Effect of betaxolol on the hemodynamic, gas exchange, and cardiac output response to exercise in chronic atrial fibrillation

Physiological and Perceived Exertion Responses during Exercise: Effect of β-blockade

PURPOSE

This study investigated the effect of β-blockade on physiological and perceived exertion (RPE) responses during incremental treadmill exercise.

METHODS

Sixteen healthy participants (n = 8 men; age, 25.3 ± 4.6 yr) performed a maximal treadmill exercise test after ingestion of 100 mg metoprolol or placebo, with a double-blind, randomized, and counterbalanced design. Heart rate (HR), ventilatory, and gas exchange variables were measured continuously, and participants reported RPE at the end of each minute. Physiological and RPE responses during each condition were compared at the ventilatory threshold (VT), respiratory compensation point, and at maximal exercise using repeated-measures ANOVA. Linear regression modeled relationships between perceived exertion and physiological variables.

RESULTS

The HR and V˙O2 at the VT, respiratory compensation point, and maximal exercise were all significantly lower after β-blockade (P < 0.05). However, when standardized to within condition peak values, differences were no longer significant. The RPE associated with VT was higher after β-blockade (12.9 ± 1.0 vs 12.3 ± 1.2, P < 0.05) but lower at maximal exercise (19.1 ± 0.6 vs 19.4 ± 0.5, P < 0.05). Increases in RPE relative to HR were greater after β-blockade and remained significant when expressed relative to peak HR. There was no difference in the growth of the relationship between RPE and V˙O2 across conditions, although the origin of the relationship was higher with β-blockade.

CONCLUSIONS

Although β-blockade resulted in a significant reduction in exercising HR and V˙O2, the RPE for a given relative intensity remained unchanged. The relationship between RPE and V˙O2 was not affected by β-blockade. The results provide evidence that RPE is a useful and reliable measure for exercise testing and prescription in patients prescribed β-blockade therapy.

Rate Control in Atrial Fibrillation

Rate control may now be adopted as a first-choice therapy in a variety of patients, especially older relatively asymptomatic patients with hypertension or other underlying heart diseases. The goal of rate control therapy is to minimize symptoms, improve quality of life, decrease the risk of development of heart failure, and prevent thromboembolic complications. A lenient rate control approach may be the initial therapeutic strategy. If symptoms persist, a stricter rate control approach may be adopted. Although long-term randomized studies are lacking, the evidence available suggests that a β-blocker with or without digoxin is the first-choice rate control therapy.

Rate control in permanent atrial fibrillation

Guidelines on the use of digoxin are inconsistent with evidence from randomised trials

Exercise capacity in atrial fibrillation: a substudy of the Sotalol-Amiodarone Atrial Fibrillation Efficacy Trial (SAFE-T)

BACKGROUND

Therapy for chronic atrial fibrillation (AF) focuses on rate versus rhythm control, but little is known about the effects of common therapeutic interventions on exercise tolerance in AF.

METHODS

Six hundred fifty-five patients with chronic AF underwent maximal exercise testing at baseline and 8 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year after randomization to sotalol, amiodarone, or placebo therapy and attempted direct current cardioversion. Analyses of baseline determinants of exercise capacity, predictors of change in exercise capacity at 6 months and 1 year, and the short- and long-term effects of cardioversion on exercise capacity were made.

RESULTS

Age, obesity, and presence of symptoms accompanying AF were inversely associated with baseline exercise capacity, but these factors accounted for only 10% of the variance in exercise capacity. Patients most likely to benefit from cardioversion were those most limited initially, younger, not obese or hypertensive, and with an uncontrolled ventricular rate at baseline. Conversion to sinus rhythm (SR) resulted in significant reductions in resting (approximately 25 beat/min) and peak exercise (approximately 40 beat/min) heart rates at 6 months and 1 year (P < .001). Successful cardioversion improved exercise capacity by 15% at 8 weeks, and these improvements were maintained throughout the year. This improvement was observed both among those who maintained SR and those with intermittent AF.

CONCLUSION

Cardioversion resulted in a sustained improvement in exercise capacity over the course of 1 year, and this improvement was similar between those in SR and those with SR and recurrent AF. Patients most likely to improve with treatment tended to be younger and nonobese and have the greatest limitations initially.

Impact of informed consent requirements on cardiac arrest research in the United States: exception from consent or from research?

INTRODUCTION

Research in patients with life-threatening illness such as cardiac arrest is challenging since they can not consent. The Food and Drug Administration addressed research under emergency conditions by publishing new criteria for exception from informed consent in 1996. We systematically reviewed randomized trials over a 10-year period to assess the impact of these regulations.

METHODS

Case-control study of published trials for cardiac arrest (cases) and atrial fibrillation (controls.) Studies were identified by using structured searches of MEDLINE and EMBASE from 1992 to 2002. Included were studies using random allocation in humans with cardiac arrest or atrial fibrillation prior to enrollment. Excluded were duplicate publications. Number of American trials, foreign trials and proportion of trials of American origin were compared by using regression analysis. Changes in cardiac arrest versus atrial fibrillation trials were calculated as risk differences.

RESULTS

Of 4982 identified cardiac arrest studies, 57 (1.1%) were randomized trials. The number of American cardiac arrest trials decreased by 15% (95% CI: 8, 22%) annually (P = 0.05). The proportion of cardiac arrest trials of American origin decreased by 16% (95% CI: 10, 22%) annually (P = 0.006). Of 5596 identified atrial fibrillation studies, 197 trials (3.5%) were randomized trials. The risk difference between cardiac arrest versus atrial fibrillation trials being of American origin decreased significantly (annual difference -5.8% (95% CI: -10, -0.1%), P = 0.03).

INTERPRETATION

Fewer American cardiac arrest trials were published during the last decade, when federal consent requirements changed. Regulatory requirements for clinical trials may inhibit improvements in care and threaten public health.

Special problems with antiarrhythmic drugs in the elderly: safety, tolerability, and efficacy

With advancing age, atrial fibrillation is increasingly likely to indicate underlying cardiovascular disease and risk. An understanding of this is particularly important in the elderly patient, where likely triggers to atrial fibrillation and the influence of other pathologies on the safety and efficacy of proposed treatments will all contribute to optimal care of these patients. It is not yet clear whether rate control or cardioversion to sinus rhythm is the best strategy for the generality of patients with atrial fibrillation, and still less so for individuals. Age and comorbidity add complexities to this decision, which should inform the choice of drugs to be used. Further uncertainties arise from a literature that has often excluded elderly patients and derived its conclusions about mode of drug action from studies undertaken during sinus rhythm rather than atrial fibrillation. Despite these difficulties the careful evaluation of elderly patients with atrial fibrillation and their involvement in relevant choices should ensure optimum treatment for the individual.

Acute ventricular rate control in atrial fibrillation: IV combination of diltiazem and digoxin vs. IV diltiazem alone

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the efficacy of an IV combination of diltiazem and digoxin vs IV diltiazem alone for acute ventricular rate control in patients with atrial fibrillation.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, open-label study.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fifty-two patients with atrial fibrillation and uncontrolled ventricular rates were randomized to receive either an IV combination of diltiazem and digoxin or IV diltiazem alone and were observed for 12 h. The successful rate control was defined as a ventricular rate < 100 beats per minute (bpm) persisting for 1 h or conversion to sinus rhythm. The loss of rate control was defined as an increase in the ventricular rate to > 100 bpm persistently for > 30 min or rebound to atrial fibrillation.

RESULTS

In both treatment arms (n = 26 each), all patients achieved successful and comparable ventricular rate control at 12 h. The mean (+/- SD) time taken to achieve successful rate control was shorter in the combination arm (15 +/- 16 vs. 22 +/- 22 min). Six patients in the combination arm and 11 in the diltiazem-alone arm experienced episodes of loss of rate control. This loss in the combination arm was less than that in the diltiazem-alone arm (14 vs 39 episodes; p = 0.05). The loss of rate control per patient in the combination arm was also less than that in the diltiazem-alone arm (2.0 +/- 1.0 vs. 3.5 +/- 1.9 episodes per patient; p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that in patients with atrial fibrillation who have a rapid ventricular response, the IV combination of diltiazem and digoxin results in a more efficacious ventricular rate control with fewer fluctuations than that achieved by therapy with IV diltiazem alone.