These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Atrial-selective sodium channel block strategy to suppress atrial fibrillation: ranolazine versus propafenone.
    Author: Burashnikov A, Belardinelli L, Antzelevitch C.
    Journal: J Pharmacol Exp Ther; 2012 Jan; 340(1):161-8. PubMed ID: 22005044.
    Abstract:
    Ranolazine has been shown to produce atrial-selective depression of sodium channel-dependent parameters and suppress atrial fibrillation (AF) in a variety of experimental models. The present study contrasts the effects of ranolazine and those of a clinically used anti-AF class IC agent, propafenone. Electrophysiological and anti-AF effects of propafenone and ranolazine were compared at clinically relevant concentrations (i.e., 0.3-1.5 and 1-10 μM, respectively) in canine isolated coronary-perfused atrial and ventricular preparations. Transmembrane action potential and pseudo-ECG were recorded. Both ranolazine and propafenone produced atrial-selective prolongation of action potential duration. Propafenone depressed sodium channel-mediated parameters [maximum rate of rise of the action potential upstroke (V(max)), conduction time, and diastolic threshold of excitation] and induced postrepolarization refractoriness to a greater degree than ranolazine, and these effects, unlike those induced by ranolazine, were not or only mildly atrial-selective at normal rates (cycle length 500 ms). At fast pacing rates, however, the effects of propafenone on V(max) and conduction time became atrial-selective, because of the elimination of diastolic interval in atria, but not in ventricles. Propafenone (1.5 μM) and ranolazine (10.0 μM) were effective in preventing the initiation of persistent acetylcholine-mediated AF (6/7 and 9/11 atria, respectively), its termination (8/10 and 8/12 atria, respectively), and subsequent reinduction (8/8 and 7/8 atria, respectively). Thus, propafenone and ranolazine both suppress AF, but ranolazine, unlike propafenone, does it with minimal effects on ventricular myocardium, suggesting a reduced potential for promoting ventricular arrhythmias.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]