• Benedict M Glover, Xudong Hu, Theresa Aves, Andrew Ramadeen, Lily Zou, Howard Leong-Poi, Hiroko Fujii, and Paul Dorian.
• Keenan Research Centre in the Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
• J. Cardiovasc. Pharmacol. 2013 May 1; 61 (5): 385-90.

ObjectiveTo compare the energy required for defibrillation and postshock outcomes after the administration of dronedarone, amiodarone, and placebo in a porcine model of cardiac arrest.MethodsForty-two pigs were randomized to amiodarone, dronedarone, or control treatments. After induction of ventricular fibrillation, compressions and ventilations were performed for 3 minutes and treatment was administered over 30 seconds. If defibrillation was unsuccessful, cardiopulmonary resuscitation continued and repeated shocks were administered every 2 minutes with continual hemodynamic monitoring for a total duration of 30 minutes.ResultsThe cumulative energy required for defibrillation was 570 ± 422 J for dronedarone, 441 ± 365 J for amiodarone, and 347 ± 281 J for control (P = not significant). Survival at 30 minutes was 1 (7.1%) for dronedarone compared with 11 (78.6%) for control (P = 0.001). Mortality in the dronedarone group was because of refibrillation in 3 (21.4%) cases, atrioventricular block in 1 (7.1%) case, and hypotension not because of bradycardia in 9 (64.3%) cases. Two minutes after successful defibrillation, systolic aortic pressure was lower in dronedarone versus control (86.6 ± 26.9 vs. 110 ± 15.1 mm Hg; P = 0.035).ConclusionsThe administration of dronedarone resulted in a significant reduction in survival and both systolic aortic and coronary perfusion pressure compared with control.

22 keywords...

hide…