4.6 Article

Antiarrhythmic drug therapy for sustained ventricular arrhythmias complicating acute myocardial infarction

期刊

CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
卷 39, 期 1, 页码 78-83

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181fd6ad7

关键词

ventricular arrhythmia; antiarrhythmic drug therapy; clinical trials; acute coronary syndrome; ventricular tachycardia; ventricular fibrillation

资金

  1. Duke Clinical Research Institute
  2. Sanofi Aventis
  3. Eli Lilly
  4. Medicines Company
  5. NIH
  6. Pfizer
  7. Roche
  8. Johnson Johnson
  9. Schering Plough
  10. Merck
  11. Sharpe Dohme
  12. Astra-Zeneca
  13. GlaxoSmithKline
  14. Daiichi Sankyo Pharma Development
  15. Bristol-Myers Squibb
  16. Boehringer Ingelheim
  17. NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE [T32HL079896] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Few data exist to guide antiarrhythmic drug therapy for sustained ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation after acute myocardial infarction. The objective of this analysis was to describe the survival of patients with sustained ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation after myocardial infarction according to antiarrhythmic drug treatment. Design and Setting: We conducted a retrospective analysis of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients with sustained ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation in Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries in Acute Coronary Syndromes (GUSTO) IIB and GUSTO III and compared all-cause death in patients receiving amiodarone, lidocaine, or no antiarrhythmic. We used Cox proportional-hazards modeling and inverse weighted estimators to adjust for baseline characteristics, beta-blocker use, and propensity to receive antiarrhythmics. Due to nonproportional hazards for death in early follow-up (0-3 hrs after sustained ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation) compared with later follow-up (>3 hrs), we analyzed all-cause mortality using time-specific hazards. Patients and Interventions: Among 19,190 acute myocardial infarction patients, 1,126 (5.9%) developed sustained ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation and met the inclusion criteria. Patients received lidocaine (n = 664, 59.0%), amiodarone (n = 50, 4.4%), both (n = 110, 9.8%), or no antiarrhythmic (n = 302, 26.8%). Results: In the first 3 hrs after ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation, amiodarone (adjusted hazard ratio 0.39, 95% confidence interval 0.21-0.71) and lidocaine (adjusted hazard ratio 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.53-0.96) were associated with a lower hazard of death-likely evidence of survivor bias. Among patients who survived 3 hrs, amiodarone was associated with increased mortality at 30 days (adjusted hazard ratio 1.71, 95% confidence interval 1.02-2.86) and 6 months (adjusted hazard ratio 1.96, 95% confidence interval 1.21-3.16), but lidocaine was not at 30 days (adjusted hazard ratio 1.19, 95% confidence interval 0.77-1.82) or 6 months (adjusted hazard ratio 1.10, 95% confidence interval 0.73-1.66). Conclusion: Among patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by sustained ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation who survive 3 hrs, amiodarone, but not lidocaine, is associated with an increased risk of death, reinforcing the need for randomized trials in this population. (Crit Care Med 2011; 39:78-83)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据