Why the study?
Does low-dose amiodarone improve maintenance of sinus rhythm in patients with atrial fibrillation compared to Class I antiarrhythmic drugs?
Does low-dose amiodarone improve maintenance of sinus rhythm in patients with atrial fibrillation compared to Class I antiarrhythmic drugs?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Low-dose amiodarone shows promise for maintaining sinus rhythm in atrial fibrillation with a favorable safety profile, prompting the call for a large-scale prospective trial.
Because atrial fibrillation is associated with substantial morbidity, restoration of sinus rhythm is desirable. Long-term maintenance of sinus rhythm often requires chronic antiarrhythmic therapy. Class I antiarrhythmic drugs such as quinidine or propafenone maintain sinus rhythm in approximately 50% of patients at 1 year and have risks for proarrhythmia and noncardiac toxicity. Studies of low-dose amiodarone for atrial fibrillation have reported sinus rhythm maintenance in 53% to 79% of patients during a mean follow-up of 27 months. Amiodarone has a lower incidence of proarrhythmia and heart failure exacerbation compared with class I drugs. Most noncardiac side effects are dose related, and low-dose amiodarone (less than 300 mg/d) is well tolerated. The time has come for a large-scale prospective evaluation of low-dose amiodarone treatment early in the course of atrial fibrillation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Middlekauff et al. (1992) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: