-
Clinical Cardiology Oct 2023Beta-blockers (BB) or dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (CCBs) are still the first choices in the treatment of idiopathic premature ventricular complexes (PVCs),...
BACKGROUND
Beta-blockers (BB) or dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (CCBs) are still the first choices in the treatment of idiopathic premature ventricular complexes (PVCs), with low-modest efficacy. Antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) of Ic class are moderate to highly efficient but the evidence on their benefits is still limited.
AIM
To compare effectiveness and safety of flecainide, propafenone, and sotalol in the treatment of symptomatic idiopathic PVCs.
METHODS
Our single-center retrospective study analyzed 104 consecutive patients with 130 medication episodes of frequent idiopathic PVCs treated with AADs flecainide, propafenone (Ic class) or sotalol (III class). The primary outcome was complete/near complete reduction of PVCs after medication episode (PVCs burden reduction >99%), and the secondary outcome was significant PVC burden reduction (≥80%).
RESULTS
The complete/near complete PVCs burden reduction occurred in 31% and was significant in 43% of treated patients. A reduction of PVC burden for >99% was achieved in 56% of patients on flecainide, in 11% of patients on propafenone (p = .002), and in 21% of patients receiving sotalol (p = .031). There was no difference between propafenone and sotalol (p = .174). A reduction of PVC burden for ≥80% was achieved in 64% of patients on flecainide, in 30% of patients on propafenone (p = .009), and 33% of patients on sotalol (p = .020). There was no difference between propafenone and sotalol (p = .661).
CONCLUSIONS
The efficacy of AADs class Ic and III in the treatment of idiopathic PVCs was modest. Flecainide was the most effective AAD in the achievement of complete/near complete or significant PVC burden reduction, compared to propafenone and sotalol.
Topics: Humans; Propafenone; Flecainide; Sotalol; Retrospective Studies; Electrocardiography; Anti-Arrhythmia Agents; Ventricular Premature Complexes
PubMed: 37533168
DOI: 10.1002/clc.24090 -
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry Nov 2022The (bio)availability of pharmaceuticals at solid/water interfaces is governed by their sorption, which determines their concentrations in groundwaters and surface...
The (bio)availability of pharmaceuticals at solid/water interfaces is governed by their sorption, which determines their concentrations in groundwaters and surface waters in contact with biota, and can be affected by the presence of other contaminants such as metallic trace elements likely to compete for adsorption sites and form complexes with pharmaceuticals. We studied the adsorption of the pharmaceuticals propranolol and sotalol-two β-blockers-on one soil and one sediment using batch experiments to assess their (bio)availability. The influence of contact time, pH, and concentration was studied. As in the real environment these contaminants are not alone but in mixtures, and they were studied alone, simultaneously added, and in the presence of Cu , which is known to form coordination complexes with propranolol and sotalol, but their presence in mixtures did not alter their adsorption properties. Sotalol was more mobile in water and thus more bioavailable for organisms than propranolol. The mobility in surface waters of both β-blockers and thus their bioavailabity for organisms is more important than their risk of transfer to groundwater during rainwater infiltration and to surface water due to runoff. Environ Toxicol Chem 2022;41:2700-2707. © 2022 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.
Topics: Soil; Adsorption; Copper; Trace Elements; Propranolol; Sotalol; Coordination Complexes; Adrenergic beta-Antagonists; Water Pollutants, Chemical; Water; Pharmaceutical Preparations
PubMed: 35899978
DOI: 10.1002/etc.5448 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Feb 2011Acute atrial fibrillation is rapid, irregular, and chaotic atrial activity of less than 48 hours' duration. Risk factors for acute atrial fibrillation include increasing... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Acute atrial fibrillation is rapid, irregular, and chaotic atrial activity of less than 48 hours' duration. Risk factors for acute atrial fibrillation include increasing age, cardiovascular disease, alcohol, diabetes, and lung disease. Acute atrial fibrillation increases the risk of stroke and heart failure. The condition resolves spontaneously within 24 to 48 hours in over 50% of people; however, many people will require interventions to control heart rate or restore sinus rhythm.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of interventions to prevent embolism, for conversion to sinus rhythm, and to control heart rate in people with recent-onset atrial fibrillation (within 7 days) who are haemodynamically stable? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to April 2010 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 30 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: amiodarone, antithrombotic treatment before cardioversion, digoxin, diltiazem, direct current cardioversion, flecainide, propafenone, quinidine, sotalol, timolol, and verapamil.
Topics: Amiodarone; Anti-Arrhythmia Agents; Atrial Fibrillation; Humans; Propafenone; Sotalol
PubMed: 21718559
DOI: No ID Found -
Journal of the American Heart... May 2022Background There is limited information regarding the clinical use and effectiveness of IV sotalol in pediatric patients and patients with congenital heart disease,...
Background There is limited information regarding the clinical use and effectiveness of IV sotalol in pediatric patients and patients with congenital heart disease, including those with severe myocardial dysfunction. A multicenter registry study was designed to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and dosing of IV sotalol. Methods and Results A total of 85 patients (age 1 day-36 years) received IV sotalol, of whom 45 (53%) had additional congenital cardiac diagnoses and 4 (5%) were greater than 18 years of age. In 79 patients (93%), IV sotalol was used to treat supraventricular tachycardia and 4 (5%) received it to treat ventricular arrhythmias. Severely decreased cardiac function by echocardiography was seen before IV sotalol in 7 (9%). The average dose was 1 mg/kg (range 0.5-1.8 mg/kg/dose) over a median of 60 minutes (range 30-300 minutes). Successful arrhythmia termination occurred in 31 patients (49%, 95% CI [37%-62%]) with improvement in rhythm control defined as rate reduction permitting overdrive pacing in an additional 18 patients (30%, 95% CI [19%-41%]). Eleven patients (16%) had significant QTc prolongation to >465 milliseconds after the infusion, with 3 (4%) to >500 milliseconds. There were 2 patients (2%) for whom the infusion was terminated early. Conclusions IV sotalol was safe and effective for termination or improvement of tachyarrhythmias in 79% of pediatric patients and patients with congenital heart disease, including those with severely depressed cardiac function. The most common dose, for both acute and maintenance dosing, was 1 mg/kg over ~60 minutes with rare serious complications.
Topics: Arrhythmias, Cardiac; Child; Heart Defects, Congenital; Humans; Infant; Registries; Sotalol; Tachycardia, Supraventricular
PubMed: 35491986
DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.121.024375 -
Journal of the American College of... Aug 2019
Topics: Female; Flecainide; Humans; Pregnancy; Prenatal Care; Tachycardia, Supraventricular
PubMed: 31416532
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.07.005 -
Economics and outcomes of sotalol in-patient dosing approaches in patients with atrial fibrillation.Journal of Cardiovascular... Mar 2022There exists variability in the administration of in-patient sotalol therapy for symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF). The impact of this variability on patient...
INTRODUCTION
There exists variability in the administration of in-patient sotalol therapy for symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF). The impact of this variability on patient in-hospital and 30-day posthospitalization costs and outcomes is not known. Also, the cost impact of intravenous sotalol, which can accelerate drug loading to therapeutic levels, is unknown.
METHODS
One hundred and thirty-three AF patients admitted for oral sotalol initiation at an Intermountain Healthcare Hospital from January 2017 to December 2018 were included. Patient and dosing characteristics were described descriptively and the impact of dosing schedule was correlated with daily hospital costs/clinical outcomes during the index hospitalization and for 30 days. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services reimbursement for 3-day sotalol initiation is $9263.51. Projections of cost savings were made considering a 1-day load using intravenous sotalol that costs $2500.00 to administer.
RESULTS
The average age was 70.3 ± 12.3 years and 60.2% were male with comorbidities of hypertension (83%), diabetes (36%), and coronary artery disease (53%). The mean ejection fraction was 59.9 ± 7.8% and the median corrected QT interval was 453.7 ± 37.6 ms before sotalol dosing. No ventricular arrhythmias developed, but bradycardia (<60 bpm) was observed in 37.6% of patients. The average length of stay was 3.9 ± 4.6 (median: 2.2) days. Postdischarge outcomes and rehospitalization rates stratified by length of stay were similar. The cost per day was estimated at $2931.55 (1. $2931.55, 2. $5863.10, 3. $8794.65, 4. $11 726.20).
CONCLUSIONS
In-patient oral sotalol dosing is markedly variable and results in the potential of both cost gain and loss to a hospital. In consideration of estimated costs, there is the potential for $871.55 cost savings compared to a 2-day oral load and $3803.10 compared to a 3-day oral load.
Topics: Aftercare; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Arrhythmia Agents; Atrial Fibrillation; Humans; Male; Medicare; Middle Aged; Patient Discharge; Sotalol; United States
PubMed: 34953091
DOI: 10.1111/jce.15342 -
Journal of the American Heart... Feb 2022Background Atrial tachyarrhythmias are common after atrial fibrillation ablation, so adjunctive antiarrhythmic drug therapy is often used. Data on the effectiveness and...
Background Atrial tachyarrhythmias are common after atrial fibrillation ablation, so adjunctive antiarrhythmic drug therapy is often used. Data on the effectiveness and safety of dronedarone and sotalol after AF ablation are limited. Here, we compared health outcomes of ablated patients treated with dronedarone versus sotalol. Methods and Results A comparative analysis of propensity score-matched retrospective cohorts was performed using IBM MarketScan Research Databases. Patients treated with dronedarone after atrial fibrillation ablation were matched 1:1 to patients treated with sotalol between January 1, 2013 and March 31, 2018. Outcomes of interest included cardiovascular hospitalization, proarrhythmia, repeat ablation, and cardioversion. This study was exempt from institutional review board review. Among 30 696 patients who underwent atrial fibrillation ablation, 2086 were treated with dronedarone and 3665 with sotalol after ablation. Propensity-score matching resulted in 1815 patients receiving dronedarone matched 1:1 to patients receiving sotalol. Risk of cardiovascular hospitalization was lower with dronedarone versus sotalol at 3 months (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.77 [95% CI, 0.61-0.97]), 6 months (aHR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.63-0.93]), and 12 months after ablation (aHR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.66-0.93]). Risk of repeat ablation and cardioversion generally did not differ between the 2 groups. A lower risk of proarrhythmia was associated with dronedarone versus sotalol at 3 months (aHR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.64-0.90]), 6 months (aHR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.70-0.93]), and 12 months (aHR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.73-0.94]) after ablation. Conclusions These data suggest that dronedarone may be a more effective and safer alternative after ablation than sotalol.
Topics: Anti-Arrhythmia Agents; Atrial Fibrillation; Catheter Ablation; Dronedarone; Humans; Retrospective Studies; Sotalol
PubMed: 35060388
DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.120.020506 -
Journal of Atrial Fibrillation 2017Sotalol is a racemic mixture possessing beta-blocker and class III anti arrhythmic properties. Approved by US food and drug administration (FDA) since 2009 based on its... (Review)
Review
Sotalol is a racemic mixture possessing beta-blocker and class III anti arrhythmic properties. Approved by US food and drug administration (FDA) since 2009 based on its bioequivalence with oral sotalol, clinicians are less familiar with the potential uses of the intravenous form despite its re-launch in United States in 2015. Available literature suggests that intravenous sotalol in recommended doses can be safely administered in adult and pediatric population achieving rapid reliable therapeutic plasma concentration and without additional proarrhythmic effects when compared to its oral form as well as other antiarrhythmic medications. Intravenous sotalol may have potential uses as an alternative agent for highly symptomatic atrial fibrillation post cardiac surgery as well as in life threatening ventricular arrhythmias. As with its oral form, judicious use with close attention to QTc and renal function is warranted. Further studies are needed to better understand the safety, efficacy and different dosing regimens of parenteral sotalol in adults and children.
PubMed: 29250266
DOI: 10.4022/jafib.1499 -
Clinical Case Reports Sep 2019We present a patient with end-stage hypertrophic cardiomyopathy who was suffering from ocular and generalized forms of myasthenia gravis as an uncommon neurological...
We present a patient with end-stage hypertrophic cardiomyopathy who was suffering from ocular and generalized forms of myasthenia gravis as an uncommon neurological complication of sotalol. This case report warns clinicians to maintain caution over rare side effects of medication, which could be confused with the clinical symptoms of the underlying disease.
PubMed: 31534771
DOI: 10.1002/ccr3.2341