Idiopathic premature ventricular complexes treatment: Comparison of flecainide, propafenone, and sotalol

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundBeta‐blockers (BB) or dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (CCBs) are still the first choices in the treatment of idiopathic premature ventricular complexes (PVCs), with low‐modest efficacy. Antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) of Ic class are moderate to highly efficient but the evidence on their benefits is still limited.AimTo compare effectiveness and safety of flecainide, propafenone, and sotalol in the treatment of symptomatic idiopathic PVCs.MethodsOur single‐center retrospective study analyzed 104 consecutive patients with 130 medication episodes of frequent idiopathic PVCs treated with AADs flecainide, propafenone (Ic class) or sotalol (III class). The primary outcome was complete/near complete reduction of PVCs after medication episode (PVCs burden reduction >99%), and the secondary outcome was significant PVC burden reduction (≥80%).ResultsThe complete/near complete PVCs burden reduction occurred in 31% and was significant in 43% of treated patients. A reduction of PVC burden for >99% was achieved in 56% of patients on flecainide, in 11% of patients on propafenone (p = .002), and in 21% of patients receiving sotalol (p = .031). There was no difference between propafenone and sotalol (p = .174). A reduction of PVC burden for ≥80% was achieved in 64% of patients on flecainide, in 30% of patients on propafenone (p = .009), and 33% of patients on sotalol (p = .020). There was no difference between propafenone and sotalol (p = .661).ConclusionsThe efficacy of AADs class Ic and III in the treatment of idiopathic PVCs was modest. Flecainide was the most effective AAD in the achievement of complete/near complete or significant PVC burden reduction, compared to propafenone and sotalol.