Cited by 33Cardiac Arrhythmias and TreatmentsCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasCongenital Heart Disease Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Clinical experience with propafenone for cardiac arrhythmias in the young

HEUSCH, A., KRAMER, H. H., KROGMANN, O. N., RAMMOS, S., BOURGEOIS, M.·1994·European Heart Journal

Abstract

Seventy-two children were treated with propafenone between 1980 and 1990. The mean age was 34 months (range 0-192). Arrhythmias included atrioventricular re-entry tachycardia in 32 patients (44%), atrial flutter in 16 (22%), atrial or junctional ectopic tachycardia in 10 (14%), atrial re-entry tachycardias in three (4%) and ventricular arrhythmias in 11 patients (16%). The efficacy of oral treatment was good in patients with atrio-ventricular re-entry tachycardia (80%), atrial flutter (71%) and atrial ectopic tachycardia (83%); it was poor in ventricular arrhythmias (40%). The mean oral dose was 13.5 mg.kg-1. day-1. Dosage and serum levels of propafenone did not differ whether the patients were treated successfully or not. No correlation between dosage and serum level was observed. Intravenous propafenone administration was only partially successful in suppressing supraventricular tachycardias (6 of 11 patients). The presence of a congenital heart defect and the time of onset of the arrhythmias had a significant influence on the efficacy of propafenone. Better results were observed in patients with normal hearts and in whom onset of arrhythmia was pre-natal (success 80%) as well as in patients with arrhythmias seen early after surgery for congenital heart defects (success 87%). Success (65%) was also observed in patients without congenital heart defects and postnatal onset of supraventricular arrhythmias. Patients with ventricular or supraventricular arrhythmias late after corrective surgery showed the poorest response (31%).

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/oxfordjournals.eurheartj.a060627

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
HEUSCH, A., KRAMER, H. H., KROGMANN, O. N., RAMMOS, S., & BOURGEOIS, M.
Affiliations
Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf (DE)
Venue
European Heart Journal
Published
1994-08
Volume
15
Issue
8
Pages
1050-1056
ISSN
  • 0195-668X (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-9645
OpenAlex
W2228763496
Cited by
33
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 6 · 2013: 1
FWCI
1.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Heart Journal (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Congenital Heart Disease Studies
Keywords
propafenone, cardiac arrhythmias, children, atrial flutter, ectopic atrial tachycardia, ventricular arrhythmias, supraventricular tachycardia, congenital heart disease, antiarrhythmic efficacy, serum drug concentration, oral administration
MeSH terms
Administration, Oral, Adolescent, Arrhythmias, Cardiac, Atrial Flutter, Child, Child, Preschool, Electrocardiography, Cardiac Complexes, Premature, Female, Heart Conduction System, Heart Defects, Congenital, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Infusions, Intravenous, Male, Propafenone, Retrospective Studies, Tachycardia, Atrioventricular Nodal Reentry, Tachycardia, Ectopic Atrial, Tachycardia, Ectopic Junctional, Tachycardia, Supraventricular, Treatment Outcome, Tachycardia, Ventricular

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