Asensio LE, Galindo UJ, Orea TA, Narváez DR, Dorantes GJ, Castillo ML, Rebollar GV, Hernández RP, Oseguera MJ

Language: Spanish
References: 44
Page: 59-65
PDF size: 153.51 Kb.

ABSTRACT

There are several options of drugs to treat arrhythmias, but frequently results are not the expected by physicians nor by patients. This occurs because the choice of anti-arrhythmic drug is not the most adequate. Thus, in multiple cases it is valid to question: do these drugs really work? The aim of this paper is to give useful information to do the most proper choice of an anti-arrhythmic drug in a determined situation.

REFERENCES

1. The CAST investigators. Preliminary report. Effect of encainide and flecainide on mortality in a randomized trial of arrhythmia suppression after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1989;321:406-12.

2. Epstein A, Bigger T, Wyse G, Romhilt W, et al. Events in the cardiac arrhythmia suppression trial (CAST): mortality in the entire population enrolled. J Am Coll Cardiol 1991;18:14-9.

3. Camm J, Julian D, Janse G. The European Myocardial Infarct Amiodarone Trial (EMIAT). Am J Cardiol 1993;72:95F-98F.

4. Cairns J, Connolly S, Roberts R, Gent M. Randomised trial of outcome after myocardial infarction in patients with frequent or repetitive premature depolarisations: CAMIAT. Lancet 1997;349:675-82.

5. Moss A. Bakground, outcome and clinical implications of the multicenter automatic defibrillator implantation trial (MADIT). Am J Cardiol 1997;80(5B):28F-32F.

6. Gold R. Primary prevention of sudden cardiac death with implantable cardioverter defibrillators: lessons learned from MADIT and MUSTT. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2000;23(11):1981-5.

7. Guidelines 2000 for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care. An international consensus on science. The American Heart Association in collaboration with the International Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR). Circulation 2000;102(suppl):I1-384.

8. Guidelines 2005 for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care. An international consensus on science. The American Heart Association in collaboration with the International Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR). Circulation 2005:112:IV1-211.

9. Dec G. Digoxin remains useful in the management of chronic heart failure. Med Clin North Am 2003;87(2):317-37.

10. Lader E, Egan D, Hunsberger S, Grag R, et al. The effect of digoxin on the quality of life in patients with heart failure. J Card Fail 2003;9(1):4-12.

11. Rich M, McSherry F, Williford W, Yusuf S. Effect of age on mortality, hospitalizations and response to digoxin in patients with heart failure: the DIG study. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2001;38(3):806-13.

12. See S, Bruno P. Digoxin increases mortality among women with congestive heart failure. J Fam Pract 2003;52(2):106-11.

13. Boriani G, Biffi M, Diemberger I, Martignani C, et al. Rate control in atrial fibrillation: choice of treatment and assessment of efficacy. Drugs 2003;63(14):1489-509.

14. Shibata M, Flather M, Wang D. Systematic review of the impact of beta-blockers on mortality and hospital admissions in heart failure. Eur J Heart Fail 2001;3(3):351-7.

15. Packer M. Current role of beta-adrenergic blockers in the management of chronic heart failure. Am J Med 2001;110 (suppl7A):81S-94S.

16. Crespo M, Paniagua M. Tratamiento de la insuficiencia cardiaca severa o refractaria. Rev Esp Cardiol 2004;57(9):869-83.

17. Jafri S. The effects of beta-blockers on morbidity and mortality in heart failure. Heart Fail Rev 2004;9(2):115-21.

18. Vaughan-Williams E. A classification of antiarrhythmic actions reassessed after a decade of new drugs. J Clin Pharmacol 1984;24:129-47.

19. Task force of the Working Group on Arrhythmias of the European Society of Cardiology: the Sicilian Gambit: a new approach to the classification of antiarrhythmic drugs based on their actions on arrhythmogenic mechanisms. Circulation 1991;84:1831-51.

20. Members of the Sicilian Gambit new approaches to antiarrhythmic therapy. Emerging therapeutic applications of the cell biology of cardiac arrhythmias. Eur Heart J 2001;(22):2148-63.

21. Fogoros R. Electrophysiologic testing. 2nd ed. Toronto: Blackwell Science, 1995.

22. Langan M. The impact of recent ion channel science on the development and use of antiarrhythmic drugs. Curr Cardiol Rep 1999;1(4):302-7.

23. Katz A. The cardiac action potential. In: Katz A. editor. Physiology of the heart, 3rd ed. Chicago: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, 2001;pp:478-516.

24. Ogawa S. Differences in selection criteria for antiarrhythmic drugs in Japan and the US. Intern Med 2004;43(2):161-2.

25. Sanguinetti M, Bennett P. Antiarrhythmic drug target choices and screening. Circ Res 2003;93(6):491-9.

26. Peters N, Cabo C, Wit A. Arrhythmogenic mechanisms: automaticity, triggered activity and reentry. In: Zipes D, Jalife J. editors. Cardiac electrophysiology. From cell to bedside. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders, 2000;pp:345-55.

27. Marcus F, Opie L. Agentes antiarrítmicos. En: Opie L. editor. Fármacos en cardiología. 4ª ed. México: McGraw-Hill Interamericana, 1995;pp:223-66.

28. Podrid P. Amiodarone: reevaluation of an old drug. Ann Intern Med 1995;122(9):689-700.

29. Freedman M, Somberg J. Pharmacology and pharmacokinetics of amiodarone. J Clin Pharmacol 1991;31(11):1061-9.

30. Yin Y, Perret G, Nicolas P, Vassy R, et al. In vivo effects of amiodarone on beta-adrenoceptor density and heart rate require thyroid hormones. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1992;19(4):541-5.

31. Lubic S, Nguyen K, Dave B, Giacomini J. Antiarrhythmic agent amiodarone possesses calcium channel blocker properties. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1994;24(5):707-14.

32. Burckhardt D. Clinical efficacy of long term treatment with amiodarone for life-threatening arrhythmias. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1992;20(suppl2):S59-62.

33. Asensio E, Álvarez B, Lozano E, Farías A, et al. Bloqueo de rama derecha, elevación del ST y muerte súbita: síndrome de Brugada. Arch Inst Cardiol Mex 2000;70(3):301-11.

34. Stelfox H, Ahmed S, Fiskio J, Bates D. Monitoring amiodarone’s toxicities: recommendations, evidence and clinical practice. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2004;75(1):110-22.

35. Ott M, Khoor A, Leventhal J, Paterick T, et al. Pulmonary toxicity in patients receiving low-dose amiodarone. Chest 2003;123(2):646-51.

36. Barbey J. Clinical pharmacology and beta-blocking efficacy of propafenone. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1991;17(suppl6):S41-3.

37. Koller B, Franz M. New classification of moricizine and propafenone based on electrophysiologic and electrocardiographic data from isolated rabbit heart. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1994;24(5):753-60.

38. Zaza A, Malfatto G, Schwartz P. Diverse electrophysiologic effects of propafenone and flecainide in canine purkinje fibres: implications for antiarrhythmic drug classification. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1994;269(1):336-43.

39. Tamargo J. Propafenone slows conduction and produces nonuniform recovery of excitability between purkinje and ventricular muscle fibers. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1993;22(2):203-7.

40. Naccarelli G, Wolbrette D, Khan M, Bhatta L, et al. Old and new antiarrhythmic drugs for converting and maintaining sinus rhythm in atrial fibrillation: comparative efficacy and results of trials. Am J Cardiol 2003;91(6A):15D-26D.

41. Kidwell G, González M. Effects of flecainide and D-sotalol on myocardial conduction and refrasctoriness: relation to antiarrhythmic and proarrhythmic drug effects. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1993;21(4):621-32.

42. Nitta J, Sunami A, Maruno F, Hiraoka M. States and sites of action of flecainide on guinea-pig cardiac sodium channels. Eur J Pharmacol 1992;214(2-3):191-7.

43. Boriani G, Capucci A, Strocchi E. Calliva R, et al. Flecainide acetate: concentration response relationships for antiarrhythmic and electrocardiographic effects. Int J Clin Pharmacol Res 1993;13(4):211-9.

44. Opie L, Sonnenblick-Frishman W, Thadani U. Agentes de bloqueo beta. En: Opie L, editor. Fármacos en cardiología. 4ª ed. México: McGraw-Hill Interamericana, 1995;pp:1-32.