Objective To systematically review the effectiveness of amiodarone in treating repurfusion arrhythmia (RA) after thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), so as to provide high quality evidence for formulating the rational thrombolytic therapy for AMI. Methods Randomized controlled trails (RCTs) on amiodarone in treating RA after thrombolytic therapy for AMI were electronically retrieved in PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library (Issue 3, 2012), CBM, CNKI, VIP and WanFang Data from inception to January, 2013. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and assessed quality. Then RevMan 5.1 software was used for meta-analysis. Results A total of 5 RCTs involving 440 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis suggested that, compared with the blank control, amiodarone reduced the incidence of RA after thrombolytic therapy in treating AMI (RR=0.60, 95%CI 0.48 to 0.74, Plt;0.000 01) and the incidence of ventricular fibrillation (RR=0.47, 95%CI 0.26 to 0.85, P=0.01). It neither affected the recanalization rate of occluded arteries after thrombolytic therapy (RR=1.00, 95%CI 0.88 to 1.15, P=0.94) nor decreased the mortality after surgery (RR=0.33, 95%CI 0.10 to 1.09, P=0.07). Conclusion Current evidence indicated that, amiodarone can decrease the incidence of RA. Unfortunately, the mortality rate can’t be reduced by amiodarone. Due to the limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high quality studies are needed to verify the above conclusion
Objective To evaluate the efficacy of preoperative low-dose oral amiodarone for the prevention of atrial fibrillation （AF） after off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting （OPCAB） in patients older than 70 years. Methods A total of 156 patients older than 70 years who underwent OPCAB in Qingdao Fuwai Cardiovascular Disease Hospital from January 2011 to June 2012 were included in this prospective，double-blind and placebo controlled study. Preoperatively，all the 156 patients were randomly divided into amiodarone group and control group. In the amiodarone group，there were 80 patients including 38 male and 42 female patients who were given oral amiodarone （trade name： Cordarone） 200 mg，three times a day，3-5 days before surgery，and amiodarone was stopped on the OPCAB day and postoperatively. Preoperative duration of amiodarone intake was 4.0±1.2 days，and total amiodarone dosage was 2.6±0.5 g. In the control group，there were 76 patients including 35 male and 41 female patients who were given oral placebo as the same medication schedule，and preoperative duration of placebo intake was 4.0±1.4 days. Operation time，graft number，postoperative AF incidence，AF duration，hospital stay and readmission rate for cardiovascular events within 6 postoperative months were compared between the two groups. Results There was no in-hospital death in either group. There was no statistical difference in graft number，operation time，AF duration of patients who had postoperative AF，or postoperative hospital stay between the two groups. Postoperative AF incidence of the amiodarone group was significantly lower than that of the control group ［18.7% （15/80） vs. 34.2% （26/76），P=0.028］. Seventy-three patients in the amiodarone group （91.3%） and 66 patients in the control group （86.8%） were followed up for 8-24 months. During follow-up，2 patients in the amiodarone group died of acute myocardial infarction and cerebral hemorrhage respectively. There was no statistical difference in readmission rate for cardiovascular events within 6 postoperative months between the 2 groups ［6.8% （5/73） vs. 6.1% （4/66），P=0.860］ .Conclusion Preoperative low-dose oral amiodarone can significantly reduce the incidence of postoperative AF in patients older than 70 years undergoing OPCAB.
Objective To evaluate the therapeutic effectiveness and safety of ibutilide versus amiodarone in the treatment of atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter. Methods An electronic search in databases including PubMed, Embase, CNKI, WanFang Data, VIP Database, and The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2011), published from January 1994 to January 2011,was conducted to include both English and Chinese randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about ibutilide versus amiodarone in treating atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter. Two reviewers independently screened the studies according to the inclusive and exclusive criteria, extracted the data, assessed the methodological quality, and then performed Meta-analysis by using RevMan 5.0 software. Results Eight RCTs involving 506 patients were finally included. The results of Meta-analysis showed: a) The total effective rate of alleviating atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter in the ibutilide group was superior to that of the amiodarone group (OR=2.27, 95%CI 1.19 to 4.33, P=0.01); b) Four RCTs showed that ibutilide was similar to amiodarone for alleviating atrial fibrillation (OR=1.61, 95%CI 0.96 to 2.71, P=0.07), but the former was superior to the latter for alleviating atrial flutter (OR=8.97, 95%CI 4.51 to 17.84, Plt;0.000 01); c) Five RCTs showed that ibulitide took shorter time to alleviate atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter compared with amiodarone (WMD= –126.55 min, 95%CI –202.35 to –50.76, P=0.001); d) Four RCTs showed that the total adverse effect rates in the two groups had no significant difference (OR=1.13, 95%CI 0.37 to 3.43, P=0.83), but there were more cardiovascular side-effects in the ibutilide group (OR=2.36, 95%CI 1.40 to 4.01, P=0.001). Conclusion Compared with amiodarone, ibutilide has a higher total effective rate in cardioversion of atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter, and it obviously takes shorter time to alleviate atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter, but there is no significant difference in the cardioversion rate of atrial fibrillation between them. There is no significant difference in total side-effect rates between the two groups, but the cardiovascular adverse reaction in the ibutilide group is significantly higher than that of the amiodarone group. Because of the limited quantity and quality of the included studies, this conclusion has to be further proved by more high-quality RCTs.
Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Shen Song Yang Xin Capsule for cardiac arrhythmia. Methods Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were searched from the following electronic databases: WanFang, CNKI, CBM, VIP, PubMed, and The Cochrane Library. Quality assessment and data extraction were conducted by two reviewers independently. Disagreement was resolved through discussion. All data were analyzed by using RevMan 5.0 software. Results Thirteen studies involving 1896 participants were included. The results of meta-analyses showed that compared with the control group, a) efficacy: Shen Song Yang Xin Capsule was superior to mexiletine (OR=2.96, 95%CI 1.79 to 4.87), and propafenone (OR=2.41, 95%CI 1.60 to 3.62), but was not superior to miodarone (OR=1.25, 95%CI 0.88 to 1.71); b) safety: Shen Song Yang Xin Capsule was superior to propafenone and miodarone in reducing the incidence of cardiac arrhythmia (OR=0.06, 95%CI 0.01 to 0.35; OR=0.05, 95%CI 0.02 to 0.17), but no significant difference was found between the two groups in incidence of gastrointestinal adverse reactions. Conclusion Based on the current studies, Shen Song Yang Xin Capsule is not inferior to the commonly-used anti-arrhythmic medicine at present. It has lower incidence of cardiac arrhythmia, and has no significant difference in the incidence of gastrointestinal adverse reactions compared with western drugs. For the quality restrictions of the included studies, more double blind RCTs with high quality are required to further assess the effects.
ObjectiveTo investigate the effect of 5% dextrose intravenous infusion for phlebitis caused by amiodarone. MethodsA total of 136 patients treated in our hospital between June 2011 and March 2012 were randomly assigned into control group with 63 patients and intervention group with 73 patients. The control group was administrated 600 mg amiodarone with 15 drops/minute intravenous injection once daily, for 3 days, while for the intervention group patients, we added 5% dextrose solution infusion in the same channel at the same time. ResultsPhlebitis occurred in 22 patients (34.9%) in the control group, while the intervention group had only 11 (15.0%) (χ2=7.252,P=0.007). ConclusionInfusion of 5% dextrose solution can significantly reduce the occurrence of phlebitis caused by amiodarone.
ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of radiofrequency ablation versus amiodarone in the treatment of atrial fibrillation, so as to provide reference for the chosen of clinical treatment options. MethodsWe searched PubMed, The Cochrane Library (Issue 10, 2014), CNKI, VIP and WanFang data from inception to October 2014 to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing radiofrequency ablation versus amiodarone for atrial fibrillation. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software. ResultsA total of 4 RCTs involving 511 atrial fibrillation patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that:compared with amiodarone, radiofrequency ablation could reduce the risk of atrial fibrillation recurrence (RR=0.35, 95%CI 0.22 to 0.55, P<0.000 01). There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality (RR=0.97, 95%CI 0.17 to 5.61, P=0.97) between both groups. The incidence of adverse events in the radiofrequency ablation group was 7.7%, and was lower than 12.7% of the amiodarone group, but there was no significant difference between the two groups. ConclusionCurrent evidence shows that, compared with amiodarona, radiofrequency ablation is related to lower recurrence rate and higher efficacy, but there is no difference in the safety between the two interventions. However, due to the limited quality and quantity of included studies, higher quality studies are needed to verify the above conclusion.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy of irbesartan combined with amiodarone versus amiodarone alone for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. MethodsWe electronically searched databases including PubMed, CENTRAL, EMbase, VIP, CNKI and WanFang Data to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about irbesartan combined with amiodarone versus amiodarone alone in the treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation from 2000 to 2014. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk bias of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.2 software. ResultsA total of nine studies involving 998 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that:Compared with the amiodarone group, the left atrial diameter was smaller (MD=-1.49, 95% CI -1.82 to -1.15), and the maintenance rates of sinus rhythm were higher (OR=3.02, 95%CI 2.21 to 4.11) in the irbesartan plus amiodarone group after 12 months. ConclusionCurrent evidence indicates that the combination treatment of irbesartan and amiodarone for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation is better than amiodarone alone in delaying the enlargement of left atrial diameter, as well as the maintenance of sinus rhythm. Due to limited quantity and quality of the included studies, more high quality studies are needed to verify the above conclusion.
ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the pharmacoeconomic value of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) versus amiodarone in the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF), and to provide reference for treatment scheme selection, drug selection and the formulation of drug policy. MethodsWe searched databases including PubMed, The Cochrane Library, CNKI and CBM from 2000 to 2014 to collect pharmacoeconomic studies on RFA versus Amiodarone for treating AF. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and assessed the methodological quality of included studies. The cost-effectiveness of RFA and Amiodarone for AF was compared according to the cost, effectiveness, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). ResultsA total of three studies were included. The results of pharmacoeconomic evaluation showed that the ICERs for each study were $7 976 to $29 068, ￡7 763 to ￡27 745, and $59 194, respectively. According to country-specific willingness to pay thresholds, the ICER of each included study was acceptable. ConclusionCompared to Amiodarone, RFA is a cost-effective therapy for AF.
Objective To explore the effect of aortic root perfusion of amiodarone when intractable ventricular fibrillation occurs during valve replacement. Methods Totally 42 patients were selected as a drug group, who underwent intractable ventricular fibrillation following ascending aortic opening in valve replacement in Beijing Anzhen Hospital from October 2006 to October 2016. There were 26 males and 16 females with an average age of 56.31±12.56 years. The aorta was re-blocked when intractable ventricular fibrillation occured, amiodarone (150 mg diluted to 20 ml) through the aortic root perfusion tube was applicated, and suction was repeated 8-10 times with the cumulative amount of 150-200 ml, and then the ascending aorta was opened and fast compressed with a frequency of 200 times/min. While 53 patients with the same condition during the same period were selected as a control group. There were 35 males and 18 females with an average age of 58.79±19.81 years. The commonly used clinical treatment method of intractable ventricular fibrillation was adopted, such as continuous intravenous injection of 1 mg/kg lidocaine, while ascending aortic was re-blocked. The warm blood perfusion was given until the heart re-beated. The clinical outcomes were compared between the two groups. Results There was one perioperative death in the drug group and two deaths in the control group during perioperative period. Defibrillation frequency (3.11±0.59 times vs. 4.91±1.34 times, t=–2.917, P=0.000), heart rate 5 min after re-beating (91.65±9.81 beats/min vs. 98.32±10.21 beats/min, t=–2.019, P=0.032), cardiopulmonary bypass time (71.68±10.21 min vs. 81.59±12.93 min, t=–2.512, P=0.032), dopamine dosage (4.32±1.28 μg·kg–1·min–1 vs. 5.79±1.98 μg·kg–1·min–1, t=–2.781, P=0.015), epinephrine dosage (0.03±0.01 μg·kg–1·min–1 vs. 0.06±0.02 μg·kg–1·min–1, t=–3.996, P=0.000) and norepinephrine dosage (0.01±0.01 μg·kg–1·min–1 vs. 0.03±0.01 μg·kg–1·min–1, t=–4.163, P=0.000) of the drug group were significantly shorter or lower than those of the control group. The rate of cardiac rhythm 5 min after re-beating (42.8% vs. 9.4%, χ2=11.211, P=0.000) of the drug group was higher than that of the control group. Conclusion During intractable ventricular fibrillation following ascending aortic opening in valve replacemen, re-blocking the aorta and amiodarone reperfusion of the aortic root can significantly improve the heart re-beating rate and avoid ventricular re-fibrillation, shorten the cardiopulmonary bypass time and reduce the dosage of inotropic drugs.