Usefulness of sotalol in suppressing ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation in patients with healed myocardial infarcts

Effects of procainamide and sotalol on restitution properties, dispersion of refractoriness, and ventricular fibrillation activation patterns in pigs

BACKGROUND

Interest in combining antiarrhythmic drugs has been prompted by the lack of efficacy of monotherapies and the toxicity resulting from high doses of individual agents.

OBJECTIVES

We tested the hypothesis that procainamide and sotalol combined have greater beneficial effects on restitution, on the dispersion of refractoriness, and on decreasing the complexity of ventricular fibrillation (VF) than either drug alone.

METHODS

Six open-chest pigs received intravenous procainamide (15 mg/kg load and 50 microg/kg/min maintenance) followed by sotalol (1.5 mg/kg). Another six pigs received sotalol first and procainamide second. Before drugs and after each drug, 20-second episodes of electrically induced VF were recorded from a 21 x 24 unipolar electrode plaque (2 mm spacing) sutured on the lateral posterior left ventricular epicardium. Restitution properties and dispersion of refractoriness were estimated from activation recovery intervals during pacing.

RESULTS

The combination of the two drugs reduced the maximum slope of the restitution curve and during VF reduced the number of wavefronts, the activation rate, the percentage of wavefront families exhibiting reentry, and the conduction velocity more than either drug alone. In addition, in the group that received sotalol first, both drugs together reduced the SD and the coefficient of variation of the spatial dispersion of refractoriness compared with baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

Procainamide and sotalol combined have greater beneficial effects on restitution properties, dispersion of refractoriness, and the complexity of VF than either drug alone compared with baseline.

Infarct related artery patency: relation to serial electropharmacological studies and outcome in patients with previous myocardial infarction and ventricular tachyarrhythmias

Evidence suggests that infarct related artery (IRA) patency may improve survival after acute myocardial infarction, which is thought to be partially due to a lower incidence of malignant ventricular tachyarrhythmias. However, little is known about the effect of IRA patency on antiarrhythmic drug response and long-term outcome in patients with previous infarction who already experienced sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias. A total of 152 patients with remote myocardial infarction and documented ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) underwent coronary angiography and programmed ventricular stimulation before and after oral administration of d,l-sotalol (240-640 mg/day). D,l-sotalol suppressed inducibility of VT/VF in 37 (25.2%) patients. The IRA was patent in 38.1% of all patients. There was no significant difference in the frequency of drug response between patients with patent or occluded IRAs (26.8% vs 24.2%, P = 0.87). In patients with a patent IRA, d,l-sotalol tended to be more effective in the absence of a left ventricular aneurysm, although this difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.38). Ejection fraction and collateral blood flow had no effect on drug response in the presence or absence of IRA patency. During follow-up (13.0 +/- 19.9 months) of 29 patients discharged on oral d,l-sotalol, 3 patients experienced symptomatic VT and 4 sudden death. Arrhythmia recurrence and death of all cause (n = 6) and cardiac death (n = 4) were independent of IRA patency status. IRA patency had no effect on short-term drug response to d,l-sotalol in patients with remote myocardial infarction and documented VT/VF. Long-term outcome of patients with sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias is independent of IRA patency status. In contrast to a previous report, outcome of electropharmacological testing was not predicted by the patency of the IRA.

Long-term reproducibility of electrophysiologically guided therapy with sotalol in patients with ventricular tachyarrhythmias

OBJECTIVES

Goal of this study was to assess the long-term reproducibility of electrophysiologic drug testing in patients with ventricular tachyarrhythmias (VT/VF).

BACKGROUND

Programmed ventricular stimulation (PVS) is still widely used to guide antiarrhythmic therapy in patients with sustained ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation (VT/VF). Sotalol is considered as one of the most effective drugs for VT/VF. Because there is no proof of long-term reproducibility of a successful drug test with sotalol, we investigated the long-term reproducibility of drug testing with sotalol.

METHODS

Thirty patients with VT/VF (age: 57+/-11 years, 20 patients with coronary heart disease, 7 patients with no structural heart disease, 3 with others) and reproducible induction of VT/VF (28 patients VT, two patients VF) in a baseline PVS, were suppressible with sotalol (mean dosage 395+/-137 mg) in a subsequent PVS. After a mean follow-up of 13+/-10 months a PVS was again performed in patients, who had no evidence of progressive cardiac disease, who did not experience any arrhythmia recurrences or who were drug compliant. Irrespective of the inducibility after long-term therapy with sotalol, all patients were kept on the initial sotalol regimen. All 30 patients had a stable cardiac condition, were free of VT/VF recurrences and were drug compliant.

RESULTS

Despite the clinical efficacy of sotalol, in 12 patients (40%) VT/VF could again be induced after 13+/-10.2 months. Inducibility was independent of age, heart disease, ejection fraction and follow-up time. During a further follow-up of 22.1+/-10.9 months, five patients experienced nonfatal VT recurrences independently of the prior inducibility.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows a lacking long-term reproducibility of an initial effective PVS with sotalol. Despite an uneventful clinical follow-up, late electrophysiologic testing showed a VT/VF inducibility in a high portion of patients. Hence, electrophysiologic testing performed late after the initial drug test may no longer be predictive of outcome.

Sotalol: Current Status and Expanding Indications

BACKGROUND: The role of antiarrhythmic drug therapy continues to undergo major changes. The change is necessitated by the advent of invasive interventional procedures, such as catheter ablation of arrhythmias and the use of implantable devices for sensing and terminating life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias and symptomatically traublesome supraventricular arrhythmias. Many conventional and time-honored drugs, such as sodium channel blockers, have been found either to be ineffective or to have the potential to produce serious proarrhythmic reactions. Attention is therefore focused on compounds that prolong repolarization and reduce sympathetic stimulation. Two compounds, amiodarone and sotalol, have emerged as prototypes of drugs of the future. METHODS AND RESULTS: This review focuses on sotalol for controlling supraventricular and ventricular tachyarrhythmias. Sotalol is a major antiarrhythmic agent that combines potent class III action with nonselective beta-blocking properties. The drug's pharmacokinetics is simple. Its elimination half-life is 10-15 hours, the drug being excreted almost exclusively by the kidneys. Sotalol's pharmacokinetics allows development of optimal dosing for initiation of therapy relative to changes in creatinine clearance with further dose adjustment by monitoring the QT interval on the surface electrocardiogram. The compound exerts broad-spectrum antiarrhythmic actions in supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmias. It prevents inducible ventricular tachycardia (VT) and ventricular fibrillation (VF) in approximately 30% of patients with a higher figure for the suppression of spontaneously occurring arrhythmias documented on Holter recordings. CONCLUSIONS: The major role of sotalol is in the management of VT/VF often in conjunction with an implantable cardioverter/defibrillator, in which context it lowere the defibrillation threshold. Sotalol is superior to class I agents, especially in VT/VF and in survivors of cardiac arrest. Sotalol has emerged as a major antifibrillatory compound for the control of life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias as the main indication. Data have indicated its potential for the maintenance of stability of sinus rhythm in patients with atrial fibrillation and flutter after electrical conversion and in preventing their occurrence in a variety of clinical settings.

Drugs versus devices in controlling ventricular tachycardia, ventricular fibrillation, and recurrent cardiac arrest

Patients with symptomatic ventricular tachycardia, ventricular fibrillation, or aborted sudden cardiac death remain at high risk for arrhythmia recurrence. In recent years, strategies to treat these patients have changed. Concerns about the proarrhythmia risk and uncertain efficacy of class I agents have resulted in a shift in interest to non-class I antiarrhythmic drugs such as sotalol and amiodarone. Both drugs have class III antiarrhythmic properties (i.e., both lengthen repolarization and refractoriness); however, each also has its own additional electrophysiologic effects. Prospectively designed, randomized studies have shown that both sotalol and amiodarone have more potent antiarrhythmic actions than class I agents. However, even as the advantages of sotalol and amiodarone have been recognized, enthusiasm for nonpharmacologic modes of treatment, particularly the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), has also markedly increased. The ICD has been shown to decrease dramatically the incidence of sudden death, which may lead to the reduction of total mortality. Whether patients with life-threatening ventricular tachyarrhythmias should be treated first with antiarrhythmic agents or with an ICD is an important question. The results of recent studies suggest that treatment with an ICD is more effective than electrophysiologically guided treatment with class I agents. However, results of prospectively designed randomized studies comparing the efficacy of the ICD with that of sotalol and amiodarone must become available before definitive recommendations can be made concerning the use of the ICD as first-line therapy in patients with ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation or aborted sudden cardiac death. In addition, there may be a significant role for the use of antiarrhythmic drugs in conjunction with ICDs.

Efficacy and safety of d,l-sotalol in patients with ventricular tachycardia and in survivors of cardiac arrest

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the antiarrhythmic efficacy and safety of d,l-sotalol in patients with ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) and in survivors of cardiac arrest and to identify the factors that are associated with arrhythmia suppression and therefore might be helpful in predicting drug efficacy.

BACKGROUND

Despite increasing use of the class III antiarrhythmic agent d,l-sotalol, data on its short- and long-term efficacy in a large patient cohort are lacking. Information on its long-term tolerability and safety is limited.

METHODS

A total of 396 patients with inducible sustained VT or VF (VT/VF) underwent programmed stimulation before and after receiving oral d,l-sotalol (240 to 640 mg/day). Patients in whom VT/VF was rendered either noninducible or more difficult to induce (more extrastimuli or faster drive cycle length needed for VT/VF induction) were discharged on a regimen of oral d,l-sotalol.

RESULTS

d,l-Sotalol suppressed VT/VF in 151 patients (38.1%) and rendered the arrhythmia more difficult to induce in 76 patients (19.2%). The extent of drug-induced prolongation of right ventricular refractoriness and a shorter VT cycle length at baseline were independent predictors of immediate drug efficacy. Torsade de pointes developed in seven patients (1.8%). Two hundred ten patients (53%) continued to receive d,l-sotalol and were followed up for 34 +/- 18 months (mean +/- SD). The actuarial rates for the absence of arrhythmic recurrence (either VT/VF or sudden death) at 1 and 3 years were 89% and 77%, respectively. Actuarial rates for overall survival at 1 and 3 years were 94% and 86%, respectively. VT/VF suppression by d,l-sotalol was an independent discriminant variable that separated patients with and without arrhythmia recurrence. However, noninducibility of VT/VF did not predict freedom from sudden death.

CONCLUSION

Oral d,l-sotalol is effective and safe in patients with VT/VF. However, sudden cardiac death develops in a significant proportion of patients, and programmed stimulation seems to be of limited value for its prediction.

The ESVEM trial: impact on treatment of ventricular tachyarrhythmias. Electrophysiologic Study Versus Electrocardiographic Monitoring

The ESVEM (Electrophysiologic Study Versus Electrocardiographic Monitoring) trial was a prospective, randomized study, initiated in 1983, to compare the outcome of patients in whom antiarrhythmic therapy was guided by serial electrophysiological study with the outcome of patients in whom therapy was guided by electrocardiographic monitoring. In a surprising finding, there was no difference in rates of arrhythmia recurrence or mortality between the two methods. Subsequent reanalyses using more stringent criteria for both methods or a combined assessment have not significantly improved the predictive accuracy of guided therapy. Because drug therapy in each limb was also randomized, a comparison of specific antiarrhythmic agents was also possible: sotalol therapy and the absence of previous antiarrhythmic drug therapy were associated with a reduction in arrhythmia recurrence. Survey data suggest that the results of this trial have influenced clinical practice.

Evolving role of sotalol in the management of ventricular tachyarrhythmias

Sotalol is a unique compound with several potential antiarrhythmic mechanisms, including beta blockade (class II activity), action potential duration prolongation (class III activity), and possibly reduction of QT dispersion. In recent years, trials such as the Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial (CAST) and the Electrophysiologic Study versus Electrocardiographic Monitoring (ESVEM) trial reported disappointing results with the use of class I agents in the management of ventricular arrhythmias in patients with coronary artery disease. These results have led to increased interest in class III antiarrhythmic agents, including sotalol. Sotalol is effective in suppressing ventricular premature complexes as well as nonsustained and sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias. The interaction between sotalol and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) is generally favorable. As is the case with other antiarrhythmic drugs, there is no placebo-controlled trial assessing the effect of sotalol on mortality. It is not known if sotalol is more effective than placebo, conventional beta blockade, amiodarone, or ICDs in reducing mortality from life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias. In addition, the optimal method of selecting patients for sotalol therapy has yet to be determined. The safety profile of sotalol has been well established in > 3,000 patients worldwide. Proarrhythmia occurs in approximately 4% of patients, and torsades de pointes occurs in approximately 2.5%. The majority of episodes of torsades de pointes occurs within 3 days of commencing sotalol therapy, and the risk of torsades de pointes increases sharply at dosages > 320 mg daily. It is recommended that initiation of sotalol therapy or dosage increases be performed in a monitored setting. Overall, only 1% of patients enrolled in clinical trials of sotalol discontinued therapy as a result of drug-related congestive heart failure. However, these trials have excluded patients with poor left ventricular systolic function and/or overt heart failure. The optimal management of these patients, who are at greatest risk of sudden cardiac death, and of patients with substrates other than coronary artery disease remains to be elucidated.

A perspective on the ESVEM trial current knowledge: sotalol should not be the first-line agent in the management of ventricular arrhythmias

The Electrophysiologic Study Versus Electrocardiographic Monitoring (ESVEM) trial has recently shown the superiority of sotalol over class-1 agents in lowering the rate of recurrence of ventricular tachyarrhythmias. However, this study was not placebo-controlled, and amiodarone was not included as one of the antiarrhythmic drugs in the trial. Randomized comparative trials between sotalol and amiodarone are available, but the results are inconclusive mainly because of small sample sizes. Because of the specific pharmacokinetics of amiodarone, sotalol has become the first-line agent in the management of ventricular arrhythmias. Because this policy is based on expediency rather than follow-up data, the long-term efficacy, morbidity, and safety of sotalol should be compared with those of amiodarone as well as of nonpharmacological treatment modes for ventricular tachyarrhythmias, such as implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy in prospective trials. Until these issues are resolved, it is incorrect to say that sotalol should be the first-line agent in the management of ventricular arrhythmias.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study of dofetilide in patients with inducible sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias

INTRODUCTION

Dofetilide is a new antiarrhythmic agent with potent IK blocking properties in vitro. We developed a dose-ranging, placebo-controlled study design to define the range of effective doses and to evaluate the clinical electrophysiology of intravenous dofetilide in patients in whom sustained ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation was reproducibly inducible at baseline electrophysiologic testing.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The initial four patients received low doses that were increased in subsequent groups of four if adverse effects were absent. In each group of four patients, one patient was randomly assigned to placebo (double blind). Twenty-four patients were studied at six incremental loading and maintenance infusion regimens. Dofetilide (0.1 to 8.0 ng/mL) produced concentration-related increases in the % delta of QT (r = 0.79, P < 0.001), QTc (r = 0.60, P = 0.02), RR (r = 0.62, P < 0.02), and right ventricular effective refractory period (cycle length 600 msec; r = 0.68, P = 0.04). Placebo produced no changes in any of these measurements. Sustained ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation was no longer inducible in 1 of 6 patients receiving placebo and 8 of 18 receiving dofetilide (4 to 13 sec nonsustained ventricular tachycardia was induced in 4 of these 8). One patient developed torsades de pointes at a high concentration (5.3 ng/mL).

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that: (1) dofetilide produces concentration-related IK blocking effects in patients; (2) an incremental dose-ranging study design aids in identifying the range of doses demonstrating electrophysiologic effects and efficacy; (3) a concomitant placebo group provides important data to assess reproducibility of results over time; and (4) further studies of dofetilide's efficacy and toxicity should be conducted.

Sotalol: from "just another beta blocker" to "the prototype of class III antidysrhythmic compound"

Sotalol is a beta-blocking drug devoid of membrane stabilizing properties, as well as intrinsic sympathomimetic actions, or cardioselectivity. In addition, sotalol prolongs atrial and ventricular repolarization (Class III antiarrhythmic activity). It appears to have less myocardial depressant effect than other beta-blocking agents. Given orally, bioavailability of the drug reaches 100%. Sotalol's plasma half-life is 15 hours (range 7-18) and is dependent only on renal function. In clinical practice, it has been found effective in the suppression of nearly all supraventricular and ventricular dysrhythmias except those related to prolonged ventricular repolarization. Most common adverse effects are dyspnea, bradycardia, and fatigue, which results in drug termination in 16% of the cases. Torsades de pointes usually associated with bradycardia and drug induced QTc prolongation has been reported in 1.9%-3.5% of the patients receiving sotalol. This complication may be reduced by limiting the dose (< 640 mg/day) especially in patients with impaired renal function. In addition hypokalemia must be avoided. To sum up, the combination of Class II and Class III effects may carry additional benefits. However, further studies are required to test such hypotheses.

Electrophysiologic effects of sotalol and amiodarone in patients with sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia

No prospective studies have compared sotalol and amiodarone during electropharmacologic testing. The purpose of this prospective, randomized study was to compare the electrophysiologic effects of sotalol and amiodarone in patients with coronary artery disease and sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (VT). Patients with coronary artery disease and sustained monomorphic VT inducible by programmed stimulation were randomly assigned to receive either sotalol (n = 17) or amiodarone (n = 17). The sotalol dose was titrated to 240 mg twice daily over 7 days. Amiodarone dosing consisted of 600 mg 3 times daily for 10 days. An electrophysiologic test was performed in the baseline state and at the end of the loading regimen. An adequate response was defined as the inability to induce VT or the ability to induce only relatively slow hemodynamically stable VT. During the follow-up electrophysiologic test, 24% of patients taking sotalol and 41% of those taking amiodarone had an adequate response to therapy (p = 0.30). Amiodarone lengthened the mean VT cycle length to a greater degree than sotalol (28% vs 12%, p < 0.01). There were no significant differences in the effects of sotalol and amiodarone on the ventricular effective refractory period. In patients with coronary artery disease, amiodarone and sotalol are similar in efficacy in the treatment of VT as assessed by electropharmacologic testing. The effects of the 2 drugs on ventricular refractoriness are similar, but amiodarone slows VT to a greater extent than sotalol.

Sotalol

Sotalol is a novel antiarrhythmic agent combining beta-adrenergic-antagonist actions with the ability to increase cardiac repolarization and refractoriness. The drug's electrophysiologic and clinical profile is different from that of conventional beta-receptor antagonists. As compared with other antiarrhythmic agents, sotalol prevents recurrences of arrhythmia in a higher proportion of patients, particularly among those presenting with ventricular tachycardia and aborted sudden cardiac death. The net hemodynamic effect of sotalol is the result of a balance between the depressant effects due to beta-receptor blockade and an action that tends to increase contractility. Although initially marketed in the United States for treatment of life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias, sotalol also has demonstrated efficacy in many patients with supraventricular arrhythmias. As with all drugs that prolong the QT interval, the syndrome of torsade de pointes is a serious potential adverse effect.

Efficacy of sotalol guided by programmed electrical stimulation for sustained ventricular arrhythmias secondary to coronary artery disease

Sotalol is a class III antiarrhythmic drug with additional beta-blocker activity that has been shown to be effective in supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmias. Its long-term efficacy for ventricular arrhythmias is not as well described. Patients with documented sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) who had their clinical arrhythmia inducible at baseline electrophysiologic study received sotalol 320 to 640 mg/day. Repeat programmed stimulation was performed after a minimum of 72 hours while receiving the final dose. Of 28 patients (25 men and 3 women) whose arrhythmias were inducible at baseline, 15 had their arrhythmias suppressed with sotalol. Sotalol had greater success in suppressing arrhythmias in those with VF (8 of 9, 89%) than in those with VT (7 of 19, 37%, p < 0.01). In patients with a history of coronary artery disease but no history of myocardial infarction the arrhythmia was suppressed in 7 of 8 (88%) compared with 8 of 20 (40%, p < 0.05) patients with a history of myocardial infarction. All 15 patients in whom ventricular arrhythmias were suppressed continued to take long-term sotalol, and at a follow-up of 10.3 +/- 6.4 months none has had arrhythmia recurrence. Thus, sotalol is an effective drug for the suppression of ventricular arrhythmias as judged by programmed electrical stimulation. It appears to be more effective in patients in whom the clinical arrhythmia is VF rather than VT.

Response to sotalol predicts the response to amiodarone during serial drug testing in patients with sustained ventricular tachycardia and coronary artery disease

It was analyzed whether the response to sotalol can predict the response to amiodarone as evaluated by programmed ventricular stimulation in 30 patients with coronary artery disease and documented recurrent sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT). Programmed ventricular stimulation was performed using 1 or 2 extrastimuli during sinus rhythm and 4 drive cycle lengths at 2 right ventricular sites. If no ventricular tachyarrhythmia was induced, a third extrastimulus was introduced during a paced cycle length of 500 ms. During the control study, VT (mean cycle length 305 +/- 63 ms) was induced in all patients, and the right ventricular effective refractory period (during S1-S1 = 500 ms) was 223 +/- 12 ms. After sotalol, sustained and nonsustained VT were inducible in 22 (73%) and 7 (23%) patients, respectively. One patient did not undergo stimulation on sotalol, because of side effects. After amiodarone, sustained and nonsustained VT were inducible in 23 (77%) and 7 (23%) patients, respectively. The mean cycle length of the induced VT was prolonged after both drugs by 17% (p < 0.001). The effective refractory period was prolonged by 15% (p < 0.001) after sotalol and by 13% (p < 0.001 compared with baseline study; p = NS between both drugs) after amiodarone. Thus, concordant results (effective or ineffective drug) between sotalol and amiodarone were found in 26 patients (87%).

IN CONCLUSION

(1) The effects of sotalol and amiodarone on the cycle length of induced VT and on right ventricular effective refractory period were similar; and (2) inability to suppress VT by amiodarone can be predicted from the response to sotalol.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Empiric use of amiodarone and sotalol

Several studies have demonstrated that class I antiarrhythmic drugs do not reduce, and may increase, sudden cardiac death mortality and total cardiac mortality. Because of this, alternative drug choices for antiarrhythmic therapy are necessary. Amiodarone has been demonstrated to be an important and effective antiarrhythmic agent, as has sotalol. The purpose of this article is to review the various indications and possible benefits of the empiric use of these 2 antiarrhythmic agents.

Sotalol: a breakthrough antiarrhythmic?

OBJECTIVE

To review the pharmacology, pharmacokinetic, dosing, adverse effects, and therapeutic uses of sotalol.

DATA IDENTIFICATION

Articles were identified with an English-language literature computer search via Knowledge Finder, using the term sotalol, and with an extensive search of bibliographies of identified articles.

STUDY SELECTION

Relevant or representative animal studies, human trials, and case reports were selected for evaluation.

DATA EXTRACTION

The literature was assessed for quality, methodology, and outcome information.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Sotalol is a racemic compound with Class II (beta-blocking properties) and Class III (prolonged action potential) antiarrhythmic activity. It has been suggested that the plasma concentration associated with QTc prolongation (a measure of the Class III action) is much greater than that associated with beta-blockade. Therefore, sotalol is categorized as a Class III antiarrhythmic agent. The 1-isomer is responsible for the beta-blocking activity, whereas both isomers have Class III properties. After oral dosing in fasting patients with normal renal function, sotalol is > 90 percent absorbed, achieves peak serum concentrations in 2-4 h, is excreted unchanged 80-90 percent in the urine, has a volume of distribution of 1-2 L/kg, and has an elimination half-life of about 12 h. Sotalol is effective in patients with life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias that have been refractory to other conventional antiarrhythmic drugs. In general, sotalol appears to be well tolerated, with many of its adverse effects caused by beta-blocking activity. As with other antiarrhythmic agents, the possibility of proarrhythmia (frequently torsade de pointes) exists.

CONCLUSIONS

Racemic sotalol is an effective Class III antiarrhythmic agent approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of documented life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias. Investigations continue with racemic sotalol in the management of supraventricular arrhythmias. Trials with the d-isomer are also ongoing.

Sotalol. An updated review of its pharmacological properties and therapeutic use in cardiac arrhythmias

Sotalol is a nonselective beta-adrenoceptor antagonist which prolongs cardiac repolarisation independently of its antiadrenergic action (class III antiarrhythmic properties). The antiarrhythmic action of sotalol appears to arise predominantly from its class III properties, and the drug exhibits a broader antiarrhythmic profile than the conventional beta-blockers. Sotalol is effective in controlling paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardias and the ventricular response to atrial fibrillation/flutter in Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome, in maintaining sinus rhythm after cardioversion of atrial fibrillation/flutter, and in preventing initiation of supraventricular tachyarrhythmias following coronary artery bypass surgery. Sotalol shows promise in the control of nonmalignant and life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias, particularly those associated with ischaemic heart disease. It is effective in suppressing complex forms of ventricular ectopy, displaying superior antiectopic activity to propranolol and metoprolol. The acute efficacy of sotalol in preventing reinduction of sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias and suppressing spontaneous episodes of these arrhythmias on Holter monitoring is translated into long term prophylactic efficacy against arrhythmia recurrence in approximately 55 to 85% of patients with refractory life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias. In addition, sotalol offers the advantage over the class I agents of reducing cardiac and all-cause mortality in the high risk population with life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias. The adverse effects of sotalol are primarily related to its beta-blocking activity and its class III property of prolonging cardiac repolarisation. Sotalol is devoid of overt cardiodepressant activity in patients with mild or moderate left ventricular dysfunction. The overall arrhythmogenic potential is moderately low, but torsade de pointes may develop in conjunction with excessive prolongation of the QT interval due to bradycardia, hypokalaemia or high plasma concentrations of the drug. In summary, sotalol displays a broad spectrum of antiarrhythmic activity, is haemodynamically well tolerated, and confers a relatively low proarrhythmic risk. It is likely to prove particularly appropriate in the treatment and prophylaxis of life-threatening ventricular tachyarrhythmias.

Usefulness of sotalol for life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias

Two trial designs have been used in evaluating sotalol in patients with sustained tachyarrhythmias: open-label dose escalation and randomized comparison with reference agents. At least 7 open-label studies (n = 16-65) have been reported from single centers in patients in whom trials of numerous other antiarrhythmic agents were unsuccessful. At the doses used, usually 320-640 mg/day, plasma concentrations were in the range associated with both beta blockade and class III antiarrhythmic activity (2-3 micrograms/mL). These concentrations produced electrophysiologic changes that were consistent across studies: 10-16% increase in right ventricular effective refractory period (ERP), 4-8% increase in corrected QT interval (QTc), and 17-30% increase in sinus cycle length (corresponding to a 15-23% decrease in heart rate). In these open-label trials, sotalol suppressed inducible ventricular tachyarrhythmias in 20-72% of patients; the higher degrees of efficacy were reported when induction protocols were confined to double extrastimuli. Side effects leading to discontinuation of sotalol in patients with sustained ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation include fatigue (4.0%), marked bradycardia (3.0%), torsades de pointes (3.0%), and heart failure or pulmonary edema (1.0%). A multicenter randomized trial compared intravenous sotalol with intravenous procainamide in a double-blind prospective fashion. Sotalol suppressed ventricular tachyarrhythmias inducible with triple extrastimuli in 15 (30%) of 50 patients, whereas procainamide was effective in 10 (20%) of 50. In this and other series, responsiveness to sotalol was prospectively identified by a particularly fast tachycardia at baseline (e.g., cycle length of < 270 msec), but not by the extent of changes in global indices of repolarization (QTc, ERP).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Practical considerations in the use of sotalol for ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation

Sotalol is a unique antiarrhythmic drug that combines beta-blocking effects with actions to prolong action potential duration. The net effect is a drug that is efficacious in the management of ventricular tachyarrhythmias. Although sotalol has effects on both heart rate and QT interval, these effects do not help predict the antiarrhythmic efficacy of the agent. Changes in QT dispersion may, however, prove to be relevant to both the antiarrhythmic effects and the arrhythmogenic effects of sotalol. Thus, although sotalol may occasionally cause torsades de pointes, this complication may be predictable and clinically controllable. Sotalol is well tolerated, and it may be used, with caution, in some patients with impaired myocardial contractile performance, despite its beta-blocking action. Sotalol has an important indication for the management of ventricular tachyarrhythmias.

Sotalol and type IA drugs in combination prevent recurrence of sustained ventricular tachycardia

OBJECTIVES

This study assessed the efficacy of the combination of sotalol and either quinidine or procainamide in preventing sustained ventricular tachycardia inducibility and recurrence and prospectively evaluated the ability of the drug combination to prevent ventricular tachycardia recurrence when the arrhythmia remained inducible but was modified.

BACKGROUND

Individual antiarrhythmic drugs are often ineffective in preventing the induction and recurrence of sustained ventricular tachycardia. Beta-adrenergic blockade and prolongation of refractoriness may be important components of successful antiarrhythmic therapy in patients with ventricular tachycardia. We reasoned that the combination of sotalol, which has beta-adrenergic blocking properties and prolonged ventricular refractoriness, and quinidine or procainamide, two agents that slow conduction and prolong refractory periods, would be effective therapy in such patients.

METHODS

We administered low dose sotalol (205 +/- 84 mg/day) plus quinidine sulfate (1,278 +/- 479 mg/day) or procainamide (2,393 +/- 1,423 mg/day) to 50 patients with spontaneous sustained ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation and inducible ventricular tachycardia.

RESULTS

In 21 (46%) of 46 patients, ventricular tachycardia was rendered noninducible at electrophysiologic study (group I), and in 17 patients (37%), inducible tachycardia was modified according to prospectively identified criteria (group II), for a combined 83% response rate. Ventricular refractory periods increased from 252 +/- 24 to 316 +/- 28 ms and from 265 +/- 33 to 316 +/- 24 ms in groups I and II, respectively (p < 0.001), but from 234 +/- 19 to only 286 +/- 13 ms in the group of patients with unmodified ventricular tachycardia inducibility (n = 8, group III, p < 0.001). Cycle length of induced ventricular tachycardia slowed from 324 +/- 62 to 432 +/- 70 ms in group II patients (p < 0.001), whereas it slowed less in group III patients (279 +/- 73 to 314 +/- 63 ms, p = NS). Forty-two of the 50 patients (including all patients in groups I and II) were discharged on treatment with the drug combination. After 25 +/- 19 months of follow-up, the actuarial recurrence rate of ventricular tachycardia was 6%, 6% and 11% at 1, 2 and 3 years, respectively. Among patients in whom this drug combination was unsuccessful at electrophysiologic study (group III) and in those who received alternative therapy after combination therapy was discontinued because of side effects, actuarial recurrence rates were 9%, 14% and 32% at 1, 2 and 3 years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of sotalol plus quinidine or procainamide markedly prolongs ventricular refractoriness and slows induced ventricular tachycardia in a high proportion of patients. Patients with modified or noninducible tachycardia have a low rate of arrhythmia recurrence in follow-up. This drug combination deserves further evaluation.

Sotalol

Sotalol causes noncardioselective beta-adrenergic antagonism and prolongation of repolarization of cardiac tissues (Class III electrophysiologic action). This dual pharmacologic profile confers unprecedented antiarrhythmic properties to the drug. Sotalol is highly bioavailable when administered orally in the fasting state and is mostly cleared unchanged in the urine with an apparent half-life of elimination of 15 to 17 hours. It has been found effective in the suppression of nearly all cardiac arrhythmias, with the exception of those precipitated by prolongation of ventricular repolarization. Its safety and efficacy relative to other antiarrhythmic drugs need to be examined more fully in randomized controlled trials of unselected patients. The adverse effects potentially associated with the use of sotalol are those commonly observed with beta-adrenergic blockade, as well as those resulting from excessive prolongation of the QT interval. The occurrence of torsade de pointes during treatment with sotalol may be minimized by limiting doses to no more than 640 mg/day and by strictly avoiding the development of hypokalemia.

Efficacy and electrophysiologic effects of oral sotalol in patients with sustained ventricular tachycardia caused by coronary artery disease

The efficacy of oral sotalol in preventing sustained ventricular tachycardia induction by invasive electrophysiological testing was assessed in 22 patients (60 +/- 9 years) with prior myocardial infarction. Programmed stimulation consisted of two basic drives followed by up to three extrastimuli at two right ventricular sites. At baseline, sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia was inducible in all patients. With sotalol (360 +/- 172 mg/day), it was no longer inducible in 10 patients; in 12 others, it remained inducible and its cycle length was only minimally prolonged (322 +/- 42 to 345 +/- 44 msec, p less than 0.05). Sotalol markedly prolonged sinus cycle length, uncorrected QT interval, and right ventricular effective and functional refractory periods, but had little effect on ventricular conduction time either in sinus rhythm or with right ventricular pacing. There was no significant difference in drug dose or in electrophysiologic effect of drug that related to efficacy, nor was there any correlation between drug-induced prolongation of ventricular tachycardia cycle length and its effects. Six patients received oral sotalol over the long term without spontaneous recurrence of ventricular tachycardia (follow-up: 23 +/- 18 months). These results demonstrate that sotalol is effective (45%) against sustained ventricular tachycardia induction at moderate doses and is well tolerated over a long term in the setting of remote myocardial infarction. However, its electrophysiologic effects as measured at invasive testing are not predictive of efficacy against ventricular tachycardia induction.

Rate dependence of sotalol-induced prolongation of ventricular repolarization during exercise in humans

Studies in animals have shown that drug-induced action potential prolongation with class III antiarrhythmic agents increases with slow pacing rates. We studied the physiological rate dependence of sotalol effects on ventricular repolarization, measured as QT interval duration on the surface electrocardiogram at rest and during a maximal exercise test, in 10 normal volunteers. In a randomized, crossover study, three dosages of sotalol (160 mg/24 hr, 320 mg/24 hr, and 640 mg/24 hr) were administered during 4 days to each subject. In a control period, no drug was administered. During each period, 50-100 QT intervals were measured over a wide range of RR intervals recorded at rest and during the course of a maximal exercise test. Plasma sotalol concentration and beta-adrenoceptor blockade (percent reduction in peak exercise heart rate from control) were also measured. The QT-versus-RR relation was fitted to several formulas, and the overall best fit was used to calculate QT interval duration normalized for a heart rate of 60 beats/min (QTc) and to analyze the rate dependence of QT prolongation with sotalol. Sotalol-induced beta-adrenoceptor blockade and QTc prolongation were dose and concentration dependent. Sotalol reduced peak exercise heart rate by 13.8 +/- 7% at the dosage of 320 mg/24 hr and by 25.4 +/- 8% at the dosage of 640 mg/24 hr (both p less than 0.01). Sotalol prolonged QTc interval by 5.8 +/- 3.7% and 11.8 +/- 3% at these respective dosages (both p less than 0.01). The concentration of sotalol required to produce minimal (mean QTc prolongation, 5.6%; confidence interval, 0-11.2%) QTc prolongation (680 ng/ml) tended to be lower than that required for minimal (mean percent reduction in maximal exercise heart rate, 13.9%; confidence interval, 0-27.8%) beta-blockade (840 ng/ml). QT prolongation with sotalol increased with increasing RR intervals (i.e., decreasing heart rate) at all dosages. QT prolongation became statistically significant for RR of 800 msec or more at all dosages and for RR intervals of 600 msec or more at the dosage of 640 mg/24 hr. This rate dependence altered the relation between QT interval duration and sotalol plasma concentrations. These results suggest that sotalol prolongs QTc interval in humans at dosages and concentrations similar to those required to produce beta-adrenoceptor blockade, QT prolongation with sotalol is more pronounced when heart rate decreases and is not apparent during exercise-induced tachycardia, and the relation between QT prolongation with sotalol and plasma concentrations of the drug depends on the heart rate at which measurements are made.

Predictive value of electrophysiologic studies during treatment of ventricular tachycardia with the beta-blocking agent nadolol. The Working Group on Arrhythmias of the French Society of Cardiology

Sixty patients with recurrent inducible sustained ventricular tachycardia were prospectively treated with nadolol (40 or 80 mg/day). Old myocardial infarction was present in 43 patients and dilated cardiomyopathy in 12. In group I (n = 36), nadolol was given alone, whereas in group II (n = 24), previously ineffective treatment with amiodarone was continued in combination with nadolol. Left ventricular ejection fraction was higher in patients in group I (0.40 +/- 0.12) than in group II (0.30 +/- 0.10, p less than 0.01) patients. Electrophysiologic study was repeated after short-term treatment with nadolol, which was continued regardless of the results of this test, according to the scheme of the parallel approach. Recurrence of spontaneous tachycardia or sudden death occurred in 21 patients after 10 +/- 9.2 months; sustained tachycardia was inducible in 19 on nadolol therapy. The remaining 39 patients (of whom 21 had inducible tachycardia while taking the drug) have had no recurrence of tachycardia after 27.8 +/- 9.3 months of follow-up study. Sensitivity, specificity and predictive value of a positive and negative test were 90.5%, 46%, 47.5% and 90%, respectively. The results differ between group I and group II patients, the latter having a high percent of false positive responses. This difference is even more obvious with respect to left ventricular ejection fraction: the predictive value of a positive test was 86% when ejection fraction was greater than 0.40 and 39% when it was less than 0.40.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)