Abstract: . . .  ( H z ) 9,0 8,0 7,0 6,0 5,0 4,0 SR AF 37 % 360 fpm 100 % 25 % 360 fpm 88 % Bollmann et al. Am J Cardiol 1998 Bollmann et al. Am J Cardiol 2002 Page 34 Conclusions (1) Determination of frequency measures from the surface electrocardiogram is possible in the vast majority of AF patients allows non-invasive monitoring of pharmacologic interventions seems to exhibit prognostic information Page 35 Conclusions (2) to terminate spontaneously to terminate after . . .
. . .  ,8 ,6 ,4 Exponential Decay Baseline vs. Drug p=.001 for Flec; p=.001 for Amio Change Flecainide vs. Amiodarone p=.272 Husser et al. Am J Cardiol 2005 Page 32 Influence of Antiarrhythmic Drugs on Fibrillatory Rate and Its Variability Results from Principal Component Analysis Raine et al. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2004 Page 33 Fibrillatory Rate as Predictor for Drug-Induced AF Termination Ibutilide 1g (+1g) i.v. Flecainide 300 mg p.o. F i b r illa t o r y F r e q u e n c  . . .
. . .  Ibutilide 1 mg (+ 1 mg if required) i.v. 15 - 114 42 fpm 60 % Baseline fibrillatory rate 338 55 vs 436 67 fpm Ibutilide 1 mg (+ 1 mg if required) i.v. 19 - 82 57 fpm 35 % Fibrillatory rate change 108 60 vs 68 52 fpm Sotalol 80 mg i.v. 5 Atrial cycle length increased in all patients 0 % - Husser et al. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther 2004 Monitoring and Predicting Antiarrhythmic Drug Effects Page 27 Monitoring Antifibrillatory Drug Effects Using Time-Frequency Analysis (1) Baseline Day 3 200 mg Flecainide . . .
. . .  rate (fpm) 386 33 420 41 .007 Page 23 Risk Stratification Based on Systolic LA Area and Fibrillatory Rate "Electro-mechanical index" > -0.25 -1.85 to -0.25 < -1.85 Patients (n) 20 15 10 5 0 Sinus Rhythm Atrial Fibrillation Electro-mechanical Index = 0.176 x Systolic LA Area + 0.029 x Fibrillatory Rate 17.674 100 % 60 % 28 % 0 % 40 % 72 % Bollmann et al. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2003 Page 24 Antiarrhythmic Drug Utilization in New-onset AF 0 10 . . .
--3000,4,375,3297,17252