Azimilide vs. placebo and sotalol for persistent atrial fibrillation : the A-COMET-II (Azimilide-CardiOversion MaintEnance Trial-II) trial
Treatment of atrial fibrillation remains a major clinical challenge owing to the limited efficacy and safety of anti-arrhythmic drugs, particularly in patients with structural heart disease. To evaluate the efficacy of azimilide, a new class III anti-arrhythmic drug, we studied 658 patients with sym...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | European heart journal 2006-09, Vol.27 (18), p.2224-2231 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Treatment of atrial fibrillation remains a major clinical challenge owing to the limited efficacy and safety of anti-arrhythmic drugs, particularly in patients with structural heart disease.
To evaluate the efficacy of azimilide, a new class III anti-arrhythmic drug, we studied 658 patients with symptomatic persistent atrial fibrillation, adequate anticoagulant therapy, and planned electrical cardioversion. Patients were randomized to placebo, azimilide (125 mg o.d.), or sotalol (160 mg b.i.d.). Primary efficacy analysis was based on event recurrence, which was defined as atrial fibrillation lasting>24 h, or requiring DC cardioversion. Median time to recurrence was 14 days for azimilide, 12 days for placebo, and 28 days for sotalol (P=0.0320 when comparing azimilide with placebo; P=0.0002 when comparing azimilide with sotalol). The placebo-to-azimilide hazard ratio was 1.291 (95% CI: 1.022-1.629) and the sotalol-to-azimilide hazard ratio was 0.652 (95% CI: 0.523-0.814). Adverse events causing patient withdrawal were more frequent (P |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0195-668X 1522-9645 |
DOI: | 10.1093/eurheartj/ehl209 |