Cited by 29Cardiac Arrhythmias and TreatmentsAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies

Atrial flutter termination by overdrive transesophageal pacing and the facilitating effect of oral propafenone

Doni, Flavio, Bella, Paolo Della, Kheir, Antoine, Manfredi, Margherita, Piemonti, Carlo, Staffiere, Elio, Rimondini, Andrea, Fiorentini, Cesare·1995·The American Journal of Cardiology

Abstract

Transesophageal overdrive atrial pacing is effective and safe for atrial flutter termination. The influence of antiarrhythmic drug therapy on this procedure is controversial. In this study, we investigated whether oral propafenone may facilitate this procedure. Thirty patients with type I atrial flutter were randomized into 2 groups in which transesophageal pacing was attempted: group A, without treatment; and group B, after oral administration of propafenone 600 mg. Transesophageal pacing was effective in interrupting atrial flutter in 53% of patients (8 of 15) in group A and in 87% of patients (13 of 15) in group B. A significant lengthening of the flutter cycle was observed with respect to the baseline in patients given propafenone (261 +/- 23 vs 217 +/- 25, p < 0.01). Sinus rhythm resumed at a shorter paced cycle in group A patients (166 +/- 13 vs 187 +/- 14 ms, p < 0.01). The transesophageal threshold for stable atrial capture was significantly lower in group A (20.5 +/- 0.2 vs 23.3 +/- 1.2, p < 0.01). In no patient was the threshold for atrial capture higher than the pain threshold. We did not observe abrupt enhancement of atrioventricular conduction. We conclude that propafenone is effective and safe when used with transesophageal pacing in the termination of atrial flutter. The slowing effect of the drug on intraatrial conduction and the possible stabilizing effect on the reentry circuit appear to be outweighed by the positive effect of propafenone on the excitable gap of the circuit, facilitating its capture and accounting for the beneficial effect of the drug on arrhythmia termination.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0002-9149(99)80350-6

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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
Doni, F., Bella, P. D., Kheir, A., Manfredi, M., Piemonti, C., Staffiere, E., Rimondini, A., & Fiorentini, C.
Corresponding author
Doni, Flavio
Venue
The American Journal of Cardiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1995-12
Volume
76
Issue
17
Pages
1243-1246
ISSN
0002-9149 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2061010504
Cited by
29
References
26
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2016: 3
FWCI
1.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The American Journal of Cardiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Keywords
atrial flutter, transesophageal pacing, overdrive pacing, propafenone, antiarrhythmic drugs, reentrant circuit, excitable gap, sinus rhythm restoration, atrioventricular conduction
MeSH terms
Administration, Oral, Anti-Arrhythmia Agents, Atrial Flutter, Cardiac Pacing, Artificial, Electrocardiography, Heart Conduction System, Humans, Propafenone, Prospective Studies

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