Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0018799 (heart disease)
 34,133 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most commonly encountered sustained arrhythmia. Heart rate control, reduction of symptoms, and prevention of embolism are major goals of treatment. Whether the strategy of cardioversion with subsequent maintenance of sinus rhythm has an advantage over heart rate control is under active investigation. Digoxin, non-dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonists, beta-adrenoceptor antagonists (beta-blockers), and amiodarone are the pharmacologic agents most commonly used to achieve rate control. In patients with drug-resistant AF, atrioventricular nodal ablation (or modification) with implantation of a permanent pacemaker is an alternative therapy. Conversion to sinus rhythm can best be achieved by electrical cardioversion. In selected patients, pharmacologic cardioversion can also be attempted. The use of antiarrhythmic drugs for the maintenance of sinus rhythm depends on several factors: (i) the nature of the arrhythmia (first attack, paroxysmal AF with frequent attacks, paroxysmal AF with infrequent attacks, or persistent AF); (ii) the associated symptoms; (iii) and the risk of severe adverse effects associated with the chosen drug. If the administration of an antiarrhythmic drug is appropriate, the choice of the drug must be tailored to the specific characteristics of the given patient. In lone AF, class Ic antiarrhythmic drugs are the best tolerated. These agents should be combined with a calcium channel antagonist or a beta-blocker to prevent rapid ventricular response in the case of conversion of AF to atrial flutter. In this situation, catheter ablation of atrial flutter at the isthmus (hybrid therapy) should be performed. All class I antiarrhythmic agents should be avoided in patients with structural heart disease. Alternative approaches that may be used if sinus rhythm cannot be maintained with drug therapy include: (i) the ablation of arrhythmogenic pulmonary veins; (ii) the implantation of an atrial defibrillator; (iii) the use of specific pacing sites; (iv) or pacing modes. Whether these approaches will reach clinical relevance merits further investigation. Intraoperative catheter ablation or surgical ablation (maze procedure) seems a promising approach for curing AF in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Among all of the available treatment options, the most consistent proof of efficacy in reducing mortality and morbidity from AF exists for antithrombotic treatment.
 ...
PMID:Current management of symptomatic atrial fibrillation. 1472 42

(1) The treatment aims in atrial fibrillation are to reduce patients' symptoms and to prevent both embolism and deterioration of any underlying heart disease. Therapy consists of anticoagulant or antiplatelet drugs, treatment of any underlying heart disease, and heart rate control. (2) Digoxin, betablockers, diltiazem and verapamil slow the heart rate but rarely restore sinus rhythm. Amiodarone, disopyramide, flecainide, quinidine and sotalol can be used to prevent relapse of atrial fibrillation after electrical cardioversion, but they all have potentially serious adverse effects. New trials of antiarrhythmic treatments have been published since our last review of this subject. (3) In one trial in 403 patients, amiodarone was more effective than sotalol and propafenone in restoring and maintaining sinus rhythm. After 15 months of follow-up, there were fewer strokes among patients treated with amiodarone, but there was no difference between the three drugs in the overall incidence of cardiovascular events. (4) A clinical trial with 4060 patients compared rhythm control (mainly with amiodarone, sotalol or propafenone; sometimes combined with electrical cardioversion) and rate control (with digoxin, betablocker, diltiazem or verapamil; systematically combined with anticoagulant therapy). The antiarrhythmic treatment restored sinus rhythm in more than half the patients in the long term. But rhythm control did not reduce the risk of death or serious cardiovascular events during a mean follow-up period of 3.5 years. Rhythm control caused more adverse events than rate control; subgroup analyses (weak evidence) suggest that rhythm control may also have caused more deaths among patients over 65 and among patients with coronary heart disease. (5) In another trial, electrical cardioversion followed by antiarrhythmic therapy (mainly sotalol) sustainably restored sinus rhythm in more than one-third of 522 patients. But, compared with rate control treatment plus anticoagulant therapy, rhythm control did not reduce the risk of cardiovascular events, and was associated with a larger number of serious adverse cardiac effects. (6) Other recent trials confirm the risk of serious adverse effects, including severe arrhythmia with sotalol (especially at the start of treatment), and adverse thyroid and pulmonary effects with amiodarone. (7) Combined radiofrequency ablation and cardiac stimulation improved symptoms in some patients with incapacitating atrial fibrillation who had not responded to other treatments. However, this approach carries a risk of serious adverse effects, and its impact on the risk of cardiovascular events and death is not known. (8) In practice, an attempt should be made to restore sinus rhythm with amiodarone and/or electrical cardioversion, in symptomatic, recent or paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in patients under 65 who have no signs or symptoms of coronary heart disease. In other situations, rate control is the first-line option, using digoxin, betablockers (other than sotalol) or calcium channel blockers (diltiazem or verapamil). Whatever the option, treatment must be combined with anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy, and with treatment of any underlying heart disease.
 ...
PMID:Atrial fibrillation: rate control often better than rhythm control. 1514 84

Digitalis intoxication is usually accidental in children. We report the case of a young infant with congenital heart disease in whom the coadministration of digoxin and josamycin led to a 50% increase in the digoxin concentration, generating sinoatrial block and cardiac failure. Clinical and electrocardiographic symptoms very quickly resolved following immunotherapy with antidigitalis Fab fragments. Digoxin concentrations must be carefully monitored in patients concomitantly receiving macrolides to ensure that the digoxin dose can be readjusted if necessary.
 ...
PMID:[Digoxin-Josamycin: a dangerous drug interaction in children]. 1676 64

This study included 40 children, who were diagnosed with pneumonia and pulmonary hypertension (from the radiographic and clinical features), was performed at Yuzuncu Yil University Faculty of Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, from September 2003 to July 2005. Patients who had pneumonia and congenital heart disease or systemic hypertension or renal and liver disease together were excluded from the study. Blood gas analysis and oxygen concentration, measured with pulse oximetry, were performed in all patients. Besides chest X-ray, electrocardiography and echocardiographic search was also carried out. Echocardiographic examination was performed by using M mode, two-dimensional echocardiography and colored Doppler sonotron Vingmed CFM 725. At echocardiographic examination, pulmonary hypertension is defined as above 35 mmHg of pulmonary artery pressure. For echocardiographic examination, patients with pulmonary hypertension were divided into two groups. Captopril (2 mg/kg/day, three doses a day) and nifedipine (0.5 mg/kg/day, three doses a day) were given to the first and the second group, respectively. Echocardiography was performed daily until normal pulmonary artery pressure was achieved. At the beginning of the treatment, the patients were treated with double antibiotics and antibiotic change was carried out in needed cases at the follow up. Digoxin was administered to the cases of respiratory infection with heart failure.
 ...
PMID:Comparison of nifedipine and captopril in children with pulmonary hypertension due to bronchopneumonia. 1830 52

The importance of managing fetal arrhythmia has increased over the past three decades. Although most fetal arrhythmias are benign, some types cause fetal hydrops and can lead to fetal death. With the aim of improving the outcome in such cases, various studies for prenatal diagnosis and perinatal management have been published. Detailed analysis of the type of arrhythmia in utero is possible using M-mode and Doppler echocardiography. In particular, a simultaneous record of Doppler waveform at the superior venous cava and the ascending aorta has become an important and useful method of assessing the interval between atrial and ventricular contractions. Common causes of fetal tachycardia (ventricular heart rate faster than 180 bpm), are paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) with 1:1 atrioventricular (AV) relation and atrial flutter with 2:1 AV relation. Of fetal SVT, short ventriculo-atrial (VA) interval tachycardia due to atrioventricular reentrant tachycardia is more common than long VA interval. Most fetuses with tachycardia are successfully treated in utero by transplacental administration of antiarrhythmic drugs. Digoxin is widely accepted as a first-line antiarrhythmic drug. Sotalol, flecainide and amiodarone are used as second-line drugs when digoxin fails to achieve conversion to sinus rhythm. Fetal bradycardia is diagnosed when the fetal ventricular heart rate is slower than 100 bpm, mainly due to AV block. Approximately half of all cases are caused by associated congenital heart disease, and the remaining cases that have normal cardiac structure are often caused by maternal SS-A antibody. The efficacy of prenatal treatment for fetal AV block is limited compared with treatment for fetal tachycardia. Beta stimulants and steroids have been reported as effective transplacental treatments for fetal AV block. Perinatal management based on prospective clinical study protocol rather than individual experience is crucial for further improvement of outcome in fetuses with tachycardia and bradycardia.
 ...
PMID:Fetal arrhythmia: prenatal diagnosis and perinatal management. 1975 19

The goals of atrial fibrillation (AF) and atrial flutter (AFL) arrhythmia management are to alleviate patient symptoms, improve patient quality of life, and minimize the morbidity associated with AF and AFL. Arrhythmia management usually commences with drugs to slow the ventricular rate. The addition of class I or class III antiarrhythmic drugs for restoration or maintenance of sinus rhythm is largely determined by patient symptoms and preferences. For rate control, treatment of persistent or permanent AF and AFL should aim for a resting heart rate of <100 beats per minute. Beta-blockers or nondihydropyridine calcium channel blockers are the initial therapy for rate control of AF and AFL in most patients without a history of myocardial infarction or left ventricular dysfunction. Digoxin is not recommended as monotherapy for rate control in active patients. Digoxin and dronedarone may be used in combination with other agents to optimize rate control. The first-choice antiarrhythmic drug for maintenance of sinus rhythm in patients with non structural heart disease can be any one of dronedarone, flecainide, propafenone, or sotalol. In patients with abnormal ventricular function but left ventricular ejection fraction >35%, dronedarone, sotalol, or amiodarone is recommended. In patients with left ventricular ejection fraction <35%, amiodarone is the only drug usually recommended. Intermittent antiarrhythmic drug therapy ("pill in the pocket") may be considered in symptomatic patients with infrequent, longer-lasting episodes of AF or AFL as an alternative to daily antiarrhythmic therapy. Referral for ablation of AF may be considered for patients who remain symptomatic after adequate trials of antiarrhythmic drug therapy and in whom a rhythm control strategy remains desired.
 ...
PMID:Canadian Cardiovascular Society atrial fibrillation guidelines 2010: rate and rhythm management. 2132 62

Introduction: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is rare during pregnancy but its incidence is expected to rise in parallel to increasing age of women in pregnancy and fraction of pregnant women with structural heart disease. Areas covered: The authors provide a review of the contemporary evidence on diagnostic work-up and optimal pharmacotherapeutic management of AF in pregnancy. The authors have performed a systematic search for relevant articles using MEDLINE, the COCHRANE LIBRARY, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Expert opinion: New-onset AF during pregnancy is usually an indication of underlying heart disease and should lead to hospital admission. Patients should be evaluated by an experienced cardiologist or an electrophysiologist. Direct cardioversion is highly effective and safe in pregnant women and should be prioritized over pharmacologic cardioversion with intravenous ibutilide or flecainide. Amiodarone should be avoided if possible. Digoxin and beta-blockers are the rate-control pharmaceutic agents with the widest experience of use. Catheter ablation during pregnancy should be considered in selected cases of atrial flutter refractory to medication and only performed using fluoroless techniques, preferably during the second trimester. Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) can be used after the first trimester, while low molecular weight heparin should be accompanied by periodic evaluation of anti-Xa factor. Non-VKA oral anticoagulants should be avoided because of limited experience in pregnancy.
 ...
PMID:Pharmacotherapeutic strategies for atrial fibrillation in pregnancy. 3113 4


<< Previous 1 2 3