Suppression of paroxysmal atrial tachyarrhythmias—results of the SOPAT trial
Abstract
AIM: The indication to treat paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) is controversial. The Suppression of Paroxysmal Atrial Tachyarrhythmias (SOPAT) trial was designed to answer the following questions: (1) What is the average rate of spontaneous events of symptomatic PAF with and without anti-arrhythmic medication? (2) what is the prevalence of severe side-effects? and (3) is the fixed combination of Quinidine + Verapamil inferior to the efficacy of sotalol or not? METHODS AND RESULTS: Within 60 months 172 centres in Germany, Poland, and The Slovak Republic prospectively enrolled 1033 patients (mean age 60 years, 62% male) with documented frequent episodes of symptomatic PAF. Patients were randomised to either Quinidine + Verapamil 480/240 mg/d (high dose; 263 patients), Quinidine + Verapamil 320/160 mg/d (low dose; 255 patients), Sotalol 320 mg/d (264 patients) or placebo (251 patients), of which 1012 patients entered the intention-to-treat analysis. The primary endpoint was the time to first recurrence of symptomatic PAF or premature discontinuation. Secondary outcome parameters were the total number of symptomatic episodes and tolerability of the tested drugs. Patients were followed for a period of up to 12 months by daily and symptom-triggered trans-telephonic ECG-monitoring (Tele-ECG). The mean time under treatment was 233 +/- 152 days. Regarding the primary endpoint, all active treatments were superior to placebo and not different from each other. A total of 756 patients reached the primary endpoint within 105.7 +/- 8.7 d (mean +/- SEM) in the placebo group, vs. Quinidine + Verapamil (high dose) (150.4 +/- 10 d, p = 0.0061), vs. Quinidine + Verapamil (low dose) (148.9 +/- 10.6 d, p = 0.0006), vs. Sotalol (145.6 +/- 93 d, p = 0.0007). All three treatments were also effective in the reduction of AF burden (days with symptomatic AF [%] mean +/- SD, p vs. placebo): Quinidine + Verapamil (high dose) (3.4 +/- 12, p = 0.0001), Quinidine + Verapamil (low dose) (4.5 +/- 12.3, p = 0.008) and Sotalol (2.9 +/- 6.5, p = 0.026) compared to placebo (6.1 +/- 13.5). A total of four deaths, 13 syncopes, and one ventricular tachycardia (VT) occurred during the active study period, of which one death and one VT were related to Quinidine/Verapamil. CONCLUSION: Taken together, anti-arrhythmic therapy with the fixed combination of Quinidine + Verapamil is as effective as Sotalol in the reduction of the recurrence rate of symptomatic PAF with a low but definite risk of severe side-effects.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Periodic ECG analysis for proarrhythmia signs has been used successfully in recent antiarrhythmic drug trials.
“Periodic ECG analysis for proarrhythmia signs has been used successfully in recent antiarrhythmic drug trials.118,584,672”
From 2016 ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with EACTS (2016) · cites this paper as [672]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 16 · Cited by 157
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Heilmann E, Bender F, Bachour G et al. Combined treatment auricular fibrillation and other tachycardic arrhythmias using quini- dine and verapamil. Med Welt 1972;23:1792-4.
- Patten M, Koch H-P, Sonntag F et al. Antiarrhythmic drug therapy in the prophylaxis of symptomatic atrial fibrillation/flutter - Rationale and design of the SOPAT trial. Z Kardiol 1999;88: 185-94.
- Authors
- PATTEN, M., MAAS, R., BAUER, P., LUDERITZ, B., SONNTAG, F., DLUZNIEWSKI, M., HATALA, R., OPOLSKI, G., MULLER, H., & MEINERTZ, T.
- Affiliations
- Universität Hamburg (DE)
- University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (DE)
- University of Vienna (AT)
- University Hospital Bonn (DE)
- Central Clinical Hospital (PL)
- Abbott (Germany) (DE)
- Corresponding author
- PATTEN, M
- Venue
- European Heart Journal
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2004-08
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 16
- Pages
- 1395-1404
- ISSN
- 0195-668X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2110571743
- Cited by
- 157
- References
- 16
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 9.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- European Heart Journal (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Universität Hamburg
- 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 › Cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
- Keywords
- paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, antiarrhythmic therapy, quinidine, verapamil, sotalol, fixed-dose combination, atrial fibrillation recurrence, drug tolerability, adverse drug reactions, treatment discontinuation, dose comparison, anticoagulation
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Anti-Arrhythmia Agents, Drug Therapy, Combination, Electrocardiography, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Quinidine, Sotalol, Tachycardia, Verapamil, Survival Analysis, Treatment Outcome
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