Restoration of sinus rhythm in atrial fibrillation of recent onset using intravenous propafenone

A Mechanistic Clinical Trial Using (R)- Versus (S)-Propafenone to Test RyR2 (Ryanodine Receptor) Inhibition for the Prevention of Atrial Fibrillation Induction

BACKGROUND

Experimental data suggest ryanodine receptor-mediated intracellular calcium leak is a mechanism for atrial fibrillation (AF), but evidence in humans is still needed. Propafenone is composed of two enantiomers that are equally potent sodium-channel blockers; however, (R)-propafenone is an ryanodine receptor inhibitor whereas (S)-propafenone is not. This study tested the hypothesis that ryanodine receptor inhibition with (R)-propafenone prevents induction of AF compared to (S)-propafenone or placebo in patients referred for AF ablation.

METHODS

Participants were randomized 4:4:1 to a one-time intravenous dose of (R)-propafenone, (S)-propafenone, or placebo. The study drug was given at the start of the procedure and an AF induction protocol using rapid atrial pacing was performed before ablation. The primary endpoint was 30 s of AF or atrial flutter.

RESULTS

A total of 193 participants were enrolled and 165 (85%) completed the study protocol (median age: 63 years, 58% male, 95% paroxysmal AF). Sustained AF and/or atrial flutter was induced in 60 participants (84.5%) receiving (R)-propafenone, 60 (80.0%) receiving (S)-propafenone group, and 12 (63.2%) receiving placebo. Atrial flutter occurred significantly more often in the (R)-propafenone (N=23, 32.4%) and (S)-propafenone (N=26, 34.7%) groups compared to placebo (N=1, 5.3%, P=0.029). There was no significant difference between (R)-propafenone and (S)-propafenone for the primary outcome of AF and/or atrial flutter induction in univariable (P=0.522) or multivariable analysis (P=0.199, adjusted for age and serum drug level).

CONCLUSIONS

There is no difference in AF inducibility between (R)-propafenone and (S)-propafenone at clinically relevant concentrations. These results are confounded by a high rate of inducible atrial flutter due to sodium-channel blockade.

REGISTRATION

https://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique Identifier: NCT02710669.

Propafenone for the treatment of supraventricular tachycardia and atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis

The purpose of this study was to determine propafenone's effectiveness in terminating and suppressing supraventricular arrhythmias using meta-analytic techniques. Published abstracts and manuscripts with these goals were selected and data abstracted on conversion and maintenance of sinus rhythm. Data were pooled using standard meta-analytic techniques and analyzed according to observation times, trial design (randomized versus nonrandomized), and route of drug administration. Propafenone successfully terminated 83.8% (95% confidence interval 78.1-89.7%) of supraventricular tachycardias. For supraventricular tachycardias, the proportion of patients remaining in sinus rhythm without recurrent arrhythmia was 64.6% (58.1-71.1%) at 1 year. The likelihood of converting a paroxysm of atrial fibrillation (AF) increased over time, with 76.1% (72.8-79.4%) of patients in sinus rhythm 24 hours after initiation of therapy. Patients receiving intravenous therapy were more likely to convert to sinus rhythm in the first 4 hours after drug administration. The treatment benefit of propafenone versus placebo in converting sinus rhythm was greatest in the first 8 hours after treatment (treatment benefit of 31.5% [24.5-38.5%] at 4 hours and 32.9% [24.3-41.5%] at 8 hours, p <0.01). This treatment benefit decreased to 1 1.0% (-0.6-22.4%) after 24 hours. Propafenone was effective in suppressing recurrences of AF in 55.4% (51.3-59.7%) at 6 months and 56.8% (52.3-61.3%) at 12 months. Thus, propafenone is effective in terminating supraventricular tachycardias and AF in the vast majority of patients. Suppression of arrhythmia recurrences is feasible in most patients, although its effectiveness decreases over time.

Intravenous Propafenone for Conversion of Atrial Fibrillation or Flutter to Sinus Rhythm: A Randomized, Placebo-controlled, Crossover Study

BACKGROUND: Propafenone has been claimed to be effective in converting atrial fibrillation and flutter to sinus rhythm; however, controlled clinical trials have reported variable results, and data about the safety of propafenone in the setting of heart failure are lacking. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous propafenone in converting atrial fibrillation and flutter to sinus rhythm. METHODS: Sixty patients with acute (<72 h) or chronic atrial fibrillation or flutter were included in a randomized, placebo-controlled, conditional cross-over study. Twenty eight patients, of whom 12 were in New York Heart Association class III and IV, had heart failure. Patients received intravenous propafenone (2 mg/kg in 10 minutes) and placebo subsequently at 1 hour intervals if sinus rhythm was not achieved. The patients' rhythms were continuously monitored for 1 hour and a 12-lead electrocardiogram, a 1-minute continuous rhythm strip and vital signs were recorded at baseline and at 15, 30, 45, and 60 minutes after the administration of each drug. RESULTS: Twenty of teh 59 patients (34%) treated with propafenone converted to sinus rhythm, while only 4 of the 50 patients (8%) treated with placebo converted (P <.001). Propafenone was more effective in patients with acute (<72 h) atrial fibrillation (64.5%). The conversion rate with propafenone was not significantly different from placebo in patients with atrial flutter and chronic atrial fibrillation (>72 h). Propafenone significantly decreased (P <.005 vs placebo) mean ventricular rate in nonresponders with a baseline heart rate of more than 100 beats/min. No clinically significant adverse effect occurred. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that intravenous propafenone treatment is effective for converting acute atrial fibrillation; however, it seems unlikely to be beneficial in atrial flutter and chronic atrial fibrillation. Propafenone decreases ventricular rate in nonresponders, and a single dose of propafenone is relatively safe even in moderate-to-severe heart failure.

Propafenone: an effective agent for the management of supraventricular arrhythmias

Propafenone is a sodium channel blocking antiarrhythmic drug. It also has beta-adrenergic, potassium channel, and weak calcium channel blocking activity. The drug is metabolized in the liver with rates dependent on the debrisoquin phenotype. The saturable metabolism results in nonlinear pharmacokinetics. The metabolites retain sodium channel blocking activity but little beta-adrenergic blocking activity. Both controlled and noncontrolled studies have documented its efficacy in a variety of supraventricular arrhythmias. Intravenous propafenone is effective in converting atrial fibrillation to normal sinus rhythm. Chronic oral administration decreases the frequency of recurrence of atrial fibrillation and paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia. The drug is particularly effective in the Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome. The drug may produce SA block in patients with underlying sinus node dysfunction. Propafenone has comparatively few noncardiac side effects. It is a useful primary drug or an alternative to more commonly used drugs used for the treatment of supraventricular arrhythmias.

Role of transesophageal pacing in recurrent atrial fibrillation. Experience with propafenone

To assess the role of transesophageal pacing (TP) at very high rates in the follow-up of patients with recurrent and sustained paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) on therapy, the authors studied 15 patients (10 women, 5 men; aged forty-four to seventy-seven years old). Of them only 1 had a mild mitral regurgitation; none had hyperthyroidism or acute ischemic heart disease. They tested propafenone (P) at a dose of 1.4-2 mg/kg over ten minutes as an intravenous bolus and 0.5 mg/minute as intravenous maintenance for two hours and then 300 mg twice daily orally and chronically. Serial TPs at very rapid rates (up to 600 bpm) were performed to test the long-term efficacy of P to prevent paroxysmal AF. The mean follow-up was fifteen months (nine to twenty-four months).

RESULTS

Intravenous P converted AF in five to ninety minutes (mean twenty-one minutes) in 9/15 patients (conversion rate of 60%); in an additional 4 patients oral P converted AF in two to fifteen hours. In the other 2 patients P failed to convert AF. Three patients experienced recurrence of AF in the early follow-up. Of the 10 patients who completed the entire protocol, only 1, who had mild mitral prolapse regurgitation and AF induction by TP, experienced new episodes of AF during follow-up. No significant side effects were noted during P therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Propafenone appears safe and effective for controlling and preventing recurrent and sustained AF. Transesophageal pacing is a valid tool for predicting the efficacy of long-term therapy in the follow-up of patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.