↓ Skip to main content

Early and late proarrhythmia from antiarrhythmic drug therapy

Overview of attention for article published in Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy, February 1992
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
7 Mendeley
Title
Early and late proarrhythmia from antiarrhythmic drug therapy
Published in
Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy, February 1992
DOI 10.1007/bf00050910
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joel Morganroth

Abstract

Antiarrhythmic drug therapy is used with the hope of suppressing arrhythmias and therefore decreasing their associated symptoms or prolonging life. Unfortunately, many antiarrhythmic drugs have the opposite effect of exacerbating or provoking arrhythmias, a phenomenon that is termed proarrhythmia when such an event is specifically due to the drug in use. Early proarrhythmic events (within 30 days of initiation of drug use) have been reasonably well characterized and are predicted by either type of drug employed or the nature of the patient's cardiac disease and arrhythmia type. Late proarrhythmic events, as defined by placebo-controlled trials, have now been recognized as an increased risk of arrhythmic death in patients on antiarrhythmic drugs after many months of therapy. Initially, this late proarrhythmic event was identified with encainide and flecainide, but now several new studies have demonstrated that the risk of late proarrhythmia of comparable magnitude may be present in patients subjected to commonly used drugs, such as quinidine, mexelitine, etc. At present, only moricizine and the class II drugs (beta-adrenergic blockers) appear not to have this potential late proarrhythmic response. Therefore, before instituting antiarrhythmic drug therapy, the physician must be able to quantitate the degree of proarrhythmia and other risks of such therapy, as compared to their potential benefit, to define the proper indications for these agents.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 29%
Unknown 5 71%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 43%
Professor 2 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 14%
Student > Master 1 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 43%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 29%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 14%
Engineering 1 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 May 2021.
All research outputs
#3,731,384
of 22,783,848 outputs
Outputs from Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy
#68
of 682 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,887
of 61,532 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,783,848 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 682 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 61,532 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them