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