Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: 10.2478/prolas-2019-0005
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorStrelnieks, Aldis-
dc.contributor.authorBerziņš, Alberts-
dc.contributor.authorKarakone, Mara-
dc.contributor.authorPupkeviča, Irina-
dc.contributor.authorJubele, Kristine-
dc.contributor.authorVikmane, Maija-
dc.contributor.authorSakne, Sandis-
dc.contributor.authorKalejs, Oskars-
dc.contributor.authorLejnieks, Aivars-
dc.date.accessioned2021-04-22T07:25:02Z-
dc.date.available2021-04-22T07:25:02Z-
dc.date.issued2019-03-01-
dc.identifier.citationStrelnieks , A , Berziņš , A , Karakone , M , Pupkeviča , I , Jubele , K , Vikmane , M , Sakne , S , Kalejs , O & Lejnieks , A 2019 , ' Comparison of effectiveness and safety of antiarrhythmic drugs class IC and III in patients after electrical cardioversion ' , Proceedings of the Latvian Academy of Sciences, Section B: Natural, Exact, and Applied Sciences , vol. 73 , no. 1 , pp. 34-39 . https://doi.org/10.2478/prolas-2019-0005-
dc.identifier.issn1407-009X-
dc.identifier.urihttps://dspace.rsu.lv/jspui/handle/123456789/3890-
dc.descriptionPublisher Copyright: © 2019 Aldis Strelnieks et al. published by Sciendo.-
dc.description.abstractPatients with atrial fibrillation are faced with an increased risk of thromboembolic events, myocardial infarction, chronic heart failure and death. For some patients with atrial fibrillation, direct current cardioversion (DCCV) is a strategy that can be used to reacquire sinus rhythm. Our aim was to analyse the most commonly used medications after an electrical cardioversion, the reasons for not using them, the effects of pharmacotherapy on recurrence rates, and compare results with data from studies in 2014. The prospective study includes patients with electrocardiographically confirmed atrial fibrillation who underwent direct current cardioversion, hospitalised at Pauls Stradiņš Clinical University Hospital (Riga, Latvia). The average age was 64.6 years. 50% of the patients were female. During the six-month study period, 14.3% patients were using amiodarone, 8.3% patients were on etacizine, 7.1% received propafenone, and 57.1% used beta blockers in monotherapy or in combination. Warfarin was used in 28.0% patients, direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC's) in 29.9%, 21,4% of patients received aspirin and 16.7% did not use any antithrombotic therapy. Comparing the recurrence rate in patients using different antiarrhythmic drugs, amiodarone showed a statistically significant superiority compared to etacizine and propafenone (p = 0.02). The obtained data showed that over four years, the use of anticoagulants increased by 11.6%.en
dc.format.extent573446-
dc.language.isoeng-
dc.relation.ispartofProceedings of the Latvian Academy of Sciences, Section B: Natural, Exact, and Applied Sciences-
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess-
dc.subjectAtrial fibrillation-
dc.subjectDirect current cardioversion-
dc.subjectOral anticoagulants-
dc.subject3.2 Clinical medicine-
dc.subject1.1. Scientific article indexed in Web of Science and/or Scopus database-
dc.subjectGeneral-
dc.titleComparison of effectiveness and safety of antiarrhythmic drugs class IC and III in patients after electrical cardioversionen
dc.type/dk/atira/pure/researchoutput/researchoutputtypes/contributiontojournal/article-
dc.identifier.doi10.2478/prolas-2019-0005-
dc.contributor.institutionDepartment of Internal Diseases-
dc.identifier.urlhttp://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85061959760&partnerID=8YFLogxK-
dc.description.statusPeer reviewed-
Appears in Collections:Research outputs from Pure / Zinātniskās darbības rezultāti no ZDIS Pure

Files in This Item:


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.