Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 7, 2026

Sterile Pericarditis in Aachener Minipigs As a Model for Atrial Myopathy and Atrial Fibrillation
Published on: September 24, 2021
Amiodarone versus diltiazem for rate control in critically ill patients with atrial tachyarrhythmias
G Delle Karth1, A Geppert, T Neunteufl
1Department of Cardiology, University of Vienna, Waeringer Gürtel 18-20, 1090 Vienna, Austria. georg.delle-karth@univie.ac.at
Objective:
To compare the rate-lowering effect of diltiazem and two amiodarone regimens in critically ill patients with recent-onset atrial tachyarrhythmias.
Design:
Prospective, randomized, controlled study.
Setting:
Medical cardiologic intensive care unit in a university hospital.
Patients:
Sixty critically ill patients (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation [APACHE] III score 70 +/- 30, age 67 +/- 10 yrs).
Interventions:
Patients with atrial fibrillation (n = 57), atrial flutter (n = 2), or atrial tachycardia (n = 1, and a heart rate consistently >120 beats/min over 30 mins were randomly assigned to one of three intravenous treatment regimens. Group 1 received diltiazem in a 25-mg bolus followed by a continuous infusion of 20 mg/hr for 24 hrs, group 2 received amiodarone in a 300-mg bolus, and group 3 received amiodarone in a 300-mg bolus followed by 45 mg/hr for 24 hrs.
Measurements And Main Results:
The primary study end point was a >30% rate reduction within 4 hrs. The secondary study end point was a heart rate <120 beats/min (a patient was considered to have uncontrolled tachycardia if heart rate was >120 beats/min 4 hrs after study drug). The primary study end point was achieved in 14/20 (70%), 11/20 (55%), and 15/20 (75%) of patients in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively (chi2 = 1.95, p =.38). Uncontrolled tachycardia was more frequently observed in group 2 (0/20, 9/29 [55%], and 1/20 [5%] of patients in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively; chi2 = 17, p =.00016). In patients achieving tachycardia control, diltiazem showed a significantly better rate reduction (p =.0001 group 1 vs. group 3, p =.0001 over time; p =.0001 group 1 vs. group 2, p =.001 over time) when compared with the amiodarone groups. Premature drug discontinuation due to hypotension was required significantly more often in group 1 (6/20 [30%], 0/20, and 1/20 [5%] for groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively; chi2 = 10, p =.01).
Conclusion:
Sufficient rate control can be achieved in critically ill patients with atrial tachyarrhythmias using either diltiazem or amiodarone. Although diltiazem allowed for significantly better 24-hr heart rate control, this effect was offset by a significantly higher incidence of hypotension requiring discontinuation of the drug. Amiodarone may be an alternative in patients with severe hemodynamic compromise.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Antiarrhythmic Drugs: Class IV Agents as Calcium Channel Blockers
Verapamil, a calcium channel blocker, inhibits calcium movement across myocardial cell membranes and vascular smooth muscle. This results in the dilation of coronary and...
Antiarrhythmic Drugs: Class III Agents as Potassium Channel Blockers
Dysrhythmias VI: Management of Dysrhythmias
ECG Interpretation of Arrhythmias II: Atrial, Junctional and Ventricular Arrhythmias
Disturbances in Heart Rhythm
Arrhythmias are categorized by their speed, rhythm, and origin. A slow heart...
Antiarrhythmic Drugs: Class II Agents as β-Adrenergic Blockers

