Current Cardiology Reports

, Volume 1, Issue 4, pp 265–267

Redefining the role of antiarrhythmic drugs in the management of ventricular arrhythmias

  • Davendra Mehta
Clinical Trials Review
  • 24 Downloads

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Singh BN: Acute management of ventricular arrhythmias: role of antiarrhythmic agents. Pharmacotherapy 1977, 2(Pt 2):56S-64S.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Desai AD, Chun S, Sung RJ: The role of intravenous amiodarone in the management of cardiac arrhythmias. Ann Intern Med 1997, 127:294–303.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Echt DS, Liebson PR, Mitchell LB, et al., and the CAST investigators: Mortality and Morbidity in patients receiving encainide, flecainide or placebo. The Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial. N Engl J Med 1991, 324:781–788.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Waldo AL, Camm AJ, deRuyter H, et al., for the SWORD investigators: Effect of d-sotalol on mortality in patients with left ventricular dysfunction after recent and remote myocardial infarction. The SWORD investigators. Survival with oral d-sotalol. Lancet 1996, 348:7–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Friedman PL, Stevenson WG: Proarrhythmia. Am J Cardiol 1998, 82:50N-58N.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    The AVID investigators: A comparison of antiarrhythmic drug therapy with implantable defibrillators in patients resuscitated from near fatal ventricular arrhythmias. N Engl J Med 1997, 337:1576–1583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cappato R: Secondary prevention of sudden death: the Dutch Study, the Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillator Trial, the Cardiac Arrest Study Hamburg, and the Canadian Implantable Defibrillator Study. Am J Cardiol 1999, 83(5B):68D-73D.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cardiac Arrest in Seattle: Conventional Versus Amiodarone Drug Evaluation (the CASCADE study). Am J Cardiol 1991, 67:578–584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    The ESVEM Investigators: Determinants of predicted efficacy of antiarrhythmic drugs in the electrophysiologic study versus electrocardiographic monitoring trial. Circulation 1993, 87:323–329.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Haverkamp W, Martinez-Rubio A, Hief C, et al.: Efficacy and safety of dl-sotalol in patients with ventricular tachycardia and in survivors of cardiac arrest. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997, 30:487–495.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pacifico A, Hohnloser SH, Williams JH, et al.: Prevention of Implantable-Defibrillator shocks by treatment with sotalol. N Engl J Med 1999, 340:1855–1862.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Seidl K, Hauer B, Schwick NG, et al.: Comparison of metoprolol and sotalol in preventing ventricular tachyarrhythmias after the implantation of a cardioverter/defibrillator. Am J Cardiol 1998, 82:744–748.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Klein LS, Shih HT, Hackett FK, et al.: Radiofrequency catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia in patients without structural heart disease. Circulation 1992, 85:1666–1674.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stevenson WG, Khan H, Sager P, et al.: Identification of reentry circuit sites during catheter mapping and radiofrequency ablation of ventricular tachycardia late after myocardial infarction. Circulation 1993, 88:1647–1670.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Current Science Inc 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Davendra Mehta
    • 1
  1. 1.Electrophysiology LabMount Sinai Hospital and Medical CenterNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations