[Comparative study of cibenzoline and flecainide administered via an intravenous route in reducing auricular...

The efficacy of intravenous flecainide and cibenzoline acetate in the reduction of atrial rhythm disorders was compared in two groups of 30 patients. These arrhythmias are divided in 31 atrial fibrillation, 11 tachy-systoles, 18 atrial flutters. Parenteral administration of the anti-arrhythmic drug over a 24 hour-period is preceded by a bolus injection of 1.5 mg/kg of flecainide acetate for group I, and a bolus of 1 mg/kg of cibenzoline for group II. The overall efficacy of the two molecules is comparable (53%) as well as the reduction of the atrial fibrillations (65% vs 57%). Flecainide acetate seems more effective in treating effectively atrial tachycardias (66.6% vs 40%), and cibenzoline is more effective in the treatment of atrial flutters (54% vs 14%). The functional, electrical and haemodynamic tolerance has always been good in both group, except in 2 patients, because of the indirect pro-arrhythmic effect of cibenzoline. We are concluding that the efficacy of both molecules is satisfactory and we advocate their use, as first intention, in recent and idiopathic atrial fibrillation; it seems that cibenzoline is more effective on ischemic cardiopathies and flecainide acetate is more effective on valvular cardiopathies. Nevertheless, the possible indirect pro-arrhythmic effect, sometimes poorly tolerated in the first minutes following administration of the bolus, only on organized atrial rhythm disorder, leads us to advocate the prescription of these two drugs when attempts of transesophageal or endocardiac atrial stimulation have failed.