Why the study?
Does nifekalant improve rates of return of spontaneous circulation and survival to discharge compared to amiodarone in patients with out-of-hospital cardiopulmonary arrest from shock-resistant ventricular fibrillation?
Does nifekalant improve rates of return of spontaneous circulation and survival to discharge compared to amiodarone in patients with out-of-hospital cardiopulmonary arrest from shock-resistant ventricular fibrillation?
In a small retrospective cohort of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with shock-resistant ventricular fibrillation, nifekalant and amiodarone showed similar rates of ROSC and survival to discharge, though nifekalant achieved ROSC more quickly.
Should not change practice given similar ROSC and survival rates; hypothesis-generating for shorter time to ROSC in shock-resistant VF.
PURPOSE: Nifekalant is a pure potassium channel blocker that has been used to treat ventricular tachyarrhythmias since 1999 in Japan. Intravenous amiodarone was approved later than nifekalant in Japan, and it is still unclear which of the two agents is superior. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of nifekalant and amiodarone for resuscitation of out-of-hospital cardiopulmonary arrest caused by shock-resistant ventricular fibrillation. METHODS: From December 2005 to January 2011, ambulance services transported 283 out-of-hospital cardiopulmonary arrest patients to our hospital. Of these, 25 patients were treated with nifekalant or amiodarone in response to ventricular fibrillation that was resistant to two or more shocks. We undertook a retrospective analysis of these 25 patients. RESULTS: We enrolled 20 men and 5 women with a mean age (± standard deviation) of 61.1 ± 16.4 years. All 25 patients were treated with tracheal intubation and intravenous epinephrine. Fourteen patients received nifekalant and 11 patients received amiodarone. The rates of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) (nifekalant, 5/14, versus amiodarone, 4/11; P = 0.97) and survival to discharge (nifekalant, 4/14, versus amiodarone, 2/11; P = 0.89) were not significantly different between the two groups. The time from nifekalant or amiodarone administration to ROSC was 6.0 ± 6.6 and 20.3 ± 10.0 min, respectively, which was significantly different (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In this small sample size study, nifekalant, compared with amiodarone, is equally effective for ROSC and survival to discharge after shock-resistant ventricular fibrillation and can achieve ROSC more quickly. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm our results.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Harayama et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: