Comparison Between Diltiazem and Cedilanid-D on Ventricular Rate Control of Atrial Fibrillation and Their Effect on Atrioventricular Conduction System.

Objectives This randomized study was designed to compare the safety and efficacy of intravenous diltiazem versus intravenous cedilanid-D （deslanoside） for ventricular rate control in patients with atrial fibrillation （AF）. Analysis of the effect on conduction system of these drugs was also performed. Methods Forty three patients with AF were randomly assigned to receive intravenous therapy with 0.25mg/kg diltiazem （n = 21） or 0.4rag cedilanid-D （n = 22）. If not effective at 120 minutes （〈 20% decrease in pretreatment ventricular rate or can not convert to sinus rhythm= another dose of diltiazem or 0.2mg cedilanid-D was administered. Blood pressure and electrocardiographic recordings were performed before and after 5, 10, 20, 30, 60 minutes of drug administration. Further recordings were performed at 120 minutes in noneffective patients, and at 180 minutes in patients who received second time drug administration. To evaluate the effect on conduction system of these two drugs by measuring PA, AH and HV intervals using His bundle electrogram test another nineteen sinus rhythm patients were randomized to dihiazem （n=9） and cedilanid （n= 10） group. His bundle electrogram recordings were performed before and after 5, 10, 20 and 30 minutes of drug administration. Statistical significance was assessed with the use of t test, Fisher＇s exact test, ANOVA and LSD methodology. Results At baseline and after 5, 10, 20, 30, 60 minutes of drug administration the heart rates （mean±SD） were（133±15）, （92±20）, （87±22）, （85 ±20）, （85±21）, （85 ±23）beats/minute in diltiazem group respectively and（ 140±21 ）, （ 122±24）, （118±25）, （110±26）, （112±25）, （110±28） beats/ minute in cedilanid-D group respectively. Heart rate reduction was higher in diltiazem group than cedilanid group during 5 （41±20 vs 17±14,P 〈 0.01）; 10 （46±21 vs 22±20, P〈0.01）; 20 （48±21 vs 29±22, P〈0.01 ） ; 30（48±22 vs 27±22,P〈0.01 ）and 60 minutes （48±23 vs 29±24, P〈 0.05）. Both drugs had no effect on both systolic and diastolic blood pressure （P 〉0.05） and no major side effects were noticed. Diltiazem maintained effective ventrieular rate in 20 patients, whereas eedilanid-D maintained in 15 patients within 180 minutes （95.2%vs 68.2%,P〈 0.05）. There were no statistical significance in baseline heart rate, age and weight between the two groups. Both diltiazem and cedilanid-D can increase AH interval, but have no effect on HV and PA intervals in sinus rhythm patients. Conclusions Both dihiazem and eedilanid-D decrease ventrieular heart rate, but heart rate reduction is significantly higher in diltiazem group, thus should be considered as a drug of choice for emergency control of ventrieular rate. Under clinical monitoring this dose of diltiazem seems to be safe and applicable in AF patients with congestive heart failure. Both drugs have no effect on PA and HV intervals but increase the AH interval thereby can reduce ventricular rate.

A case of recurrent PMT caused by poor atrial pacing

Pacemaker mediated tachycardia(PMT)can occur in patients with DDD pacemaker implantation,and PMT in narrow sense is a kind of circular motor tachycardia,which is often caused by ventricular atrial retrograde conduction.This paper reports a case of patients with high atrial pacing value in the early stage of pacemaker implantation,resulting in atrial retrograde conduction and recurrent PMT,Almost non-stop.Although the pacemaker has the PMT automatic termination procedure,PMT is still a short array of repeated attacks due to the presence of poor atrial pacing,resulting in the patients with shortness of breath,lower extremity edema and other heart failure symptoms.Finally,PMT was stopped by prolonging PVARP,and its lower starting frequency was slowed down to 50bpm,and AV interval was kept unchanged for 250ms,so as to reduce the release of atrial pulse and encourage the emergence of self selling down-propagation excitation.The proportion of atrial and ventricular pacing was significantly reduced,which not only saved the electric energy of pacemaker,but also conformed to the physiology.In a narrow sense,pacemaker mediated tachycardia(PMT)is a kind of circular motor tachycardia,which is often caused by reverse ventricular conduction.Repeated attacks for a long time may affect the patient's heart function.Although most modern pacemakers have PMT automatic termination procedures,they are still relatively passive in the presence of some induced factors.Finally,it is necessary to extend PVARP to truly terminate and prevent PM.A case of recurrent PMT due to poor atrial pacing is reported.