Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 11, 2026

The WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage Closure Device for Atrial Fibrillation
Published on: February 28, 2012
[Pharmacological therapy of atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter]
Gerian C Grönefeld1, Yi-Gang Li, Stefan H Hohnloser
1Abteilung Kardiologie, Medizinische Klinik IV, Johann-Wolfgang-Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main.
Background:
Despite the increasing availability of nonpharmacological treatment options for atrial fibrillation, drug therapy targeted at restoration and maintenance of sinus rhythm, or aimed at symptomatic ventricular rate control remains the mainstay of therapy for the majority of patients.
Method:
Available data suggest that these two treatment approaches yield similar responder rates with regard to symptomatic improvement.
Results:
Detailed results from major prospective studies investigating the prognostic effects of different atrial fibrillation treatment modalities are expected to become available soon. At present, however, the choice of the primary treatment strategy, i.e. rate control or rhythm control, still remains upon the clinical decision and expertise of the treating physician. Cardioversion by means of external biphasic shock delivery has shown to effectively convert atrial fibrillation to sinus rhythm in more than 90% of patients. Pharmacological cardioversion, in contrast, has a far lower success rate and may be followed by severe complications mandating in-hospital administration with the majority of drug regimens. For the maintenance of sinus rhythm, the proarrhythmic side effects of Class I antiarrhythmic drugs currently limit their use to those patients without any structural heart disease. Clinical investigation of newer "pure" Class III drugs have shown to excite considerable prolongation of ventricular repolarization duration resulting in a significant risk for torsade-de-pointes tachycardia. Betablockers are beneficial in many clinical situations associated with the occurrence of atrial fibrillation, such as heart failure, arterial hypertension and coronary artery disease. These substances, however, do not seem to improve cardioversion rates and their effect in maintaining sinus rhythm is only moderate. Patients with structural heart disease in whom maintenance of sinus rhythm is strongly desired, therefore, are left to amiodarone therapy. The cardiac safety profile as well as the proven effectiveness are unsurpassed by any other available drug at present. This paper reviews major studies published during the last decade implementing recent guidelines regarding pharmacological rate control, cardioversion and maintenance of sinus rhythm and the approach towards patients suffering from paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.
Related Concept Videos
Antiarrhythmic Drugs: Class II Agents as β-Adrenergic Blockers
Antiarrhythmic Drugs: Class III Agents as Potassium Channel Blockers
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...
Treatment for Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors and Calcium Channel Blockers
TKIs, such as imatinib (Gleevec), are particularly effective in tackling the growth and mitogenic factors that become upregulated in PAH patients. These factors contribute to the...
Dysrhythmias VI: Management of Dysrhythmias
ECG Interpretation of Arrhythmias II: Atrial, Junctional and Ventricular Arrhythmias

