Why the study?
Does mexiletine reduce ventricular arrhythmias and what is the relationship between its plasma levels and side effects in patients with prior myocardial infarction?
Does mexiletine reduce ventricular arrhythmias and what is the relationship between its plasma levels and side effects in patients with prior myocardial infarction?
Mexiletine has a narrow therapeutic window in post-myocardial infarction patients, as the plasma levels required to suppress ventricular arrhythmias overlap with those causing frequent side effects.
Narrow therapeutic window for mexiletine post-MI warrants level monitoring caution; leaves optimal dosing open for randomized trials.
The relationships between plasma mexiletine levels and the presence of ventricular arrhythmias and side effects were studied on patients from IMPACT (International Mexiletine and Placebo Antiarrhythmic Coronary Trial). 630 patients who had suffered a myocardial infarction were randomized between placebo and mexiletine. Plasma levels were measured 1 month after the beginning of treatment. Arrhythmia findings (presence or absence of premature ventricular contractions (PVCs), couplets, runs, bigeminy, trigeminy, multiformity and various combinations) were assessed from 24-h ambulatory ECG recordings. The empirical logistic transform was used for modeling the relationships. For all these variables, except the presence of PVCs, trigeminy and runs, the association with plasma level was significant: the higher the plasma level, the lower the rate of occurrence of the particular arrhythmia. This was true whether or not the patient had the arrhythmia at baseline. Analyses based on the same model showed a significant correlation between plasma level and tremor, constipation, sexual problems and the presence of at least one side effect. As the levels of mexiletine at which side effects become frequent are in the same range as those necessary to suppress arrhythmias, the therapeutic range is narrow and individual dose adjustment should preferably be made.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Peyrieux et al. (1987) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: