by Stephen C. Vlay, MD
 |
| Stephen C. Vlay,MD, is professor of medicine, State University of New York, Stony Brook, NY. |
Management of atrial fibrillation
remains one of the most difficult
challenges for physicians and patients.
Reynolds and colleagues assessed
the effect of amiodarone (Cordarone,
Pacerone) in a group of patients enrolled in
the Fibrillation Registry Assessing Costs,
Therapies, Adverse Events, and Lifestyle
(FRACTAL). This registry provided prospective
observational cohort data for 1,005
patients from 17 centers over a 3-year period
following a first episode of atrial fibrillation.
Analysis was performed on 973 subjects after
various exclusions.
Amiodarone was administered to 19.5%
of women and 26.2% of men. During the
follow-up period, 25 women and 35 men
underwent pacemaker implantation for
bradyarrhythmias, with the most common
diagnosis being “sick sinus syndrome.” After
statistical analysis, the hazard ratio for implantation
was higher in women (4.69) than
in men (1.05). The authors speculated on the
reasons for the sex differences and considered
age at onset of atrial fibrillation, body size,
bioavailability, and incidence of hypertension,
valvular heart disease, and coronary artery
disease. Although they did not come to any
definite conclusions, they warn physicians of
the higher incidence of bradyarrhythmias
requiring pacemaker implantation in women
than in men, independent of weight or body
mass index.
One of the limitations of this study was
the low number of patients it included; in
fact, the percentage of those who actually received
amiodarone was similarly low. Looking
at the raw data, the difference in the total
number of implanted pacemakers between
men and women was just 10 devices. Consequently,
caution must be used in interpreting
the data.
Nevertheless, clinicians should not disregard
this information, as it serves to remind
us that we should be mindful of sex differences.
There are important clinical differences
between men and women, including age of
onset of a condition, how medication is
metabolized, and in the course of an established
illness. Prospective studies provide valid
data, particularly when demographic variables
are controlled and the population contains an
adequate sampling of both sexes (in this
study, 60% of patients were men and 40%
were women).
The electrophysiology and use of amiodarone
are well-known. Physicians should
remember that despite its widespread use
for atrial fibrillation, amiodarone is approved
by the Food and Drug Administration only
for life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias.
When administered, particularly in
the elderly, bradyarrhythmias are not
uncommon, and if symptomatic, may
require a pacemaker or change of
medication.
The present article stresses particular
vigilance in women, especially during
the loading period. Loading is an
aspect not addressed in this article,
but is important pharmacologically.
Amiodarone’s complex pharmacokinetics
requires loading in the tissues to
achieve a steady state and clinical
efficacy—the faster the better when
the problem is life-threatening ventricular
fibrillation or tachycardia.
Loading doses vary, ranging between
800 and 1,600 mg/day, administered
in divided doses for an initial 1 to 2
weeks. With these large doses, effects
on the sinus node and atrioventricular
node may be particularly striking,
resulting in severe bradycardia or
heart block.
For atrial arrhythmias, daily
administration of a 200-mg dose
without a loading dose will require
considerably more time to achieve a
steady state; however, it may, at least
initially, avoid the need for a permanent
pacemaker to treat the bradyarrhythmias
associated with high-dose
loading regimens. Arrhythmia control
with restoration of sinus rhythm
will occur at a later date, but atrial
arrhythmias usually are not lifethreatening.
The take-home message is that
clinicians should be knowledgeable
about the pharmacokinetics of a medication
and carefully monitor their
patients for any adverse effects.