ReviewClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2024
Relevance of mexiletine in the era of evolving antiarrhythmic therapy of ventricular arrhythmias.
Review in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review of Physiology, Pathology, and Pharmacology of Voltage-Gated Sodium Channels in Regards to the Potential Role of NaV 1.8 Selective Inhibitor, Suzetrigine, for Chronic Pain Management.Journal of pain research · 2026Review
- Arrhythmias in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Call for a Multidisciplinary Team.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Cardiac sarcoidosis in patients with recurrent ventricular arrhythmias refractory to endocardial ablation.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2025Article
- Management of channelopathies in children.Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie · 2025Review
- A Comprehensive Review of a Mechanism-Based Ventricular Electrical Storm Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- From genes to clinical management: A comprehensive review of long QT syndrome pathogenesis and treatment.Heart rhythm O2 · 2024Review
- Chronic Mexiletine Administration Increases Sodium Current in Non-Diseased Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell-Derived Cardiomyocytes.Biomedicines · 2024Article
- The present and future of antiarrhythmic drugs.JRSM cardiovascular diseaseArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite impressive developments in the field of ventricular arrhythmias, there is still a relevant number of patients with ventricular arrhythmias who require antiarrhythmic drug therapy and may, e.g., in otherwise drug and/or ablation refractory situations, benefit from agents known for decades, such as mexiletine. Through its capability of blocking fast sodium channels in cardiomyocytes, it has played a minor to moderate antiarrhythmic role throughout the recent decades. Nevertheless, certain patients with structural heart disease suffering from drug-refractory, i.e., mainly amiodarone refractory ventricular arrhythmias, as well as those with selected forms of congenital long QT syndrome (LQTS) may nowadays still benefit from mexiletine. Here, we outline mexiletine's cellular and clinical electrophysiological properties. In addition, the application of mexiletine may be accompanied by various potential side effects, e.g., nausea and tremor, and is limited by several drug-drug interactions. Thus, we shed light on the current therapeutic role of mexiletine for therapy of ventricular arrhythmias and discuss clinically relevant aspects of its indications based on current evidence.
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.