Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
1, 2000
© 2000 by the American College of Cardiology ISSN 0735-1097/00/$20.00
Published by Elsevier Science Inc. PII S0735-1097(00)00676-8
weeks after initiation of drug therapy, looking for asymp- period]) and thus stabilize the multiple reentrant wavelets
tomatic AF (defined as ⬎5 s while awake); asymptomatic that perpetuate AF. In animals, rapid pacing shortens atrial
AF was documented in 27% of the propafenone group and refractoriness and allows sustained AF where it was previ-
22% of the patients taking propranolol. Of the total 11 ously nonsustained. Class IA and class III agents are
patients with asymptomatic AF, the lack of symptoms was thought to protect against AF by prolonging atrial refrac-
attributed to shorter duration of AF in seven; slowing of the toriness. Although beta-blockers are not generally regarded
AF was held responsible in the remaining four patients as membrane stabilizing agents, they may protect against
(mean 126 beats/min in AF before initiation, reduced to AF by delaying atrial repolarization. Kühlkamp et al. (1)
82 beats/min with therapy). Data were not provided on speculate that beta-blockers protect against adrenergically
asymptomatic AF prior to therapy, nor were data provided mediated shortening of the action potential duration (APD)
for those patients who experienced recurrent symptoms. that is thought to help precipitate and maintain AF.
Despite obvious problems with design, this trial documents Another potential mechanism for preventing AF could
frequent occurrence of asymptomatic AF in patients receiv- result from suppression of pulmonary vein ectopy that
ing therapy, including beta-blockade. Frequent asymptom- triggers AF (14).
atic AF was also documented in a recent abstract, as seen in
routine daily transtelephonic ECG from patients with DO BETA-BLOCKERS REDUCE THE RECURRENCE OF
symptomatic paroxysmal AF (11). In addition, implanted
PERSISTENT AF?
devices with capability for automated storage of recorded
arrhythmias allow long-term monitoring for asymptomatic The study by Kühlkamp et al. (1) represents an important
AF; in a study using dual chamber pacemaker in 354 contribution to the literature. In this study, patients with
patients, 104 of the 179 patients who showed supraventric- persistent AF were randomized to metoprolol CR/XL or
ular arrhythmias had no symptoms (12). Finally, the neu- matching placebo. Most patients had been converted with
rology literature is filled with reports of patients presenting DC shock, although 17.5% converted after a class I antiar-
with embolic stroke and newly diagnosed asymptomatic AF. rhythmic medication was administered (drug and route of
delivery not defined). Patients were followed up for six
BETA-BLOCKER THERAPY IN TREATMENT OF months or until documentation of recurrent AF or atrial
flutter (as assessed by ECGs obtained in response to
ATRIAL FIBRILLATION
symptoms or at one week or one, three or six months).
Beta-adrenergic blockers have been an option in the control Using a log-rank analysis for the primary end point, a
of ventricular response in AF for many years; but recently, significant treatment effect of metoprolol was observed (p ⫽
beta-blockers, along with calcium channel blockers, have 0.005), with 59.9% having recurrent AF in the placebo
replaced digoxin as first-line therapy for AF rate control. group, compared with 48.7% in the metoprolol group. The
Randomized studies have confirmed the superiority of median time to recurrence was 7.5 days for placebo versus
beta-blockers in controlling the ventricular response, espe- 13.0 days for metoprolol (ratio of 1.7). The heart rate in
cially with exercise (13). sinus rhythm was reduced 10 beats per minute with meto-
Beta-blockers generally have not been considered to be prolol, vs a reduction of 2 beats/min with placebo. With
atrial stabilizing agents except in two well-defined situa- recurrence of AF, the ventricular response was reduced, at
tions. First, a small population of patients experience 107 beats/min with metoprolol, compared with 98 beats/
recurrent AF in association with stress or anxiety; these min for placebo. Evaluation of safety and tolerability
patients with adrenergically mediated AF may respond well showed the expected adverse events associated with beta-
to beta-blockade (as opposed to the opposite syndrome of blocker use, including dizziness, atrioventricular (AV)
vagally mediated AF, in which beta-blockers may exacerbate block, bradycardia, dyspnea and fatigue. All three deaths
AF and treatment with agents possessing anticholinergic occurred in the metoprolol group, with one sudden death.
properties is desirable). Second, and more common, is the The sample is small and clearly this finding does not meet
use of beta-blockers for prevention of AF in patients statistical significance. In addition, there are abundant data
following cardiothoracic surgery, in which AF occurs in to support a reduction of mortality associated with beta-
approximately 30% of patients (3). The benefit of beta- blockers, thus negating this apparent lopsidedness in deaths.
blockade is greatest in patients who previously have received These mortality findings underscore the importance of
beta-blockers, although a reduction in AF is seen also in designing trials with adequate power when evaluating drugs
patients not previously receiving beta-blockers. The efficacy with potential for proarrhythmia.
of beta-blockers in this circumstance likely relates to the Before attempting to answer the question of beta-
elevated sympathetic tone present postoperatively. blockers’ reduction in AF recurrence, we must examine the
It is widely believed that shortening of atrial refractori- population studied in the report by Kühlkamp et al. (1), and
ness facilitates AF and prolonging refractoriness suppresses consider the potential asymptomatic AF. The authors state
AF. Shorter atrial refractory periods presumably shorten the that no patients had a history of documented paroxysmal (or
wavelength (defined by [conduction velocity] ⫻ [refractory self-terminating) AF. Only 10% had previously undergone
JACC Vol. 36, No. 1, 2000 Page 149
July 2000:147–50 Editorial Comment
cardioversion, so we can assume that this represented the atenolol and d,l-sotalol. Although distinction between
first episode of documented AF in the vast majority of the symptomatic and asymptomatic AF was not made, this
patients enrolled. Of the patients with duration of AF article was reassuring in that the true frequency of AF was
documented, one half had AF lasting ⬎30 days. Thus, a evaluated, and improvement resulted from both drugs.
relatively homogenous population with “persistent” AF was Is the action of d,l-sotalol on AF essentially that of
enrolled. Persistent AF has been defined as that which beta-blockade? Most likely, the answer is no. When higher
sustains ⬎48 h or until cardioversion is performed (15). doses of d,l-sotalol (up to 160 mg twice daily) were
This is contrasted with “paroxysmal” AF, characterized by compared with placebo and d-sotalol (the stereoisomer with
recurrences of AF alternating with sinus mechanism, in only class III effects and no beta-blockade), in patients
which most of the episodes of AF terminate spontaneously following electrical cardioversion, d,l-sotalol reduced recur-
within 48 h. Obviously there is potential for overlap rence from 68% to 50% (18). Clearly the beta-blocker effect
between the persistent and paroxysmal AF groups, as contributed to the results, since d-sotalol alone was associ-
acknowledged by those who created the definitions (15). ated with a recurrence rate intermediate between placebo
Kühlkamp et al. (1) state that patients with known parox- and the racemic mixture (60% recurrence).
ysmal AF were not enrolled, but the potential for prior
asymptomatic AF is not defined. SHOULD METOPROLOL BECOME THE “TREATMENT
If the data regarding asymptomatic events are scant for
OF FIRST CHOICE” FOR AF?
paroxysmal AF, they are nonexistent for persistent AF. This
raises the question, should we be concerned about asymp- Kühlkamp et al. (1) suggest that metoprolol CR/XL may
tomatic AF in patients such as those studied by Kühlkamp become the treatment of first choice for those “who require
et al. (1), with “persistent” AF? I think we must. As above, drug therapy to maintain sinus rhythm.” I cannot agree with
in the absence of nodal blockade, the distinction between this statement on the basis of two concerns. First, the
persistent and paroxysmal AF is often unclear; in the reduction in recurrence of symptomatic AF with metoprolol
presence of AV nodal blockade, the distinction may be even is modest—less than the twofold increase in median time to
more obscure. Recurrent AF that previously was symptom- recurrence prospectively required for efficacy in other trials.
atic and “persistent” may become so well-tolerated that it is Thus, metoprolol cannot be considered to be an atrial
allowed to spontaneously revert to sinus mechanism before stabilizing agent in the same league as the commonly used
symptoms are noted (even over a period of days). agents, quinidine, disopyramide, propafenone, flecainide,
The question of whether drugs with AV nodal blocking d,l-sotalol and amiodarone. Second, when one considers
properties might simply be converting symptomatic to possible asymptomatic AF, it is not clear that metoprolol
asymptomatic AF is not new. Concerns were raised at a truly stabilizes the atrium (despite a modest reduction of
recent Food and Drug Administration Cardiovascular and symptomatic recurrence).
Renal Drugs Advisory Committee meeting that d,l-sotalol However, beta-blockers have an excellent safety profile,
(a racemic mixture that has both beta-blocking and class III so reduced efficacy might be acceptable in a first-line agent
activities) might, in part, be reducing symptomatic recur- when the lack of proarrhythmia and serious side effects are
rence of AF by slowing the ventricular response and making considered. In addition, beta-blockers are a good first choice
recurrences asymptomatic (16). Only after the majority of in therapy for the control of the ventricular response in AF,
committee members became convinced that d,l-sotalol in- since they control the ventricular response better than
deed reduced symptomatic recurrence of AF to a greater digoxin should AF recur. One must keep in mind that this
degree than simply that of a beta-blocker was the drug heart rate control may be responsible for reducing symptoms
recommended for approval for the prevention of symptom- of AF, making it even more important to continue antico-
atic AF. agulation.
In considering metoprolol for prevention of symptomatic
AF, we should review some of the data regarding d,l-sotalol. TREATMENT OF SYMPTOMATIC AF: ISSUES
Kühlkamp et al. (1) reference a recent article that suggested
OF ANTICOAGULATION
d,l-sotalol (80 mg twice daily) was not better than atenolol
(50 mg daily) in reducing recurrent AF (17). In patients The goal of atrial stabilizing therapy, as correctly stated by
with paroxysmal AF, atenolol and d,l-sotalol demonstrated Kühlkamp et al. (1), is to prolong the time to recurrence of
similar reduction of paroxysmal AF, as assessed by 72-h symptomatic AF. How important is asymptomatic AF? The
ambulatory monitoring. This study used d,l-sotalol in a answer depends on whether one is considering changes in
dosage range where beta-blocking characteristics typically anticoagulant therapy based on the apparent reduction in
overshadow class III activity, so it was essentially a compar- AF. Warfarin (Coumadin), and perhaps to a much lesser
ison of two beta-blockers. The continuous nature of the degree, aspirin, are the only therapies demonstrated to
monitoring periods allowed collection of all episodes of AF reduce the risk of embolic complications of AF. Based on
(both symptomatic and asymptomatic), and similar reduc- the data cited above regarding asymptomatic AF, we should
tions of AF, compared with placebo, were seen for both assume that patients with AF are having more events than
150 Page JACC Vol. 36, No. 1, 2000
Editorial Comment July 2000:147–50
anyone recognizes, a situation exacerbated perhaps by drugs Danish Investigations of Arrhythmia and Mortality on Dofetilide
Study Group. N Engl J Med 1999;341:857– 65.
that block the AV node. Our group is most comfortable 5. Pritchett E, Page R, Connolly S, Marcello S, Schnell D, Wilkinson
continuing warfarin therapy indefinitely after cardioversion W. Azimilide treatment of atrial fibrillation. Circulation 1998;98:I–
of AF. Maintenance of anticoagulation provides protection 633.
6. Anderson JL, Gilbert EM, Alpert BL, et al. Prevention of symptom-
from thromboembolic complications of recurrent AF atic recurrences of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in patients initially
(whether symptomatic or asymptomatic) and allows prompt tolerating antiarrhythmic therapy: a multicenter, double-blind, cross-
conversion of sinus mechanism when recurrent AF is over study of flecainide and placebo with transtelephonic monitoring.
Circulation 1989;80:1557–70.
recognized (obviating the otherwise mandatory three weeks 7. Pritchett ELC, McCarthy EA, Wilkinson WE. Propafenone treat-
of warfarin or transesophageal echocardiogram for recur- ment of symptomatic paroxysmal supraventricular arrhythmias: a
rences ⬎48 h in duration). randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover trial in patients tolerating
oral therapy. Ann Intern Med 1991;114:539 – 44.
If anticoagulation is ever discontinued, we advocate that 8. The Atrial Fibrillation Investigation with Bidisomide (AFIB) Inves-
two steps be considered prior to the drug change. First, a tigators. Treatment of atrial fibrillation and paroxysmal supraventric-
Holter monitor should be placed to evaluate for asymptom- ular tachycardia with bidisomide. Circulation 1997;96:2625–32.
9. Page RL, Wilkinson WE, Clair WK, McCarthy EA, Pritchett ELC.
atic AF; obviously if AF is seen, discontinuation of antico- Asymptomatic arrhythmias in patients with symptomatic paroxysmal
agulation should be avoided. Second, one should consider atrial fibrillation and paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia. Circu-
discontinuing treatment with any agents likely to reduce lation 1994;89:224 –7.
10. Wolk R, Kulakowski P, Karczmarewicz S, et al. The incidence of
symptoms (such as AV nodal blocking drugs). This may asymptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in patients treated with
seem paradoxical, but allowing a higher rate, when AF does propranolol or propafenone. Int J Cardiol 1996;54:207–11.
recur, allows the best possible “warning system” for recur- 11. Patten M, Maas R. Event-recorder monitoring for differentiation of
symptomatic and asymptomatic episodes of paroxysmal atrial fibrilla-
rent AF. Finally, although the data are not strong for its use tion (abstr). Circulation 1999;100:I–286.
in AF (19), in the absence of warfarin, aspirin, 325 mg daily, 12. DeFaye P, Dournaux F, Mouton E, for the AIDA Multicenter Study
should be prescribed. Group. Prevalence of supraventricular arrhythmias from the automated
analysis of data stored in the DDD pacemakers of 617 patients: the
AIDA study. PACE 1998, part II;21:250 –5.
Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. Richard L. Page, 13. Farshi R, Kistner D, Sarma JSM, Longmate JA, Singh BN. Ventric-
Department of Internal Medicine (Cardiovascular Division, Clin- ular rate control in chronic atrial fibrillation during daily activity and
ical Cardiac Electrophysiology), The University of Texas South- programmed exercise: a crossover open-label study of five drug
western Medical Center, Rm CS7.102, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd., regimens. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999;33:304 –10.
14. Chen S-A, Hsieh M-H, Tai C-T, et al. Initiation of atrial fibrillation
Dallas, Texas 75235-9047. by ectopic beats originating from the pulmonary veins: electrophysio-
logical characteristics, pharmacological responses, and effects of radio-
frequency ablation. Circulation 1999;100:1879 – 86.
REFERENCES 15. Gallagher MM, Camm AJ. Classification of atrial fibrillation. PACE
1997;20:1603–5.
1. Kühlkamp V, Schirdewan A, Stangl K, Homberg M, Matthias P, 16. US Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug
Beck OA. Use of metoprolol CR/XL to maintain sinus rhythm after Administration. Proceedings of the cardiovascular and renal drugs
conversion from persistent atrial fibrillation: a randomized double advisory committee, 88th meeting, April 29, 1999.
blind placebo controlled study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;36:139 – 46. 17. Steeds RP, Birchall AS, Smith M, Channer KS. An open label,
2. Kassotia J, Costeas C, Blitzer M, Reiffel JA. Rhythm management in randomised, crossover study comparing sotalol and atenolol in the
atrial fibrillation—with primary emphasis on pharmacologic therapy: treatment of symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Heart 1999;
part 3. PACE 1998;21:1133– 45. 82:170 –5.
3. Prystowsky EN, Benson DW, Fuster V, et al. AHA Medical/ 18. Edvardsson N, Huikuri H, Kennebäck G, et al. for a European
Scientific Statement Special Report: management of patients with Multicenter Study. Antiarrhythmic efficacy by a class III agent with
atrial fibrillation: a statement for healthcare professionals from the and without betablockade in chronic atrial fibrillation—a double-blind
subcommittee on Electrocardiography and Electrophysiology, Amer- randomised comparison of DI-sotalol, D-sotalol and placebo (ab-
ican Heart Association. Circulation 1996;93:1262–77. stracts— oral 706-1 at 10:30). J Am Coll Cardiol 1996;46A.
4. Torp-Pedersen C, Moller M, Bloch-Thomsen PE, et al. Dofetilide in 19. Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation Study. Final results. Circula-
patients with congestive heart failure and left ventricular dysfunction: tion 1991;84:527–39.