ArticleJournal of emergencies, trauma, and shock2010
Treating critical supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmias.
Article in Journal of emergencies, trauma, and shock, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cardiac Injury After Traumatic Brain Injury: Clinical Consequences and Management.Neurocritical care · 2024Article
- Polyelectrolyte Microcapsules: An Extended Release System for the Antiarrhythmic Complex of Allapinin with Glycyrrhizic Acid Salt.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Outcome of life-threatening arrhythmias among patients presenting in an emergency setting at a tertiary hospital in Accra-Ghana.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2022Article
- Article
- [Tachycardias. What must the emergency physician know?].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2012Review
- What an emergency physician needs to know about acute care of cardiac arrhythmias.Journal of emergencies, trauma, and shock · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Atrial fibrillation (AF), atrial flutter, AV-nodal reentry tachycardia with rapid ventricular response, atrial ectopic tachycardia and preexcitation syndromes combined with AF or ventricular tachyarrhythmias (VTA) are typical arrhythmias in intensive care patients (pts). Most frequently, the diagnosis of the underlying arrhythmia is possible from the physical examination (PE), the response to maneuvers or drugs and the 12-lead surface electrocardiogram. In unstable hemodynamics, immediate DC-cardioversion is indicated. Conversion of AF to sinus rhythm (SR) is possible using antiarrhythmic drugs. Amiodarone has a conversion rate in AF of up to 80%. Ibutilide represents a class III antiarrhythmic agent that has been reported to have conversion rates of 50-70%. Acute therapy of atrial flutter (Aflut) in intensive care pts depends on the clinical presentation. Atrial flutter can most often be successfully cardioverted to SR with DC-energies <50 joules. Ibutilide trials showed efficacy rates of 38-76% for conversion of Aflut to SR compared to conversion rates of 5-13% when intravenous flecainide, propafenone or verapamil was administered. In addition, high dose (2 mg) of ibutilide was more effective than sotalol (1.5 mg/kg) in conversion of Aflut to SR (70 versus 19%). Drugs like procainamide, sotalol, amiodarone or magnesium were recommended for treatment of VTA in intensive care pts. However, only amiodarone is today the drug of choice in VTA pts and also highly effective even in pts with defibrillation-resistant out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (CA). There is a general agreement that bystander first aid, defibrillation and advanced life support is essential for neurologic outcome in pts after cardiac arrest due to VTA. Public access defibrillation in the hands of trained laypersons seems to be an ideal approach in the treatment of ventricular fibrillation (VF). The use of automatic external defibrillators (AEDs) by basic life support ambulance providers or first responder (FR) in early defibrillation programs has been associated with a significant increase in survival rates (SRs). However, use of AEDs at home cannot be recommended.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.