Key result
Lamotrigine perfusion in murine hearts resulted in a high prevalence of ventricular tachycardia (7 of 9 hearts) by preferentially decreasing longitudinal ventricular conduction velocity.
Why the study?
Prompted by an FDA safety warning based on in vitro data predicting class Ib antiarrhythmic activity, the authors investigated the proarrhythmic potential of lamotrigine compared with flecainide.
Does lamotrigine promote ventricular tachycardia in murine hearts compared to flecainide?
Does lamotrigine promote ventricular tachycardia in murine hearts compared to flecainide?
Lamotrigine promotes reentrant ventricular tachycardia in murine hearts by preferentially slowing longitudinal conduction velocity, providing mechanistic support for FDA safety warnings.
Supports FDA lamotrigine warnings mechanistically in murine models; leaves open human translation and clinical relevance.
OBJECTIVE: In 2021, the US Food and Drug Administration issued a safety warning concerning lamotrigine use in patients with underlying cardiac disorders. This warning was based on in vitro data that predicted class Ib antiarrhythmic activity for lamotrigine. Therefore, we investigated the proarrhythmic potential of lamotrigine in the murine heart and compared its effect with flecainide. METHODS: ). RESULTS: Ex vivo electrocardiography revealed a high prevalence of ventricular tachycardia (VT) in lamotrigine-perfused hearts (7/9 hearts), whereas only two hearts exposed to flecainide evidenced VT. Optical voltage mapping showed that lamotrigine preferentially decreased ventricular conduction velocity (CV) in the longitudinal direction at all pacing frequencies tested (-22% ± 8.6%, -30% ± 15.4%, and -33% ± 13.3% for pacing frequency of 200-ms, 180-ms, and 150-ms cycle length, respectively, p ≤ .05) compared to the transverse direction, which only slowed CV at the fastest pacing frequency (-15% ± 16% for pacing frequency of 150-ms cycle length, p ≤ .01). Notably, the preferential CV slowing in the longitudinal direction altered the anisotropic ratio, giving rise to a functional substrate for reentrant VT. In contrast, flecainide slowed CV uniformly in both longitudinal and transverse directions (-30% ± 8.5% vs. -27% ± 5.3%, -32% ± 9.4% vs. -29% ± 6.9%, and - 29% ± 8.3% vs. -27% ± 10% for pacing frequency of 200-ms, 180-ms, and 150-ms cycle length, respectively, p ≤ .05). SIGNIFICANCE: Our findings provide mechanistic insight into the proarrhythmic impact of lamotrigine.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dias et al. (2025) studied Murine hearts (experimental). Lamotrigine vs. Flecainide was evaluated on Ventricular tachycardia (VT) prevalence. Lamotrigine perfusion in murine hearts resulted in a high prevalence of ventricular tachycardia (7 of 9 hearts) by preferentially decreasing longitudinal ventricular conduction velocity.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: