Cited by 160Atrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesCardiac Arrhythmias and TreatmentsHeart rate and cardiovascular health

A placebo-controlled trial of continuous intravenous diltiazem infusion for 24-hour heart rate control during atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter: a multicenter study

Open access
Ellenbogen, Kenneth A., Dias, Virgil C., Plumb, Vance J., Heywood, J.Thomas, Mirvis, David M.·1991·Journal of the American College of Cardiology

Abstract

The safety and efficacy of a 10- to 15-mg/h continuous infusion of intravenous diltiazem were evaluated in 47 patients with atrial fibrillation or flutter who first responded to 20 mg or 20 mg followed by one or more 25-mg bolus doses of open label intravenous diltiazem. Of the 47 patients, 44 responded to the bolus injection and were randomized under double-blind conditions to receive either a continuous infusion of intravenous diltiazem (10 to 15 mg/h) (23 patients) or placebo (21 patients) for up to 24 h. Seventeen (74%) of the 23 patients receiving diltiazem infusion and none of the 21 with placebo infusion maintained a therapeutic response for 24 h (p less than 0.001). Over 24 h, patients receiving diltiazem infusion lost response significantly more slowly than did those receiving placebo infusion (p less than 0.001). Nonresponders to the double-blind infusion were given an additional bolus injection of open label intravenous diltiazem and administered an open label 24-h intravenous diltiazem infusion. The overall proportion of patients maintaining a response to a 24-h infusion of intravenous diltiazem under double-blind or open label conditions combined was 83% (34 of 41). Efficacy of the 24-h infusion of intravenous diltiazem was similar in elderly versus young patients, those who did versus those who did not receive digoxin and those weighing less than 84 versus greater than or equal to 84 kg. However, intravenous diltiazem appeared to be more effective in atrial fibrillation than in atrial flutter. No significant untoward effects were noted.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0735-1097(91)90743-s

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ellenbogen, K. A., Dias, V. C., Plumb, V. J., Heywood, J. T., & Mirvis, D. M.
Affiliations
  • Hunter Holmes McGuire VA Medical Center (US)
  • Loma Linda University (US)
Corresponding author
Ellenbogen, Kenneth A.
Venue
Journal of the American College of Cardiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1991-10
Volume
18
Issue
4
Pages
891-897
ISSN
0735-1097 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2005308598
Cited by
160
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 4 · 2012: 1
FWCI
7.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American College of Cardiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart rate and cardiovascular health
Keywords
diltiazem, intravenous infusion, atrial fibrillation, atrial flutter, rate control, calcium channel blockers, antiarrhythmic therapy, digoxin, cardioversion
MeSH terms
Aged, Atrial Fibrillation, Atrial Flutter, Diltiazem, Double-Blind Method, Female, Heart Rate, Humans, Infusions, Intravenous, Male, Time Factors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review