Why the study?
Does scopolamine prevent ventricular fibrillation in a canine model of prior myocardial infarction and acute ischemia?
Does scopolamine prevent ventricular fibrillation in a canine model of prior myocardial infarction and acute ischemia?
Acute administration of scopolamine increases heart rate variability but does not protect against ventricular fibrillation during acute myocardial ischemia in a canine model.
Scopolamine fails to prevent VF despite vagal enhancement in high-risk post-MI dogs; leaves open whether vagal modulation protects against ischemia-induced arrhythmias.
BACKGROUND: Low-dose scopolamine increases heart rate variability (HRV) in patients with a prior myocardial infarction (MI). This observation, combined with the evidence that elevated cardiac vagal activity during acute myocardial ischemia is antifibrillatory, has generated the hypothesis that scopolamine might be protective after MI. We tested low-dose scopolamine in a clinically relevant experimental preparation for sudden death in which other vagomimetic interventions are effective. METHODS AND RESULTS: Nineteen mongrel dogs that survived an anterior MI were used in the study. Occurrence or lack of ventricular fibrillation (VF) due to acute myocardial ischemia during submaximal exercise identified dogs at high and low risk for sudden death. Dose-response curves performed in 12 dogs at high (n = 6) and low (n = 6) risk showed that scopolamine at 3 micrograms/kg exerts the greatest effect on HRV. A second group of 7 high-risk dogs were exposed to an exercise-and-ischemia test after treatment with scopolamine (3 micrograms/kg i.v.). Scopolamine increased the standard deviation of RR intervals by 41%, increased the high-frequency band of spectral analysis by 48%, and decreased resting heart rate by 14%. Despite the increase in markers of vagal activity, VF recurred during the exercise-and-ischemia test in 6 dogs (86%). CONCLUSIONS: The significant increase in HRV induced by acute scopolamine did not result in a decreased risk for VF due to acute myocardial ischemia in association with sympathetic activation. Caution must be applied when extrapolating the potential antifibrillatory activity of an intervention from its influence on autonomic markers.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hull et al. (1995) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: