Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology · 2023
Medical cardioversion of atrial fibrillation and flutter with class IC antiarrhythmic drugs in young patients with and without congenital heart disease.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание 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.
Przybylski Robert, Eberly Logan M, Alexander Mark E, Bezzerides Vassilios J, DeWitt Elizabeth S, Dionne Audrey, Mah Douglas Y, Triedman John K, Walsh Edward P, O'Leary Edward T
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The use of flecainide and propafenone for medical cardioversion of atrial fibrillation (AF) and atrial flutter/intra-atrial reentrant tachycardia (IART) is well-described in adults without congenital heart disease (CHD). Data are sparse regarding their use for the same purpose in adults with CHD and in adolescent patients with anatomically normal hearts and we sought to describe the use of class IC drugs in this population and identify factors associated with decreased likelihood of success.
METHODS: Single center retrospective cohort study of patients who received oral flecainide or propafenone for medical cardioversion of AF or IART from 2000 to 2022. The unit of analysis was each episode of AF/IART. We performed a time-to-sinus rhythm analysis using a Cox proportional hazards model clustering on the patient to identify factors associated with increased likelihood of success.
RESULTS: We identified 45 episodes involving 41 patients. As only episodes of AF were successfully cardioverted with medical therapy, episodes of IART were excluded from our analyses. Use of flecainide was the only factor associated with increased likelihood of success. There was a statistically insignificant trend toward decreased likelihood of success in patients with CHD.
CONCLUSIONS: Flecainide was more effective than propafenone. We did not detect a difference in rate of conversion to sinus rhythm between patients with and without CHD and were likely underpowered to do so, however, there was a trend toward decreased likelihood of success in patients with CHD. That said, medical therapy was effective in >50% of patients with CHD with AF.
METHODS: Single center retrospective cohort study of patients who received oral flecainide or propafenone for medical cardioversion of AF or IART from 2000 to 2022. The unit of analysis was each episode of AF/IART. We performed a time-to-sinus rhythm analysis using a Cox proportional hazards model clustering on the patient to identify factors associated with increased likelihood of success.
RESULTS: We identified 45 episodes involving 41 patients. As only episodes of AF were successfully cardioverted with medical therapy, episodes of IART were excluded from our analyses. Use of flecainide was the only factor associated with increased likelihood of success. There was a statistically insignificant trend toward decreased likelihood of success in patients with CHD.
CONCLUSIONS: Flecainide was more effective than propafenone. We did not detect a difference in rate of conversion to sinus rhythm between patients with and without CHD and were likely underpowered to do so, however, there was a trend toward decreased likelihood of success in patients with CHD. That said, medical therapy was effective in >50% of patients with CHD with AF.