Skip to main content

Table 2 Studies comparing amiodarone and calcium channel blockers

From: Treatment strategies for new onset atrial fibrillation in patients treated on an intensive care unit: a systematic scoping review

Authors Sample size and setting Primary diagnosis Study design and risk of bias Intervention Rate control outcome Rhythm control outcome Mortality outcome
Delle Karth et al. (2001) n = 60
n = 20 (diltiazem)
n = 20 (amiodarone bolus)
n = 20 (amiodarone bolus and 24 h infusion)
Setting: Austria ICU
Mixed cardiac and medical ICU population RCTa
Risk of bias: high
Diltiazem versus amiodarone bolus versus amiodarone bolus and 24 h continuous infusion Rate reduction within 4 h: NSb
Diltiazem: 70%
Amiodarone bolus: 55%
Amiodarone bolus with 24 h continuous infusion: 75%
Rate reduction within 24 h:
Diltiazem versus amiodarone groups: p = .001
Amiodarone bolus versus amiodarone bolus with 24 h continuous infusion: p = .08
Within 4 h: NS
Diltiazem: 30%
Amiodarone bolus: 40%
Amiodarone bolus with 24 h continuous infusion: 45%
Not assessed
Gerlach et al. (2008) n = 61
n = 55 NOAF patients
n = 28 (diltiazem)
n = 27 (amiodarone)
Setting: USA Surgical ICU
Noncardiac surgical population Prospective comparative
Risk of bias: Critical
Diltiazem versus amiodarone Not assessed At 24 h: NS
Diltiazem: 87% Amiodarone: 87%
Mean time to conversion: NS
Diltiazem: 7 h
Amiodarone: 5 h
Not assessed
Jaffer et al. (2016) (conference abstract) n = 65
Setting: USA ICU
Septic shock Retrospective comparative
Risk of bias: Critical
Calcium channel blockers (drug not specified) versus amiodarone Not assessed Not assessed NS
Mieure et al. (2011) (conference abstract) n = 126c
n = 61 (amiodarone)
n = 41 (diltiazem)
Setting: USA ICU
Not reported Retrospective comparative
Risk of bias: Critical
Diltiazem versus amiodarone At 24 h: NS
Diltiazem: 85%
Amiodarone: 85%
Diltiazem: 7%
Amiodarone: 21%
Not assessed
McKenzie Brown et al. (2018) n = 33d
n = 6 (amiodarone)
n = 2 (calcium channel blockers)
Setting: USA Surgical ICU
Noncardiac surgical population Retrospective comparative
Risk of bias: Critical
Calcium channel blockers (drug not specified) versus amiodarone Amiodarone: 83%
Calcium channel blockers: 50%
Amiodarone: 83%
Calcium channel blockers: 50%
Not assessed
  1. aRandomised controlled trial
  2. bStatistically not significant
  3. cIncludes beta blockers group
  4. dIncludes beta blockers group no treatment groups