Key result
Intravenous antazoline demonstrated comparable efficacy to intravenous propafenone for the acute conversion of nonvalvular paroxysmal atrial fibrillation to sinus rhythm (63% vs 52.1%, P=0.39).
Why the study?
Antazoline is frequently used for cardioversion of recent-onset AF, but no randomized controlled trial had evaluated its efficacy and safety compared with other approved antiarrhythmic drugs.
Does intravenous antazoline improve the rapid conversion of nonvalvular paroxysmal atrial fibrillation to sinus rhythm compared to intravenous propafenone in patients without heart failure?
RCT (n=94)
Double-blind
1:1
No
Does intravenous antazoline improve the rapid conversion of nonvalvular paroxysmal atrial fibrillation to sinus rhythm compared to intravenous propafenone in patients without heart failure?
Intravenous antazoline is as effective and safe as propafenone for the acute cardioversion of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, but achieves sinus rhythm significantly faster.
Antazoline offers a rapid alternative to propafenone for acute paroxysmal AF cardioversion without heart failure; provides first RCT confirmation of comparable efficacy and safety.
INTRODUCTION: Antazoline is a frequently used antiarrhythmic drug (AAD); however, to date, no randomized controlled trial has evaluated its efficacy and safety for cardioversion of recent‑onset atrial fibrillation (AF) in comparison with other approved AADs. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare clinical efficacy and safety of antazoline and propafenone for a rapid conversion of nonvalvular paroxysmal AF to sinus rhythm in patients without heart failure. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a single‑center, randomized, double‑blind study. It included patients with AF (lasting <48 hours) who were in a stable cardiopulmonary condition and eligible for cardioversion. The individuals who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were randomly assigned to receive either antazoline (up to 300 mg) or propafenone (up to 140 mg) intravenously. The primary end point was conversion of AF to sinus rhythm confirmed on electrocardiography. RESULTS: Overall, 94 participants (46 [48.9%] in the antazoline group and 48 [51.1%] in the propafenone group) were included. The mean (SD) age was 67.5 (14) years, and 40 participants (42.5%) were men. Successful AF conversion was observed in 29 patients (63%) from the antazoline group and 25 individuals (52.1%) from the propafenone group (P = 0.39). The median time to conversion was 10 minutes in the antazoline group and 30 minutes in the propafenone group (P = 0.03). Severe adverse events were observed in 5 patients (10.8%) treated with antazoline and 5 individuals (10.4%) who received propafenone. CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous antazoline demonstrated efficacy and safety comparable to those of intravenous propafenone for acute conversion of nonvalvular paroxysmal AF to sinus rhythm in patients without heart failure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Karwowski et al. (2024) conducted an RCT in Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (n=94). Antazoline vs. Propafenone (up to 140 mg intravenously) was evaluated on Conversion of AF to sinus rhythm confirmed on standard 12-lead ECG at the end of the 3-hour observation period (p=0.39). Intravenous antazoline demonstrated comparable efficacy to intravenous propafenone for the acute conversion of nonvalvular paroxysmal atrial fibrillation to sinus rhythm (63% vs 52.1%, P=0.39).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: