Key result
Nifekalant may be superior to amiodarone for resuscitation of cardiopulmonary arrest resulting from shock-resistant ventricular fibrillation, potentially due to a shorter time to return of spontaneous circulation.
Why the study?
Does intravenous nifekalant improve resuscitation compared to intravenous amiodarone in patients with shock-resistant ventricular fibrillation?
Does intravenous nifekalant improve resuscitation compared to intravenous amiodarone in patients with shock-resistant ventricular fibrillation?
This review suggests nifekalant may have pharmacological advantages over amiodarone for resuscitation in shock-resistant ventricular fibrillation, though further clinical trials are needed.
Nifekalant may shorten time to ROSC versus amiodarone in shock-resistant VF; leaves open optimal protocol pending larger trials.
Early direct current (DC) shock is the most important therapy for ventricular fibrillation. Following the increased availability of automated external defibrillators (AED), the survival rate of cardiopulmonary arrest patients with ventricular fibrillation has improved. Although patients with shock-resistant ventricular fibrillation require additional antiarrhythmic drug therapy, the optimal protocol has not been established. Nifekalant is a pure potassium channel blocker with a pyrimidinedione structure. Nifekalant was approved in Japan for the treatment of life-threatening ventricular tachyarrhythmias in 1999, and is widely used as a class III antiarrhythmic intravenous drug. Intravenous amiodarone was approved in Japan in 2007, and exhibits various effects on ion channels, receptors, sympathetic activity, and thyroid function. Nifekalant and amiodarone also exhibit many pharmacological and pharmacodynamic differences. As nifekalant has no negative inotropic effect and a rapid action and clearance with a short half-life, it has some advantages over amiodarone for use in cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Indeed, data from clinical and animal studies suggest that nifekalant is superior to amiodarone for resuscitation of cardiopulmonary arrest resulting from shock-resistant ventricular fibrillation. A 300-mg bolus intravenous injection of amiodarone is considered an overdose for resuscitation of shock-resistant ventricular fibrillation. Further clinical studies are required to evaluate the effects of nifekalant compared with amiodarone, and to determine the optimal dose of amiodaone, for resuscitation of shock-resistant ventricular fibrillation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Harayama et al. (2016) conducted a review in Shock-resistant ventricular fibrillation. Nifekalant vs. Amiodarone was evaluated. Nifekalant may be superior to amiodarone for resuscitation of cardiopulmonary arrest resulting from shock-resistant ventricular fibrillation, potentially due to a shorter time to return of spontaneous circulation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: