静脉注射胺碘酮转复阵发性心房颤动疗效分析

目的比较静脉注射胺碘酮和普罗帕酮转复阵发性心房颤动的有效性和安全性。方法62例阵发性心房颤动随机分为胺碘酮组（32例）和普罗帕酮组（30例），胺碘酮组予胺碘酮150mg静注，继以1mg／min的速度静脉输入，维持6h。再以0．5mg／min的速度维持18h；普罗帕酮组予普罗帕酮70mg静注。未复律1h后追加70mg。结果转律率：胺碘酮组81．25％（26／32），普罗帕酮组70％（21／30）。两组转律率相近。不良反应发生率：胺碘酮组15．6％（5／32），普罗帕酮组23．3％（7／30），两组不良反应发生率相近。但胺碘酮转复时间短，无房室传导阻滞出现。结论静脉注射胺碘酮转复阵发性的心房颤动安全有效，且优于普罗帕酮。

Efficacy of intravenous injection of amiodarone and propafenone for patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation

Objective To compare the efficacy and security of amiodarone and propafenone on paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Methods Sixty-two patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation were randomly divided into two groups： amiodarone（n=32） and propafenone （n=30）group. In amiodarone group, 150mg amiodarone was injected intravenously firstly, then continuously pumped with 1mg/min for 6 hour and with 0. 5mg/min for 18 hours in proper order. In propafenone group,70mg propafenone was given intravenously. Results The conversion rate to sinus rhythm was 81. 25% （26/32） in amiodarone group and 70. 00% （21/30）in propafenone group（P〈0. 05）. The side effect was 15.6% （5/ 32） in amiodarone group and 23. 3%（7/30） in the propafenone group （P〉0. 05）. Conclusion It is suggested that intravenous injection of amiodarone is more effective and safe than propafenone for rapid conversion of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation to sinus rhythm.