The effectiveness and safety of d,l-sotalol in the ambulatory treatment of atrial fibrillation and flutter

Data on short and long term efficacy and safety of d,l sotalol in patients with atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter is limited. The aims of this study were to (1) assess the antiarrhythmic efficacy of d,l sotalol maintaining normal sinus rhythm in patients with refractory atrial fibrillation or flutter, (2) evaluate the efficacy of d,l sotalol in preventing recurrences of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation or flutter, (3) evaluate the control of ventricular rate in patients with paroxysmal or refractory atrial fibrillation or flutter unsuccessfully treated with other antiarrhythmic agents, (4) determine predictors of efficacy (5) assess the safety of d,l sotalol in this setting. Two hundred patients with chronic or paroxysmal atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter or both, who had failed one to six previous antiarrhythmic drug trials were treated with d,l sotalol 80 to 440 mg/day orally. Fifty four percent was female, age 47 +/- 16 years (range 7-79), follow up period 7 +/- 7 months (range 1 to 14 months), 79% of patients had the arrhythmia for more than one year. The atrial fibrillation in 37.5% of patients was chronic and paroxysmal in 23.5. The atrial flutter was chronic in 31% of patients and paroxysmal in 8%. Eighty two percent of patients was in functional class I (NYHA) and 82% had cardiac heart disease: left atrial (LA) size 44 +/- 10 mm, right atrial (RA) size 37 +/- 7 mm and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 58 +/- 8%. Total success was achieved in 58% of patients (atrial fibrillation 40% and 18% in atrial flutter), partial success in 38% (atrial fibrillation in 18% and 20% in atrial flutter) and 4% of patients failure. It was p < 0.07 when compared total success vs partial success among atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter groups. Patients with cardiac heart disease responded worst (p = 0.10) to the drug than those without it, specially if the heart was dilated. We concluded that d,l sotalol has moderate efficacy to convert and maintain normal sinus rhythm, as well as it acts controlling paroxysmal relapses and ventricular heart rate.

Frequent ventricular tachycardias: antiarrhythmic drug treatment or catheter ablation?

Antiarrhythmic drugs are used in at least 50% of patients who received an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). The potential indications for antiarrhythmic drug treatments in patients with an ICD are generally the following: reduction of the number of ventricular tachycardias (VTs) or episodes of ventricular fibrillation and therefore reduction of the number of ICD therapies, most importantly, the number of disabling ICD shocks. Accordingly, the quality of life should be improved and the battery life of the ICD extended. Moreover, antiarrhythmic drugs have the potential to increase the tachycardia cycle length to allow termination of VTs by antitachycardia pacing and reduction of the number of syncopes. In addition, supraventricular arrhythmias can be prevented or their rate controlled. Recently published or reported trials have shown the efficacy of amiodarone, sotalol and azimilide to significantly reduce the number of appropriate and inappropriate ICD shocks in patients with structural heart disease. However, the use of antiarrhythmic drugs may also have adverse effects: an increase in the defibrillation threshold, an excessive increase in the VT cycle length leading to detection failure. In this situation and when antiarrhythmic drugs are ineffective or have to be stopped because of serious side effects, catheter ablation of both monomorphic stable and pleomorphic and/or unstable VTs using modern electroanatomic mapping systems should be considered. The choice of antiarrhythmic drug treatment and the need for catheter ablation in ICD patients with frequent VTs should be individually tailored to specific clinical and electrophysiological features including the frequency, the rate, and the clinical presentation of the ventricular arrhythmia. Although VT mapping and ablation is becoming increasingly practical and efficacious, ablation of VT is mostly done as an adjunctive therapy in patients with structural heart disease and ICD experiencing multiple shocks, because the recurrence and especially the occurrence of "new" VTs after primarily successful ablation with time and disease progression have precluded a widespread use of catheter ablation as primary treatment.

Drug-induced torsades de pointes in an underserved urban population. Methadone: is there therapeutic equipoise?

BACKGROUND Although it has been well established that methadone use can result in prolonged QTc/torsades de pointes (TdP) and has been labeled as one of the main drugs that cause TdP, it is still prescribed indiscriminately, and several cases of methadone-associated TdP have been seen in our community. METHODS Our objective was to determine the associated factors for prolonged QTc and the development of torsades de pointes (TdP) in our underserved patient population. We found 12,550 ECGs with prolonged QTc between 2002 and 2013. Medical records were reviewed in order to identify precipitating factors for prolonged QTc and to detect incidence of TdP. RESULTS We identified 2735 patients with prolonged QTc who met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 89 (3%) experienced TdP. There was a greater prevalence of HIV infection in the TdP group (11.2 vs. 3.7%, p < 0.001). Furosemide, hydrochlorothiazide, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), amiodarone, ciprofloxacin, methadone, haloperidol, and azithromycin were the drugs most often associated with prolonged QTc (31, 8.2, 7.6, 7.1, 3.9, 3.4 and 3.3%, respectively). However, the agents most commonly associated with TdP were furosemide (39.3%), methadone (27%), SSRIs (19.1%), amiodarone (18%), and dofetilide (9%). The medications with statistical significance in the multivariate analysis for TdP development in descending order were as follows: ranolazine (odds ratios [OR] = 53.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.4-524, p < 0.001), dofetilide (OR = 25, CI 6.47-103.16, p < 0.001), voriconazole (OR = 21.40, CI 3.24-124.25, p < 0.001), verapamil (OR = 10.98, CI 2.62-44.96, p < 0.001), sotalol (OR = 12.72, 1.95-82.81, p = 0.008), methadone (OR = 9.89, CI 4.05-24.15, p < 0.001), and SSRI (OR = 2.26, CI 1.10-5.96, p < 0.001). This multivariate analysis revealed that amiodarone and HIV infection were not implicated in TdP. CONCLUSION Methadone was by far the leading medication implicated in the development of TdP and an independent predictor in both univariate and multivariate analyses despite the fact that it was not the most common QT-prolonging medication in our population.