Heart rhythm · 2016
Use of dofetilide in adult patients with atrial arrhythmias and congenital heart disease: A PACES collaborative study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
El-Assaad Iqbal, Al-Kindi Sadeer G, Abraham JoEllyn, Sanatani Shubhayan, Bradley David J, Halsey Colby, Law Ian H, Balaji Seshadri, Shetty Ira, Aziz Peter F
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Arrhythmia management has become the major treatment challenge in adult patients with congenital heart disease (ACHD).
OBJECTIVE: We sought to investigate the utility and safety profile of dofetilide for atrial arrhythmias in ACHD.
METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed. We included patients (age ≥18 years) with congenital heart disease who had atrial fibrillation (AF) or intra-atrial reentrant tachycardia treated with dofetilide.
RESULTS: We identified 64 patients with a mean age at initiation of 42 ± 14 years. ACHD type included single ventricle (n = 19, 30%), transposition of the great arteries (n = 14, 22%), atrial septal defect (n = 9, 14%), tetralogy of Fallot (n = 8, 12%), atrioventricular canal defect (n = 5, 8%), mitral/aortic stenosis (n = 7, 11%), and other (n = 2, 3%). Thirty-five (55%) had atrial fibrillation, and 29 (45%) had intra-atrial reentrant tachycardia. A total of 3 (4.7%) patients had major inpatient adverse events: torsades de pointes (n = 1, 1.5%), ventricular tachycardia (n = 1, 1.5%), and corrected QT prolongation requiring discontinuation (n = 1, 1.5%). Dofetilide was discontinued in 1 patient because of sinus node dysfunction, and another patient discontinued therapy before discharge because of persistent arrhythmia. Of the patients who were discharged on dofetilide (n = 59, 92%), 40 (68%) had adequate rhythm control and 19 (32%) had partial rhythm control. After a median follow-up of 3 years, 29 (49%) patients remained on dofetilide and 2 (3%) patients died. Reasons for discontinuation included waning effect (n = 16, 57%), side effects (n = 5, 18%), noncompliance (n = 2, 7%), successful ablation (n = 3, 11%), high cost (n = 1, 3.5%), and unknown (n = 1, 3.5%).
CONCLUSION: Dofetilide remains a viable antiarrhythmic drug option in this challenging population. At 3 years, 49% remained on dofetilide. Close monitoring of renal function, concomitant medications, and corrected QT interval is required.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to investigate the utility and safety profile of dofetilide for atrial arrhythmias in ACHD.
METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed. We included patients (age ≥18 years) with congenital heart disease who had atrial fibrillation (AF) or intra-atrial reentrant tachycardia treated with dofetilide.
RESULTS: We identified 64 patients with a mean age at initiation of 42 ± 14 years. ACHD type included single ventricle (n = 19, 30%), transposition of the great arteries (n = 14, 22%), atrial septal defect (n = 9, 14%), tetralogy of Fallot (n = 8, 12%), atrioventricular canal defect (n = 5, 8%), mitral/aortic stenosis (n = 7, 11%), and other (n = 2, 3%). Thirty-five (55%) had atrial fibrillation, and 29 (45%) had intra-atrial reentrant tachycardia. A total of 3 (4.7%) patients had major inpatient adverse events: torsades de pointes (n = 1, 1.5%), ventricular tachycardia (n = 1, 1.5%), and corrected QT prolongation requiring discontinuation (n = 1, 1.5%). Dofetilide was discontinued in 1 patient because of sinus node dysfunction, and another patient discontinued therapy before discharge because of persistent arrhythmia. Of the patients who were discharged on dofetilide (n = 59, 92%), 40 (68%) had adequate rhythm control and 19 (32%) had partial rhythm control. After a median follow-up of 3 years, 29 (49%) patients remained on dofetilide and 2 (3%) patients died. Reasons for discontinuation included waning effect (n = 16, 57%), side effects (n = 5, 18%), noncompliance (n = 2, 7%), successful ablation (n = 3, 11%), high cost (n = 1, 3.5%), and unknown (n = 1, 3.5%).
CONCLUSION: Dofetilide remains a viable antiarrhythmic drug option in this challenging population. At 3 years, 49% remained on dofetilide. Close monitoring of renal function, concomitant medications, and corrected QT interval is required.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AdultAnti-Arrhythmia AgentsAtrial FibrillationDrug MonitoringElectrocardiographyFemaleHeart Defects, CongenitalHospitalizationHumansMaleMiddle AgedOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CarePhenethylaminesRetrospective StudiesSulfonamidesTachycardia, Atrioventricular Nodal ReentryUnited StatesWithholding Treatment