Donate Help Contact The AHA Sign In Home
American Heart Association
Circulation
Search: search_blue_button Advanced Search
« Previous Article | Table of Contents | Next Article »
Circulation. 2003;107:e90
doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000064686.11947.12
This Article
Right arrow Extract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Krohn, B. G.
Right arrow Articles by Li, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Krohn, B. G.
Right arrow Articles by Li, J.
Related Collections
Right arrow Contractile function
Right arrow Electrophysiology
Right arrow Animal models of human disease
Right arrow Arrythmias-basic studies
Right arrow Other Treatment

(Circulation. 2003;107:e90.)
© 2003 American Heart Association, Inc.

Correspondence

Inappropriate Use of Atrioventricular Nodal Vagal Stimulation in Atrial Fibrillation

Bernard G. Krohn, MD

Good Samaritan Hospital, Los Angeles, Calif, bernard.krohn@verizon.net

To the Editor:

Zhuang et al1 showed well that slowing the ventricular rate by atrioventricular nodal vagal stimulation (AVN-VS) improved hemodynamics during atrial fibrillation (AF). This gave better hemodynamic responses than slowing the ventricular rate by atrioventricular nodal ablation with right ventricular pacing, which caused adverse effects that the authors cited. The authors then wrongly concluded, "...we believe that this novel strategy (AVN-VS) might be applicable in some patients, eg, postoperative patients with AF."

However, atrial fibrillation after surgical operations, especially cardiac operations, is peculiar because it is self-limiting. This arrhythmia commonly starts on the second or third postoperative day, and it reverts to regular sinus rhythm in a few days if the fast ventricular rate is slowed. The ventricular rate can be slowed promptly and safely by giving intravenous digoxin, 15 to 19 micrograms per kg of lean body weight,2,3 using the dosing calculations of Roger Jelliffe et al.4 Digoxin stimulates the vagus nerve actively. ß-blockers can be used in addition to digoxin.

Many doctors are rightly reluctant to estimate these higher digoxin doses because estimating can cause toxicity. In contrast, the calculations by Jelliffe et al of doses for dangerous drugs, including digoxin, are used in more than 100 institutions and are available (Laboratory of Applied Pharmacokinetics, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, Calif. contact@lapk.org). AVN-VS is an effective treatment. However, doctors should give postoperative patients the benefits of digoxin therapy controlled by the same calculations of doses that they use for other dangerous drugs, such as aminoglycosides. This costs less money and is less disturbing to the patients than other treatments.

References

  1. Zhuang S, Zhang Y, Mowrey KA, et al. Ventricular rate control by selective vagal stimulation is superior to rhythm regularization by atrioventricular nodal ablation and pacing during atrial fibrillation. Circulation. 2002; 106: 1853–1858.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Krohn BG, Saenz JM, Eto KK. The critical dose of digoxin for treating supraventricular tachycardias after heart surgery. Chest. 1989; 95: 729–734.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Krohn BG, Kay JH, Mendez MA, et al. Rapid sustained recovery after cardiac operations. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1990; 100: 194–197.[Abstract]
  4. Jelliffe RW, Buell J, Kalaba R. Reduction of digitalis toxicity by computer-assisted glycoside dosage regimes. Ann Int Med. 1972; 77: 891–906.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
 

Response

Shaowei Zhuang, MD; Youhua Zhang, MD, PhD; Kent A. Mowrey, MS; Tomotsugu Tabata, MD, PhD; Don W. Wallick, PhD; Zoran B. Popovic, MD; Richard A. Grimm, DO; Andrea Natale, MD; Todor N. Mazgalev, PhD

Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, The Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio

Jianbo Li, PhD

Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, The Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio

Although we appreciate the comments of Dr Krohn, it appears that he has inappropriately interpreted our study.1 We reported a novel method for slowing of the ventricular rate during atrial fibrillation (AF) and evaluated it in juxtaposition to the atrioventricular (AV) nodal ablation accompanied by right ventricular pacing. We suggested that because of the demonstrated advantages of the selective AV nodal vagal stimulation, this alternative approach might deserve clinical consideration in a selected group of patients.

This suggestion, however, does not deserve to be presented as an "inappropriate use of atrioventricular nodal vagal stimulation in AF." Indeed, one cannot make any conclusions about its appropriateness before an objective evaluation is performed and comparisons between alternatives are made. Dr Krohn’s letter, therefore, simply refers to his experience using digoxin for ventricular rate control. This neither relates to our study nor compares digoxin with other pharmacological agents.

We felt that the novel technology reported in our study would be most suitable for evaluation in postoperative patients because temporary pacing wires are frequently used and kept for several days in this group of patients. In fact, 2 clinical laboratories have already used similar technologies in patients. In one,2 the presence of the AV nodal fat pad and its use for modulation of the conduction were confirmed in open-heart surgery patients. The other,3 using standard intracardiac electrophysiological catheters, concluded that parasympathetic nerve stimulation "may serve as an adjunctive tool for the diagnosis/treatment of supraventricular tachycardias and may be beneficial for ventricular rate slowing during tachycardiac AF in patients with congestive heart failure." In view of the preliminary observations of its effectiveness and ease of use, selective vagal stimulation may prove to be an appropriate tool in certain cases.

As to use of digoxin in postoperative AF patients, it was never a goal of our report to evaluate its appropriateness. This has been done repetitively by others, however, and it is well established that digoxin has no advantages as a single agent. In fact, ventricular rate control occurs more rapidly with both ß-blocking agents and calcium antagonists than digoxin,4,5 and in general a combination of drugs is most often the recommended approach.6

References

  1. Zhuang S, Zhang Y, Mowrey KA, et al. Ventricular rate control by selective vagal stimulation is superior to rhythm regularization by atrioventricular nodal ablation and pacing during atrial fibrillation. Circulation. 2002; 106: 1853–1858.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Quan KJ, Lee JH, Van Hare GF, et al. Identification and characterization of atrioventricular parasympathetic innervation in humans. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2002; 13: 735–739.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  3. Schauerte P, Mischke K, Plisiene J, et al. Catheter stimulation of cardiac parasympathetic nerves in humans: a novel approach to the cardiac autonomic nervous system. Circulation. 2001; 104: 2430–2435.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. Tisdale JE, Padhi ID, Goldberg AD, et al. A randomized, double-blind comparison of intravenous diltiazem and digoxin for atrial fibrillation after coronary artery bypass surgery. Am Heart J. 1998; 135(5 Pt 1): 739–747.
  5. Khairy P, Nattel S. New insights into the mechanisms and management of atrial fibrillation. CMAJ. 2002; 167: 1012–1020.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  6. Fuster V, Ryden LE, Asinger RW, et al. ACC/AHA/ESC guidelines for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the European Society of Cardiology Committee for Practice Guidelines and Policy Conferences (Committee to Develop Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001; 38: 1231–1265.[Free Full Text]




This Article
Right arrow Extract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Krohn, B. G.
Right arrow Articles by Li, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Krohn, B. G.
Right arrow Articles by Li, J.
Related Collections
Right arrow Contractile function
Right arrow Electrophysiology
Right arrow Animal models of human disease
Right arrow Arrythmias-basic studies
Right arrow Other Treatment

Circulation Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search
Copyright © 2003 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited.