Pharmacological Therapy of Atrial Fibrillation and Flutter: Advances and Limitations of Specific Antiarrhythmic Drugs

  • P. Alboni
Conference paper


A problem that has long been debated is whether in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) we should try to maintain as far as possible the normal sinus rhythm (SR) by utilizing antiarrhythmic drugs and cardioversion in case of relapses, or only to control the heart rate with drugs that slow atrioventricular nodal conduction (digoxin, 13-blockers, calcium channel blockers). The presumed benefits of maintaining SR include the following: better exercise tolerance and a reduction of symptoms, a reduction in the risk of cerebrovascular accidents, improvement of quality of life, and prolonged survival. In fact, however, these possible advantages have never been investigated in large prospective studies. The AFFIRM trial was presented at the last Congress of the American College of Cardiology, but has not been published up to now.


Atrial Fibril Antiarrhythmic Drug Structural Heart Disease Atrial Fibril Recurrence Rhythm Control 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Hohnloser SH, Kuck KH, Lilienthal J (2000) Rhythm or rate control in atrial fibrillation. Pharmacological intervention in atrial fibrillation (PIAF): a randomized trial. Lancet 356:1789–1794PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kühlkamp V, Schirdewan A, Stangl K, Homberg M, Flock M, Beck OA (2000) Use of metoprolol CR/XL to maintain sinus rhythm after conversion from persistent atrial fibrillation. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. J Am Coll Cardiol 36:139–146PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Roden DM, Woosley RL, Primm RK (1986) Incidence and clinical features of the quinidine associated long QT syndrome. Implications for patient care. Am Heart J 111:1088–1093PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    CAST Investigators (1989) Effect of encainide and flecainide on mortality in a randomized trial of arrhythmia suppression after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 321:406–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hohnloser SH, Zabel M (1992) Short-and long-term efficacy and safety of flecainide acetate for supraventricular arrhythmias. Am J Cardiol 70:3–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Podrid PJ, Anderson JL (1996) Safety and tolerability of long-term propafenone for supraventricular tachyarrhythmias. Am J Cardiol 78:430–434PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chimienti M, Cullen MT, Casaderi G et al (1996) Safety of long-term flecainide and propafenone in the management of patients with symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: report from the flecainide and propafenone Italian study investigators. Am J Cardiol 77:60–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Alboni P, Razzolini R, Scarf6 S et al (1993) Hemodynamic effects of oral sotalol during both sinus rhythm and atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol 22:1373–1377PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Roy D, Talajic M, Dorian P et al (2000) Amiodarone to prevent recurrence of atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 342:913–920PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Deedwania PC, Singh BN, Ellenbogen K et al (1998) Spontaneous conversion and maintenance of sinus rhythm by amiodarone in patients with heart failure and atrial fibrillation. Observations from the Veterans Affairs Congestive Heart Failure Survival Trial of Antiarrhythmic Therapy (CHF-STAT). Circulation 98:2574–2579PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Betapace package insert. Berlex Laboratories, 1994Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chun SH, Sager PT, Stevenson WG et al (1995) Long-term efficacy of amiodarone for the maintenance of normal sinus rhythm in patients with refractory atrial fibrillation or flutter. Am J Cardiol 76:47–50PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hughes MM, Trohman RG, Simmons TV et al (1992) Flecainide therapy in patients treated for supraventricular tachycardia with near normal left ventricular function. Am Heart J 123:408–412PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Prystowsky EN (1994) Inpatient versus outpatient initiation of antiarrhythmic drug therapy for patients with supraventricular tachycardia. Clin Cardiol 17:11:7–10Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Alboni P (1999) Quando non prescrivere un trattamento cronico al paziente con fibrillazione atriale. G Ital Cardiol 1999;29:824–827PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. Alboni
    • 1
  1. 1.Divisione di Cardiologia e Centro AritmologicoOspedale CivileCento (FE)Italy

Personalised recommendations