You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 256 No. 1, July 4, 1986 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Original Contributions
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (36)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Adverse Reactions to Antiarrhythmic Drugs During Therapy for Ventricular Arrhythmias

Thomas W. Nygaard, MD; T. Duncan Sellers, MD; Tracey S. Cook; John P. DiMarco, MD, PhD

JAMA. 1986;256(1):55-57.


Abstract

We analyzed the incidence of adverse reactions to antiarrhythmic drugs in 123 consecutive patients with a history of sustained ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation. Blood levels were measured serially and were maintained within the usual therapeutic range. Minor reactions were defined as those that required dosage reduction and major reactions as those that required drug discontinuation or permanent pacing for bradycardia. A total of 237 individual, oral drug trials were evaluated in the 123 patients. Adverse reactions were noted in 79 trials (33%) Fifty-nine (48%) of the 123 patients had one or more adverse reaction. Major reactions were noted in 36 patients (29%). Adverse effects occurred during 49% of trials with mexiletine hydrochloride, 44% of trials with amiodarone, 24% of trials with procainamide hydrochloride, and 18% of trials with quinidine sulfate or gluconate. In conclusion, clinically significant adverse reactions are common during drug therapy for ventricular arrhythmias. These observations indicate that with the drugs used in this study, an acceptable risk-benefit ratio will be possible only in patients at a significant risk for a symptomatic arrhythmia. Antiarrhythmic drug therapy in patients at low risk for serious arrhythmia should be discouraged.

(JAMA 1986;256:55-57)



Author Affiliations

From the Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville. Dr Sellers is now with the Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Geisinger Medical Center, Danville. Pa.


Footnotes

Reprint requests to Division of Cardiology, Box 158, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA 22908 (Dr Nygaard).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Cost-Effectiveness of Cardioversion and Antiarrhythmic Therapy in Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation
Catherwood et al.
ANN INTERN MED 1999;130:625-636.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Quinidine
Grace and Camm
NEJM 1998;338:35-45.
FULL TEXT  

Adverse Reactions to Antiarrhythmic Drugs
Carbonin and Incalzi
JAMA 1987;257:1474-1474.
ABSTRACT  

Risk / Benefit Considerations in Antiarrhythmic Therapy
Woosley
JAMA 1986;256:82-84.
ABSTRACT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1986 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.