Efficacy and safety of sotalol in patients with complex ventricular arrhythmias

Safety of outpatient commencement of sotalol

Background

Inpatient monitoring is recommended for sotalol initiation.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to assess the safety of outpatient sotalol commencement.

Methods

This is a multicenter, retrospective, observational study of patients initiated on sotalol in an outpatient setting. Serial electrocardiogram monitoring at day 3, day 7, 1 month, and subsequently as clinically indicated was performed. Corrected QT (QTc) interval and clinical events were evaluated.

Results

Between 2008 and 2023, 880 consecutive patients who were commenced on sotalol were evaluated. Indications were atrial fibrillation/flutter in 87.3% (n = 768), ventricular arrhythmias in 9.9% (n = 87), and other arrhythmias in 2.8% (n = 25). The daily dosage at initiation was 131.0 ± 53.2 mg/d. The QTc interval increased from baseline (431 ± 32 ms) to 444 ± 37 ms (day 3) and 440 ± 33 ms (day 7) after sotalol initiation (P < .001). Within the first week, QTc prolongation led to the discontinuation of sotalol in 4 and dose reduction in 1. No ventricular arrhythmia, syncope, or death was observed during the first week. Dose reduction due to asymptomatic bradycardia occurred in 3 and discontinuation due to dyspnea in 3 within the first week. Overall, 1.1% developed QTc prolongation (>500 ms/>25% from baseline); 4 within 3 days, 1 within 1 week, 4 within 60 days, and 1 after >3 years. Discontinuation of sotalol due to other adverse effects occurred in 41 patients within the first month of therapy.

Conclusion

Sotalol initiation in an outpatient setting with protocolized follow-up is safe, with no recorded sotalol-related mortality, ventricular arrhythmias, or syncope. There was a low incidence of significant QTc prolongation necessitating discontinuation within the first month of treatment. Importantly, we observed a small incidence of late QT prolongation, highlighting the need for vigilant outpatient surveillance of individuals on sotalol.

Effectiveness and safety of mexiletine in patients at risk for (recurrent) ventricular arrhythmias: a systematic review

While mexiletine has been used for over 40 years for prevention of (recurrent) ventricular arrhythmias and for myotonia, patient access has recently been critically endangered. Here we aim to demonstrate the effectiveness and safety of mexiletine in the treatment of patients with (recurrent) ventricular arrhythmias, emphasizing the absolute necessity of its accessibility. Studies were included in this systematic review (PROSPERO, CRD42020213434) if the efficacy or safety of mexiletine in any dose was evaluated in patients at risk for (recurrent) ventricular arrhythmias with or without comparison with alternative treatments (e.g. placebo). A systematic search was performed in Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and in the clinical trial registry databases ClinicalTrials.gov and ICTRP. Risk of bias were assessed and tailored to the different study designs. Large heterogeneity in study designs and outcome measures prompted a narrative synthesis approach. In total, 221 studies were included reporting on 8970 patients treated with mexiletine. Age ranged from 0 to 88 years. A decrease in ventricular arrhythmias of >50% was observed in 72% of the studies for pre-mature ventricular complexes, 64% for ventricular tachycardia, and 33% for ventricular fibrillation. Electrocardiographic effects of mexiletine were small; only in a subset of patients with primary arrhythmia syndromes, a relative (desired) QTc decrease was reproducibly observed. As for adverse events, gastrointestinal complaints were most frequently observed (33% of the patients). In this systematic review, we present all the currently available knowledge of mexiletine in patients at risk for (recurrent) ventricular arrhythmias and show that mexiletine is both effective and safe.

Comparison of a Standard versus Accelerated Dosing Regimen for d,l-Sotalol for the Treatment of Atrial and Ventricular Dysrhythmias

BACKGROUND

The current recommended starting dose of sotalol is 80 mg orally twice per day, followed by a judicious increase in dosage every 3 days under continuous telemetry monitoring. We hypothesized that sotalol administered at a higher starting dose (120 or 160 mg twice daily) would allow a more rapid attainment of therapeutic response with an acceptable safety and comparable efficacy profile.

METHODS

Two hundred nine inpatients with various atrial and ventricular dysrhythmias were begun on either a standard starting dose (80 mg b.i.d.) or an accelerated dose (120 or 160 mg b.i.d.) of sotalol. In-hospital occurrences of drug-related adverse effects (proarrhythmic and others), drug efficacy, and length of hospitalization were retrospectively compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Ten patients (9.3%) in the 80 mg b.i.d. starting dose group experienced a cardiac adverse effect of sotalol as compared to 15 patients (14.9%) in the accelerated dose group (P = 0.286). The mean amount of corrected QT (QTc) prolongation over baseline was not significantly different between the two groups at hospital discharge (22.5 ms vs 21.6 ms, P = 0.898). There was a trend toward more noncardiac side effects of sotalol in the accelerated dose group: 2 (1.9%) versus 7(6.9%), P = 0.092. The average length of hospital stay was similar in the two groups (6.8 days vs 7.4 days, P = 0.558).

CONCLUSION

Initiating sotalol at 120-160 mg orally twice per day marginally increases the risk of cardiac and non-cardiac side effects compared to the standard starting regimen of 80 mg b.i.d. Such an accelerated dosing regimen neither shortened hospitalization nor had any effect on treatment efficacy in this retrospective analysis.

Micro-Electrode Arrays in Cardiac Safety Pharmacology

Drug-induced QT interval prolongation is now a major concern in safety pharmacology. Regulatory authorities such as the US FDA and the European Medicines Agency require in vitro testing of all drug candidates against the potential risk for QT interval prolongation prior to clinical trials. Common in vitro methods include organ models (Langendorff heart), conventional electrophysiology on cardiac myocytes, and heterologous expression systems of human ether-a-go-go-related gene (hERG) channels. A novel approach is to study electrophysiological properties of cultured cardiac myocytes by micro-electrode arrays (MEA). This technology utilises multi channel recording from an array of embedded substrate-integrated extracellular electrodes using cardiac tissue from the ventricles of embryonic chickens. The detected field potentials allow a partial reconstruction of the shape and time course of the underlying action potential. In particular, the duration of action potentials of ventricular myocytes is closely related to the QT interval on an ECG. This novel technique was used to study reference substances with a reported QT interval prolonging effect. These substances were E4031, amiodarone, quinidine and sotalol. These substances show a significant prolongation of the field potential. However, verapamil, a typical 'false positive' when using the hERG assay does not cause any field potential prolongation using the MEA assay. Whereas the heterologous hERG assay limits cardiac repolarisation to just one channel, the MEA assay reflects the full range of mechanisms involved in cardiac action potential regulation. In summary, screening compounds in cardiac myocytes with the MEA technology against QT interval prolongation can overcome the problem of a single cell assay to potentially report 'false positives'.

Efficacy and safety of sotalol versus quinidine for the maintenance of sinus rhythm after conversion of atrial fibrillation. SOCESP Investigators. The Cardiology Society of São Paulo

To compare the efficacy and safety of sotalol and quinidine after conversion of atrial fibrillation (AF) of <6 months, a prospective multicenter trial enrolled 121 patients who were randomized to receive dl-sotalol (160 to 320 mg/day, 58 patients) or quinidine sulfate (600 to 800 mg/day, 63 patients). Patients with left ventricular ejection fraction of <0.40 or left atrial diameter >5.2 cm were excluded. After 6 months of follow-up, using the Kaplan-Meier method, the probabilities of success were comparable between sotalol (74%) and quinidine (68%), but recurrences occurred later with sotalol than with quinidine (69 vs 10 days, p <0.05). Four patients developed proarrhythmic events, 3 (5%) with sotalol and 1 (2%) with quinidine, which were all associated with diuretic therapy. In patients converted from recent-onset AF (< or = 72 hours), sotalol was more effective than quinidine (93% vs 64%, p = 0.01), whereas in chronic AF (> 72 hours), quinidine was more effective than sotalol (68% vs 33%, p <0.05). During recurrences, the ventricular rate was significantly reduced in patients taking sotalol (98 to 82 beats/min, p <0.05). Independent predictors of therapeutic success were recent-onset AF in the sotalol group (p <0.001) and absence of hypertension in the quinidine group (p <0.05). In conclusion, sotalol and quinidine have comparable efficacy and safety for the maintenance of sinus rhythm in the overall group. In recent-onset AF, sotalol was more effective, whereas in chronic AF, quinidine had a better result. Recurrences occurred later with sotalol when compared with quinidine. Because of proarrhythmia, these drugs should be used judiciously in patients on diuretic therapy.

Is hospital admission for initiation of antiarrhythmic therapy with sotalol for atrial arrhythmias required? Yield of in-hospital monitoring and prediction of risk for significant arrhythmia complications

OBJECTIVES

We sought to determine the yield of in-hospital monitoring for detection of significant arrhythmia complications in patients starting sotalol therapy for atrial arrhythmias and to identify factors that might predict safe outpatient initiation.

BACKGROUND

The need for hospital admission during initiation of antiarrhythmic therapy has been questioned, particularly for sotalol, with which proarrhythmia may be dose related.

METHODS

The records of 120 patients admitted to the hospital for initiation of sotalol therapy were retrospectively reviewed to determine the incidence of significant arrhythmia complications, defined as new or increased ventricular arrhythmias, significant bradycardia or excessive corrected QT (QTc) interval prolongation.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients (20.8%) experienced 35 complications, triggering therapy changes during the hospital period in 21 (17.5%). New or increased ventricular arrhythmias developed in 7 patients (5.8%) (torsade de pointes in 2), significant bradycardia in 20 (16.7%) (rate <40 beats/min in 13, pause >3.0 s in 4, third-degree atrioventricular block in 1, permanent pacemaker implantation in 3) and excessively prolonged QTc intervals in 8 (6.7%) (dosage reduced or discontinued in 6). Time to the earliest detection of complications was 2.1 +/- 2.5 (mean +/- SD) days after initiation of sotalol, with 22 of 25 patients meeting criteria for complications within 3 days of monitoring. Baseline electrocardiographic intervals or absence of heart disease failed to distinguish a low risk group. Multivariate analysis identified absence of a pacemaker as the only significant predictor of arrhythmia complications (p = 0.022).

CONCLUSIONS

Because clinically significant complications can be detected with in-hospital monitoring in one of five patients starting sotalol therapy, hospital admission is warranted for initiation of sotalol. Patients without pacemakers are at higher risk for these complications.

Electrocardiographic and clinical predictors of torsades de pointes induced by almokalant infusion in patients with chronic atrial fibrillation or flutter: a prospective study

The aim of this study was to identify predictors of torsades de pointes (TdP) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) or flutter exposed to the Class III antiarrhythmic drug almokalant. TdP can be caused by drugs that prolong myocardial repolarization. One hundred patients received almokalant infusion during AF (infusion 1) and 62 of the patients during sinus rhythm (SR) on the following day (infusion 2). Thirty-two patients converted to SR. Six patients developed TdP. During AF, T wave alternans was more common prior to infusion (baseline) in patients developing TdP (50% vs 4%, P < 0.01). After 30 minutes of infusion 1, the TdP patients exhibited a longer QT interval (493 +/- 114 vs 443 +/- 54 ms [mean +/- SD], P < 0.01), a larger precordial QT dispersion (50 +/- 74 vs 27 +/- 26 ms, P < 0.05), and a lower T wave amplitude (0.12 +/- 0.21 vs 0.24 +/- 0.16 mV, P < 0.01). After 30 minutes of infusion 2, they exhibited a longer QT interval (672 +/- 26 vs 489 +/- 74 ms, P < 0.001), a larger QT dispersion in precordial (82 +/- 7 vs 54 +/- 52 ms, P < 0.01) and extremity leads (163 +/- 0 vs 40 +/- 34 ms, P < 0.001), and T wave alternans was more common (100% vs 0%, P < 0.001). Risk factors for development of TdP were at baseline: female gender, ventricular extrasystoles, and treatment with diuretics; and, after 30 minutes of infusion: sequential bilateral bundle branch block, ventricular extrasystoles in bigeminy, and a biphasic T wave. Patients developing TdP exhibited early during almokalant infusion a pronounced QT prolongation, increased QT dispersion, and marked morphological T wave changes.

Suppression of frequent premature ventricular contractions and improvement of left ventricular function in patients with presumed idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy

OBJECTIVE

To examine the hypothesis that suppression of frequent premature ventricular contractions may be associated with improvement in left ventricular function in patients with presumed idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy.

DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective case study and statistical analysis of the effect of cardiac medical therapy on outcome.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study population consisted of 14 patients with more than 20,000 premature ventricular contractions in 24 hours recorded by Holter monitoring and associated left ventricular dysfunction (ejection fraction, 40% or less). Clinical characteristics, number of premature ventricular contractions per hour on 24-hour ambulatory Holter monitoring, and ejection fraction based on transthoracic echocardiography were compared before and after cardiac therapeutic intervention.

RESULTS

Of the 14 patients, 10 had presumed idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy, and 4 had ischemic heart disease. Of the overall study group, seven had received additional cardiac medical therapy after the index evaluation, including four patients who had amiodarone therapy. A significant reduction (75% or more from baseline) in premature ventricular contractions after medical therapeutic intervention was observed in five patients at the first follow-up examination. The mean interval to the first follow-up examination was 6 +/- 3 months. Of the five patients, four had significant improvement in clinical functional status and the ejection fraction. The mean ejection fraction of these five patients increased from 27 +/- 10% at baseline to 49 +/- 17% after medical therapy (P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

The suppression of frequent premature ventricular contractions may be associated with improvement of left ventricular function in patients with presumed idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy.

Atrial fibrillation: antiarrhythmic therapy versus rate control with antithrombotic therapy

Atrial fibrillation is a major health problem in the United States, but the best strategies for treating it have not been rigorously determined in clinical studies. Specifically, there is a paucity of data comparing the approach of maintaining sinus rhythm using prophylactic antiarrhythmic drug therapy with the approach of controlling the ventricular response to atrial fibrillation while reducing embolic events with concomitant antithrombotic therapy. Until ongoing randomized trials are completed, which patients benefit most from a specific approach cannot be determined with certainty. In general, the most reasonable strategies include (1) the restoration of sinus rhythm (without prophylactic antiarrhythmic therapy) after the patient's first episode of atrial fibrillation; and (2) the maintenance of sinus rhythm (including the use of prophylactic antiarrhythmic therapy) in patients who remain symptomatic despite adequate rate control, and who are not at high risk for proarrhythmia and/or are unlikely to maintain sinus rhythm. The risks and benefits need to be carefully weighed in patients with truly asymptomatic atrial fibrillation. Many patients may require multiple attempts to maintain sinus rhythm. Current investigative treatment modalities (e.g., ablation techniques, atrial implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, new antiarrhythmic agents) are likely to alter the current approaches to atrial fibrillation.

Sotalol: a new beta-adrenergic blocker for ventricular arrhythmias

Sotalol is a water-soluble, nonselective, beta-adrenergic blocker that was recently approved in oral form in the United States for the treatment of ventricular arrhythmias that are judged to be life-threatening. As a beta-blocker, sotalol is unique in having additional class-III antiarrhythmic activity. It is still not resolved whether sotalol is more effective than other beta-blockers in managing arrhythmias, but there are suggestions that it might possess greater antiarrhythmic and life-protecting activities than other types of antiarrhythmic drugs. The drug is well tolerated, but, because of its electrophysiologic activity, there is a small risk of proarrhythmia, specifically the development of polymorphic ventricular tachycardia and torsade de pointes.

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.