小剂量口服胺碘酮在心脏瓣膜疾病合并心房颤动患者围术期的应用

目的 评估围术期口服胺碘酮对心脏瓣膜疾病合并心房颤动患者术后心房颤动心律的转复和窦性心律维持,以及术后并发症的影响.方法 78例心房颤动且择期行心脏瓣膜手术的患者被分为试验组（38例）和对照组（38例）.试验组开始口服胺碘酮每天2次,每次200 mg至术后第3天,术后第4天至出院前胺碘酮剂量改为每天1次,每次200 mg.对照组以安慰剂代替胺碘酮,服药时间、剂量和方法同实验组.比较两组术后窦性心律的转复和维持、有无低心排血量综合征、心律失常发生及类型、重症监护病房停留时间、住院时间、出院时心房颤动患者的心律和心室率,及术前、术后患者肝功能、甲状腺功能的变化,有无发生肺纤维化.结果 术后两组比较,试验组窦性心律患者比例在手术复跳时（39.4％ vs.10.5％,P＜0.01）、出院前（46.7％ vs.2.6％,P＜0.01）及术后1个月（36.8％ vs.2.6％,P＜0.01）均高于对照组,差异有统计学意义.试验组与对照组比较,术后快速性心房颤动（15.8％ vs.31.6％,P＜0.05）、发作时心室率[（136.5±25.2）次/min vs.（158.6±30.9）次/min,P＜0.05]及室性心律失常（7.9％ vs.18.4％,P＜0.05）低于对照组,差异有统计学意义.试验组重症监护病房停留时间[（40.9±11.2）hvs.（58.5±13.8）h,P＜0.05）]、心房颤动患者出院时心室率[（74.2±8.4）次/min vs.（91.7±10.2）次/min,P＜0.05]均小于对照组,差异有统计学意义.两组患者术后无死亡,无肝功能及甲状腺功能异常及无肺纤维化.结论 行心脏瓣膜置换或整形手术的心房颤动患者围术期口服胺碘酮可明显提高患者术后窦性心律转复率、维持窦性心律时间、降低快速心房颤动及室性心律失常发生率,对心室率的控制满意,减少重症监护病房入住时间,无明显不良反应.     

Differences in amiodarone efficacy in relation to ejection fraction and basal rhythm in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators

Background

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) are associated with increased morbidity and mortality. However, data are lacking concerning the association of AF and VAs. This study aimed to clarify the association between AF and VAs and to investigate the effect of amiodarone on the incidence of VAs in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs).

Effect of prophylactic amiodarone in patients with rheumatic valve disease undergoing valve replacement surgery

The study was carried out to evaluate the effect of prophylactic single-dose intravenous amiodarone in patients undergoing valve replacement surgery. Maintenance of sinus rhythm is better than maintenance of fixed ventricular rate in atrial fibrillation (AF) especially in the presence of irritable left or right atrium because of enlargement. Fifty-six patients with valvular heart disease with or without AF were randomly divided into two groups. Group I or the amiodarone group (n=28) received amiodarone (3 mg/kg in 100 ml normal saline) and group II or the control group received same volume of normal saline. The standardized protocol for cardiopulmonary bypass was maintained for all the patients. AF occurred in 7.14% patients in group I, and in group II, 28.57% (P=0.035); ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation was observed in 21.43% patients in group I and 46.43% patients in group II (P=0.089) after release of aortic clamp. Most of the patients in group I (92.86%) maintained sinus rhythm without cardioversion or defibrillation after release of aortic cross clamp (P=0.002). Defibrillation or cardio version was needed in 7.14% patients in group I and 28.57% patients in group II (P=0.078). A single prophylactic intraoperative dose of intravenous amiodarone decreased post bypass arrhythmia in this study in comparison to the control group. Single dose of intraoperative amiodarone may be used to decrease postoperative arrhythmia in open heart surgery.     

Pharmacological Approach for the Prevention of Atrial Fibrillation After Cardiovascular Surgery

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common complication of cardiovascular surgery. The two most important risk factors for its development are advancing age and a preoperative history of AF. Long-term sequelae, such as a stroke, are uncommon, however, atrial fibrillation frequently results in increased length and cost of hospitalization. Strategies to prevent postoperative AF include perioperative beta-blockers, amiodarone, and atrial pacing. These strategies are most effective in high-risk patients. When AF does occur, treatment includes control of the ventricular rate, systemic anticoagulation, and conversion to sinus rhythm.     

Oral class III antiarrhythmics: what is new?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review describes the latest developments in the clinical usage of class III antiarrhythmics. It also discusses some new studies providing insight into the mechanism of action of these drugs. RECENT FINDINGS: New data suggest that amiodarone is one of the most effective drugs for management of ventricular as well as supraventricular tachyarrhythmias. As over the years we have learned to deal with the toxic side effects of this drug, the risk of bradyarrhythmias requiring placement of a pacemaker is becoming more significant. Sotalol was approved for treatment of atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter (AF). It was also found to be effective in management of postoperative AF. Dofetilide has been approved for the conversion and maintenance of sinus rhythm in AF; its role in ventricular arrhythmias remains unclear. Data are emerging regarding clinical efficacy of azimilide and dronedarone. SUMMARY: Management of arrhythmias in patients with structural heart disease remains a challenge. Class III antiarrhythmics are the mainstay of treatment in this group of patients.     

Use of enalapril to facilitate sinus rhythm maintenance after external cardioversion of long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation. Results of a prospective and controlled study.

AIMS: This study aimed to assess whether enalapril could improve cardioversion outcome and facilitate sinus rhythm maintenance after conversion of chronic atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with chronic AF for more than 3 months were assigned to receive either amiodarone (200mg orally 3 times a day; group I: n=75) or the same dosage of amiodarone plus enalapril (10mg twice a day; group II: n=70) 4 weeks before scheduled external cardioversion. The end-point was the time to first recurrence of AF. In 125 patients (86.2%), AF was converted to sinus rhythm. Group II had a trend to a trend to a lower rate of immediate recurrence of AF than group I did (4.3% vs 14.7%, P=0.067). Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated a higher probability of group II remaining in sinus rhythm at 4 weeks (84.3% vs 61.3%, P=0.002) and at the median follow-up period of 270 days (74.3% vs 57.3%, P=0.021) than in group II. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of enalapril to amiodarone decreased the rate of immediate and subacute arrhythmia recurrences and facilitated subsequent long-term maintenance of sinus rhythm after cardioversion of persistent AF.     

氯沙坦联合胺碘酮对阵发性心房颤动复律及复律后窦性心律维持的影响

目的 了解氯沙坦联合胺碘酮对阵发性心房颤动的复律效果及复律后窦性心律维持的影响.方法 2003年1月至2005年10月将解放军421医院心内科86例非瓣膜病阵发性心房颤动患者分为胺碘酮治疗组和氯沙坦 胺碘酮治疗组,观察治疗24 h,3 d和7 d时心房颤动的转复情况.在心房颤动复律后,继续药物治疗并随访观察1年,评价两组窦性心律的维持效果.结果 胺碘酮组44例心房颤动患者治疗24 h,3 d和7 d心房颤动的转复率分别为65.90%,75.00%和86.36%,氯沙坦 胺碘酮治疗组的转复率为66.66%,80.95%和95.23%.两组在7 d时心房颤动的转复率差异有显著性意义(P＜0.05).随访1年时两组窦性心律的维持率分别为71.05%和87.50%(P＜0.05),两组左房内径分别为(37.45±1.44)mm和(35.83±1.38)mm(P＜0.05).结论 氯沙坦联合胺碘酮对阵发性心房颤动的复律及复律后窦性心律维持均优于单用胺碘酮治疗,可能与氯沙坦抑制肾素-血管紧张素系统,降低心脏负荷,抑制心房电及结构重构有关.     

Comparison of oral loading dose of propafenone and amiodarone for converting recent-onset atrial fibrillation. PARSIFAL Study Group

In patients with recent-onset atrial fibrillation (AF), restoration of sinus rhythm is considered to be the first-line therapeutic option. Although this conversion might be obtained by direct-current shock or intravenous antiarrhythmic drugs, administration of an oral loading dose of class I or III antiarrhythmic drugs is more simple and convenient. This prospective, randomized, multicenter study compares the time to conversion to sinus rhythm obtained with an oral loading dose of propafenone or amiodarone. Patients with recent-onset AF (<2 weeks), without contraindications for the 2 drugs, were randomly assigned to be treated with propafenone (600 mg for the first 24 hours and if necessary a repeated dose of 300 mg for 24 hours) or amiodarone (30 mg/kg for the first 24 hours and if necessary a repeated dose of 15 mg/kg for 24 hours). Exact conversion time during the first 24 hours was determined by Holter monitoring. In each treatment group 43 patients with the same baseline characteristics were included. The median time for restoration of sinus rhythm was shorter (p = 0.05) in the propafenone (2.4 hours) than in the amiodarone (6.9 hours) group. After 24 hours (56% in the propofenone and 47% in the amiodarone group) and 48 hours, the same proportion of patients in the 2 groups recovered sinus rhythm (no serious adverse events were noticed). Thus, oral loading dose of propafenone or amiodarone was safe with a similar conversion rate of recent-onset AF. Propafenone had a faster action.     

厄贝沙坦与胺碘酮联合对风湿性心脏病持续性心房颤动转复患者的窦性心律维持作用

目的 研究风湿性心脏病持续性心房颤动(房颤)应用厄贝沙坦联合胺碘酮的窦性心律(窦律)维持作用及复发的危险因素.方法 选择住院准备房颤复律且符合入选标准风湿性心脏病(风心病)瓣膜置换术后持续性房颤患者63例.随机分为对照组(31例)和试验组(32例).对照组给予胺碘酮,试验组用胺碘酮+厄贝沙坦.入选患者转复为窦律后即为试验起始时间,试验终点为转复后12个月.终点事件:症状或无症状房颤首次复发.结果 试验组窦律维持率显著高于对照组(68.7%与41.9%,P＜0.05).治疗12个月后,试验组左心房内径(LAD)显著小于对照组[(48.6±4.6)mm与(51.5±4.2)mm,P＜0.05].风心病持续性房颤复发与LAD(OR 1.242)和是否使用厄贝沙坦(OR 0.226)有关.结论 LAD是风心病持续性房颤复发的危险因素.厄贝沙坦联合胺碘酮在风心病持续性房颤复律后维持窦律的疗效优于单用胺碘酮,并能延缓左心房扩大,防止房颤复发.     

风湿性心脏病瓣膜置换术后心房颤动复律的临床分析

目的　探讨风湿性心脏病瓣膜置换术后心房颤动转复为窦性心律的情况及影响因素。方法　对 2 0 0 0年 1月至2 0 0 2年 1月 132例风湿性心脏病合并心房颤动行瓣膜置换术患者进行回顾性研究 ,根据患者的病史、手术前后超声心动图、心电图和术后 6个月的随访结果对手术后不同时间心房颤动转复为窦性心律的比例及影响因素进行分析。结果　术后自动复跳或电击复跳转复为窦性心律有 78例 (5 9.0 9% ) ,维持 2 4 h以上有 4 3例 (32 .5 8% ) ,窦性心律维持 2周以上有 2 1例 (15 .91% ) ,6个月以后则有 2 3例 (17.4 2 % )为窦性心律。术后即刻转复为窦性心律与心房颤动持续时间、心胸比例、左心房内径、右心房内径、肺动脉高压、术后电击复跳次数等因素有关 ,窦性心律的维持与心房颤动持续时间、左心房内径、肺动脉高压等有关。结论　瓣膜置换术可使部分风湿性心脏病合并心房颤动患者恢复窦性心律 ,术前心房颤动持续时间、左心房内径、肺动脉高压对心房颤动转复及窦性心律维持有重要意义     

Efficacy of intravenous amiodarone in the management of paroxysmal or new atrial fibrillation with fast ventricular response

We tested the efficacy of intravenous amiodarone (5 mg/kg) in slowing ventricular response and/or restoring sinus rhythm in 26 patients with paroxysmal or new atrial fibrillation with fast ventricular response. There were 16 men and 10 women with ages ranging from 35 to 84 years, mean 63 years. Intravenous amiodarone initially slowed the ventricular response in all patients from 143 +/- 27 to 96 +/- 10 beats/min (P less than 0.001). Twelve patients (46%) reverted to sinus rhythm within the first 30 min (range 5 to 30 min, mean 14 +/- 9 min). One patient reverted to atrial flutter after 10 min and 40 min later to sinus rhythm. Six patients (23%) converted to sinus rhythm after 2 to 8 hr and in these 6 cases, the initial slowing in ventricular response obtained with amiodarone persisted until conversion. Seven patients (27%) did not convert to sinus rhythm following amiodarone administration and they required further medical therapy to slow the ventricular response and/or to convert to sinus rhythm. No serious side effects from drug administration were noted. Intravenous amiodarone appears as a highly effective medication in the conversion or control of new onset atrial fibrillation with fast ventricular response.     

心房颤动电复律与胺碘酮节律控制的效果——附53例临床观察

目的：观察电复律＋胺碘酮维持治疗对持续性心房颤动（房颤）节律控制的效果及安全性。方法：回顾分析2007年8月至2010年12月在我院行心脏电复律＋胺碘酮维持治疗的53例持续性房颤患者的资料,对复律≥2年的24例患者进行随访,其中维持窦性心律1.5年者16例（复律组）,房颤复发者8例（复发组）。结果：53例有50例达到复律早期成功,早期成功率为94.3%,与电复律前比较,电复律后患者的总心室率[（109777±6757）次/min比（81083±5036）次/min]、平均心率[（81±8）次/min比（62±6）次/min]、最快心室率[（145±13）次/min比（123±11）次/min]、最慢心室率[（67±7）次/min比（45±6）次/min]明显减低（P〈0.05）;与复律组比较,复发组的房颤持续时间[（4.36±1.47）月比（8.7±2.15）月]、左房内径[（35.85±2.07）mm比（43.15±1.95）mm]、年龄[（54.3±11.7）岁比（72.1±8.3）岁]均明显增大（P〈0.01～〈0.001）。所有病人无明显副作用。结论：电复律联合小剂量胺碘酮维持治疗对大部分持续性房颤患者有效、安全、简便,应该推广。     

Factors determining maintenance of sinus rhythm after chronic atrial fibrillation with left atrial dilatation

Successful therapy of atrial fibrillation (AF) has been reportedly influenced by a variety of factors including patient age, type of underlying heart disease, duration of arrhythmia, left ventricular function and left atrial (LA) size. To determine which of these factors are associated with maintenance of sinus rhythm after conversion, 43 patients with symptomatic chronic AF in the setting of a dilated left atrium (greater than or equal to 45 mm, range 45 to 78) were followed for at least 6 months after the return of sinus rhythm. Class IA drugs, IC drugs or amiodarone were used for therapy. Life table analysis showed sinus rhythm to be maintained in 81% for 6 months, 79% for 12 months and 60% for 24 months. Factors positively associated with success were conversion with drug therapy alone, duration of chronic AF less than or equal to 1 year, absence of mitral valve disease and LA dimension less than or equal to 60 mm (all p less than 0.05). Patient age, left ventricular function and presence of coronary disease were not associated with outcome. Thus, patients with moderate LA dilatation (45 to 60 mm) and a short duration of chronic AF can often be maintained in sinus rhythm, especially if they convert with pharmacologic intervention alone.     

替米沙坦联合胺碘酮维持阵发性心房颤动患者窦性心律的作用

目的 观察非瓣膜病阵发性心房颤动(房颤)的患者应用替米沙坦在房颤复律后维持窦性心律的疗效. 方法 76例非瓣膜病变阵发性房颤患者,随机分为胺碘酮对照组和替米沙坦+胺碘酮治疗组(联合治疗组),观察治疗后3、6、12个月两组患者左心房内径的变化及评价窦性心律的维持效果. 结果 治疗3、6个月两组左心房内径和窦性心律维持率差异无统计学意义(分别为t=0.04、0.51和t=0.03、1.12,均为P>0.05).治疗1年后,两组窦性心律的维持率分别为48.4%和73.5%,左心房内径分别为(37.26±4.85)mm和(34.38±3.85)mm,联合治疗组窦性心律维持率高于对照组(t=4.33,P<0.05),左房内径小于对照组(t=2.66,P<0.05). 结论 替米沙坦联合胺碘酮对阵发性房颤复律后窦性心律维持优于单用胺碘酮治疗,随着时间延长,维持窦性心律效果越好,可能与替米沙坦抑制肾素血管紧张素系统,降低心脏负荷,抑制心房电及结构重构有关.     

Long-term efficacy of amiodarone therapy for the prevention of recurrence of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Analysis based on patient characteristics

There is little information available on factors affecting the long-term prevention of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) in the Japanese population. A total of 71 patients (49 men, mean age, 68 ± 8 years) with paroxysmal AF refractory to ≥ 2 class I antiarrhythmic drugs received oral amiodarone (50-200 mg/day). All patients were observed for more than 12 months (mean follow-up period, 47 ± 26 months) and were analyzed on the basis of patient profiles. The percentage of patients with AF recurrence despite amiodarone therapy was 54% in all patients. In multivariate logistic regression analysis adjusted for age and sex, the following factors were associated with preventive efficacy for AF recurrence: left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (relative risk [RR] 0.933, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.877-0.993, P = 0.029), asymptomatic AF (RR 0.068, CI 0.005-0.870, P = 0.039), and AF occurring irrespective of circadian variation (RR 0.115, CI 0.013-0.988, P = 0.049). The percentage of patients with conversion to permanent AF despite amiodarone therapy was 31% in all patients. In multivariate logistic regression analysis adjusted for age and sex, asymptomatic AF (RR 0.085, CI 0.010-0.732, P = 0.025) was the only factor associated with preventive efficacy for conversion to permanent AF. Amiodarone appears to be effective in maintaining sinus rhythm, especially in patients with impaired left ventricular function. In contrast, amiodarone appears to be refractory in those with asymptomatic AF or AF occurring irrespective of circadian variation.     

Combination therapy with amiodarone and enalapril in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation prevents the development of structural atrial remodeling

The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between long-term efficacy of amiodarone therapy (100-200 mg/day) combined with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI; enalapril 5 mg/day) administration, and the development of structural atrial remodeling in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). Fifty-eight patients (40 men, 18 women, mean age, 68 +/- 8 years, mean follow-up period, 43 +/- 18 months) with AF refractory to >or= two class I antiarrhythmic drugs were divided into two groups; those treated with enalapril on amiodarone (group A, n = 25) and those treated with amiodarone alone (group B, n = 33), to evaluate the efficacy of combination therapy. 1) At 12 and 24 months, the survival rates for patients free from AF recurrence were 80% and 64% in group A, and 45% and 30% in group B, respectively (P < 0.05, group A versus group B). The percentage of patients with conversion to permanent AF despite amiodarone therapy was 20% in group A and 48.5% in group B (P < 0.05, group A versus group B). 2) In group B, left atrial dimension (LAD) was significantly greater after amiodarone therapy (40.2 +/- 6.3 mm) than at baseline (35.2 +/- 6.6 mm) (P < 0.01), whereas there was no significant difference in LAD between baseline and after amiodarone therapy in group A (39.1 +/- 5.0 mm versus 41.0 +/- 5.0 mm, respectively). In patients with paroxysmal AF, ACE-I appears to enhance the efficacy of amiodarone therapy in maintaining sinus rhythm and preventing the development of structural remodeling in atria.     

Intravenous amiodarone for cardioversion of recent-onset atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is one of the most common causes of hospital admission, with a prevalence of up to 5% of the population, increasing with advancing age. Emergency direct current cardioversion is the therapy of choice when arrhythmia leads to hemodynamic compromise, but in patients who are hemodynamically stable, antiarrhythmic drugs are usually given to restore sinus rhythm. HYPOTHESIS: The study was undertaken to assess the efficacy of intravenous amiodarone in cardioversion of recent-onset paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). No standard antiarrhythmic therapy has been accepted for pharmacologic cardioversion of AF. Amiodarone seems to be a promising candidate, but only few randomized trials are available and the results are inconsistent. METHODS: In all, 160 patients with AF lasting < 24 h were randomly assigned (2:1 fashion) to the amiodarone group (n = 106) receiving 5 mg/kg as a 30 min intravenous (i.v.) infusion, followed by i.v. infusion of 10 mg/kg during 20 h diluted in 1000 ml of 10% glucose with 20 IU of rapid-action insulin, 80 mEq of potassium chloride, and 8 g of magnesium sulphate (GIKM), or to the control group (n = 54) receiving 1000 ml of GIKM alone. Treatment was continued up to 20 h independent of sinus rhythm restoration. RESULTS: Sinus rhythm was restored 20 h after initiation of therapy in 88 (83%) patients in the amiodarone group and in 24 (44%) patients in the control group (p < 0.0001). The difference between efficacy of the two treatment modalities became significant already after 8 h of therapy (53 vs. 14 patients with sinus rhythm, respectively, p < 0.05). The mean dose of amiodarone administered until sinus rhythm restoration was 740 +/- 296 mg. The presence and the type of underlying heart disease did not influence the conversion rate in either group. In two patients (1.8%) treated with amiodarone, the return of sinus rhythm was preceded by asystole. CONCLUSION: Amiodarone is effective in the termination of AF lasting < 24 h. It may be particularly useful in patients with organic heart disease in whom class I antiarrhythmic agents may be contraindicated. During treatment, the heart rhythm should be monitored continuously.     

A comparative study of the efficacy and safety of procainamide versus propafenone versus amiodarone for the conversion of recent-onset atrial fibrillation

The appropriate treatment for the restoration of sinus rhythm in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) of recent onset is still the subject of controversy. In this prospective, randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study, we investigated the effectiveness and safety of procainamide, propafenone, and amiodarone, administered intravenously, for the conversion of recent-onset AF. We enrolled 362 consecutive patients (183 men; age 34 to 86 years; mean 65+/-10) with AF duration of no >48 hours. Of these patients, 89 were given procainamide, 91 propafenone, 92 amiodarone, and 90 placebo. Treatment was considered successful if conversion to sinus rhythm was achieved within the 24-hour study period. Baseline clinical characteristics were similar in the 4 groups. The treatment was successful in 61 of the 89 patients who received procainamide (68.53%; median time 3 hours), 73 of the 91 patients who received propafenone (80.21%; median time 1 hour), 82 of the 92 patients who received amiodarone (89.13%; median time 9 hours), and 55 of the 90 patients who received placebo (61.11%; median time 17 hours; p<0.05 for all medicated groups vs placebo; p<0.05 for amiodarone and propafenone vs procainamide). In conclusion, all 3 medications, when administered intravenously, are effective in the restoration of sinus rhythm in recent-onset AF. Amiodarone and propafenone are more effective whereas procainamide and propafenone are faster.     

Amiodarone for maintenance of sinus rhythm after conversion of atrial fibrillation in the setting of a dilated left atrium

Previous reports suggest that the finding of left atrial (LA) dilatation (greater than 45 mm) by echocardiography identifies patients not likely to maintain sinus rhythm after conversion of atrial fibrillation (AF). However, these studies antedate the availability of amiodarone, an antiarrhythmic agent that reportedly is effective in patients with AF in whom other drug therapy has failed. To analyze the relation between LA size and the ability to maintain sinus rhythm with amiodarone therapy, 28 patients, aged 32 to 87 years (mean 61), with an LA dimension greater than 45 mm (range 46 to 78, mean 57) were studied. Thirteen patients (46%) had valvular heart disease, 10 (36%) dilated cardiomyopathy and 5 (18%) miscellaneous disorders. In 25 patients (89%) quinidine therapy had failed. After therapy with amiodarone, sinus rhythm returned in all patients and was maintained. Therapy was judged completely successful in 10 patients (alive and still in sinus rhythm with at least 1 year of follow-up), partially successful in 11 (maintaining sinus rhythm for at least 6 months before a change in status) and failed in 7. Completely successful therapy was accomplished in 9 of 18 patients with an LA dimension between 46 and 60 mm, but in only 1 of 10 patients with an LA dimension greater than 60 mm (p less than 0.05). Thus, patients with LA dimensions between 46 and 60 mm who are significantly compromised by AF can often be maintained in sinus rhythm with amiodarone therapy. However, in patients with larger LA dimensions. AF is likely to return despite aggressive antiarrhythmic therapy with amiodarone, a drug with potentially serious side effects.     

Efficacy of landiolol hydrochloride for atrial fibrillation after open heart surgery

It is important to establish effective treatment for postoperative atrial fibrillation (AF), the most common complication after cardiac surgery. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of landiolol hydrochloride for rhythm conversion in patients with postoperative AF. Among 134 patients who developed new-onset AF after open heart surgery between 2007 and 2009, 69 patients who received landiolol hydrochloride for treatment of postoperative AF were enrolled. The AF conversion rate, the percentage of patients with 20 % reduction of the ventricular rate, and the factors related to successful treatment were evaluated. Then, the landiolol group was compared with 65 patients who had postoperative AF and did not receive landiolol hydrochloride. Landiolol hydrochloride was the first-line treatment in 46 patients and the only therapy in 26 patients. Reversion to sinus rhythm was achieved in 51 patients, while the conversion rate in patients without landiolol hydrochloride was only 56.8 % (p < 0.05). A 20 % reduction of the ventricular rate was achieved more frequently in the landiolol group. Although landiolol hydrochloride was highly effective in patients who had undergone off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting, patients with cardiopulmonary bypass did not respond as well. The heart rate was reduced from 130 ± 26 to 81 ± 12 (p < 0.05) after landiolol administration, while blood pressure did not decrease significantly. Landiolol hydrochloride was effective for conversion of postoperative AF. This ultra-short-acting β-blocker is a safe first-line treatment for postoperative AF after open heart surgery, and is most effective in patients who have undergone off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting.