Evolution of the management of malignant ventricular tachyarrhythmias: the roles of drug therapy and implantable defibrillators

Innovative pharmacologic approaches to cardiopulmonary resuscitation

The survival rate of patients undergoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation is 5 to 15%. New cardiopulmonary resuscitation treatment approaches under investigation include the use of vasopressin as a vasopressor, amiodarone for the treatment of ventricular tachyarrhythmias, and adenosine antagonists (i.e., theophylline) for bradyasystolic rhythms. More innovative approaches include the use of thyroid hormone and endothelin.

Amiodarone: the expanding antiarrhythmic role and how to follow a patient on chronic therapy

Amiodarone was introduced as an antiarrhythmic compound in the early 1970s and was approved in the U.S. for the treatment of refractory ventricular arrhythmias in late 1984. Since that time the drug has become the most widely studied antiarrhythmic compound with expanding potential indications, including maintaining stability of sinus rhythm, secondary prevention in the survivors of myocardial infarction, and prolongation of survival in certain subsets of patients with congestive heart failure. Intravenous amiodarone was introduced in the U.S. in 1995 for the control of recurrent destabilizing ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation resistant to conventional therapy. The level of comfort in its use has risen considerably in the recent past. This has stemmed from the reasonably decisive evidence that class I agents increase mortality in patients with structural heart disease. In contrast, amiodarone either reduces mortality or its effect is neutral; this is consistent with its low to negligible proarrhythmic actions. The drug does not aggravate heart failure and it may even increase left ventricular ejection fraction and improve exercise capacity. Above all, it is becoming increasingly evident from wider experience and from controlled clinical trials that the side-effect profile of the drug is not as compelling an issue as it appeared to be when first used in much higher doses. Therefore, the overall objective of amiodarone therapy is to use the lowest dose that produces a defined therapeutic end point without causing serious side effects. Careful clinical surveillance in conjunction with monitoring of certain laboratory parameters and indices of efficacy at regular intervals permits the drug to be used effectively in a large number of patients who fail to respond to, or are intolerant of other antiarrhythmic compounds. Many experienced clinicians have begun to consider the use of amiodarone as first-line therapy in certain disorders of rhythm, especially in patients with severely compromised ventricular function.

Prediction of outcome of patients with life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias treated with automatic implantable cardioverter-defibrillators using SPECT perfusion imaging

BACKGROUND

In the present study, we examined the predictors of outcome of 103 patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction who had life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias and were treated with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators with the use of single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT).

METHODS AND RESULTS

During a mean follow-up of 29 months, there were 29 cardiac deaths. In comparison with patients who died, survivors had less diabetes mellitus (45% versus 19%, P < .007), higher left ventricular ejection fraction (23 +/- 9% versus 27 +/- 11%, P = .04), and fewer perfusion defects as determined with stress SPECT (15 +/- 5 versus 12 +/- 5, P < .004). Most of the perfusion defects were fixed, indicative of scarring; the extent of reversible defects did not differ (2 +/- 3 in survivors and 3 +/- 4 in nonsurvivors). Multivariate Cox survival analysis identified the number of fixed defects as the only independent predictor of death (chi 2 = 10, P = .002). There were six deaths among 42 patients (14%) with < 8 fixed defects compared with 23 deaths among 61 patients (38%) with > or = 8 defects (P = .005). The 4-year survival was better in patients with < 8 segmental fixed defects than in those with > or = 8 fixed defects (80% versus 36%) (chi 2 = 8, P = .005).

CONCLUSIONS

The myocardial perfusion pattern is an important determinant of outcome in patients with life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias who are treated with a implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. The extent of scarring separates patients into high- and low-risk groups with a 2.7-fold difference in death rate.

Antiarrhythmic actions of amiodarone: a profile of a paradoxical agent

Amiodarone, a complex compound with variegated electropharmacologic and pharmacokinetic properties and an equally complex side-effect profile, continues to have a critical role in the control of ventricular and supraventricular tachyarrhythmias as the use of class I agents has declined. Such is also the case with sotalol. Unlike other so-called class III agents, amiodarone non-competitively blocks sympathetic stimulation, and its effects on repolarization are not associated with reverse use dependency. Rarely does it produce torsades de pointes despite its propensity to induce significant bradycardia and marked prolongation of the QT interval. During long-term therapy with the drug, there is no impairment of ventricular function; in fact, there are significant increases in the left ventricular ejection fraction during protracted amiodarone therapy in patients with heart failure. Long-term amiodarone administration consistently demonstrates marked efficacy in a wide spectrum of arrhythmias. The major limitation of amiodarone during long-term therapy is its unusual side-effect profile, although the increasing trend for low-dose drug therapy has demonstrated a major decline in the overall incidence of serious adverse reactions. Amiodarone is effective in controlling symptomatic ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation (VT/VF) in > 60-70% of patients when conventional agents (especially class I) are ineffective or not well tolerated. The efficacy of amiodarone compared with that of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in patients with VT/VF and in survivors of cardiac arrest remains uncertain when total mortality is used as the primary endpoint of comparison. Amiodarone suppresses ventricular ectopy and markedly suppresses nonsustained VT. It prevents inducible VT/VF in a small number of patients, but slows VT rate in a larger number. The role of the drug in prolonging survival in the postmyocardial infarction patient is unclear, although preliminary data from blinded studies suggest that the drug decreases arrhythmia-related mortality. Similarly, in heart failure, amiodarone has the potential to reduce total mortality but appears to be selectively effective in nonischemic rather than in ischemic cardiomyopathy. Intravenous amiodarone was recently introduced in the United States for the control of recurrent destabilizing VT or VF resistant to conventional therapy. There is also evolving data indicating that the drug might be the most potent agent in maintaining sinus rhythm in patients with atrial fibrillation or flutter converted chemically or electrically to sinus rhythm. However, blinded controlled comparative studies involving sotalol, quinidine, or pure class III drugs have not been carried out. The available data nevertheless suggest that, barring its side-effect profile, amiodarone is a desirable prototype of a broad-spectrum antifibrillatory and antiarrhythmic compound.