Emergency management of atrial fibrillation and flutter: intravenous diltiazem versus intravenous digoxin
Abstract
Study objective To compare the effects of i.v. diltiazem and i.v. digoxin on ventricular rate control in the emergency treatment of acute atrial fibrillation and flutter (AFF).Methods This prospective, randomized, open-label trial involved 30 consecutive patients who presented with acute AFF to the emergency department of an urban, 420-bed community teaching hospital from April 1993 through March 1994. Exclusion criteria included systolic blood pressure lower than 100 mm Hg, treatment with calcium-channel blockers other than diltiazem, lack of informed consent, and objection of the private physician. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either i.v. diltiazem alone, i.v. digoxin alone, or both. Heart rate control was defined as a ventricular rate of less than 100 beats/minute. I.v. digoxin, 25 mg, was given as a bolus at time 0 and at time 30 minutes. An initial dose of .25 mg/kg diltiazem was given intravenously over the first 2 minutes, followed by a dose of .35 mg/kg at time 15 minutes and then a titratable i.v. infusion at a rate of 10 to 20 mg/hour to maintain heart rate control. The dosing regimens were the same whether the drugs were given alone or in combination. Heart rhythm, heart rate, and blood pressure were measured at time 0, 5, 10, 15, 30, 60, 120, and 180 minutes. Statistical significance was assessed with the use of Student's t test and ANOVA methodology.Results At time 0, the heart rate (mean +/- SD) was 150 +/- 19 beats/minute in the diltiazem group and 144 +/- 12 in the digoxin group (difference not significant, P = .432). The decrease in heart rate from time 0 reached statistical significance at time 5 minutes in the diltiazem group (P = .0006); the mean rates at time 5 minutes were 111 +/- 26 beats/minute for diltiazem and 144 +/- 13 for digoxin. The decrease in heart rate achieved with digoxin did not reach statistical significance until time 180 minutes (P = .0099), at which time the rates were 90 +/- 13 for diltiazem and 117 +/- 22 for digoxin.Conclusion Treatment of acute AFF with i.v. diltiazem decreases ventricular heart rate significantly within 5 minutes, compared with 3 hours for treatment with i.v. digoxin. No advantage was noted within 3 hours for i.v. treatment with a combination of diltiazem and digoxin. I.v. diltiazem is superior to i.v. digoxin in the emergency control of ventricular rate in acute AFF and should be considered as a drug of choice for this condition. This study was not large enough to adequately assess adverse effects, and further studies may be warranted for clinical validation.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
For acute rate control, beta-blockers and diltiazem/verapamil are preferred over digoxin because of their rapid onset of action and effectiveness at high sympathetic tone.
“For acute rate control, beta-blockers and diltiazem/verapamil are preferred over digoxin because of their rapid onset of action and effectiveness at high sympathetic tone.[528][529][530][531][532]”
From 2016 ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with EACTS (2016) · cites this paper as [529]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 19 · Cited by 113
- Authors
- Schreck, D. M., Rivera, A. R., & Tricarico, V. J.
- Affiliations
- Muhlenberg Regional Medical Center (US)
- ORCID
- Schreck, David M
- Venue
- Annals of Emergency Medicine
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1997-01
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 135-140
- ISSN
- 0196-0644 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2113939441
- Cited by
- 113
- References
- 19
- Citations by year
- 2025: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 2.62
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Annals of Emergency Medicine (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 › Cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
- Keywords
- atrial fibrillation, atrial flutter, diltiazem, digoxin, ventricular rate control, intravenous calcium channel blockers, emergency treatment, heart rate reduction, blood pressure, drug combination therapy, adverse effects, hypotension, bradycardia, tachycardia, arrhythmia management, emergency department care, cost-effectiveness comparison
- MeSH terms
- Acute Disease, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Analysis of Variance, Anti-Arrhythmia Agents, Atrial Fibrillation, Atrial Flutter, Digoxin, Diltiazem, Emergency Medical Services, Female, Heart Rate, Humans, Infusions, Intravenous, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, 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