ArticleJournal of arrhythmia2016
A multicenter observational study of the effectiveness of antiarrhythmic agents in ventricular arrhythmias: A propensity-score adjusted analysis.
Article in Journal of arrhythmia, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modeling of nifekalant injection with varies dosing plan in Chinese volunteers: a randomized, blind, placebo-controlled study.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2024Trial
- Comparative Effectiveness of Amiodarone Versus Lidocaine as Antiarrhythmic Therapy for Cardiac Arrest with Shockable Rhythms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Preventive Effect of Nifekalant on Recurrent Ventricular Fibrillation and Electrical Storm - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Circulation reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVentricular tachyarrhythmias (VTs) are life-threatening events that result in hemodynamic compromise. Recurrence is common and may worsen a patient׳s clinical course despite appropriate treatment. This study aimed to examine the effectiveness of antiarrhythmic drugs for suppression of VTs.
methodsIn this cohort study, eligible patients were those who were admitted to one of the nine cardiovascular care centers and treated with continuous infusion of an antiarrhythmic drug for at least 1 h to prevent recurrence of VTs after return of spontaneous circulation. To adjust for differences in baseline characteristics among treatment groups, propensity scores for administered agents were generated and used as covariates in regression analyses.
resultsSeventy-two patients were enrolled and 67 patients were included in the final analysis. Amiodarone (n=21, 31.3%), nifekalant (n=24, 35.8%), and lidocaine (n=22, 32.8%) were administered as first-line therapy for suppression of VTs. In the adjusted analyses, the odds ratio (OR) of switching to a different drug was significantly higher in the lidocaine group (OR 37.6, 95% CI 5.1-279, p<0.001) than in the amiodarone group, but not in the nifekalant group (OR 4.1, 95% CI 0.72-23.2, p=0.11). There was no significant difference in mortality rate in the lidocaine group (OR 1.67, 95% CI 0.40-6.95, p=0.48) or the nifekalant group (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.15-4.85, p=0.89) compared with the amiodarone group.
conclusionAmiodarone and nifekalant are similarly effective in preventing VT recurrence, but their impact on survival rate is minimal. These data indicate that both nifekalant and amiodarone can be used for treatment of refractory VT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.