SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Rate control”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 73 records · Page 4Linked to original sources

PubMed2003

Rate control versus rhythm control for the management of atrial fibrillation: the verdict of the AFFIRM trial.

Atrial fibrillation is the most common sustained cardiac arrhythmia encountered in clinical practice that affects cardiovascular morbidity and mortality and generates significant healthcare costs. There are two approaches for the management of atrial fibrillation: rate control and rhythm control. Rate-control strategy involves using rate-controlling agents such as beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers or digoxin, or a combination thereof to control symptoms while allowing atrial fibrillation to persist. Rhythm-control strategy involves cardioversion and treatment with antiarrhythmic drugs to maintain sinus rhythm. Although each strategy has its own advantages as well as limitations, it has long been debated which of the strategies offers better long-term outcomes and thus should be the preferred and recommended approach for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation. The Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) study was the first large-scale randomised study to address this important issue. In this article, the long awaited verdict of the AFFIRM study with its implications for the clinical management of patients with atrial fibrillation is discussed.

Aged↗

PubMed1998

Atrial fibrillation--maintaining sinus rhythm versus ventricular rate control: the PIAF trial. Pharmacological Intervention in Atrial Fibrillation.

INTRODUCTION: In patients with persistent atrial fibrillation, therapy can be directed toward restoration of sinus rhythm or control of ventricular rate only. There are no prospective data in the literature comparing both treatment strategies. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with symptomatic persistent atrial fibrillation (duration > or = 7 and < or = 360 days) will be randomized to control of ventricular rate only or to conversion therapy. All patients will be followed for 12 months. Diltiazem is used as the primary therapy for rate control, whereas amiodarone will be administered for restoration and maintenance of sinus rhythm. The primary endpoint of the trial is the recurrence of symptomatic tachyarrhythmic episodes in patients randomized to rate control and recurrent atrial fibrillation in the alternative treatment arm. A number of secondary endpoints also will be investigated. The trial is expected to end its follow-up in the summer of 1998. CONCLUSION: PIAF (Pharmacological Intervention in Atrial Fibrillation) is one of several trials designed to evaluate the optimal treatment strategy in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation. The results hopefully will help to improve care of patients with this common rhythm disorder.

Animals↗

PubMed2005

Rate control versus rhythm control.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The results of five randomized clinical trials comparing rate control with rhythm control in the management of atrial fibrillation have been published recently. The purpose of this report is to review their main results and selected subanalyses and other related data to offer practical recommendations regarding the treatment of patients with this common arrhythmia. RECENT FINDINGS: In the aggregate, the five trials enrolled a total of 5175 subjects and accumulated 16,186 patient-years of follow-up. All these trials have had similar results in that each of them failed to demonstrate a clear advantage of the rhythm control approach over that of rate control. The largest of the studies, the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-Up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) study, enrolled 79% of all the cases in the five trials and accounts for 88% of the cumulative follow-up experience and for 92% of all deaths. Among AFFIRM participants, antiarrhythmic drug use did not improve survival, stroke risk, quality of life, or functional capacity but was associated with increased resource use. In several of the trials, however, the presence of sinus rhythm was associated with improved outcomes. SUMMARY: The evidence is now overwhelming that for most patients with atrial fibrillation, rhythm control using currently available antiarrhythmic drugs is more expensive but not more effective than the rate control strategy in the prevention of major adverse events. Further research is needed to determine whether maintaining sinus rhythm by other means can improve outcomes.

Anti-Arrhythmia Agents↗

PubMed2003

Atrial fibrillation. Rhythm versus rate control.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained arrhythmia encountered in primary care practice. Because the prevalence increases with age and the overall population is steadily aging, physicians of all specialties will be faced with managing more AF patients. AF independently increases mortality as well as the risk of stroke, subsequent coronary events, and congestive heart failure. Stroke prevention is particularly important in older patients, since they are at highest risk for these events. In addition, because of an increased risk of proarrhythmia, older adults should be managed cautiously with antiarrhythmic drugs. Data are now emerging on the optimal management of older patients with persistent AF. For each patient, physicians will have to answer the question: is rhythm control better than rate control?

Aged↗

PubMed2000

The evidence regarding the drugs used for ventricular rate control.

OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to determine what drugs are most efficacious for controlling the ventricular rate in patients with atrial fibrillation. SEARCH STRATEGY: We conducted a systematic review of the literature published before May 1998, beginning with searches of The Cochrane Collaboration's CENTRAL database and MEDLINE. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included English-language articles describing randomized controlled trials of drugs used for heart rate control in adults with atrial fibrillation. DATA COLLECTION/ANALYSIS: Abstracts of trials were reviewed independently by 2 members of the study team. We reviewed English-language abstracts of non-English-language publications to assess qualitative consistency with our results. MAIN RESULTS: Forty-five articles evaluating 17 drugs met our criteria for review. In the 5 trials of verapamil and 5 of diltiazem, heart rate was reduced significantly (P <.05), both at rest and with exercise, compared with placebo, with equivalent or improved exercise tolerance in 6 of 7 comparisons. In 7 of 12 comparisons of a beta-blocker with placebo, the beta-blocker was efficacious for control of resting heart rate, with evidence that the effect is drug specific, as nadolol and atenolol proved to be most efficacious. All 9 comparisons demonstrated good heart rate control with beta-blockers during exercise, although exercise tolerance was compromised in 3 of 9 comparisons. In 7 of 8 trials, digoxin administered alone slowed the resting heart rate more than placebo, but it did not significantly slow the rate during exercise in 4 studies. The trials evaluating other drugs yielded insufficient evidence to support their use, but those drugs may yet be promising. CONCLUSIONS: The calcium-channel blockers verapamil or diltiazem, or select beta-blockers are efficacious for heart rate control at rest and during exercise for patients with atrial fibrillation without a clinically important decrease in exercise tolerance. Digoxin is useful when rate control during exercise is less a concern.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗

PubMed1999

Ventricular rate control during atrial fibrillation by cardiac parasympathetic nerve stimulation: a transvenous approach.

OBJECTIVES: To identify intravascular sites for continuous, stable parasympathetic stimulation (PS) in order to control the ventricular rate during atrial fibrillation (AF). BACKGROUND: Ventricular rate control during AF in patients with congestive heart failure is a significant clinical problem because many drugs that slow the ventricular rate may depress ventricular function and cause hypotension. Parasympathetic stimulation can exert negative dromotropic effects without significantly affecting the ventricles. METHODS: In 22 dogs, PS was performed using rectangular stimuli (0.05 ms duration, 20 Hz) delivered through a catheter with an expandable electrode-basket at its end. The catheter was positioned either in the superior vena cava (SVC, n = 6), coronary sinus (CS, n = 10) or right pulmonary artery (RPA, n = 6). The basket was then expanded to obtain long-term catheter stability. Atrial fibrillation was induced and maintained by rapid atrial pacing. RESULTS: Nonfluoroscopic (SVC) and fluoroscopic (CS/RPA) identification of effective intravascular PS sites was achieved within 3 to 10 min. The ventricular rate slowing effect during AF started and ceased immediately after on-offset of PS, respectively, and could be maintained over 20 h. In the SVC, at least a 50% increase of ventricular rate (R-R) intervals occurred at 22 +/- 11 V (331 +/- 139 ms to 653 +/- 286 ms, p < 0.001), in the CS at 16 +/- 10 V (312 +/- 102 ms vs. 561 +/- 172 ms, p < 0.001) and in the RPA at 18 +/- 7 V (307 +/- 62 ms to 681 +/- 151 ms, p < 0.001). Parasympathetic stimulation did not change ventricular refractory periods. CONCLUSIONS: Intravascular PS results in a significant ventricular rate slowing during AF in dogs. This may be beneficial in patients with AF and rapid ventricular response since many drugs that decrease atrioventricular conduction have negative inotropic effects which could worsen concomitant congestive heart failure.

Animals↗

PubMed2003

[Cardioversion for atrial fibrillations: not better than ventricular rate control].

Atrial fibrillation is a frequent cardiac arrhythmia in the elderly, which can be treated either by rate control, or by rhythm control through chemical or electrical cardioversion. Rate control is easily achieved, but leaves the arrhythmia with its inherent risk of heart failure and stroke intact. Although rhythm control is logistically more complex to obtain, it does restore normal sinus rhythm. However, dangerous antiarrhythmics are then needed to maintain this. Recently, two randomised trials showed that rate control is not inferior to rhythm control. Restoration and maintenance of sinus rhythm was accompanied by a higher incidence of death, ventricular arrhythmias, heart failure, stroke and the need for permanent pacemaker implantation. Recurrent atrial fibrillation can be treated optimally by rate control through digitalis, beta-blockers or calcium antagonists, accompanied by oral anticoagulation. Once the sinus rhythm has been restored, oral anticoagulation should be continued.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗

PubMed1999

Comparison of the effects of controlled-rate cryopreservation and vitrification on 2-cell mouse embryos and their subsequent development.

Effects of two cryopreservation procedures (conventional slow controlled-rate freezing using a programmable freezer and vitrification by direct plunging into liquid nitrogen) were compared on 2-cell embryos and their subsequent development to blastocysts, fresh or cryopreserved 2-cell mouse embryos were developed into blastocysts in vitro. The percentage of vitrified embryos which developed into blastocysts was significantly lower than that of fresh and slow controlled-rate frozen embryos. Although blastocysts from each cryopreservation procedure appeared morphologically normal and neither number of cells in the blastocysts nor in-vitro trophoblast spreading differed significantly, there were significant differences in their functional viability. First, the glucose incorporation activity in terms of [(3)H]2-deoxyglucose (2-DG) uptake in vitrified and thawed 2-cell embryos significantly decreased compared with fresh or slow controlled-rate frozen and thawed 2-cell embryos. Second, 2-DG uptake by blastocysts developed in vitro from fresh 2-cell embryos and from slow controlled-rate frozen or vitrified 2-cell embryos was 105 +/- 75, 43.0 +/- 28.3 and 22.0 +/- 11.4 fmol/embryo/h respectively. Third, the implantation rate of blastocysts developed in vitro from vitrified 2-cell embryos (10.2%) was significantly lower than that from fresh 2-cell embryos (30.8%) or slow controlled-rate frozen 2-cell embryos (22.1%). Since these data suggest that cryopreservation may have ulterior consequences on the functional development of embryos and that vitrification may exert a more harmful effect than slow controlled-rate freezing, more attention should be paid to its safety before vitrification is used routinely in a clinical programme.

Animals↗

PubMed1986

Rate control with an external SO2 closed loop system.

In 20 volunteers (mean age 35.5 y) and 12 pacemaker patients (mean age 68.7 y), central venous oxygen saturation (SO2) was monitored continuously by means of an optical sensor integrated in an external transvenous pacing lead placed in the right ventricular cavity. From the SO2 signal recorded at rest and during various modalities of exercise, an algorithm for controlling pacing rate of an external pacing system was developed. An open loop system was used in the volunteers, allowing the comparison of the computed pacing rate with the individual intrinsic heart rate. There was an excellent correlation between the two frequencies as far as the dynamic characteristics and the steady state relationship were concerned. In five pacemaker patients who were stimulated via the external lead, a closed loop control of pacing rate was used. In one patient with a DDD pacemaker implanted for third degree AV-block, the rate response of the SO2 driven pacemaker was well in accordance with the rate attained with the implanted atrial triggered system. With both pacing modes, exercise capacity as determined on a symptom limited treadmill test was identical. In four patients (3 AV block III, 1 bradyarrhythmia) an improvement in exercise tolerance up to 65 percent could be demonstrated with the rate responsive pacing mode. In all patients, it could be shown that an autoregulating pacemaker system with SO2 is an open possibility.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

A comparison of rate control and rhythm control in patients with recurrent persistent atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Maintenance of sinus rhythm is the main therapeutic goal in patients with atrial fibrillation. However, recurrences of atrial fibrillation and side effects of antiarrhythmic drugs offset the benefits of sinus rhythm. We hypothesized that ventricular rate control is not inferior to the maintenance of sinus rhythm for the treatment of atrial fibrillation. METHODS: We randomly assigned 522 patients who had persistent atrial fibrillation after a previous electrical cardioversion to receive treatment aimed at rate control or rhythm control. Patients in the rate-control group received oral anticoagulant drugs and rate-slowing medication. Patients in the rhythm-control group underwent serial cardioversions and received antiarrhythmic drugs and oral anticoagulant drugs. The end point was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, heart failure, thromboembolic complications, bleeding, implantation of a pacemaker, and severe adverse effects of drugs. RESULTS: After a mean (+/-SD) of 2.3+/-0.6 years, 39 percent of the 266 patients in the rhythm-control group had sinus rhythm, as compared with 10 percent of the 256 patients in the rate-control group. The primary end point occurred in 44 patients (17.2 percent) in the rate-control group and in 60 (22.6 percent) in the rhythm-control group. The 90 percent (two-sided) upper boundary of the absolute difference in the primary end point was 0.4 percent (the prespecified criterion for noninferiority was 10 percent or less). The distribution of the various components of the primary end point was similar in the rate-control and rhythm-control groups. CONCLUSIONS: Rate control is not inferior to rhythm control for the prevention of death and morbidity from cardiovascular causes and may be appropriate therapy in patients with a recurrence of persistent atrial fibrillation after electrical cardioversion.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗

PubMed2002

A comparison of rate control and rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: There are two approaches to the treatment of atrial fibrillation: one is cardioversion and treatment with antiarrhythmic drugs to maintain sinus rhythm, and the other is the use of rate-controlling drugs, allowing atrial fibrillation to persist. In both approaches, the use of anticoagulant drugs is recommended. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, multicenter comparison of these two treatment strategies in patients with atrial fibrillation and a high risk of stroke or death. The primary end point was overall mortality. RESULTS: A total of 4060 patients (mean [+/-SD] age, 69.7+/-9.0 years) were enrolled in the study; 70.8 percent had a history of hypertension, and 38.2 percent had coronary artery disease. Of the 3311 patients with echocardiograms, the left atrium was enlarged in 64.7 percent and left ventricular function was depressed in 26.0 percent. There were 356 deaths among the patients assigned to rhythm-control therapy and 310 deaths among those assigned to rate-control therapy (mortality at five years, 23.8 percent and 21.3 percent, respectively; hazard ratio, 1.15 [95 percent confidence interval, 0.99 to 1.34]; P=0.08). More patients in the rhythm-control group than in the rate-control group were hospitalized, and there were more adverse drug effects in the rhythm-control group as well. In both groups, the majority of strokes occurred after warfarin had been stopped or when the international normalized ratio was subtherapeutic. CONCLUSIONS: Management of atrial fibrillation with the rhythm-control strategy offers no survival advantage over the rate-control strategy, and there are potential advantages, such as a lower risk of adverse drug effects, with the rate-control strategy. Anticoagulation should be continued in this group of high-risk patients.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗

PubMed2003

Rate-control versus conversion strategy in postoperative atrial fibrillation: trial design and pilot study results.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) remains a frequent complication of cardiac surgery. The optimal treatment strategy has not been established. Retrospective studies have suggested that a primary rate-control strategy may be equivalent to a strategy that restores sinus rhythm. Fifty patients with postoperative atrial fibrillation were randomly assigned to a strategy of antiarrhythmic therapy +/- electrical cardioversion or ventricular rate control. Anticoagulation with heparin overlapped with coumadin was administered to both arms. The primary endpoint of the study was time to conversion to sinus rhythm analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method. The effects of strategy on hospital length of stay was examined as well as the incidence of recurrent AF. This study demonstrated no significant difference between an antiarrhythmic conversion strategy (n = 27) and a rate-control strategy (n = 23) in time to conversion to sinus rhythm (11.2 +/- 3.2 vs. 11.8 +/- 3.9 hours; p = 0.8). With Cox multivariate analysis to control for the effects of age, sex, beta-blocker usage, and type of surgery, the conversion strategy showed a trend toward reducing the time from treatment to restoration of sinus rhythm (p = 0.08). The length of hospital stay was reduced in the antiarrhythmic arm compared with the rate-control strategy (9.0 +/- 0.7 vs. 13.2 +/- 2.0 days; p = 0.05). In hospital relapse rates in the antiarrhythmic arm were 30% compared with 57% in the rate-control strategy (p = 0.24). At the termination of the study, 91% of the patients in the rate-control arm were in sinus rhythm compared with 96% in the antiarrhythmic arm. In conclusion, this pilot study shows little difference between a rate-control strategy and a strategy to restore/maintain sinus rhythm. Regardless of the strategy, majority of patients will be in sinus rhythm after two months. A larger randomized, controlled study is needed to assess the impact of restoration of sinus rhythm on length of stay.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗

PubMed2001

Effects of biofeedback training on voluntary heart rate control during dynamic exercise.

The aims of this study were to (1) compare the effect of biofeedback with that of verbal instructions on the control of heart rate during exercise on a treadmill, (2) test the possible effect of workload on this control, and (3) examine the effect of workload on baseline heart rate at rest and during exercise. The study involved 35 participants who were randomly assigned to each of 4 experimental conditions generated by combining the 2 independent variables: training strategy for heart rate control (heart rate biofeedback or verbal control instructions) and work level (30 or 50% of maximal heart rate). By the end of 5 experimental sessions, participants trained with heart rate biofeedback showed a greater attenuation of the increase in heart rate produced by exercise than participants trained with verbal control instructions. The workload did not influence the voluntary control of heart rate, nor did it affect resting baseline heart rate, but it did affect exercise baseline heart rate.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2000

Rate-control versus conversion strategy in postoperative atrial fibrillation: a prospective, randomized pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation remains a frequent complication after heart surgery. The optimal strategy to treat the condition has not been established. Several retrospective studies have suggested that a primary rate-control strategy may be equivalent to a strategy that restores sinus rhythm. METHODS: Fifty patients with atrial fibrillation after heart surgery were randomly assigned to a strategy of antiarrhythmic therapy with or without electrical cardioversion or ventricular rate control. Both arms received anticoagulation with heparin overlapped with warfarin. The primary end point was time to conversion to sinus rhythm analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method. Atrial fibrillation relapse after the initial conversion was monitored in the hospital over a 2-month period. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between an antiarrhythmic conversion strategy (n = 27) and a rate-control strategy (n = 23) in time to conversion to sinus rhythm (11.2 +/- 3. 2 vs 11.8 +/- 3.9 hours; P =.8). With the use of Cox multivariate analysis to control for the effects of age, sex, beta-blocker usage, and type of surgery, the antiarrhythmic strategy showed a trend toward reducing the time from treatment to restoration of sinus rhythm (P =.08). The length of hospital stay was reduced in the antiarrhythmic arm compared with the rate-control strategy (9.0 +/- 0.7 vs 13.2 +/- 2.0 days; P =.05). In-hospital relapse rates in the antiarrhythmic arm were 30% compared with 57% in the rate-control strategy (P =.24). There were no significant difference in relapse rates at 1 week (24% vs 28%), 4 weeks (6% vs 12%), and 6 to 8 weeks (4% vs 9%). At the end of the study, 91% of the patients in the rate-control arm were in sinus rhythm compared with 96% in the antiarrhythmic arm (P =.6). CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study shows little difference between a rate-control strategy and a strategy to restore sinus rhythm. Regardless of strategy, most patients will be in sinus rhythm after 2 months. A larger randomized, controlled study is needed to assess the impact of restoration of sinus rhythm on length of stay.

Aged↗

PubMed2005

Rhythm vs. rate control of atrial fibrillation meta-analysed by number needed to treat.

BACKGROUND: Whenever feasible, rhythm control of atrial fibrillation (AF) was generally preferred over rate control, in the belief that it offered better symptomatic relief and quality of life, and eliminated the need for anticoagulation. However, recent trials appear to challenge these assumptions. AIMS: To explore the desirability of rhythm vs. rate control of AF by systematic review of pertinent, published, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and a meta-analysis by number needed to treat (NNT) year(-1), with respect to diverse clinically important outcomes. METHODS: RCTs of outcome primarily comparing rate vs. rhythm control in patients with spontaneous AF were identified. For each outcome and assuming rhythm control to be the active treatment, relative risk reduction (RRR) and NNT year(-1) were derived for individual trials together with an NNT year(-1) for all trials combined; corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were also calculated. Adverse drug reaction (ADR) and quality of life reporting were also assessed. RESULTS: In all, data from five suitable RCTs (entailing 5239 patients) were analysed. For hospitalization, available RRRs and NNT year(-1) values were all clinically and statistically significant. Overall, one additional patient was hospitalized for every 35 assigned to rhythm control (95% CI 27, 48). For the endpoints of death, 'ischaemic' stroke and 'non-CNS' bleeding, there was no significant difference. ADRs were significantly more common in rhythm control patients, whereas quality of life assessments revealed no difference. Thromboembolism was associated with cessation of or subtherapeutic anticoagulation, irrespective of treatment assignment. CONCLUSION: Reduced risk of hospitalization and non-inferiority for other endpoints all favour rate control, the less costly strategy. If symptoms of AF are not a problem, treatment should target optimizing rate control and more widespread and effective prophylactic anticoagulation.

Aged↗

PubMed1975

Change over training sessions of relationship between locus of control and voluntary heart-rate control.

The present study investigated the effects of locus of control on learning to accelerate and decelerate heart over a number of training sessions. 15 Ss who scored internal in locus of control and 15 who scored external were trained to change their heart rates. Ss were given two training sessions in speeding heart rate and two in slowing heart rate. Results indicated that during the initial training sessions, internals were better able to increase their heart rates than externals; the externals were better able to decrease their heart rates than internals. However, this association diminished to nonsignificance when additional training sessions were provided. These results argue for routinely conducting a number of training sessions to avoid any premature statement of a relationship between personaltiy measures and learned control of heart rate.

Adolescent↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Procainamide for rate control of postsurgical junctional tachycardia.

This study was conducted to determine the efficacy of procainamide therapy for rapid rate control of postoperative junctional tachycardia (JT). Postoperative JT is one of the most difficult forms of tachycardia to manage. Reported success with a variety of treatments of JT in infants and children has been inconsistent and limited. Rate control using procainamide was achieved in 17 children having rapid JT (heart rate >200 beats/min) between 1986 and 1997. In the first 5 patients (protocol A), following a loading dose of 3 mg/kg over 20 minutes, a continuous procainamide infusion was initiated at a rate of 20 microg/kg/min. The infusion dose was increased in 10 microg/kg steps every 30 minutes to 40-120 microg/kg/min until the heart rate decreased below the target rate of 180 beats/min. In the other 12 patients (protocol B), after a higher loading dose of 10 mg/kg the infusion rate was increased every 10-15 minutes until the heart rate decreased below the target rate of 180 beats/min. Procainamide decreased JT rates in all patients but the response was significantly faster in protocol B. In the patients treated with protocol A, pretreatment JT rates ranged from 203 to 240 (213+/-17) beats/min and decreased to 195+/-10 beats/min at 2 hours (p = ns), 186+/-8.8 at 4 hours (p<0.02), and 179+/-8 at 6 hour postinitiation of PA. In protocol B, pretreatment JT rates ranged from 201 to 240 (218+/-17) beats/min and decreased to 183+/-20 beats/min at 2 hours (p<0.001) and 171+/-12 at 4 hours after starting the procainamide therapy. The mean duration to decrease JT rates below the target rate of 180 beats/min was 3.2+/-1.1 hours in protocol B compared to 6.4+/-3.8 hours in protocol A (p<0.02). Eight of 12 patients in protocol B achieved rate control below the target rate of 180 beats/min within 4 hours despite remaining on significant inotropic support. The procainamide infusion rates to maintain heart rates below 180 beats/min were 40-120 (68.4+/-22.1) microg/kg/min. No proarrhythmia, bradycardia, or significant hypotension was observed. In this series procainamide provided safe, effective, and rapid rate control of JT occurring in the immediate postoperative period.

Analysis of Variance↗

PubMed2003

Left ventricular performance during acute rate control in atrial fibrillation: the importance of heart rate and agent used.

BACKGROUND: The relation between heart rate and left ventricular function during rate control in atrial fibrillation is incompletely understood. METHODS: Twenty-four patients (age 67 +/- 11 years) with symptomatic recent onset rapid atrial fibrillation and rapid ventricular rate (> 110 bpm) were randomly assigned to receive either intravenous digoxin (13 mcg/kg) or intravenous diltiazem (0.25 mg/kg bolus plus a maintenance infusion). A portable radionuclide detector was used to collect validated measures of relative left ventricular volumes, along with heart rate data, every 15 seconds for 6 hours. RESULTS: Heart rate decreased significantly at 15 minutes and 180 minutes in the diltiazem group (from 133 +/- 18 bpm to 111 +/- 26 bpm [P <.01] to 94 +/- 24 bpm [P <.001]) but not in the digoxin group (from 129 +/- 18 bpm to 126 +/- 17 bpm [P = NS] to 118 +/- 15 bpm [P = NS]). Left ventricular ejection fraction improved in both groups to a similar extent (from 39 +/- 10% to 50 +/- 8%, [P <.05] after diltiazem, and from 38 +/- 8% to 52 +/- 11% [P <.05] after digoxin at baseline vs 180 minutes, respectively). The ejection fraction vs heart rate slope was steeper in the digoxin group than in the diltiazem group (-0.34 +/- 0.18 vs -0.16 +/- 0.17, P =.048) indicating a more pronounced improvement in ejection fraction per unit decrease in heart rate. CONCLUSION: In patients with acute atrial fibrillation, digoxin led to similar improvements in ejection fraction compared to diltiazem despite a slower and less potent heart rate slowing.

Aged↗