-
Cureus Jun 2023This systematic review aimed to explore whether elderly patients administered amiodarone were susceptible to developing myxedema coma. Utilizing the Cochrane guidelines,... (Review)
Review
This systematic review aimed to explore whether elderly patients administered amiodarone were susceptible to developing myxedema coma. Utilizing the Cochrane guidelines, a comprehensive review of databases such as Medline (PubMed), Science Direct, CINAHL Cochrane, and Google Scholar was undertaken to examine case reports on amiodarone-induced myxedema coma. Following stringent criteria for inclusion, 12 pertinent case reports were identified. These findings suggested a high probability of myxedema coma development in patients who had been administered amiodarone. Specifically, patients who received an oral dosage of 100-200 mg of amiodarone were reported to have developed bradycardia and hypothermia alongside elevated thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) levels. Upon diagnosis, the majority of patients were treated with a regimen of levothyroxine and hydrocortisone medication. Despite the myriad potential causes of myxedema coma complicating the diagnosis, it was found that through a combination of clinical symptoms and serum TSH measurements, a confirmed diagnosis could be reached. Furthermore, it was observed that amiodarone-induced myxedema coma responded favorably to treatment with levothyroxine and glucocorticoids.
PubMed: 37492810
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.40893 -
Cureus Jul 2022The emergency treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF) involves utilizing two strategies. The first strategy normally involves permitting the atrial fibrillation to... (Review)
Review
An Integrative Comparative Study Between Digoxin and Amiodarone as an Emergency Treatment for Patients With Atrial Fibrillation With Evidence of Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
The emergency treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF) involves utilizing two strategies. The first strategy normally involves permitting the atrial fibrillation to persevere as the ventricular rate is controlled. The other method involves utilizing anti-arrhythmic drugs in cardioversion and attempting to maintain sinus rhythm. Different pharmacological treatments, including digoxin and amiodarone, have been used to manage AF. A literature review on amiodarone and digoxin in the treatment of AF among patients with heart failure (HF) has shown that both drugs have potential risks. Therefore, we are conducting this systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness of amiodarone and digoxin in the treatment of AF among patients with evidence of HF. A literature search of relevant articles was conducted on six electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Medline, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar) from 2000 to 2022. The search yielded seven studies that had met the inclusion criteria. Our meta-analysis of four studies showed that there was no significant difference in the reduction of heart rate after treatment with either amiodarone or digoxin (mean difference (MD): -5.44; 95% confidence interval (CI): -9.53 to -1.34; I = 25%; p = 0.26). On the other hand, the statistical analysis showed that amiodarone had a better effect on the conversion to sinus rhythm than digoxin (63% versus 35%, respectively). Based on evidence from our meta-analysis, the clinical effect of amiodarone and digoxin in the emergency treatment of AF on heart rate control was unclear. However, amiodarone has a significant impact on the restoration of sinus rhythm compared with digoxin and can be considered the first-line drug regimen in conversion to sinus rhythm for AF patients with evidence of heart failure. However, the use of amiodarone and digoxin is complicated by adverse events and all-cause mortality.
PubMed: 35971374
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.26800 -
Cureus Jun 2022Sudden cardiac death (SCD) is an unexpected death that occurs within one hour of symptom onset. In the United States, sudden cardiac death is considered the leading... (Review)
Review
A Comparative Study Between Amiodarone and Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator in Decreasing Mortality From Sudden Cardiac Death in High-Risk Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Sudden cardiac death (SCD) is an unexpected death that occurs within one hour of symptom onset. In the United States, sudden cardiac death is considered the leading cause of natural death, accounting for 325,000 adult patients annually. SCD is more common in adult patients (above the mid-30s) and men. The risk factors that predict SCD are categorized into clinical, sociological, genetic, and psychological. To prevent the occurrence of SCD, several treatment options, especially antiarrhythmic drugs and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), have been used. A literature search from 2000 to 2022 was conducted on six electronic databases: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar. The search query used Boolean expressions and keywords such as amiodarone, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, sudden cardiac death, cardiac arrest, arrhythmic death, and all-cause mortality. The articles identified from the literature search were screened using the eligibility criteria, resulting in eight articles relevant for inclusion in the review. A meta-analysis of data from six of the included studies showed that ICD was more effective in the reduction of SCD rates, with an SCD rate of 5.97% (n = 84/1,408) observed in the ICD group compared with an SCD rate of 11.81% (n = 168/1,423) observed in the amiodarone group. The results also show that ICD was more effective in reducing all-cause mortality compared with amiodarone (odds ratio (OR): 1.36; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.06-1.74; I = 57%; P = 0.03). ICD treatment of high-risk patients was more effective in reducing SCD and all-cause mortality rates compared with amiodarone treatment. There is evidence that amiodarone can be used as an adjuvant treatment option, especially for patients who are not eligible for ICD treatment and those who face more adverse events. Evidence has also shown that using amiodarone with ICD treatment significantly improves survival rates compared to ICD treatment only.
PubMed: 35865418
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.26017 -
Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy Feb 2024The available evidence to determine which antidysrhythmic drug is superior for pharmacologic cardioversion of recent-onset (onset within 48 h) atrial fibrillation (AF)... (Review)
Review
Safety and Effectiveness of Antidysrhythmic Drugs for Pharmacologic Cardioversion of Recent-Onset Atrial Fibrillation: a Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-analysis.
PURPOSE
The available evidence to determine which antidysrhythmic drug is superior for pharmacologic cardioversion of recent-onset (onset within 48 h) atrial fibrillation (AF) is uncertain. We aimed to identify the safest and most effective agent for pharmacologic cardioversion of recent-onset AF in the emergency department.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science from inception to February 21, 2023 (PROSPERO: CRD42018083781). Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials that enrolled adult participants with AF ≤ 48 h, compared a guideline-recommended antidysrhythmic drug with another antidysrhythmic drug or a different formulation of the same drug or placebo and reported specific adverse events. The primary outcome was immediate, serious adverse event - cardiac arrest, sustained ventricular tachydysrhythmia, atrial flutter 1:1 atrioventricular conduction, hypotension, and bradycardia. Additional analyses included the outcomes of conversion to sinus rhythm within 4 h and 24 h. We extracted data according to PRISMA-NMA and appraised trials using Cochrane RoB 2. We performed Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) using a Markov Chain Monte Carlo method with random-effect model and vague prior distribution to calculate odds ratios with 95% credible intervals. We assessed confidence using CINeMA. We used surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to rank agent(s).
RESULTS
The systematic review initially identified 5545 studies. Twenty-five studies met eligibility criteria, and 22 studies (n = 3082) provided data for NMA, which demonstrated that vernakalant (SUCRA = 70.9%) is most likely to be safest. Additional effectiveness NMA demonstrated that flecainide (SUCRA = 89.0%) is most likely to be superior for conversion within 4 h (27 studies; n = 2681), and ranolazine-amiodarone IV (SUCRA 93.7%) is most likely to be superior for conversion within 24 h (24 studies; n = 3213). Confidence in the NMA estimates is variable and limited mostly by within-study bias and imprecision.
CONCLUSIONS
Among guideline-recommended antidysrhythmic drugs, the combination of digoxin IV and amiodarone IV is definitely among the least safe for cardioversion of recent onset AF; flecainide, vernakalant, ibutilide, propafenone, and amiodarone IV are definitely among the most effective for cardioversion within 4 h; flecainide is definitely among the most effective for cardioversion within 24 h. Further, randomized controlled trials with predetermined and strictly defined, hemodynamic adverse event outcomes are recommended.
PubMed: 38324103
DOI: 10.1007/s10557-024-07552-6 -
The American Journal of Emergency... Oct 2020Although available studies have not demonstrated that antiarrhythmic drugs could increase long-term survival or survival with favorable neurological outcome, some... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Although available studies have not demonstrated that antiarrhythmic drugs could increase long-term survival or survival with favorable neurological outcome, some studies have shown that the rate of hospital admission is higher with amiodarone or lidocaine than with placebo. To study the effects of antiarrhythmic drugs during cardiac arrest, a meta-analysis was conducted to assess the efficacy of amiodarone and/or lidocaine.
METHODS
We searched studies from inception until Jan 21, 2020. The primary endpoint was survival to hospital discharge in cardiac arrest, and the secondary endpoints were survival to hospital admission/24 h and favorable neurological outcome.
RESULTS
A total of 9 studies were included. In head-to-head studies, amiodarone (odds ratio [OR] 2.96, 95% credible interval [CrI] 1.02-8.53) and lidocaine (OR 3.12, 95% CrI 1.08-9.98) had superior effects on survival to hospital admission/24 h compared to the combination of the two drugs. In terms of survival to hospital discharge, amiodarone (OR 1.18, 95% CrI 1.03-1.35) and lidocaine (OR 1.22, 95% CrI 1.06-1.41) were more effective than placebo. Amiodarone (OR 1.20, 95% CrI 1.02-1.41) was significantly better than placebo in favorable neurological outcome. However, there was no significant difference in other pairwise comparisons. The surface under cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) revealed that lidocaine was the most effective therapy for survival to hospital admission (84.1%) and discharge (88.4%), while amiodarone was associated with a more favorable neurological outcome (88.2%).
CONCLUSIONS
Lidocaine had the best effect on both survival to hospital admission and discharge, while amiodarone was associated with a more favorable neurological outcome.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42020171049.
Topics: Amiodarone; Anti-Arrhythmia Agents; Bayes Theorem; Heart Arrest; Humans; Lidocaine; Network Meta-Analysis; Survival Analysis
PubMed: 33071078
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2020.06.074 -
Current Medicinal Chemistry 2023Due to the importance of amiodarone-induced hyperthyroidism in patients with heart failure, the purpose of the present systematic review and metaanalysis was to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Due to the importance of amiodarone-induced hyperthyroidism in patients with heart failure, the purpose of the present systematic review and metaanalysis was to determine the prevalence of thyroid dysfunction (hypothyroidism and hyperthyroidism) in patients with heart disease who received amiodarone.
METHODS
Electronic databases including Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, and Science Direct were searched by two investigators. To assess the heterogeneity between the included studies, the chi-square χ test (α=0.05) and I index were used. Additionally, a random-effects model with 95% CI was used to estimate the pooled prevalence of thyroid dysfunction due to the heterogeneity of the studies. To identify the cause of heterogeneity, a meta-regression analysis was employed. All analyses were performed using Stata ver13 (Stata Corporation, College Station, TX, USA).
RESULTS
The pooled prevalence of hypothyroidism was 23.43% (95% CI: 11.54-35.33) and hyperthyroidism was 11.61% (95% CI: 7.20-16.02). There was no significant association between the prevalence of hypothyroidism and the year of the study (p=0.152), sample size (p=0.805), and mean age of subjects in the sample groups (p=0.623). However, there was a significant association between the prevalence of hyperthyroidism and the year of the study (p=0.037), but no statistically significant association between either the prevalence of hyperthyroidism and sample size (p=0.425), or the prevalence of hyperthyroidism and the mean age of subjects in the sample groups (p=0.447).
CONCLUSION
The prevalence of thyroid dysfunction in patients with cardiac arrhythmias receiving amiodarone was considerable. Extreme care should be exercised to improve the monitoring of any thyroid abnormalities that may arise in patients receiving amiodarone.
Topics: Humans; Amiodarone; Prevalence; Hypothyroidism; Hyperthyroidism; Arrhythmias, Cardiac
PubMed: 36045523
DOI: 10.2174/0929867329666220831145651 -
European Heart Journal. Cardiovascular... Jun 2022This systemic review aims to provide a practical overview of the prevalence, clinical manifestation, and management of adverse photoinduced skin reactions caused by...
This systemic review aims to provide a practical overview of the prevalence, clinical manifestation, and management of adverse photoinduced skin reactions caused by frequently used cardiovascular drugs and to assess their potential relevance for skin cancer development. Data search included PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. A systematic review of peer-reviewed studies reporting the photosensitizing and/or skin cancer-inducing properties of common cardiovascular drugs was performed and a guide to clinical management of photoinduced skin eruptions by cardiovascular drugs was provided. Study quality was assessed for major methodological biases. A total of 58 studies were identified (i.e. 23 case reports, 14 observational studies, 10 review articles, 10 experimental studies, and 1 meta-analysis). Most commonly, drug-associated adverse photoinduced cutaneous reactions were caused by phototoxic and photoallergic mechanisms. There is evidence suggesting that amiodarone and dronedarone, thiazide diuretics, thiazide-like diuretics, angiotensin receptor blockers, dihydropyridine-type calcium channel blockers, and certain angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and statins may cause photoinduced adverse cutaneous reactions. Other drugs such as anticoagulants, antiplatelets, aldosterone antagonists, and fibrates have not been linked with photosensitizing reactions or adverse cutaneous reactions. Some drugs, i.e. thiazides and thiazide-like diuretics, were associated with an increased risk of non-melanoma skin cancers (basal cell carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma). Certain commonly used cardiovascular drugs have been associated with adverse photoinduced cutaneous reactions. If they occur, further diagnosis and treatment might be needed, depending on the severity and progress. Whether photosensitizing drugs increase the risk of skin cancer remains elusive and further randomized controlled trials are required.
Topics: Antihypertensive Agents; Calcium Channel Blockers; Cardiovascular Agents; Diuretics; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Humans; Photosensitizing Agents; Skin Neoplasms; Thiazides
PubMed: 35278085
DOI: 10.1093/ehjcvp/pvac017 -
Clinical Cardiology Jun 2023There are limited comparative data on safety and efficacy within commonly used Vaughan-Williams (VW) class III antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) for maintenance of sinus... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
There are limited comparative data on safety and efficacy within commonly used Vaughan-Williams (VW) class III antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) for maintenance of sinus rhythm in adults with atrial fibrillation (AF).
HYPOTHESIS
We hypothesized that dronedarone and sotalol, two commonly prescribed VW class III AADs with class II properties, have different safety and efficacy effects in patients with nonpermanent AF.
METHODS
A systematic literature review was conducted searching MEDLINE®, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) up to June 15, 2021 (NCT05279833). Clinical trials and observational studies that evaluated safety and efficacy of dronedarone or sotalol in adults with AF were included. Bayesian random-effects network meta-analysis (NMA) was used to quantify comparative safety and efficacy. Where feasible, we performed sensitivity analyses by including only randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
RESULTS
Of 3581 records identified through database searches, 37 unique studies (23 RCTs, 13 observational studies, and 1 nonrandomized trial) were included in the NMA. Dronedarone was associated with a statistically significantly lower risk of all-cause death versus sotalol (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.38 [95% credible interval, CrI: 0.19, 0.74]). The association was numerically similar in the sensitivity analysis (HR = 0.46 [95% CrI: 0.21, 1.02]). AF recurrence and cardiovascular death results were not significantly different between dronedarone and sotalol in all-studies and sensitivity analyses.
CONCLUSION
The NMA findings indicate that, across all clinical trials and observational studies included, dronedarone compared with sotalol was associated with a lower risk of all-cause death, but with no difference in AF recurrence.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Amiodarone; Anti-Arrhythmia Agents; Atrial Fibrillation; Dronedarone; Network Meta-Analysis; Sotalol
PubMed: 37025083
DOI: 10.1002/clc.24011 -
Kardiologia Polska Oct 2020Appropriate pharmacotherapy during advanced resuscitation procedures may affect the return of spontaneous circulation. Current guidelines on cardiopulmonary... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Appropriate pharmacotherapy during advanced resuscitation procedures may affect the return of spontaneous circulation. Current guidelines on cardiopulmonary resuscitation recommend amiodarone for shock‑refractory cardiac arrest or when lidocaine is not available.
AIMS
The aim of this study was to systematically analyze the available literature and to conduct a meta‑‑analysis to determine the effect of amiodarone and lidocaine on survival and neurological outcome after shock‑refractory cardiac arrest.
METHODS
PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. Two independent reviewers screened randomized and quasi‑randomized controlled trials as well as cohort and cross‑sectional trials evaluating amiodarone or lidocaine for the treatment of adults with cardiac arrest.
RESULTS
After screening 682 unique references, 8 were selected for this meta‑analysis. A higher number of cases with return of spontaneous circulation was observed in the amiodarone group compared with the lidocaine group (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.87-1.21; P = 0.75). A similar relationship was observed for survival to hospital discharge (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.92-1.38; P = 0.26), as well as survival with favorable neurological outcome (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.89-1.39; P = 0.35).
CONCLUSIONS
We found no statistically significant survival benefit of resuscitation with amiodarone compared with lidocaine. Future randomized controlled trials are needed to identify which antiarrhythmic drug should be use in shock‑refractory cardiac arrest.
Topics: Amiodarone; Anti-Arrhythmia Agents; Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation; Cross-Sectional Studies; Humans; Lidocaine; Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest
PubMed: 32627999
DOI: 10.33963/KP.15483 -
The Journal of Heart and Lung... Jun 2024Vasoplegic syndrome (VS) is a common occurrence during heart transplantation (HT). It currently lacks a uniform definition between transplant centers, and its... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Vasoplegic syndrome (VS) is a common occurrence during heart transplantation (HT). It currently lacks a uniform definition between transplant centers, and its pathophysiology and treatment remain enigmatic. This systematic review summarizes the available published clinical data regarding VS during HT.
METHODS
We searched databases for all published reports on VS during HT. Data collected included the incidence of VS in the HT population, patient and intraoperative characteristics, and postoperative outcomes.
RESULTS
Twenty-two publications were included in this review. The prevalence of VS during HT was 28.72% (95% confidence interval: 27.37%, 30.10%). Factors associated with VS included male sex, higher body mass index, hypothyroidism, pre-HT left ventricular assist device or venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO), pre-HT calcium channel blocker or amiodarone usage, longer cardiopulmonary bypass time, and higher blood product transfusion requirement. Patients who developed VS were more likely to require postoperative VA-ECMO support, renal replacement therapy, reoperation for bleeding, longer mechanical ventilation, and a greater 30-day and 1-year mortality.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of our systematic review are an initial step for providing clinicians with data that can help identify high-risk patients and avenues for potential risk mitigation. Establishing guidelines that officially define VS will aid in the precise diagnosis of these patients during HT and guide treatment. Future studies of treatment strategies for refractory VS are needed in this high-risk patient population.
Topics: Humans; Vasoplegia; Heart Transplantation; Incidence; Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation; Intraoperative Complications
PubMed: 38428755
DOI: 10.1016/j.healun.2024.02.1458