电复律治疗风湿性心脏病瓣膜置换术后持续性心房颤动的疗效观察

目的探讨电复律治疗风湿性心脏病瓣膜置换术后伴左房明显增大的持续性心房颤动的疗效。方法将164例风湿性心脏病瓣膜置换术后持续性心房颤动的患者（左房内径均〉50mm）随机分为3组：胺碘酮组20例;胺碘酮＋雷米普利组76例;胺碘酮＋厄贝沙坦组68例。所有患者在经静脉应用胺碘酮后,房颤如未转复,则行电复律治疗。复律成功者胺碘酮改为口服200mg／d,联合雷米普利及厄贝沙坦组同时口服雷米普利5mg／d、厄贝沙坦150mg／d,3～6个月后停用。结果即时成功率92．7％（152／164例）。平均随访（1．8±0．4）年,128例（78．0％）保持窦性心律。联合雷米普利组窦律维持率为86．8％（66／76例）,联合厄贝沙坦组窦律维持率为75．0%（51／68例）无统计学差异,单独口服胺碘酮组55．0%（11／20例）维持窦性心律,与联合雷米普利组、厄贝沙坦组比较,有显著差异。末次随访,胺碘酮组左房内径较复律前明显增加[（60．5±3．8）mm vs（57．7±4．5）mm;P=0．04];联合雷米普利组[（58．2±4．3）mm vs（57．3±5．8）mm,P=0．283和联合厄贝沙坦组[（57．2．±5．5）mm vs（56．4±4．9）mm,P=0．373前后对照无显著差异。三组患者心功能均改善,两两比较无显著差异。结论对于房颤时间长,左房增大的患者只要正确掌握电复律的指征及方法,并予以辅助药物维持治疗,电复律的成功率较高,转复后维持率亦高,并能改善患者心功能。胺碘酮联合雷米普利或厄贝沙坦能延缓左房增大,提高窦律维持率。     

厄贝沙坦联合胺碘酮对风湿性心脏病人瓣膜置换术后维持窦律的作用

目的评价厄贝沙坦和胺碘酮联用在风湿性心脏病持续性房颤患者复律后的窦律维持作用。方法风湿性心脏病瓣膜置换术后持续性房颤患者116例随机分为胺碘酮组(55例)和厄贝沙坦+胺碘酮组(61例)。两组均在治疗2周后行电复律术,转为窦性心律后继续分别服用。试验随访时间为18月。比较治疗后的窦性心律维持率和治疗前及治疗后6、12、18月左心房内径。结果胺碘酮组左心房内径在治疗12月后显著大于胺碘酮+厄贝沙坦组,P<0.05。厄贝沙坦+胺碘酮组窦律维持率高于胺碘酮组,在治疗12月时有显著差异。结论厄贝沙坦联合胺碘酮在风湿性心脏病持续性房颤复律后维持窦性心律的疗效优于单用胺碘酮,并能延缓左房扩大,防止房颤复发。     

厄贝沙坦联合胺碘酮对风湿性心脏病人瓣膜置换术后维持窦律的作用

目的 评价厄贝沙坦和胺碘酮联用在风湿性心脏病持续性房颤患者复律后的窦律维持作用.方法 风湿性心脏病瓣膜置换术后持续性房颤患者116例随机分为胺碘酮组(55例)和厄贝沙坦 胺碘酮组(61例).两组均在治疗2周后行电复律术,转为窦性心律后继续分别服用.试验随访时间为18月.比较治疗后的窦性心律维持率和治疗前及治疗后6、12、18月左心房内径. 结果胺碘酮组左心房内径在治疗12月后显著大于胺碘酮 厄贝沙坦组,P＜0.05.厄贝沙坦 胺碘酮组窦律维持率高于胺碘酮组,在治疗12月时有显著差异. 结论厄贝沙坦联合胺碘酮在风湿性心脏病持续性房颤复律后维持窦性心律的疗效优于单用胺碘酮,并能延缓左房扩大,防止房颤复发.     

厄贝沙坦在胺碘酮治疗持续性心房颤动中的影响

观察厄贝沙坦与胺碘酮联合运用在持续性心房颤动(简称房颤)复律的作用。128例持续性房颤患者随机分为A组64例,B组64例。A组单独给予胺碘酮治疗,B组联合给予胺碘酮和厄贝沙坦治疗。结果:B组转复房颤为窦性心律的成功率明显高于A组(76.56%vs54.60%,P<0.01,),至6个月时仍维持窦性心律的比例亦高于B组(91.94%vs74.29%,P<0.05)。结论:联合胺碘酮和厄贝沙坦转复房颤并维持窦性心律的比例高于单独使用胺碘酮。     

心脏瓣膜置换术后持续性心房颤动的电复律

目的探讨心脏瓣膜置换术后持续性心房颤动（简称房颤）电复律的成功率和安全性。方法对瓣膜置换术后病程长、左房增大（≥50mm）的持续性房颤患者135例行同步直流电复律治疗。电复律之前常规抗凝，加用厄贝沙坦和胺碘酮，积极处理原发心脏疾病。复律成功后继续服用厄贝沙坦和胺碘酮，3个月后停止。随访至电复律后12个月。结果135例，6例（4．4％）加用药物后自行转复。126例电击成功（97．7％）。3例（2．3％）未能转复。132例复律成功苦12个月后123例维持窦性心律（93．2％），9例复发；复律后3，12个月左房内径较复律前缩小（P〈0．05），左室射血分数增加（P〈0．05）。结论对于瓣膜置换术后病程长、左房增大（≥50mm）的持续性房颤患者，应尝试给予转复的机会，在经过充分准备和抗心律失常药物协同应用下，其电复律成功率高，窦性心律维持时间长，并发症少。     

联用胺碘酮与培哚普利对老年持续性房颤患者复律的影响

目的：探讨联用胺碘酮与培哚普利对老年持续性房颤患者复律的影响。方法将92例老年持续性房颤患者随机分为常规治疗组和联合治疗组,每组各46例。常规治疗组予以胺碘酮复律治疗,联合治疗组在常规治疗组基础上加用培哚普利4 mg／d。观察两组4周内的转复率及平均复律时间。结果与常规治疗组比较,联合治疗组4周转复率明显升高、平均复律时间明显缩短,差异均有统计学意义（P＜0．05）。结论联用胺碘酮与培哚普利可显著提高老年持续性房颤患者的转复率并缩短复律时间。     

胺碘酮联合氯沙坦预防心房颤动复律后复发

目的观察胺碘酮联合氯沙坦治疗阵发性和持续性心房颤动复律后维持窦性心律的疗效。方法80例具有转复窦性心律指征的阵发性和持续性心房颤动患者随机分为两组,单用胺碘酮治疗组（n=40）和胺碘酮＋氯沙坦治疗组（n=40）,12个月后停用胺碘酮,共随访18个月,观察药物对两组患者窦性心律的维持率及心房重构的影响。结果随访第12月和18月,窦性心律维持率在单用胺碘酮治疗组分别为45．9％和35．1％,在胺碘酮＋氯沙坦治疗组分别为79．5％和56．0％;胺碘酮＋氯沙坦组显著高于胺碘酮组（P均〈0．05）。胺碘酮＋氯沙坦组转变为永久性心房颤动患者（8例）显著低于单用胺碘酮治疗组（13例）,（P〈0．05）。左心房直径在单用胺碘酮组治疗前后有显著变化[治疗前（37．7±6．2）mm,治疗18月后时39．2±6．5mm）（P〈0．05）],而胺碘酮＋氯沙坦组无显著改变[治疗前（38．1±5．8）mm,治疗18月后（38．4±6．1）mm]。结论胺碘酮联合氯沙坦能提高心房颤动复律后维持窦性心律的疗效和防止心房结构重构。     

厄贝沙坦联合胺碘酮对阵发性房颤复律后维持窦性心律的效果

目的：观察厄贝沙坦联合胺碘酮对阵发性心房颤动复律后维持窦性心律的临床效果及其对左心房内径的影响。方法：选择阵发性心房颤动患者89例,分为胺碘酮治疗组（44例,单纯服用胺碘酮）,联合治疗组（45例,服用胺碘酮及厄贝沙坦）,随访12个月,观察两组患者治疗前后窦性心律维持率,左房内径的变化,并进行比较分析。结果：治疗12个月后,与胺碘酮组比较,联合治疗组窦性心律维持率明显提高（64.3%比81.4%）,左房内径明显减小[（40.12±10.6）mm比（34.10±10.11）mm],P均〈0.05。结论：厄贝沙坦联合胺碘酮对阵发性心房颤动复律后维持窦性心律的作用明显优于单用胺碘酮,且明显抑制左房扩大,无明显不良反应。     

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.     

缬沙坦联合胺碘酮对持续性心房颤动复律及复律后窦性心律维持率的影响

目的观察缬沙坦联合胺碘酮对持续性心房颤动复律及复律后窦性心律维持率的影响。方法选择持续性心房颤动患者96例,随机分为两组,治疗组49例,给予缬沙坦及胺碘酮治疗,对照组47例给予安慰剂及胺碘酮治疗。随访1年,观察两组心房颤动转复率和转复后3、12个月时心房颤动复发率,以及转复时及转复后12个月左心房内径（LAD）、左心室射血分数（LVEF）变化。结果心房颤动转复率治疗组（87．8％）与对照组（85．1％）差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。心房颤动复发率转复后3个月及12个月治疗组（14．0％、2312％）均小于对照组（32．5％、54．5％）（P〈0．05或0．01）,转律后12个月LAD治疗组[（44．3±065）mm）]较对照组[（469±0．54）mm]变小（P〈0＋05）,LVEF治疗组[（56．8±8．64）％]较对照组[（52．3±908）％]升高（P〈0．05）。结论缬沙坦联合胺碘酮治疗持续性心房颤动在减少心房颤动的复发率以及改善心功能方面优于单独使用胺碘酮。     

缬沙坦和贝那普利预防老年房颤转复后复发的作用及其机制

目的：探讨小剂量胺碘酮联合缬沙坦或贝那普利预防老年持续性房颤转复后房颤复发的作用及其机制。方法：150例持续性房颤患者（持续超过7d）,经药物或电复律后随机分为三组：胺碘酮组（Ⅰ组）,胺碘酮＋缬沙坦组（Ⅱ组）,胺碘酮＋贝那普利组（Ⅲ组）,各50例;治疗随访时间为1年,比较三组治疗后房颤的复发情况以及治疗前,治疗后第2周、3月、6月、12月的左心房内径。结果：142例完成治疗,随访12月,与I组比较,Ⅱ组和Ⅲ组心房颤动复发率（37.50%比17.39%比18.75%）明显降低,左房内径[（38.11±1.24）mm比（34.11±1.37）mm比（34.13±1.36）mm]明显缩小（P均〈0.05）,而Ⅱ组和Ⅲ组间差异无显著性（P均〉0.05）。结论：胺碘酮分别与缬沙坦和贝那普利联合用于持续性房颤复律后预防房颤复发,较单用胺碘酮有效,长期服用可逆转左房扩大,抑制电重构,从而防止房颤复发。     

Oral amiodarone increases the efficacy of direct-current cardioversion in restoration of sinus rhythm in patients with chronic atrial fibrillation.

AIMS: Direct current cardioversion of persistent atrial fibrillation is one of the most widely used and effective treatments for the restoration of sinus rhythm, but may be hampered by a low success rate and a high percentage of early recurrence. Pre-treatment with amiodarone or a glucose-insulin-potassium solution could improve the efficacy of electrical cardioversion by reversing the partially depolarized diastolic potential of the subsidiary pacemakers in atrial fibrillation. In a controlled randomized study, we assessed the effectiveness of electrical cardioversion in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation after pre-treatment with amiodarone or potassium infusion and the efficacy of amiodarone in maintaining sinus rhythm after electrical cardioversion. METHODS AND RESULTS: Ninety-two patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (>2 weeks duration) were prospectively randomized into three matched groups: A (n=31, oral amiodarone 400 mg. day(-1)1 month before and 200 mg. day(-1)2 months after cardioversion), B (n=31, 180 mg. day(-1)oral diltiazem 1 month before and 2 months after cardioversion and 80 mmol potassium, 50 UI insulin in 500 ml 30% glucose solution 24 h before cardioversion) and C (n=30, control patients, 180 mg. day(-1)oral diltiazem 1 month before and 2 months after cardioversion). Before cardioversion all patients were under 4 weeks effective oral anticoagulant therapy (warfarin). Before electrical cardioversion, the rate of spontaneous conversion to sinus rhythm was higher in group A (25%) than groups B (6%) or C (3%) (P<0.005). Electrical cardioversion was more successful in group A (88%) than groups B (56%) or C (65%) (P<0.05), while the electrical thresholds for effective cardioversion were lower in group B than the other groups (P<0.05). Twenty-four hours after cardioversion, the early recurrence of atrial fibrillation was similar in the three groups (P=ns), while at 2 months the recurrence rate was lower in group A (32%) than groups B (56%) or C (52%) (P<0.01). CONCLUSION: Pre-treatment with low-dose oral amiodarone, compared with oral diltiazem or glucose-insulin-potassium treatments, induces a significantly high percentage of instances of spontaneous conversion, increases electrical cardioversion efficacy and reduces atrial fibrillation recurrence.     

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.     

血管紧张素Ⅱ受体拮抗剂、胺碘酮联用对预防心房颤动的影响

目的观察厄贝沙坦联用胺碘酮在持续性心房颤动转复后维持窦性心律的作用及对左心房功能的影响。方法98例持续性心房颤动(持续超过7d)患者,药物或电复律后随机分为两组,Ⅰ组50例给予胺碘酮0.2g,1次/d;Ⅱ组48例给予厄贝沙坦150mg,1次/d,胺碘酮0.2g,1次/d;两组均连服6个月。分别于治疗后第1周、2周、1个月、2个月、4个月及6个月复查心电图或动态心电图,观察心房颤动复发情况;复律后次日及6个月后做超声心动图(UCG)检查,观察左心房功能变化。结果共87例完成治疗。随访6个月,心房颤动复发Ⅰ组为34.9%(15/43),Ⅱ组为13.6%(6/44),两组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),Ⅱ组复律后次日及治疗6个月后,超声测量左心房内径由(42±12)mm缩小为(34±11)mm,治疗前与治疗6个月后比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.01),而Ⅰ组上述指标比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论厄贝沙坦联用胺碘酮在持续性心房颤动转复后维持窦性心律,较单用胺碘酮更有效,长期服用厄贝沙坦可逆转左心房扩大,降低左心房压,有利于消除心房颤动复发的基础。     

A randomized placebo-controlled trial with amiodarone for persistent atrial fibrillation in rheumatic mitral stenosis after successful balloon mitral valvuloplasty

ObjectiveAtrial fibrillation is the most common sustained arrhythmia in patients with rheumatic heart disease (RHD). This study was conducted to determine the maintenance of sinus rhythm with amiodarone therapy following DC cardioversion (DCCV), early after successful balloon mitral valvuloplasty (BMV).MethodsPatients were randomized to amiodarone group and placebo group and their baseline characteristics were recorded. DCCV was done 48 h after BMV. After cardioversion, oral amiodarone was started initially 200 mg three times a day for 2 weeks, then 200 mg twice daily for two weeks followed by 200 mg once daily for 12 months. Patients in placebo group received DCCV alone without preloading amiodarone. After DCCV, they were given placebo for 12 months.ResultsThe 3 months follow-up period was completed by 77 patients (95%). Of them, 31 (77.5%) patients in amiodarone group and 14 (34.1%) in placebo group remained in sinus rhythm (SR). The 12 months follow-up period was completed by 73 patients (90.1%). Of them, 22 (55%) patients in amiodarone group and 7 (17.1%) in placebo group remained in SR.ConclusionWe conclude that amiodarone is more effective than placebo in maintenance of SR at the end of 3 months following successful cardioversion and more patients continued to remain in SR even at the end of 12 months without major serious adverse effects.