胺碘酮治疗顽固性心房颤动

作者分析顽固性心房颤动(房颤)患者口服胺碘酮的复律效果及其预报因子。方法:经奎尼丁、普鲁卡因酰胺、双异苯丙胺治疗无效的症状性房颤患者68(男37、女31)例,平均年龄59(25～75)岁,包括冠心病15例、风心病13例、高血压症12例、孤立性房颤9例、病态窦房结综合征7例、特发性扩张性心肌病6例、二尖瓣替换术后3例及肥厚性心肌病和慢性阻塞性肺部病变各2例。胺碘酮口服剂量:初次为800mg/day,一周后减至400mg/day。根据药效及不良作用,维持剂量为200～400mg/day,使血药浓度保持在1.0～2.5mg/L。治疗4～6周后,28例未恢复正常窦性心律,接受电复律术。胺碘酮治疗4周以上且血药浓度≥1.0mg/L,方可评价疗效。治疗有效的标准为:心房颤动停止发作;或者临床复发率减少75%以上且发作可自行终止,症状能耐受。阵发性房颤或房颤持续时间不足1年者(54例)为组Ⅰ,房颤持续时间超过1年者(14例)为组Ⅱ。服胺碘酮后随访3～56(平均21)个月。结果:54例长期口服胺碘酮治疗有效,总有效     

心脏再同步化治疗顽固性心力衰竭合并心房颤动

目的总结心脏再同步化治疗(CRT)合并心房颤动(房颤)的心力衰竭(心衰)的疗效,分析这类患者CRT反应的可能原因。方法 2003年3月至2007年3月接受CRT合并房颤的难治性心衰患者5例,4例为扩张型心肌病,1例为缺血性心肌病,NYHA心功能Ⅲ～Ⅳ级。4例经冠状窦途径成功置入左室电极,1例冠状窦途径失败后行右室双部位起搏(流出道间隔部和心尖部)。结果术后平均随访(12±13)个月,所有患者术后临床症状均有不同程度的改善,NYHA分级提高0+～2级;生活质量和活动耐力均有改善。平均双室起搏比例(90±9)%,其中第2、4、5例术后频发室性早搏,平均双室起搏比例偏低(77%～83%)。第2例加用胺碘酮后比例由83%升至95%,NYHA分级提高2级。5例患者先后于术后1～33个月死亡,直接死亡原因为室性心律失常者2例,心衰恶化者3例。结论 CRT同样可以使合并持续性房颤的难治性心衰患者受益,可以提高生活质量、活动耐力。保证完全的双室起搏是合并房颤的心衰患者对CRT反应的关键因素之一。合并房颤的难治性心衰患者可能更需要在严重心衰早期积极地选择CRT。部分合并房颤的难治性心衰患者,在行CRT同时应考虑植入除颤器。     

心脏再同步治疗合并心房颤动的顽固性心力衰竭五例

近年来心脏再同步治疗(CRT)逐渐被证明为一种治疗顽固性心力衰竭合并室内传导障碍患者的有效方法[1].但目前大多数CRT研究中人选患者为窦性心律的心力衰竭患者,对合并心房颤动(房颤)的心力衰竭患者的研究相对较少.     

心房颤动的治疗

心房颤动 (Ａｆ)是临床最常见的心律失常之一 ,发病机制尚无定论 ,其有一定的致残率和病死率 ,一直是临床心律失常学治疗关注的焦点。1　分类1 1　根据Ａｆ存在的时间　如Ａｆ的“三Ｐ”分类方案 :①阵发性　 <2～ 7ｄ ,常 2 4ｈ可自动转复 ;②持续性 >2～ 7ｄ ,常需电转复律或药物复律 ;③永久性 :不可能恢复窦性心律的慢性Ａｆ。1 2　根据病因　可分为瓣膜病性及非瓣膜病性 ,后者又可分为 :①心源性 ;②非心源性 ;③孤立性Ａｆ。1 3　根据自主神经的影响　可分为迷走神经依赖性和交感神经依赖性。2　治疗原则　　①消除易患因素 ,②恢复和…     

心房颤动的治疗

本文回顾了心房颤动的治疗,可供基层医院参考.     

心房颤动的治疗

<正>心房颤动是临床上最常见的一种心律失常,其患病率与发病率均随年龄增长逐步增加,40岁以上男性和女性的心房颤动患病终生风险分别为26%和23%[1]。心房颤动是由遗传因素、自主神经系统、炎症系统及内分泌系统共同作用所致的进行性疾病。在心电图上表现为正常的P波消失,代之以波幅不等、形态各异、间隔不齐的连续小锯齿波,频率在350-600次/min。这种持续紊乱的电活动会引起心房收缩功能下降,心排出量下降超过15%;会使心房局部     

心房颤动的治疗

正心房纤颤,简称房颤,是一种快速、不规则的心律失常,它是由心脏上腔(心房)中不正常的电信号释放引起的。随着年龄的增长,这种心律失常的发病率越来越高,65岁以上的人群中大约有10%的人患有这种疾病。房颤的特征是不规律的心脏跳动,可以持续几秒钟到几个小时,甚至更长时间,持续性房颤可以持续不恢复。尽管大约20%的房颤患者没有任何症状,但它是会有很大的隐患     

心房颤动的药物治疗

心房颤动（房颤）的发病率在我国尚无可靠的统计数据,但据临床印象它是除了室性和房性早搏以外发病率最高的心律失常。在７０年代以前,风湿性心脏病二尖瓣狭窄合并的房颤占住院患者房颤中的６０％～７０％,８０年代以后则有所下降［１］。高血压、冠状动脉硬化性心脏病...     

心房颤动的综合治疗

心房颤动是临床上最常见的心律失常之一,普通人群的患病率为0.4%～1.0%[1].随着年龄的增长,发病率呈逐渐增加趋势.心房颤动引起的血流动力学改变和栓塞事件,明显地增加了患者的致残率和病死率,也明显地增加了临床医疗负担和费用.     

心房颤动的消融治疗

心房颤动(房颤)是临床上最常见的心律失常之一。Framingham研究的房颤患病率约为2·1%,发病率约为0·5%,并随年龄增长而升高,在任何年龄段男性发病率均高于女性,80岁以上高龄的房颤患病率达到近10%[1-3]。该病可引起心悸、胸闷等临床症状,可导致血栓栓塞并发症,尤其是脑卒中,还与心力衰竭等关系密切,轻者影响生活质量,重者可致残、致死。房颤的治疗策略大体上分为两方面:(1)控制心脏节律,即转复房颤并维持窦性心律;(2)控制心室率并长期抗凝以预防血栓栓塞并发症,这是一种姑息性治疗。传统的节律控制方法依赖于抗心律失常药。但现有的抗心律…     

Therapy of atrial fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation is the most common cardiac arrhythmia in adults. Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation terminates spontaneously, whereas the persistent form terminates only after medical or electrical cardioversion. Permanent atrial fibrillation cannot be cardioverted. Restoration of sinus rhythm can be achieved by antiarrhythmic drugs or electrical cardioversion, both performed under continuous electrocardiographic monitoring. If atrial fibrillation has lasted longer than 48 hours or the precise time of onset cannot be determined, there are two alternative approaches: systemic anticoagulation to achieve an international normalised ratio (INR) of 2.0 to 3.0 for at least three weeks, followed by cardioversion; or cardioversion guided by transesophageal echocadiography indicating the absence of thrombus. Several drugs have been shown to be effective for the maintenance of sinus rhythm. Anticoagulant therapy is mandatory for a minimum of three weeks after cardioversion. In case of drug refractory, highly symptomatic atrial fibrillation the indication for radiofrequency catheter ablation should be discussed, although the value of this new method is still under evaluation.     

Amiodarone for refractory atrial fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a difficult arrhythmia to manage with antiarrhythmic agents. Amiodarone is highly effective in restoring and maintaining normal sinus rhythm in patients with AF. However, the mechanism and predictors of efficacy for amiodarone in treating AF have not been adequately addressed. Various measures of success or failure of amiodarone therapy were examined in 68 patients who had paroxysmal or chronic, established AF refractory to conventional antiarrhythmic agents. The patients were 25 to 75 years old (mean 59) and mean follow-up was 21 months (range 3 to 56). Maintenance amiodarone dosages were 200 to 400 mg/day. Overall, amiodarone therapy was effective long term in 54 of the 68 patients (79%). Left atrial diameter, age, gender and origin of AF were not helpful in predicting success or failure of amiodarone therapy. The presence of chronic AF for longer than 1 year was an adverse factor in maintaining normal sinus rhythm (p = 0.007), although the success rate even in this group was relatively high (57%). Thirty-five percent of the patients had adverse effects, which precluded long-term therapy with amiodarone in 10%.     

Therapy of refractory symptomatic atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter: a staged care approach with new antiarrhythmic drugs

One hundred nine patients with recurrent episodes of symptomatic atrial fibrillation or flutter, or both, who had failed one to five previous antiarrhythmic drug trials were treated with propafenone and, subsequently, sotalol if atrial fibrillation recurred. The clinical profile of the study group was as follows: age 63 +/- 13 years, left atrial anteroposterior dimension 4.4 +/- 0.9 cm and left ventricular ejection fraction 57 +/- 14%. Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation occurred in 56 patients (51%) and chronic atrial fibrillation occurred in 53 patients (49%). After loading and dose titration phases were completed, the maintenance doses of drugs were 450 to 900 mg/day for propafenone and 160 to 960 mg/day for sotalol. Life table estimates of the duration of freedom from atrial fibrillation were constructed for each drug trial. The percent of patients free of recurrent symptomatic arrhythmia at 6 months was 39% for propafenone and 50% for sotalol. The cumulative proportion of patients successfully treated with propafenone or sotalol, or both, by 6 months was 55% and remained relatively constant beyond that point. The incidence of intolerable side effects necessitating discontinuation of therapy ranged from 7% to 8%. Thus, despite previous unsuccessful drug trials, a substantial proportion of patients with recurrent symptomatic atrial fibrillation refractory to conventional therapy can be treated successfully and safely with newer antiarrhythmic drugs. Treatment failures tend to occur early in the course of follow-up, permitting easy identification of candidates for alternative therapeutic approaches.     

Amiodarone in the management of refractory atrial fibrillation

Thirty-eight patients were studied to evaluate amiodarone hydrochloride in the treatment of refractory atrial fibrillation. Among them were 25 with sustained atrial fibrillation and 13 with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. All patients were symptomatic and refractory to therapeutic doses of at least two conventional drug trials, and patients with atrial fibrillation had relapsed from electroversion. Amiodarone hydrochloride was administered in doses of 5 mg/kg intravenously, then 600 to 800 mg/d for seven to ten days, followed by 200 to 400 mg/d. Holter recordings were obtained every one to three months. The effect of amiodarone on the ventricular rate during sustained atrial fibrillation was evaluated in 18 patients and decreased from 99/min (range, 72/min to 143/min) at baseline to 75/min (range, 60/min to 102/min) at follow-up before conversion. Conversion to normal sinus rhythm occurred in 19 patients (76%), including 11 with and eight without direct-current cardioversion. During long-term treatment, sinus rhythm was sustained on an average of 16 months (range, three to 27 months) in 20 patients (53%). This included 11 of 25 patients with sustained atrial fibrillation and nine of 13 patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, with only four of these patients relapsing. Four patients (11%) developed intolerable side effects, but no serious toxic effects were encountered, perhaps because of the relatively low doses of amiodarone hydrochloride that were used (average, 232 +/- 80 mg/d). Amiodarone is a safe and effective alternative to standard therapy in patients with refractory sustained or paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.     

Double external direct-current shocks for refractory atrial fibrillation

Encouraged by preliminary data using double external direct-current (DC) shocks in patients with atrial fibrillation refractory to single external DC shocks, we undertook a prospective study of all patients with atrial fibrillation of > 1-month duration using a shock sequence with (1) 1 shock of 200 J anterior-posterior, (2) 1 shock of 360 J anterior-posterior, (3) 1 shock of 360 J apex-anterior, and (4) double shocks with configurations 2 and 3 delivered almost simultaneously by 2 defibrillators. The double shocks appeared to be safe and restored sinus rhythm in approximately 2 of 3 of patients in whom DC cardioversion failed with single shocks.     

Right atrial overdrive pacing for prevention of symptomatic refractory atrial fibrillation.

AIMS: Our aim was to investigate whether right atrial overdrive pacing is effective for the prevention of atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients without bradyarrhythmias. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with symptomatic paroxysmal or persistent AF refractory to at least two Class I or III antiarrhythmic drugs and without bradyarrhythmias were included. Successful therapy was defined as the combination of (a) a reduction of AF burden with or without AAD use >75%, (b) total AF burden < or =5% per year, and (c) less than one electrical cardioversion per year. Lower rate was set at 70 b.p.m. Additional AF prevention and termination features were used in case of no success.After a median follow-up of 18 (10-55) months, therapy was effective in 19 of the 36 included patients (53%). In 74% of the successfully treated patients, additional antiarrhythmic drugs were used. In successfully treated patients, the AF burden was reduced from 15% (5-100%) to 0% (0-4%). Multivariate analysis showed that the concomitant use of a Class I or III antiarrhythmic drug, a lower AF burden before implantation and the use of an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor were predictors of successful therapy. CONCLUSION: Right atrial overdrive pacing in combination with antiarrhythmic drugs seems an attractive treatment option in drug refractory symptomatic AF patients.     

Treatment of refractory supraventricular arrhythmias with induced permanent atrial fibrillation

Controlled permanent atrial fibrillation was successfully induced in 2 patients by means of paired atrial catheter pacing. The induced atrial fibrillation proved to be effective chronic therapy for both drug-refractory supraventricular bradycardia and tachycardia and eliminated the need for consideration of cardiac surgery in these patients.     

Recovery of the right atrial effective refractory period after cardioversion of chronic atrial fibrillation

The effective refractory period was shorter in patients with than without chronic atrial fibrillation (AF). The effective refractory period was prolonged, and at 12 and 24 hours after cardioversion of AF it was the same as the subjects without AF.     

Long-term oral propafenone therapy for suppression of refractory symptomatic atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter

Sixty patients who had recurrent episodes of symptomatic atrial fibrillation or flutter, or both, and who had failed one to five prior drug trials were treated with open label oral propafenone hydrochloride. On a mean maximal tolerated dose of 795 +/- 180 mg/day, actuarial estimates of the percent of individuals free of recurrences of symptomatic atrial fibrillation/flutter during propafenone treatment were: 1 month, 54%; 3 months, 44% and 6 months, 40%. No individual baseline characteristic achieved statistical significance as a correlate of poor response to propafenone. Drug-related adverse reactions were reported in 22% of patients but were severe enough to require termination of propafenone in only 5%. Thus, oral propafenone is a useful and well tolerated drug for long-term suppression of symptomatic recurrences of atrial fibrillation/flutter despite a history of unresponsiveness to prior antiarrhythmic drug treatment.     

Biatrial and three-dimensional mapping of spontaneous atrial arrhythmias in patients with refractory atrial fibrillation

INTRODUCTION: While atrial fibrillation (AF) initiation in the pulmonary veins has been well-studied, simultaneous biatrial and three-dimensional noncontact mapping (NCM) has not been performed. We hypothesized that these two techniques would provide novel information on triggers, initiation, and evolution of spontaneous AF and permit study of different AF populations. METHODS AND RESULTS: The origin of atrial premature beats (APBs), onset of spontaneous AF and its evolution were analyzed in 50 patients with AF in the presence or absence of structural heart disease (SHD) and in different AF presentations (group A: Persistent, group B: Paroxysmal). In 45 patients, spontaneous APBs in the right atrium (RA; n = 60) and left atrium (LA; n = 25) with similar regional distributions regardless of heart disease status were demonstrated. In total, 22 patients (44%) had > or =2 disparate regional origins. Biatrial regional foci were seen with equal frequency in patients with SHD (31%), without SHD (40%), in group A (32%), and in group B (36%). Biatrial mapping and NCM showed organized monomorphic atrial tachyarrhythmias arising in the RA (17), septum (17), or LA (21) and were classified as atrial flutter (RA = 34, LA = 8), macro-reentrant atrial tachycardia (RA = 1, LA = 3) or focal atrial tachycardia (RA = 2, LA = 7). Their regional distribution was more extensive in patients with SHD and persistent AF compared with patients without SHD or paroxysmal AF. Simultaneous biatrial tachycardias were observed only in group A patients and those with SHD. CONCLUSIONS: Simultaneous biatrial and NCM permits successful AF mapping in different AF populations and demonstrates a biatrial spectrum of spontaneous triggers and tachycardias. Organized monomorphic tachycardias with multiple unilateral or biatrial locations are commonly observed in human AF. Patients with heart disease or persistent AF have a more extensive distribution as well as simultaneous coexistence of multiple tachycardias during AF.