静脉注射胺碘酮治疗心力衰竭伴快速性心房颤动的疗效观察

目的观察心力衰竭伴快速性心房颤动患者静脉注射胺碘酮转复或控制心室率治疗心力衰竭的疗效,包括心房颤动的转复率、转复时间、心室率的控制、不良反应及安全性。方法心力衰竭伴快速性心房颤动患者48例,胺碘酮150mg加50g.L-1葡萄糖注射液20mL静脉注射,患者30min后房颤未转复即再应用1次,继以0.5～1mg.min-1维持静滴48h,观察用药后1,2,6,12,24和48h转复率、心室率、心力衰竭症状的缓解及不良反应。结果胺碘酮可快速有效使快速房颤转复为窦性心律,控制心室率,纠正心力衰竭,且无严重不良反应发生。结论心力衰竭伴快速性心房纤颤患者静脉注射胺碘酮治疗安全有效,尤其适用于合并器质性心脏病患者。     

多巴胺转复低血压伴室上性心动过速43例临床观察

目的观察多巴胺对阵发性室上性心动过速的转复效果。方法 43例资料完整明确诊断PSVT伴低血压患者(拒绝电复律),经物理治疗失败后给予多巴胺20 mg(不稀释),10 s静脉匀速注射,观察成功率,转复时间,转复前、转复后即刻、5 min、1 h患者心率、血压变化,PSVT终止时合并症。结果成功率93.02%,其中有21例在静脉注射盐酸多巴胺注射液后立即转复为窦性心律,19例在30 s～3.9 min转复为窦性心律,3例失败。成功患者无血压大于140/90 mmHg者及心率每分钟小于60次者。终止PSVT时8例出现恶心呕吐症状,14例胸闷、10例乏力、8例无特殊不适。但是均为一过性发作,未经处理自行缓解。结论多巴胺可作为终止低血压伴室上性心动过速患者的转复药物。     

针刺和胺碘酮治疗阵发性心房颤动临床分析

目的 探讨针刺和静脉注射胺碘酮对阵发性心房颤动(PAF)的临床疗效。方法 152例器质性心脏病阵发性心房颤动患者,针刺内关、神门穴,并首剂静脉注射150 mg,继以1 mg·min^-1静脉泵入,维持6 h。观察PAF转复情况,心率、QT间期变化及不良反应。结果 152例患者中,25例10 min复律,占16.45%;110例5 h后转复,占72.37%;2例10 h后转复,占1.32%。复律成功137例,占90.13%。未转律者15例,占9.87%。用药期间,未见缓慢性心律失常、低血压、心衰加重及QT间期延长等,1例心率57次·min^-1,占0.66%,无其他不良反应。结论 针刺和静脉注射胺碘酮转复PAF安全有效。     

静脉注射伊布利特转复心房颤动、心房扑动的中国 多中心随机对照临床研究

目的：静脉注射富马酸伊布利特注射液与普罗帕酮注射液对心房颤动、心房扑动患者转复疗效的比较及安全性评价。方法：2004年2月-2005年10月,采用前瞻性随机、双盲、对照临床研究方法,入选200例90d内发生心房颤动、心房扑动的患者,按1[DK]∶1的比例随机分为伊布利特治疗组(1mg,iv,必要时重复给药1次;体重小于60kg者按0.01mg[DK]?kg-1给药)或普罗帕酮对照组(70mg,iv,必要时重复给药1次),观察心律的转复,监测临床症状、血压、心率、电解质、肝肾功能、心电图改变、24h动态心电图等。结果：给药后90min,伊布利特组心房颤动或心房扑动患者总转复率为55%（55/100例）,心房颤动转复率为50%（40/79例）,心房扑动转复率为71%（15/21例）;普罗帕酮组总转复率为21%（21/100例）,心房颤动转复率为24%（21/90例）。转复时RR间期两组比较无显著性差异。伊布利特组发生1例尖端扭转型室性心动过速（1%）,经电复律成功转为窦性心律。结论:静脉注射伊布利特转复心房颤动、心房扑动疗效优于普罗帕酮,与国外研究结果一致。心律失常等不良反应两组间比较无显著性差异。     

针刺和胺碘酮治疗阵发性心房颤动临床分析

目的 探讨针刺和静脉注射胺碘酮对阵发性心房颤动(PAF)的临床疗效。方法 152例器质性心脏病阵发性心房颤动患者，针刺内关、神门穴，并首剂静脉注射150 mg，继以1 mg·min^-1静脉泵入，维持6 h。观察PAF转复情况，心率、QT间期变化及不良反应。结果 152例患者中，25例10 min复律，占16.45%；110例5 h后转复，占72.37%；2例10 h后转复，占1.32%。复律成功137例，占90.13%。未转律者15例，占9.87%。用药期间，未见缓慢性心律失常、低血压、心衰加重及QT间期延长等，1例心率57次·min^-1，占0.66%，无其他不良反应。结论 针刺和静脉注射胺碘酮转复PAF安全有效。     

复发性房颤患者复律前后血浆BNP的变化

目的探讨复发性心房颤动（AF）患者转复为窦性心律前后血浆脑钠肽（Brain Natriuretic Peptide,BNP）浓度的变化及其临床意义。方法选取心功能1-2级的无合并其他心脏病复发性AF患者30例,采用干性免疫法测定AF复律前、转复为窦性心律后患者血浆BNP浓度,比较BNP的差异。结果复律前患者血浆BNP水平为（82．3±12．1）ng／L,转复为窦性心律时患者血BNP水平为（51．5±15．2）ng/L,两者有统计学差异（P〈0．05）。结论复发性AF患者复律前血浆BNP的浓度增高,成功转复为窦性心律时下降,提示BNP的浓度变化可作为复发性AF的预测指标。     

顿服心律平转复心房颤动的临床观察

目的探讨和验证顿服600mg心律平转复近期心房颤动的有效性及安全性。方法选择近期(2h<持续时间<7d)发生房颤的患者60例,无禁忌证,随机分为2组:口服组给予心律平片600mg顿服;静脉组给予心律平针剂70mg静推,无效后30min重复该剂量给药。用药期间及用药后监护心电及房颤转复情况。结果口服组30例,1h转复2例(6.7%),3h转复16例(53.3%),8h转复23例(76.7%);静脉组30例,1h转复7例(23.3%),3h转复13例(43.3%),8h转复22例(73.3%)。两组比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。口服组未发生明显不良反应,静脉组1例转复后一过性严重窦缓,1例发生一过性Ⅲ度房室传导阻滞。结论顿服心律平片与静脉推注心律平针剂转复近期房颤疗效相同,但大剂量口服用药比大剂量静脉用药更安全。     

直流电同步转复房颤心律31例护理体会

近年来“电转复”疗法的开展,对某些严重的快速型心律失常,如心房颤动、心房扑动、室速、室颇等均获得了满意疗效。临床实践证明,电击转复心律是一种简单、安全、疗效较高,值得推广的疗法。我院内二病房自1976开展了对风心病并房颤患者进行了直流电同步电击转复心律(体外)以来,在31个病例中一次成功28例占90.3％,二次成功3例占9.7％。由于我们认其做好了电击转复的病例选择,术前准备及术后观察护理,在31个病例中无1例因电击而发生意外,做到转复率高、疗效好,巩固时间长,     

伊布利特转复房颤的效果及不良反应分析

目的 观察新一代Ⅲ类抗心律失常药伊布利特转复阵发性房颤的效果、不良反应。方法 选择2019年1月-2023年3月本科室治疗的68例阵发性房颤患者,10min一次性静脉注射伊布利特1mg,观察转复率、转复时间、严重不良反应。结果 伊布利特对阵发性房颤转复成功55例,成功率80.8%,平均转复时间26.7min,最快转律时间为3min,最长转律时间138min。无器质性心脏病患者,发生1例非持续性单型性室速,4h内自行消失。合并冠心病、慢性心力衰竭患者,发生持续性单型性室速、阿斯综合征1例,电复律终止;发生非持续性单型性室速1例,4h内自行终止。未发生尖端扭转性室速,未发生严重心动过缓、加重、低血压,无死亡病例。结论 无器质性心脏病的阵发性房颤患者,使用伊布利特转律快速、有效、安全;合并冠心病、慢性心力衰竭、急性心肌梗死的患者,在急救完备的情况下,可谨慎使用。     

伊布利特与胺碘酮转复心房颤动的临床观察

目的比较新型Ⅲ类抗心律失常药伊布利特和胺碘酮转复心房颤动的有效性和安全性。方法本文采用随机、单盲对照研究。共入选房颤患者25例,房颤持续时间2h～7d。随机进入伊布利特组(n=13),胺碘酮组(n=12)。在心电、血压监护下前组患者于30min内静脉泵入伊布利特1mg,后组患者于30min内静脉泵入胺碘酮150mg。如未转复,则可于10min后重复前述治疗1次。观察开始给药后1.5h内房颤的转复率及4h内的不良反应。结果伊布利特转复房颤的成功率高于胺碘酮组(57%vs53%),但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);伊布利特转复房颤所用的时间明显短于胺碘酮,给药后30min内伊布利特转复率达57%,胺碘酮的转复率为17%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。伊布利特组出现1例频发室早、短阵室速,并QT间期延长至520ms,未予特殊处理自行消失。胺碘酮组有4例出现低血压。结论伊布利特转复房颤快速、安全、有效。     

Efficacy of disopyramide in conversion and prophylaxis of post-thyrotoxic atrial fibrillation

Summary Rhythm conversion in patients with post-thyrotoxic atrial fibrillation (AF) has been performed with disopyramide in order to evaluate the conversion rate and to test its effect on the maintenance of sinus rhythm after cardioversion.The duration of AF ranged from 9 to 122 months (mean 31.8 months). Of 81 patients, 12 (15%) with relatively short duration AF were converted to sinus rhythm with disopyramide. The remaining 69 patients required DC cardioversion, which restored sinus rhythm in 58 patients. The 58 DC-converted patients were divided into two groups: a disopyramide group (D group) and a non-disopyramide group (non-D group). The D group received disopyramide 300 mg per day for 3 months after DC cardioversion and the non-D group did not receive anti-arrhythmic drugs. During the early observation period, only one patient relapsed in the D group into AF, but 5 successive patients in the non-D group reverted to AF, forcing discontinuation of the non-D protocol. A second DC cardioversion performed on 3 of those 5 patients was followed by maintenance therapy with disopyramide 300 mg per day, and they remained in sinus rhythm. With the inclusion of those three subjects, sinus rhythm was still present in 44 of the total of 58 patients converted by DC (76%) at the time of follow-up (64 months).Thus, disopyramide was effective in rhythm conversion and it was essential for the maintenance of sinus rhythm after cardioversion in patients with post-thyrotoxic AF.     

伊布利特联合胺碘酮治疗心房扑动/心房颤动的疗效观察

目的观察伊布利特联合胺碘酮转复心房扑动（房扑）／心房颤动（房颤）的有效性及安全性。方法选择符合条件的患者88例,按制定的入选标准与排除标准将88例患者根据是否服用胺碘酮分为对照组和试验组。对照组：单用伊布利特;试验组：口服胺碘酮后联合伊布利特。口服胺碘酮组负荷量7～15g（3～4周内达到靶剂量）。伊布利特首剂1．0mg,10min内缓慢静脉注射,如给药10min后仍未转复为窦性心律,行第2次注射,剂量仍为1．0mg,观察开始给药后4h内转复的成功率、转复过程中用药剂量、用药前后的QT间期的差异及4h内不良反应的发生情况。结果①试验组房扑转复成功率（92％）高于对照组（56％）,但差异无统计学意义（P=0．116）;而房颤转复成功率试验组（76％）与对照组（44％）差异有统计学意义（P=0．010）;试验组（80％）与对照组（47％）房扑和房颤总的转复成功率差异亦有统计学意义（P=0．003）。②在转复房扑、房颤成功的患者伊布利特使用剂量房扑[（1．1±0．4）mg]低于房颤[（1．7±0．4）mg],差异有统计学意义（P〈0．01）。③试验组与对照组使用伊布利特前QT间期（0．49±0．08）、（0．43±0．04）差异无统计学意义（P=0．760）;2组使用伊布利特后QT间期（0．52±0．06）、（0．45±0．03）,差异亦无统计学意义（P=0．150）;试验组与对照组各自在注药前后QT间期均延长,差异有统计学意义（对照组P=-0．013;试验组P〈0．01）。④试验组有2例室性心动过速（发生率为2％）。1例在推药过程中发生尖端扭转型室性心动过速（Trip）,经电复律终止,转为窦性心律、频发室性早搏,再次房颤继之再发Tdp,静脉注射2．5g硫酸镁终止;1例在转复成功5min后发生非持续单形性室性心动过速,自行终止。2组各发生2例窦性停搏,均在2-3s后自行或经胸外按压后恢复窦性心律。结论口服胺碘酮联合伊布利特转复房扑,房颤成功率高于单一用药,并可预防其复发,联合应用未增加不良事件的发生率。     

A case report of atrial fibrillation potentially induced by hydroxycut: a multicomponent dietary weight loss supplement devoid of sympathomimetic amines

Multicomponent dietary weight loss supplements comprise the single largest segment of herbal preparations available to the public. As a result of limited de novo regulatory oversight, supplement-related adverse events are underreported secondary to the lack of adequate pharmacodynamic, pharmacokinetic, and clinical data. Here we report the case of an obese 63-year-old caucasian female with a 2-day history of symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) with rapid ventricular response following a 2-week course of therapy with hydroxycut, a multicomponent dietary weight loss supplement devoid of sympathomimetic amines. Upon presentation, the patient received 2 doses of intravenous diltiazem, was loaded with intravenous digoxin, and spontaneously converted to normal sinus rhythm 36 hours following her last dose of the product. Epigallocatechin (EGCG), a principal ingredient in the hydroxycut preparation is the suspected causative component. EGCG blocks the atrial-specific KCNA5 potassium channel. Loss of KCNA5 function has been reported in patients with familial lone AF. Thus, causal relationship between hydroxycut and AF in this patient is probable. Given the serious risks associated with AF, patients at risk of developing AF should avoid dietary supplements containing EGCG until more information on the adverse effects of EGCG is known.     

心房纤颤临床转复78例

目的 探讨心房纤颤的临床转复治疗。方法 分别应用口服奎尼丁、乙胺碘肤酮和直流电复律等转复房颤。结果 奎尼丁转复率达80％以上,电复律成功率为93.75％,乙胺碘肤酮为75％。结论 电复律作为房颤转复的首选;奎尼丁疗效优于乙胺碘肤酮、心律平等,且在严密观察下可避免出现恶性心律失常等严重副作用,也是安全的。     

肺静脉前庭在犬心房颤动中的作用

目的测定诱发心房颤动（AF）或持续电刺激2h前后肺静脉前庭有效不应期（ERP）,探讨其在AF中的作用。方法健康杂种犬10只,S1S2程序刺激测定窦性心律下和诱发AF或持续电刺激2h后肺静脉前庭ERP;并进行AF诱发,并记录AF的发生。结果肺静脉前庭ERP在诱发AF或持续电刺激2h后与窦性心律下相比差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。诱发AF或持续电刺激2h后AF诱发率增加（24.38% VS 9.68%,P〈0.05）。结论诱发AF或持续电刺激2h后可以使肺静脉前庭ERP缩短且更易诱发AF,肺静脉前庭在AF中起着重要作用。     

Intravenous amiodarone for conversion of atrial fibrillation: misled by meta-analysis?

Therapeutic goals for atrial fibrillation (AF) include ventricular rate control, stroke prevention, conversion to normal sinus rhythm, and maintenance of normal sinus rhythm. The optimal strategy of rate versus rhythm control for acute management of patients with AF is a continuing debate. However, selected patients may require acute treatment with antiarrhythmic agents for conversion of symptomatic AF episodes to normal sinus rhythm. Recently published randomized controlled trials, qualitative systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and evidence-based international consensus guidelines have addressed the controversy regarding acute conversion of AF using antiarrhythmic therapy. Although meta-analyses often provide the highest level of evidence, the validity and application of their results are based on the quality of their methodology and accuracy of reporting. Authors of the most recent meta-analysis of amiodarone for conversion of AF state that the drug is effective and relatively rapid acting in converting AF to normal sinus rhythm in a wide range of patients, and they recommend it as a first-line drug. We feel that these conclusions are overstated and potentially misleading due to methodologic limitations of the analysis. The results of this meta-analysis and others concerning acute conversion of AF should be viewed as hypothesis generating and not the definitive answer to this question. Ultimately, well-designed, adequately powered, randomized placebo- or rate-controlled trials are needed in specific patient populations with AF to determine the absolute benefit of intravenous amiodarone for conversion of AF to normal sinus rhythm. Until more data are available, intravenous amiodarone cannot be promoted as a first-line agent for this purpose.     

胺碘酮治疗冠心病心房颤动撤药时机的相关性研究

目的研究胺碘酮联合氯沙坦治疗阵发性心房颤动,心律转为窦性后逐渐加用β受体阻滞剂倍他乐克后胺碘酮撤药时机的相关性因素分析。方法胺碘酮联合氯沙坦治疗,6个月后已复律患者30例,给予从小剂量开始逐渐加量,维持心室率在55～65次/min,减少胺碘酮用量,在3个月内撤掉胺碘酮,从撤药开始随访半年,观察患者窦性心律的维持情况,分析影响撤药成功的因素。结果胺碘酮联合氯沙坦治疗可使患者心功能改善(P<0.05),左房内径左心室舒张末内径缩小、EF值增大(P<0.01)。倍他乐克逐渐替换胺碘酮后房颤复发9例(30%),维持21例(70%),差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。用Logistic回归统计方法,分析患者窦性心律的维持与撤药前左房内径相关(P<0.01,OR1.30,95%CI1.01～1.74)),左房<40mm的患者不易复发房颤。结论氯沙坦治疗在应用基础上倍他乐克替换胺碘酮在临床有其可行性,且撤药成功与撤药前患者左心房内经相关,远期疗效及对心血管事件的影响有待进一步观察。     

急诊老年心房颤动快速心室率患者临床用药效果观察

摘要 目的：观察并比较静脉注射毛花甙C、地尔硫卓及胺碘酮控制老年房颤伴快速心室率的有效性和安全性。方法：收集于天津医科大学第二医院心脏科急诊诊治的心房颤动伴快速心室率的老年患者(≥60岁)97例,患者随机分为3组,分别静脉用毛花甙C(A组,30例)组、地尔硫卓(B组,32例)和胺碘酮(C组,35例)组。观察用药前及用药后5、l0、15、30、60、90min患者的心室率、血压、心律变化以及药物起效时间及不良反应。结果：毛花甙C、地尔硫卓和胺碘酮均能有效控制心房纤颤伴快速心室率患者的心室率。总有效率分别为75％、90％和85％,平均用药有效时间分别为(35.4±15.7)min、(9.7±3.6) min和(18.8±7.6)min。西地兰组恢复窦律6例,低血压l例;地尔硫卓组恢复窦律5例,出现低血压2例,窦缓l例;胺碘酮组恢复窦律8例,窦缓l例;均自行缓解,未发生心衰加重。结论：毛花甙C、地尔硫卓及胺碘酮均能有效、迅速、安全控制老年房颤伴快速心室率患者的心室率。但地尔硫卓、胺碘酮更迅速,而胺碘酮相对安全。     

三维电解剖标测系统指导下环肺静脉线性消融治疗心房颤动的临床应用

目的报道10例在三维电解剖标测(Carto标测)指导下环肺静脉线性消融治疗心房颤动的结果和体会。方法 8例阵发性和2例持续性心房颤动患者采用Carto标测构建左心房三维电解剖图,行肺静脉造影了解其形态,围绕左侧和右侧肺静脉口线性消融,对肺静脉进行隔离。结果 10例患者均完成预定的环肺静脉前庭隔离线性消融(CPVA)。1例持续性心房颤动患者术后l~2 d有心房颤动复发并自行转复。术后无一例并发症出现。随访6~12个月,平均(8±4)个月,10例患者未发生有症状的心房颤动。结论环肺静脉线性电隔离治疗心房颤动有较好的治疗效果,但也存在一定的并发症和复发可能性,仍需积累更多病例和做更长时间的观察。     

Gemcitabine and atrial fibrillation: a rare manifestation of chemotherapy toxicity

Gemcitabine is a purine analog with known activity in many solid tumors, namely lung, breast, pancreatic, genitourinary and head/neck cancers. Cardiac toxicity is a rare event and only one report previously described atrial fibrillation (AF) as a consequence of gemcitabine infusion. We report two cases of women suffering from lung cancer who were treated with gemcitabine. Both patients were admitted to hospital for paroxysmal AF occurring 12-24 h after the infusion of the drug. In the first case a sinus rhythm was spontaneously repristinated when AF occurred for the first time, while the second episode required an anti-arrhythmic drug to interrupt the dysrhythmia. In the second case, the patient had to be treated with digitalis glycoside to control the ventricular response without attaining a sinus rhythm. We could not recognize any other precipitating factor beyond the infusion of gemcitabine as a cause for the arrhythmia. Both cases were treated with gemcitabine for lung cancer and we observed the appearance of AF less than 24 h after drug administration. We assume that 2',2'-difluorodeoxyuridine, an active metabolite of gemcitabine, could be responsible for the toxic effect. We conclude that AF is an unusual, but potentially dangerous, side-effect of gemcitabine infusion. The arrhythmia should be suspected whenever patients complain of dyspnea and palpitations beginning 12-24 h after treatment. In these cases, the treatment of AF consists of anti-arrhythmic drugs in order to repristinate a sinus rhythm or control the heart rate.