静脉注射伊布利特与胺碘酮转复消融术后复发房性心动过速的对比研究

目的观察和比较伊布利特和胺碘酮转复心房颤动（房颤）射频消融术后早期复发房性心动过速（房速）的疗效和安全性。方法连续46例接受房颤射频消融后复发房速的患者，男性32例，女性14例，平均年龄（56±12）岁，分别静脉应用伊布利特（ibutilide，1．0mg／次，1～2次，10min内静脉推注）和胺碘酮（150me,／次，1～2次，10min内静脉推注）。观察转复率和转复时间，记录不良反应。结果4h内伊布利特组和胺碘酮组转复率分别为86．4％和41．7％（P=0．0023）；24h时内转复率分别为90．9％和62．5％（P=0．0376）。伊布利特组对持续时间〈24h的房速转复率为100％，胺碘酮组转复率为66．7％（P=0．0421）。伊布利特组平均转复时间为（13±8）min，胺碘酮组转复时间为（364-25）min（P〈0．01）。两组均未发生致命性不良反应，不良反应发生率差异无统计学意义。结论伊布利特和胺碘酮均能终止射频消融术后复发房速，伊布利特更快速、安全、有效。

Climcal comparison of ibutilide and amiodarone for termination of rectorrent atrial tachycardia after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation

Objective To evaluate the immediate efficacy and safety of intravenous ibutilide and amio-darone for termination of recurrent atrial tachycardia after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation. Methods For-ty-six consecutive patients with recurrent atrial tachycardia less than 90 days who underwent catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation were enrolled in this study 32 male,14 female,aged(56±12)years]. The patients were ran-domly assigned to receive infusion of ibutilide (ibutilide group, 1 to 2 times, 1.0 mg for each) or amiodarone (amiodarene group, 1 to 2 times, 150 mg for each). Results Ibutilide was superior to amiodarone in treating recurrent atrial tachycardia after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation(90.9% vs 62.5%, P =0.0376). The mean response time was (13±8) min in ibutilide group and (36±25) min in amiodarone group (P < 0.01). Conclusion Ibutilide can immediately terminate recurrent atrial tachycardia after catheter ablation of atrial fi-brillation safely and effectively.