia (21%), and for other reasons (10%). The potential influence of antiarrhythmic drugs on the defibrillation threshold (DFT) is the most important issue. In animal studies lidocaine increased the DFT in a dose-dependent manner. Quinidine, procainamide, propafenone, and flecainide did not affect the DFT or, in some cases, led to a small increase. Sotalol even decreased the energy requirements for internal defibrillation. In a prospective investigation we were able to document a significant increase of DFT (from 14.1 + 3.0 to 20.9 + 5.4 J, p < 0.001) by the use of amiodarone (400 mg/day), whereas this effect was not found in patients who received mexiletine (720 mg/day). In conclusion, the DFT or the safety margin for defibrillation should be known before antiarrhythmic agents are administered to patients with an ICD. In case of a small safety margin, the DFT should be reassessed after antiarrhythmic drug therapy is begun.

Effects of amiodarone on refractory ventricular fibrillation in acute myocardial infarction: experimental study

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of a single dose of intravenous amiodarone in facilitating defibrillation of ventricular fibrillation refractory to lidocaine and epinephrine plus direct current countershocks in experimental acute myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND

Amiodarone has been hailed as the most effective single antiarrhythmic drug for the treatment of ventricular arrhythmias. However, intravenous amiodarone has only sporadically been used in the defibrillation of ventricular fibrillation in acute myocardial infarction.

METHODS

Acute myocardial infarction was induced in 60 dogs by ligation of the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery for 2 h. Animals that developed spontaneous ventricular fibrillation were treated with lidocaine and epinephrine plus five direct-current countershocks. Dogs with ventricular fibrillation refractory to this regimen were randomized to further treatment with additional intravenous administration of epinephrine and bolus lidocaine plus < or = 15 direct-current countershocks (group I) or administration of amiodarone, 10 mg/kg body weight intravenously, followed by defibrillation with direct-current counter-shock (group II).

RESULTS

Sixteen (27%) of the 60 dogs in which the protocol was attempted developed spontaneous ventricular fibrillation 21 min after ligation and were included in the study. Lidocaine and epinephrine plus five direct-current countershocks succeeded in converting ventricular fibrillation in one dog (6%). The other 15 dogs were randomized to group I (8 dogs) or group II (7 dogs). Defibrillation was achieved in one of the eight dogs in group I and in six of the seven dogs in group II (p < 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

In an experimental model of acute ischemia, intravenous amiodarone (10 mg/kg) influences positively the response to defibrillation of ventricular fibrillation refractory to lidocaine and epinephrine plus direct current countershocks.