...
首页> 外文期刊>Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology >Amiodarone versus procainamide for the acute treatment of recurrent supraventricular tachycardia in pediatric patients.
【24h】

Amiodarone versus procainamide for the acute treatment of recurrent supraventricular tachycardia in pediatric patients.

机译:胺碘酮与普鲁卡因酰胺可用于小儿患者复发性室上性心动过速的急性治疗。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Intravenous amiodarone and procainamide are both used as therapies for refractory supraventricular tachycardia (SVT). However, no studies have compared the efficacy and safety of these agents in pediatric patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: All patients treated with intravenous amiodarone or procainamide during 25 consecutive months for the following mechanisms of SVT were included: orthodromic reciprocating tachycardia, intra-atrial reentrant tachycardia, and ectopic atrial tachycardia; junctional ectopic tachycardia was excluded. Treatment response was categorized as full success, partial success, or failure. Partial success was defined as clinical improvement and/or arrhythmia control but not meeting full success criteria. Adverse events were classified as major (requiring resuscitation) or minor (management changes). There were 40 episodes of SVT in 37 patients (median age, 34 days; 24 with congenital heart disease). Amiodarone was the initial therapy in 26 cases and procainamide in 14 cases. If partial and full success are combined, procainamide was successful in 71% of cases compared with 34% for amiodarone (P=0.046). If partial success is considered a treatment failure, procainamide was successful in 50% compared with 15% for amiodarone (P=0.029). Ten patients received the second medication after the first failed. Success was achieved in 5 of 8 amiodarone-to-procainamide crossovers compared with 1 of 2 procainamide-to-amiodarone crossovers. One major and 10 minor adverse events occurred in amiodarone patients versus 6 minor adverse events in procainamide patients (P=NS). CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, procainamide achieved greater success compared with amiodarone in the management of recurrent SVT without statistically significant differences in adverse event frequency.
机译:背景:静脉注射胺碘酮和普鲁卡因酰胺均被用作难治性室上性心动过速(SVT)的治疗方法。但是,尚无研究比较这些药物在儿科患者中的疗效和安全性。方法和结果:所有连续25个月接受静脉胺碘酮或普鲁卡因胺治疗的SVT发生机制均包括:正向往复性心动过速,房内折返性心动过速和异位性心动过速;排除交界性异位心动过速。治疗反应分为完全成功,部分成功或失败。部分成功定义为临床改善和/或心律失常控制,但未达到完全成功标准。不良事件分为重大事件(需要复苏)或次要事件(管理变更)。 37例患者发生40例SVT(中位年龄34天; 24例患有先天性心脏病)。最初的治疗方法是胺碘酮26例,普鲁卡因胺14例。如果将部分成功和全部成功结合起来,普鲁卡因酰胺在71%的病例中成功,而胺碘酮的成功率为34%(P = 0.046)。如果将部分成功视为治疗失败,则普鲁卡因酰胺的成功率为50%,而胺碘酮的成功率为15%(P = 0.029)。十例患者在第一次失败后接受了第二种药物。相较于2个普鲁卡因酰胺至胺碘酮的转换,在8个胺碘酮至普鲁卡因酰胺的转换中有5个获得了成功。胺碘酮患者发生1次重大不良事件和10次轻微不良事件,普鲁卡因酰胺患者发生6次轻微不良事件(P = NS)。结论:在这一队列研究中,普鲁卡因酰胺与胺碘酮相比在复发性SVT的治疗中取得了更大的成功,而不良事件发生频率无统计学差异。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号