Crossover comparison of cibenzoline and quinidine in ambulatory patients with chronic ventricular arrhythmias

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This study was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of cibenzoline and quinidine in ambulatory patients with ventricular arrhythmias. Following washout of previous antiarrhythmic treatment, a 48-h ambulatory electrocardiographic (ECG) recording was obtained. Twenty-seven patients were screened, of whom 20 met the entry criteria of ≥ 30 ventricular premature beats (VPBs)/h. Cibenzoline was started at 130 mg every 12 h and was increased to 160 mg every 12 h if necessary. Quinidine was started at 300 mg every 6 h and was increased to 400 mg every 6 h if necessary. Treatment was assessed by 24-h ambulatory ECG recording. Efficacy was defined as > 75% reduction in single VPBs, > 90% reduction in paired VPBs, and total abolition of ventricular tachycardia events. A 7-day washout with repeat 24-h ambulatory ECG recording to document return of ventricular arrhythmias was required prior to crossover. Efficacy was documented in 9 of 20 (45%) patients receiving cibenzoline and in 9 of 20 (45%) patients receiving quinidine. Response to cibenzoline 130 mg every 12 h was documented in 8 of 20 (40%) patients and in 1 of 11 (9%) patients receiving cibenzoline 160 mg every 12 h. Response to quinidine 300 mg every 6 h was documented in 8 of 20 (40%) patients and in 2 of 6 (33%) patients receiving 400 mg every 6 h. Dose-limiting side effects occurred in 1 of 20 (5%) patients receiving cibenzoline and in 7 of 20 (35%) patients receiving quinidine. Cibenzoline and quinidine are equal in efficacy, but cibenzoline is significantly better tolerated.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)525-529
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology
Volume13
Issue number4
StatePublished - 1989

Fingerprint

Quinidine
Cardiac Arrhythmias
Ventricular Premature Complexes
cifenline
Ventricular Tachycardia
Safety

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Pharmacology

Cite this

@article{7bec8f9f94044482a4931a7b2059cc32,
title = "Crossover comparison of cibenzoline and quinidine in ambulatory patients with chronic ventricular arrhythmias",
abstract = "This study was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of cibenzoline and quinidine in ambulatory patients with ventricular arrhythmias. Following washout of previous antiarrhythmic treatment, a 48-h ambulatory electrocardiographic (ECG) recording was obtained. Twenty-seven patients were screened, of whom 20 met the entry criteria of ≥ 30 ventricular premature beats (VPBs)/h. Cibenzoline was started at 130 mg every 12 h and was increased to 160 mg every 12 h if necessary. Quinidine was started at 300 mg every 6 h and was increased to 400 mg every 6 h if necessary. Treatment was assessed by 24-h ambulatory ECG recording. Efficacy was defined as > 75{\%} reduction in single VPBs, > 90{\%} reduction in paired VPBs, and total abolition of ventricular tachycardia events. A 7-day washout with repeat 24-h ambulatory ECG recording to document return of ventricular arrhythmias was required prior to crossover. Efficacy was documented in 9 of 20 (45{\%}) patients receiving cibenzoline and in 9 of 20 (45{\%}) patients receiving quinidine. Response to cibenzoline 130 mg every 12 h was documented in 8 of 20 (40{\%}) patients and in 1 of 11 (9{\%}) patients receiving cibenzoline 160 mg every 12 h. Response to quinidine 300 mg every 6 h was documented in 8 of 20 (40{\%}) patients and in 2 of 6 (33{\%}) patients receiving 400 mg every 6 h. Dose-limiting side effects occurred in 1 of 20 (5{\%}) patients receiving cibenzoline and in 7 of 20 (35{\%}) patients receiving quinidine. Cibenzoline and quinidine are equal in efficacy, but cibenzoline is significantly better tolerated.",
author = "Mohiuddin, {Syed M.} and Woodruff, {M. P.} and Esterbrooks, {Dennis J.} and Mooss, {Aryan N.} and Hansen, {J. M.} and Hilleman, {Daniel E.}",
year = "1989",
language = "English",
volume = "13",
pages = "525--529",
journal = "Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology",
issn = "0160-2446",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Crossover comparison of cibenzoline and quinidine in ambulatory patients with chronic ventricular arrhythmias

AU - Mohiuddin, Syed M.

AU - Woodruff, M. P.

AU - Esterbrooks, Dennis J.

AU - Mooss, Aryan N.

AU - Hansen, J. M.

AU - Hilleman, Daniel E.

PY - 1989

Y1 - 1989

N2 - This study was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of cibenzoline and quinidine in ambulatory patients with ventricular arrhythmias. Following washout of previous antiarrhythmic treatment, a 48-h ambulatory electrocardiographic (ECG) recording was obtained. Twenty-seven patients were screened, of whom 20 met the entry criteria of ≥ 30 ventricular premature beats (VPBs)/h. Cibenzoline was started at 130 mg every 12 h and was increased to 160 mg every 12 h if necessary. Quinidine was started at 300 mg every 6 h and was increased to 400 mg every 6 h if necessary. Treatment was assessed by 24-h ambulatory ECG recording. Efficacy was defined as > 75% reduction in single VPBs, > 90% reduction in paired VPBs, and total abolition of ventricular tachycardia events. A 7-day washout with repeat 24-h ambulatory ECG recording to document return of ventricular arrhythmias was required prior to crossover. Efficacy was documented in 9 of 20 (45%) patients receiving cibenzoline and in 9 of 20 (45%) patients receiving quinidine. Response to cibenzoline 130 mg every 12 h was documented in 8 of 20 (40%) patients and in 1 of 11 (9%) patients receiving cibenzoline 160 mg every 12 h. Response to quinidine 300 mg every 6 h was documented in 8 of 20 (40%) patients and in 2 of 6 (33%) patients receiving 400 mg every 6 h. Dose-limiting side effects occurred in 1 of 20 (5%) patients receiving cibenzoline and in 7 of 20 (35%) patients receiving quinidine. Cibenzoline and quinidine are equal in efficacy, but cibenzoline is significantly better tolerated.

AB - This study was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of cibenzoline and quinidine in ambulatory patients with ventricular arrhythmias. Following washout of previous antiarrhythmic treatment, a 48-h ambulatory electrocardiographic (ECG) recording was obtained. Twenty-seven patients were screened, of whom 20 met the entry criteria of ≥ 30 ventricular premature beats (VPBs)/h. Cibenzoline was started at 130 mg every 12 h and was increased to 160 mg every 12 h if necessary. Quinidine was started at 300 mg every 6 h and was increased to 400 mg every 6 h if necessary. Treatment was assessed by 24-h ambulatory ECG recording. Efficacy was defined as > 75% reduction in single VPBs, > 90% reduction in paired VPBs, and total abolition of ventricular tachycardia events. A 7-day washout with repeat 24-h ambulatory ECG recording to document return of ventricular arrhythmias was required prior to crossover. Efficacy was documented in 9 of 20 (45%) patients receiving cibenzoline and in 9 of 20 (45%) patients receiving quinidine. Response to cibenzoline 130 mg every 12 h was documented in 8 of 20 (40%) patients and in 1 of 11 (9%) patients receiving cibenzoline 160 mg every 12 h. Response to quinidine 300 mg every 6 h was documented in 8 of 20 (40%) patients and in 2 of 6 (33%) patients receiving 400 mg every 6 h. Dose-limiting side effects occurred in 1 of 20 (5%) patients receiving cibenzoline and in 7 of 20 (35%) patients receiving quinidine. Cibenzoline and quinidine are equal in efficacy, but cibenzoline is significantly better tolerated.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0024519639&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0024519639&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 2470988

AN - SCOPUS:0024519639

VL - 13

SP - 525

EP - 529

JO - Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology

JF - Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology

SN - 0160-2446

IS - 4

ER -