The article discusses the historical context and changing attitudes towards the use of quinidine for ectopic rhythms, suggesting its dangers may have been overstressed.
Quinidine for ectopic rhythms may warrant cautious reconsideration; literature review leaves open need for contemporary trials.
The value of quinidine in the treatment of auricular fibrillation was first reported by Frey 1 in 1918. Soon after its introduction many accidents and a few fatalities occurred, and there followed numerous articles calling attention to its dangers. Many practitioners formed their ideas of quinidine during this period of relative nihilism and still refrain from its use, even going so far as to refuse it to patients whom they send to cardiac consultants. Musser 2 maintains, however, that the dangers of quinidine have been overstressed, and that fear-inducing terms still prevent it from taking its rightful place as one of our most valuable cardiac drugs. There is at present, therefore, a reaction to this extreme position, and many changes are taking place in cardiology which make for a larger and more advantageous use of quinidine. There is a greater willingness on the part of cardiac patients to be treated
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Charles W. Barrier (1927) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: