Cited by 749Atrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesCardiac Arrhythmias and TreatmentsCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias

Amiodarone versus sotalol for atrial fibrillation

Open access
Singh, Bramah N., Singh, Steven N., Reda, Domenic J., Tang, X. Charlene, Lopez, Becky, Harris, Crystal L., Fletcher, Ross D., Sharma, Satish C. +5 more·2005·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The optimal pharmacologic means to restore and maintain sinus rhythm in patients with atrial fibrillation remains controversial. METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned 665 patients who were receiving anticoagulants and had persistent atrial fibrillation to receive amiodarone (267 patients), sotalol (261 patients), or placebo (137 patients) and monitored them for 1 to 4.5 years. The primary end point was the time to recurrence of atrial fibrillation beginning on day 28, determined by means of weekly transtelephonic monitoring. RESULTS: Spontaneous conversion occurred in 27.1 percent of the amiodarone group, 24.2 percent of the sotalol group, and 0.8 percent of the placebo group, and direct-current cardioversion failed in 27.7 percent, 26.5 percent, and 32.1 percent, respectively. The median times to a recurrence of atrial fibrillation were 487 days in the amiodarone group, 74 days in the sotalol group, and 6 days in the placebo group according to intention to treat and 809, 209, and 13 days, respectively, according to treatment received. Amiodarone was superior to sotalol (P<0.001) and to placebo (P<0.001), and sotalol was superior to placebo (P<0.001). In patients with ischemic heart disease, the median time to a recurrence of atrial fibrillation was 569 days with amiodarone therapy and 428 days with sotalol therapy (P=0.53). Restoration and maintenance of sinus rhythm significantly improved the quality of life and exercise capacity. There were no significant differences in major adverse events among the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: Amiodarone and sotalol are equally efficacious in converting atrial fibrillation to sinus rhythm. Amiodarone is superior for maintaining sinus rhythm, but both drugs have similar efficacy in patients with ischemic heart disease. Sustained sinus rhythm is associated with an improved quality of life and improved exercise performance.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmoa041705

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Benditt DG, Williams JH, Jin J, et al. Maintenance of sinus rhythm with oral d,l-sotalol therapy in patients with sympto- matic atrial fibrillation and/or atrial flutter. Am J Cardiol 1999;84:270-7.
  2. Roy D, Talajic M, Dorian P, et al. Amio- darone to prevent recurrence of atrial fibril- lation. N Engl J Med 2000;342:913-20.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Singh, B. N., Singh, S. N., Reda, D. J., Tang, X. C., Lopez, B., Harris, C. L., Fletcher, R. D., Sharma, S. C., Atwood, J. E., Jacobson, A. K., Lewis, H. D., Raisch, D. W., & Ezekowitz, M. D.
Affiliations
  • VA West Los Angeles Medical Center (US)
  • United States Department of Veterans Affairs (US)
  • Veterans Health Administration (US)
  • Providence VA Medical Center (US)
  • Walter Reed National Military Medical Center (US)
  • Hahnemann University Hospital (US)
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2005-05-05
Volume
352
Issue
18
Pages
1861-1872
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2166887354
Cited by
749
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 39 · 2015: 38 · 2014: 40 · 2013: 33 · 2012: 33
FWCI
41.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • New England Journal of 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
amiodarone, sotalol, atrial fibrillation, sinus rhythm restoration, sinus rhythm maintenance, atrial fibrillation recurrence, antiarrhythmic drugs, ischemic heart disease, quality of life, exercise capacity, transtelephonic monitoring
MeSH terms
Aged, Amiodarone, Anti-Arrhythmia Agents, Atrial Fibrillation, Double-Blind Method, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Quality of Life, Sotalol, Exercise Tolerance, Myocardial Ischemia, Disease-Free Survival, Secondary Prevention

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