No abstract

IntroductionResults from the multicenter trial (J-Land study) of landiolol versus digoxin in atrial fibrillation (AF) and atrial flutter (AFL) patients with left ventricular (LV) dysfunction revealed that landiolol was more effective for controlling rapid HR than digoxin. The subgroup analysis for patient characteristics was conducted to evaluate the impact on the efficacy and safety of landiolol compared with digoxin.MethodsTwo hundred patients with AF/AFL, heart rate (HR) ≥ 120 beats/min, and LV ejection fraction (LVEF) 25–50% were randomized to receive either landiolol (n = 93) or digoxin (n = 107). Successful HR control was defined as ≥20% reduction in HR together with HR < 110 beats/min at 2 h after starting intravenous administration of landiolol or digoxin. The subgroup analysis for patient characteristics was to evaluate the impact on the effectiveness of landiolol in AF/AFL patients complicated with LV dysfunction.ResultsThe efficacy in patients with NYHA class III/NYHA class IV was 52.3%/35.3% in landiolol, and 13.8%/9.1% in digoxin (p < 0.001 and p = 0.172), lower LVEF (25–35%)/higher LVEF (35–50%) was 45.7%/51.1% in landiolol, and 14.0%/12.7% in digoxin (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001), CKD stage 1 (90 < eGFR)/CKD stage 2 (60 ≤ eGFR < 90)/CKD stage 3 (30 ≤ eGFR < 60)/CKD stage 4 (15 ≤ eGFR < 30) was 66.7%/59.1%/39.6%/66.7% in landiolol, and 0%/13.8%/17.0%/0% in digoxin (p = 0.003, p < 0.001, p = 0.015 and p = 0.040).ConclusionsThis subgroup analysis indicated that landiolol was more useful, regardless of patient characteristics, as compared with digoxin in AF/AFL patients complicated with LV dysfunction. Particularly, in patients with impaired renal function, landiolol should be preferred for the purpose of acute rate control of AF/AFL tachycardia.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12325-014-0111-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

ABSTRACT-ONO-9302

No abstract

No abstract