Landiolol for Treatment of New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in Critical Care: A Systematic Review
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
3. Results
4. Tolerance and Adverse Events
5. Discussion
6. Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation in Non-Cardiac-Surgery Patients
7. Management of NOAF/POAF in Critically Ill Patients
8. Efficacy and Tolerance of Landiolol in Critically Ill Patients and Post-Surgery Patients
9. Limitations
10. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Klein Klouwenberg, P.M.; Frencken, J.F.; Kuipers, S.; Ong, D.S.; Peelen, L.M.; van Vught, L.A.; Schultz, M.J.; van der Poll, T.; Bonten, M.J.; Cremer, O.L. Incidence, Predictors, and Outcomes of New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in Critically Ill Patients with Sepsis. A Cohort Study. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2017, 195, 205–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Moss, T.J.; Calland, J.F.; Enfield, K.B.; Gomez-Manjarres, D.C.; Ruminski, C.; DiMarco, J.P.; Lake, D.E.; Moorman, J.R. New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in the Critically Ill. Crit. Care Med. 2017, 45, 790–797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yoshida, T.; Fujii, T.; Uchino, S.; Takinami, M. Epidemiology, prevention, and treatment of new-onset atrial fibrillation in critically ill: A systematic review. J. Intensive Care 2015, 3, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kuipers, S.; Klouwenberg, P.M.K.; Cremer, O.L. Incidence, risk factors and outcomes of new-onset atrial fibrillation in patients with sepsis: A systematic review. Crit. Care 2014, 18, 688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kanji, S.; Williamson, D.R.; Yaghchi, B.M.; Albert, M.; McIntyre, L.; Canadian Critical Care Trials Group. Epidemiology and management of atrial fibrillation in medical and noncardiac surgical adult intensive care unit patients. J. Crit. Care 2012, 27, 326.e1–326.e8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Patel, A.J.; Hunt, I. Review of the evidence supports role for routine prophylaxis against postoperative supraventricular arrhythmia in patients undergoing pulmonary resection. Interact. Cardiovasc. Thorac. Surg. 2014, 19, 111–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Schizas, D.; Kosmopoulos, M.; Giannopoulos, S.; Giannopoulos, S.; Kokkinidis, D.G.; Karampetsou, N.; Papanastasiou, C.A.; Rouvelas, I.; Liakakos, T. Meta-analysis of risk factors and complications associated with atrial fibrillation after oesophagectomy. Br. J. Surg. 2019, 106, 534–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bosch, N.A.; Cimini, J.; Walkey, A.J. Atrial Fibrillation in the ICU. Chest 2018, 154, 1424–1434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) Investigators. A comparison of rate control and rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation. N. Engl. J. Med. 2002, 347, 1825–1833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roy, D.; Talajic, M.; Dubuc, M.; Thibault, B.; Guerra, P.; Macle, L.; Khairy, P. Atrial fibrillation and congestive heart failure. Curr. Opin. Cardiol. 2009, 24, 29–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- O’Bryan, L.J.; Redfern, O.C.; Bedford, J.; Petrinic, T.; Young, J.D.; Watkinson, P.J. Managing new-onset atrial fibrillation in critically ill patients: A systematic narrative review. BMJ Open 2020, 10, e034774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Balik, M.; Sander, M.; Trimmel, H.; Heinz, G. Landiolol for managing post-operative atrial fibrillation. Eur. Heart J. Suppl. 2018, 20 (Suppl. A), A10–A14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nakano, T.; Shimizu, K.; Kawashima, O.; Kamiyoshihara, M.; Nagashima, T.; Ibe, T.; Takeyoshi, I. Effect of landiolol hydrochloride, an ultra-shortacting beta1-selective blocker, on supraventricular tachycardia, atrial fibrillation and flutter after pulmonary resection. J. Clin. Pharm. Ther. 2012, 37, 431–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nojiri, T.; Yamamoto, K.; Maeda, H.; Takeuchi, Y.; Funakoshi, Y.; Maekura, R.; Okumura, M. Efficacy of low-dose landiolol, an ultrashort-acting bblocker, on postoperative atrial fibrillation in patients undergoing pulmonary resection for lung cancer. Gen. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2011, 59, 799–805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mori, K.; Yamada, K.; Fukuda, T.; Mitsui, T.; Kitamura, T.; Yamaguchi, D.; Ando, J.; Wada, I.; Nomura, S.; Shimizu, N.; et al. Landiolol hydrochloride for early postoperative tachycardia after transthoracic esophagectomy. Surg. Today 2014, 44, 848–854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Niwa, Y.; Koike, M.; Iwata, N.; Kobayashi, D.; Tanaka, C.; Fujii, T.; Nakayama, G.; Sugimoto, H.; Fujiwara, M.; Kodera, Y. Effect of landiolol hydrochloride on tachyarrhythmia after esophagectomy. Hepatogastroenterology 2014, 61, 1546–1551. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Okamoto, K.; Ninomiya, I.; Maruzen, S.; Makino, I.; Fujimura, T.; Ohta, T. Usefulness of a short-acting β1- selective blocker, landiolol hydrochloride, for tachyarrhythmia after thoracoscopic esophagectomy. J. Jpn. Surg. Assoc. 2013, 74, 874–879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suzuki, S.; Morimatsu, H.; Egi, M.; Shimizu, K.; Matsuzaki, T.; Katayama, H.; Morita, K. Effect of landiolol on postoperative atrial fibrillation in 7 patients undergoing esophagectomy. J. Jpn. Soc. Intensive Care Med. 2011, 18, 215–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kikuchi, M.; Nakajima, M.; Muroi, H.; Takahashi, M.; Yamaguchi, S.; Sasaki, K.; Tsuchioka, T.; Kato, H. Effect of Landiolol hydrochloride for perioperative tachyarrhythmias in patients with esophageal cancer. Nihon Gekakei Rengo Gakkaishi (J. Jpn. Coll. Surg.) 2019, 4, 176–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ojima, T.; Nakamori, M.; Nakamura, M.; Katsuda, M.; Hayata, K.; Kato, T.; Kitadani, J.; Tabata, H.; Takeuchi, A.; Yamaue, H. Randomized clinical trial of landiolol hydrochloride for the prevention of atrial fibrillation and postoperative complications after oesophagectomy for cancer. Br. J. Surg. 2017, 104, 1003–1009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yoshida, Y.; Terajima, K.; Sato, C.; Akada, S.; Miyagi, Y.; Hongo, T.; Takeda, S.; Tanaka, K.; Sakamoto, A. Clinical role and efficacy of landiolol in the intensive care unit. J. Anesth. 2008, 22, 64–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sasaki, H.; Imaizumi, H.; Masuda, Y.; Tatsumi, H.; Goto, K.; Yoshida, S.; Ryan, R.; Asai, Y. Clinical evaluation and prospects of landiolol in an intensive care unit ICU & CCU. Jpn. J. Intensive Care Med. 2012, 36, 671–676. [Google Scholar]
- Kawano, S.; Yasuda, S.; Shimojyoa, N.; Hagiya, K.; Seki, Y..; Takahashi, S.; Mizutani, T. Effects of ultra-short acting beta1-adrenergic blocking agent (Landiolol) on perioperative atrial fibrillation. Crit. Care Med. 2009, 37 (Suppl. 12), A107. [Google Scholar]
- Okajima, M.; Takamura, M.; Taniguchi, T. Landiolol, an ultra-short-acting β1-blocker, is useful for managing supraventricular tachyarrhythmias in sepsis. World J. Crit. Care Med. 2015, 4, 251–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Oishi, Y.; Oku, S.; Kawanoue, N.; Sasai, T.; Mieda, H.; Shin, Y.; Ishikawa, T.; Tokioka, H. Management of tachyarrhythmias in critically ill patients with sepsis. J. Jpn. Soc. Intensive Care Med. 2014, 21, 341–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Misonoo, Y.; Yajima, S.; Morisaki, H.; Suzuki, T.; Takeda, J. Effciacy and safety of beta-1 adrenoreceptor blockade by landiolol in sepsis. Crit. Care Med. 2009, 37 (Suppl. 12), A-238. [Google Scholar]
- Kii, N.; Sato, S.; Azumaguchi, R. Experience with landiolol for tachyarrhythmia in patients with sepsis. J. Jpn. Soc. Intensive Care Med. 2016, 23, 422. [Google Scholar]
- Kakihana, Y.; Nishida, O.; Taniguchi, T.; Okajima, M.; Morimatsu, H.; Ogura, H.; Yamada, Y.; Nagano, T.; Morishima, E.; Matsuda, N. J-Land 3S Study Group. Efficacy and safety of landiolol, an ultra-short-acting β1-selective antagonist, for treatment of sepsis-related tachyarrhythmia (J-Land 3S): A multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Respir. Med. 2020, 8, 863–872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Tsujita, Y.; Yamane, T.; Hamamoto, T.; Hayafuji, K.; Fujino, K.; Matsumura, K.; Saotome, T.; Eguchi, Y. Effect of landiolol on atrial fibrillation with a rapid ventricular response caused by systemic inflammatory response syndrome. J. Jpn. Soc. Intensive Care Med. 2011, 18, 575–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Muller-Werdan, U.; Buerke, M.; Ebelt, H.; Heinroth, K.M.; Herklotz, A.; Loppnow, H.; Ruß, M.; Schlegel, F.; Schlitt, A.; Schmidt, H.B. Septic cardiomyopathy—A not yet discovered cardiomyopathy? Exp. Clin. Cardiol. 2006, 11, 226–236. [Google Scholar]
- Hagiwara, S.; Iwasaka, H.; Maeda, H.; Noguchi, T. Landiolol, an ultrashortacting beta1-adrenoceptor antagonist, has protective effects in an LPS-induced systemic inflammation model. Shock 2009, 31, 515–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Walkey, A.J.; Wiener, R.S.; Ghobrial, J.M.; Curtis, L.H.; Benjamin, E.J. Incident stroke and mortality associated with new-onset atrial fibrillation in patients hospitalized with severe sepsis. JAMA 2011, 306, 2248–2254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rabie, A.; Fahmy, T.S.; Aal, A.A.; El-Hadidy, A. Prognostic value of new-onset atrial fibrillation in patients with septic shock. EJICT 2017, 7, 1–12. [Google Scholar]
- Arrigo, M.; Mebazaa, A.; Bettex, D.; Rudiger, A. Hemodynamic response of restoring sinus rhythm in critically ill patients with atrial fibrillation. Am. J. Emerg. Med. 2020, 38, 1192–1194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cotter, G.; Blatt, A.; Kaluski, E.; Metzkor-Cotter, E.; Koren, M.; Litinski, I.; Simantov, R.; Moshkovitz, Y.; Zaidenstein, R.; Peleg, E.; et al. Conversion of recent onset paroxysmal atrial fibrillation to normal sinus rhythm: The effect of no treatment and high-dose amiodarone. A randomized, placebo-controlled study. Eur. Heart J. 1999, 20, 1833–1842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hindricks, G.; Potpara, T.; Dagres, N.; Arbelo, E.; Bax, J.J.; Blomström-Lundqvist, C.; Boriani, G.; Castella, M.; Dan, G.-A.; Dilaveris, P.E.; et al. 2020 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur. Heart J. 2021, 42, 373–498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mitrić, G.; Udy, A.; Bandeshe, H.; Clement, P.; Boots, R. Variable use of amiodarone is associated with a greater risk of recurrence of atrial fibrillation in the critically ill. Crit. Care. 2016, 20, 90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Brien, B.; Burrage, P.S.; Ngai, J.Y.; Prutkin, J.M.; Huang, C.-C.; Xu, X.; Chae, S.H.; Bollen, B.A.; Piccini, J.P.; Schwann, N.M.; et al. Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists/European Association of Cardiothoracic Anaesthetists Practice Advisory for the Management of Perioperative Atrial Fibrillation in Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery. J. Cardiothorac. Vasc. Anesth. 2019, 33, 12–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Drikite, L.; Bedford, J.P.; O’bryan, L.; Petrinic, T.; Rajappan, K.; Doidge, J.; Harrison, D.A.; Rowan, K.M.; Mouncey, P.R.; Young, D.; et al. Treatment strategies for new onset atrial fibrillation in patients treated on an intensive care unit: A systematic scoping review. Crit. Care 2021, 25, 257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bosch, N.A.; Rucci, J.M.; Massaro, J.M.; Winter, M.R.; Quinn, E.K.; Chon, K.H.; McManus, D.D.; Walkey, A.J. Comparative Effectiveness of Heart Rate Control Medications for the Treatment of Sepsis-Associated Atrial Fibrillation. Chest 2021, 159, 1452–1459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Levy, B.; Fritz, C.; Piona, C.; Duarte, K.; Morelli, A.; Guerci, P.; Kimmoun, A.; Girerd, N. Hemodynamic and anti-inflammatory effects of early esmolol use in hyperkinetic septic shock: A pilot study. Crit. Care 2021, 25, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Brown, S.M.; Beesley, S.J.; Lanspa, M.J.; Grissom, C.K.; Wilson, E.L.; Parikh, S.M.; Sarge, T.; Talmor, D.; Banner-Goodspeed, V.; Novack, V.; et al. Esmolol infusion in patients with septic shock and tachycardia: A prospective, single-arm, feasibility study. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2018, 4, 132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Aoki, Y.; Kawasaki, Y.; Ide, K.; Shimizu, Y.; Sato, S.; Yokoyama, J. Landiolol hydrochloride for prevention of atrial fibrillation during esophagectomy: A randomized controlled trial. JA Clin. Rep. 2020, 6, 34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hajibandeh, S.; Melhado, R.; Akhtar, K.; Trivedi, V.; Asaad, P. Landiolol hydrochloride for preventing postoperative atrial fibrillation. Anaesthesia 2018, 73, 910–911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Horikoshi, Y.; Goyagi, T.; Kudo, R.; Kodama, S.; Horiguchi, T.; Nishikawa, T. The suppressive effects of landiolol administration on the occurrence of postoperative atrial fibrillation and tachycardia, and plasma IL-6 elevation in patients undergoing esophageal surgery: A randomized controlled clinical trial. J. Clin. Anesth. 2017, 38, 111–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Aoyama, H.; Otsuka, Y.; Aoyama, Y. Landiolol infusion during general anesthesia does not prevent postoperative atrial fibrillation in patients undergoing lung resection. Gen. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2016, 64, 735–741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nagai, R.; Kinugawa, K.; Inoue, H.; Atarashi, H.; Seino, Y.; Yamashita, T.; Shimizu, W.; Aiba, T.; Kitakaze, M.; Sakamoto, A.; et al. J-Land Investigators. Urgent management of rapid heart rate in patients with atrial fibrillation/flutter and left ventricular dysfunction: Comparison of the ultra-short-acting β1-selective blocker landiolol with digoxin (J-Land Study). Circ. J. 2013, 77, 908–916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yamashita, T.; Nakasu, Y.; Mizutani, H.; Sumitani, K. A prospective observational survey on landiolol in atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter patients with chronic heart failure—AF-CHF landiolol survey. J. Cardiol. 2019, 74, 418–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shinohara, M.; Wada, R.; Yano, K.; Akitsu, K.; Koike, H.; Kinoshita, T.; Suzuki, T.; Fujino, T.; Ikeda, T. Comparison of Landiolol and Digoxin as an Intravenous Drug for Controlling the Heart Rate in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Severely Depressed Left Ventricular Function. Int. Heart J. 2020, 61, 944–950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sakamoto, A.; Kitakaze, M.; Takamoto, S.; Namiki, A.; Kasanuki, H.; Hosoda, S.; JL-KNIGHT Study Group. Landiolol, an Ultra-Short-Acting β1-Blocker, More Effectively Terminates Atrial Fibrillation Than Diltiazem after Open Heart Surgery. Circ. J. 2012, 76, 1097–1101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shibata, S.C.; Uchiyama, A.; Ohta, N.; Fujino, Y. Efficacy of landiolol compared to amiodarone for the management of postoperative atrial fibrillation in intensive care patients. J. Cardiothorac. Vasc. Anesth. 2016, 30, 418–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fellahi, J.-L.; Heringlake, M.; Knotzer, J.; Fornier, W.; Cazenave, L.; Guarracino, F. Landiolol for managing atrial fibrillation in post-cardiac surgery. Eur. Heart J. Suppl. 2018, 20 (Suppl. A), A4–A9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Matsuda, N.; Nishida, O.; Taniguchi, T.; Okajima, M.; Morimatsu, H.; Ogura, H.; Yamada, Y.; Nagano, T.; Ichikawa, A.; Kakihana, Y. Impact of patient characteristics on the efficacy and safety of landiolol in patients with sepsis- related tachyarrhythmia: Subanalysis of the J-Land 3S randomised controlled study. EClinicalMedicine 2020, 28, 100571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Whitehouse, T.; Hossain, A.; Perkins, G.D.; Gordon, A.C.; Bion, J.; Young, D.; Singer, M.; Lord, J.; Gates, S.; Veenith, T.; et al. STRESS-L Collaborators. Landiolol and Organ Failure in Patients with Septic Shock: The STRESS-L Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA 2023, 330, 1641–1652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Study Reference | Confounding Bias | Measurement of Exposure Bias | Selection of Participant Bias | Post-Exposure Intervention Bias | Missing Data Bias | Outcome Measurement Bias | Bias in the Selection of the Reported Result |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Yoshida 2008 | Low | Low | Some concern | Some concern | Some concern | Some concern | Low |
Kawano 2009 | Low | Low | Some concern | Low | Low | Some concern | Some concern |
Nakano 2011 | Some concern | Low | Low | Some concern | Low | Low | Some concern |
Nojiri 2011 | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Suzuki 2011 | Some concern | Low | Some concern | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Okamoto 2013 | Some concern | Low | Low | Some concern | Some concern | Low | Some concern |
Mori 2013 | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Niwa 2014 | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Ojima 2017 | Low | Low | Low | Low | Some concern | Low | Low |
Kikuchi 2020 | Low | Low | Low | Low | Some concern | Some concern | Low |
Misonoo 2009 | Low | Some concern | Some concern | Low | Low | Some concern | Some concern |
Tsujita 2011 | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low | Some concern |
Sasaki 2014 | Some concern | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low | Some concern |
Oishi 2014 | Some concern | Low | Some concern | Low | Low | Low | Some concern |
Kii 2016 | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low | Some concern | Low |
Okajima 2015 | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Kakihana 2020 | Some concern | Low | Low | Some concern | Low | Low | Some concern |
Reference | Study Design/Objective | Participants | Protocol for Landiolol Use | Main Results | Other Information | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AF Conversion | Hemodynamic | |||||
Yoshida et al. 2008 [21] | Retrospective single-center study Investigate the clinical use and efficacy of LDL in an intensive and coronary care unit (indication, infusion rate, HR, BP, catecholamine use, and oral BB transition). | LDL was administered to 80 patients, including 27 AF patients in a surgical setting (n = 17) and a non-surgical setting (n = 10) | LDL initial infusion rate: 5–10 μg/kg/min titrated in increments of 1–2 μg/kg/min Median dose: 5 μg/kg/min Median duration: 2 days | 47% (8/17) SR conversion (post-surgery) and 50% (5/10) SR conversion (medical ICU) | 35% and 20% of the HR target (−21% bpm) for the surgical and medical ICU setting, respectively | −17.4% HR decrease in patients on catecholamines and a −26% HR decrease in patients without catecholamine support (NS) |
Kawano et al. 2009 [23] | Retrospective single-center study Investigate the effects of LDL on rhythm control and rate control for POAF. | n = 36 AF n = 25 Paroxysmal AF (PAF) and n = 11 Chronic AF (CAF) | LDL: 8.5 ± 7.9 μg/kg/min Prevention of recurrence of AF tends to be associated with a higher landiolol dosage during the maintenance phase (5.5 +/− 4.1 mcg/kg/min vs. 2.8 +/− 0.7 mcg/kg/min, p = 0.09) Duration: NA | 64% (16/25) SR conversion within 3 h in PAF patients. | HR decrease (<100 bpm) in 64% of PAF patients and 82% of CAF patients. Landiolol infusion discontinued due to unexpected bradycardia and hypotension in 2 of 36 patients (5%) | Factors associated with SR restoration: - a higher initial landiolol dose (10.0 +/−9.0 mcg/kg/min vs. 5.6 +/− 4.0 mcg/kg/min, p < 0.05); - a lower frequency of coexisting heart failure (35% vs. 88%, p < 0.05); - administration of catecholamines (29% vs. 88%, p < 0.05). |
Nakano et al. 2011 [13] | Two-center prospective observational cohort study Evaluate the efficacy of LDL for POAF | n = 25 patients undergoing pulmonary resection | LDL: 60 μg/kg/1 min + 5–10 μg/kg/min Patients (duration): 5 (24–72 h), 4 (3–7 days), and 4 (>7 days) | 48% (14/25) SR conversion within 24 h | −37% HR decrease −8.5% BP decrease | No side effects, including those related to the circulatory and respiratory systems |
Nojiri et al. 2011 [14] | Retrospective single-center study Evaluate the safety and efficacy of low-dose LDL for POAF in lung cancer surgery (SBP, DBP, HR, and oxygen saturation at baseline and 30 min, 2 h, and 12 h after starting medication). Time to restoration of SR | n = 15 (LDL) n = 15 (CTL) Exclusion criteria: history of AF, antiarrhythmic drug use including β-blockers, thyroid dysfunction, renal failure requiring hemodialysis, repeated pulmonary resection, and recent (<1 month) angina pectoris or myocardial infarction. | LDL: 5–10 μg/kg/min Infusion duration: 8.1 ± 11.0 h followed by 2.5–5.0 mg of carvedilol orally each day for 1 month CTL: 0.25 mg of digoxin and 5 mg of verapamil I.V. loaded every 12 h for 1 day and then 0.125–0.25 mg of digoxin and 120 mg of verapamil orally each day for 1 month | SR conversion of 73% (11/15) within 24 h (53% at 2 h) for LDL 53% (8/15) SR conversion (20% at 2 h) for CTL | −40% HR decrease No impact on SBP/DBP. HR was significantly lower in LDL vs. CTL at 30 min, 2 h, and 12 h. (p < 0.05) | Also included a subgroup with the following landiolol regimen: loading at 20–60 μg/kg/min for 20 min + a decrease at 1–5 μg/kg/min No postoperative deaths, thromboembolic events, or congestive heart failure events associated with AF in either group. One (7%) case of pneumonia in the LDL group. Four (27%) cases of pneumonia, two (13%) cases of hypotension, and one (7%) case of acute respiratory distress syndrome in the CTL group. All patients recovered with treatment. |
Suzuki et al. 2011 [18] | Retrospective case series Investigate LDL’s effects on hemodynamics and the antiarrhythmic effects other than BB failure in esophageal cancer surgery patients with POAF after treatment with antiarrhythmic drugs | n = 7 esophageal cancer surgery patients Initial AF management before LDL: fluid load, sedation, analgesia, and treatment with antiarrhythmic drugs | LDL: 10.8 mcg/kg/min Infusion duration: NA Prior AA drugs in five cases, digoxin in five cases, disopyramide phosphate in two cases, cibenzoline in one case, adenosine triphosphate in one case, and magnesium sulfate in two cases. | 86% (6/7) SR conversion within 24 h (29% at 1 h, 57% at 6 h) | −51% HR decrease (63% achieved the HR target of 100 bpm) | No bronchospasm In 3/7 cases, a recurrence of PAF was observed after the administration of landiolol ended |
Okamoto et al. 2013 [17] | Retrospective single-center study Describe the effects of LDL on tachyarrhythmia in postoperative esophagectomy (SBP, DBP, HR, and oxygen saturation at baseline and 1 h, 2 h, 4 h, 24 h, and 48 h after starting medication) | n = 38 patients with AF after endoscopic esophageal cancer surgery 28 patients treated with LDL 10 patients treated with digoxin or a calcium antagonist | LDL: started at 3 to 5 mcg/kg/min Mean LDL dose: 4.1 ± 2.4 mcg/kg/min Infusion duration: 110.8 ± 71.2 h | 100% (28/28) SR conversion Time to conversion: 9.1 h ± 14.0 Time to conversion in the dixogin/calcium antagonist: 22.2 h ± 20.3 | −18% HR decrease −3% SBP decrease −2% DBP decrease | No asthma crisis occurred after administration in four patients with bronchial asthma. Three cases of AF recurrence after LDL discontinuation. No significant difference in postoperative complications between the LDL group and the non-tachycardic historical control |
Mori et al. 2013 [15] | Single-center prospective observational cohort study Evaluate the efficacy and safety of LDL for tachyarrhythmia in postoperative esophagectomy | n = 13/74 (18%) esophageal cancer patients that developed AF after transthoracic esophagectomy Exclusion criteria: history of heart disease with NYHA ≥3, postoperative use of another BB or antidepressant, and marked liver or kidney dysfunction | LDL: loading for 1 min at a dose of 60 mcg/kg/min + 10 mcg/kg/min up to 40 mcg/kg/min Mean LDL dose: 26.9 ± 12.5 mcg/kg/min Infusion duration: at least until the HR target was reached (−20%) or SR conversion | 76.9% (10/13) SR conversion in less than 1 h 82% (9/11) in AF and 50% (1/2) in PSVT | −38% HR decrease (77% on the HR target of <100 bpm) −10% MAP decrease | 2 MAP < 80 mmHg and 2 MAP with a 30% decrease = > hypotension not necessitating a vasopressor or discontinuation No bronchospasm or ischemia 6/11 AF relapse (55%) necessitating BB resumption or an alternative |
Niwa et al. 2014 [16] | Single-center retrospective cohort study Evaluate the efficacy and safety of LDL for tachyarrhythmia in postoperative esophagectomy | n = 32/231 (10.8%) esophageal cancer patients that developed AF after transthoracic esophagectomy Exclusion criteria: eight patients were excluded (five receiving LDL and digoxin, CCB, or disopyramide and three who were not treated) | n = 11 (LDL): the mean dose started at 6.5 ± 3.4 then increased to 7.7 ± 4.4 mcg/kg/min Infusion duration: 38 ± 42 h Eight patients with NOAF, one with chronic AF, and two with sinus tachycardia n = 13 (CTL): alone or in combination with digoxin (n = 11), verapamil (n = 6), or disopyramide (n = 3) | LDL: 62.5% (5/8) at 2 h and 100% (8/8) at 12 h Mean SR conversion time: 3.6 h ± 6.6 CTL: 7.7% (1/13) at 2 h and 46% (6/13) at 12 h Mean SR conversion time: 23.3 h ± 5.2 SR conversion was faster at 2 and 12 h (p < 0.05) | The HR reduction % at 1 h was higher in LDL compared with CTL: −28.5 ± 4.4% vs. 12.3 ± 3.5% (p = 0.011) The SBP and DBP reduction % was similar in the LDL and CTL groups: SBP: −14.3 ± 8.3% vs. −13.5 ± 14.5% (p = 0.883) DBP: −16.6 ± 7.1% vs. −9.5 ± 9.8% (p = 0.061) | AF recurred in one patient in the LDL group and three patients in the CTL group; one LDL patient experienced an episode of bradycardia/hypotension. No bronchospasm or ischemia in either group. |
Kikuchi et al. 2020 [19] | Single-center retrospective cohort study Evaluate the effectiveness of LDL for treating tachyarrhythmia after esophageal cancer surgery (SBP, DBP, HR, and oxygen saturation at baseline and each hour after starting medication) Identify AF risk factors | n = 19/141 (13.5%) esophageal cancer patients that developed AF after thoracotomy or thoracoscopic esophagectomy Patients without tachyarrythmia (n = 122) were used as the CTL for identifying AF risk | LDL: 60 μg/kg/1 min + 20 μg/kg/min Infusion duration: NA | 83.3% (10/12) SR conversion Timing: NA Length of hospital stay not significantly longer in patients with postoperative tachyarrhythmia (p = 0.0056). | 75% reached the HR target of <100 bpm No impact on SBP | No deterioration of respiratory conditions, such as bronchial stenosis, was observed Risk factors for tachyarrhythmia: preoperative ECG abnormalities (p = 0.0001); history of CV disease (p = 0.0061); history of oral CV medicine (p = 0.0007); long-term surgery (p = 0.01). Presence or absence of preoperative chemotherapy (p = 0.59) and history of cerebrovascular disease (p = 0.134) were not significant factors. |
Ojima et al. 2017 [20] | Single-center randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled trial Determine whether LDL is effective and safe for the prevention of AF after oesophagectomy | 100 patients scheduled for transthoracic oesophagectomy receiving landiolol (n = 50) or a placebo (n = 50) for AF prevention 20 patients (5 LDL, 15 CTL) that developed AF | Patients that developed POAF all received LDL: 3 to 5 μg/kg/min Infusion duration: NA | 90% (18/20) SR conversion Median duration for POAF: 27.5 h [1–180 h] | NA for landiolol use as a POAF treatment. When used for POAF prevention, LDL effectively suppresed postoperative HR, but the decrease in BP was not harmful. | 18 of 20 patients returned to SR; no electrical cardioversion needed. LDL at 3 μg/kg/min for 72 h reduced the incidence of POAF (5/50) vs. the placebo (15/50), p = 0.012 The overall incidence of postoperative complications was significantly lower in the LDL group (p = 0·046). |
Kakihana et al. 2020 [28] | Multi-center randomized, open-label, and controlled trial Investigate the efficacy and safety of LDL for treating sepsis-related tachyarrhythmias Primary outcome: proportion of patients with an HR of 60–94 bpm at 24 h after randomization SBP, DBP, and HR at 24 h, 48 h, 72 h, and 96 h after initiation of treatment. Tachyarrhythmia and safety outcomes at 168 h after randomization | Baseline SR patients n = 57 (LDL) n = 63 (CTL) Baseline AF patients n = 17 (LDL) n = 12 (CTL) | LDL: 5.3 ± 5.2 μg/kg/min Infusion duration: 58.2 h ± 50.4 h Additional AA drugs LDL: group I-AA (n = 4), BB (n = 1), amiodarone (n = 3), CCB (n = 2), digoxin (n = 2) CTL: group I-AA (n = 5), BB (n = 11), amiodarone (n = 7), digoxin (n = 1) | SR conversion: 94.1% (16/17) at 168 h SR conversion in the control group: 83.3% (10/12) | 41.2% (7/17) of LDL patients reached an HR of <95 bpm at 24 h vs. 41.4% (5/12) in the CTL group 47.1% of the LDL group developed an adverse event vs. 50% of the CTL group. | In the SR baseline group, 10.5% (6/57) of LDL patients and 27% (17/63) of CTL patients developed NOAF at 168 h Overall, a lower incidence of NOAF at 168 h after randomization in the LDL vs. CTL groups (9% (7 of 75) vs. 25% (19 of 75)), p = 0·015 Adverse events led to LDL discontinuation in nine patients (12%). Hypotension was the most frequent adverse event, which either resolved or improved even in serious cases after taking appropriate measures, such as a dose reduction, LDL withdrawal, or the administration of catecholamine. |
Okajima et al. 2015 [24] | Historical-cohort, single-center, interventional, and inter-subjective comparison study Investigate the safety and efficacy of LDL in controlling the HR of SVTs in severe sepsis patients SBP, DBP, and HR at 1 h, 8 h, and 24 h after initiation of tachyarrhythmia. Heart rhythm and conversion to sinus rhythm. Pulmonary arterial pressure, central venous pressure (CVP), cardiac output, and cardiac index (CI) were measured if a pulmonary arterial catheter was inserted. Systemic vascular resistance index (SVRI) | n = 61/163 (37.4%) septic patients with tachyarrhythmia, n = 39 (LDL group) and n = 22 (CTL group) Intra-abdominal infection was higher (p < 0.05) and urinary tract infection was lower (p < 0.05) in the LDL group compared with the CTL group | LDL: 5.5 ± 4.1 mcg/kg/min Infusion duration: 80.7 h ± 78.5 h CTL: calcium channel blockers and antiarrhythmic agents | LDL: 69.7% (27/39) SR conversion within 24 h (25.6% at 1 h, 55.3% at 8 h) CTL: 36.4% (8/22) SR conversion within 24 h (0% at 1 h, 18.2% at 8 h) SR conversion was observed more frequently in the LDL group than in the CTL group at each point (Figure 1, p < 0.01 at 8 h; p < 0.05 at 24 h). | HR drop: −18% (1 h); −38% (24 h) HR reduction: 145 ± 14 to 90 ± 20 bpm at 24 h No impact on MAP At 24 h after the initiation of tachyarrhythmia, landiolol reduced the HR dramatically (from 145 ± 14 bpm to 90 ± 20 bpm, Figure 1). There was a lower degree of HR reduction in the CTL group (from 136 ± 21 bpm to 109 ± 18 bpm) compared with the LDL group | Greater HR decrease vs. the control group. Baseline diastolic pulmonary arterial pressures were similar between groups and did not change. In the LDL group, the baseline CI was lower and did not decrease compared with the control group. |
Tsujita et al. 2011 [29] | Retrospective case series Evaluate the effectiveness of landiolol in SIRS patients with tachyarrhythmia Part 1: SBP, DBP, HR, CVP, SVI, and SVRI at baseline and 2 h, 4 h, and 6 h after starting medication Part 2: delta SBP, DBP, HR, SR conversion rate, and timing when comparing LDL to other agents | 167 patients treated with LDL, digoxin, cibenzoline, and verapamil for arrhythmia, among which n = 16/37 (LDL), n = 23/98 (digoxin), n = 19/56 (cibezoline) and n = 21/47 (verapamil) met the SIRS criteria for inclusion. | LDL: 0.5 to 5 mcg/kg/min Infusion duration: 139 h ± 118 h CTL: Digoxin: 0.125–0.250 mg I.V. Cibenzoline: 35–75 mg Verapamil: 2.5–5.0 mg | Part 1: 68.8% (11/16) SR conversion within 1.8 h ± 1.6 91% (10/11) AF recurrence Part 2: SR conversion LDL: 60% (10/15) Digoxin: 26% (6/23) Cibenzoline: 63% (12/19) Verapamil: 19% (4/21) Time to conversion for digoxin: 250 ± 91 min. Less than 90 min for cibenzoline and verapamil | 81% of patients reached the HR target −41% HR −6% SBP −9% DBP LDL had a significantly lower heart rate effect compared with digoxin, cibenzoline, and verapamil (p < 0.05) SBP and DBP were both mildly reduced, and there was no significant difference compared with the other agents | In 2/16 cases, infusion was discontinued due to an AE (hypotension) In both cases, the BP returned to the original BP within 30 and 80 min of infusion discontinuation, respectively. Treatment of AF recurrence: landiolol resumption (n = 3), carvedilol (n = 4), bisoprolol (n = 2), verapamil (n = 1) |
Misonoo et al. 2009 [26] | Retrospective case series Evaluate the effectiveness and safety of landiolol in septic patients with tachyarrhythmia MAP, HR, CVP, and ECG blood gas at baseline and 12 h Adverse events | 21 septic patients, among which AF patients (n = 8) and VT patients (n = 2) received an LDL infusion for at least 24 h | LDL: 3.7 ± 2.5 mcg/kg/min Infusion duration: 48 h | 100% (8/8) SR conversion at 12 h | 76% of patients reached the HR target (<95 bpm) at 12 h −30% HR 121 ± 20 to 85 ± 14 bpm The MAP, CVP, SpO2, and PaO2–FiO2 ratio did not change significantly | Low SBP (<90 mmHg) was observed in some patients. No bradycardia Two VT patients also converted. |
Kii et al. 2016 [27] | Retrospective study Evaluate the safety and efficacy of LDL for patients with septic shock MAP, HR, ECG, lactate, and fluid | 19 septic patients, among which were AF patients (n = 13) and sinus tachycardic patients (n = 6) | LDL: 2.6 ± 1.9 μg/kg/min Infusion duration: 5.6 ± 3.9 days | 84.6% (11/13) SR conversion | HR decreased significantly (p < 0.0001). No significant change in BP before and after administration (p = 0.1045) | Eight cases in which noradrenaline was used concomitantly, and the dose was 0.12 ± 0.07 μg/kg/min The 6 h fluid infusion volume was 39.3 ± 30.3 mL/kg. The 24 h fluid infusion volume was 123.5 ± 79.1 mL/kg. The 24 h lacate clearance was 21.9 ± 40.6%. |
Sasaki et al. 2014 [22] | Retrospective study Medical and surgical intensive care setting Evaluate the effects of LDL on arrhythmia MAP, HR, and SR conversion rate | 95 ICU patients with arrhythmia, among which were PAF patients (n = 51), PSVT patients (n = 16), persistent AF patients (n = 15), and Aflut patients (n = 2) | LDL: 4.3 ± 2.9 μg/kg/min Infusion duration: 41.4 h ± 50.1 h LDL was used as a first-line treatment in 72% of cases and a second-line treatment in 28% of cases after verapamil (n = 12), digoxin (n = 8), disopyramide (n = 7), cibenzoline (n = 3), pilsicainide (n = 1), and amiodarone (n = 1) | 51% (26/51) SR conversion Conversion time: 3.8 h ± 6.7 | −30% HR decrease No impact on MAP Regardless of whether a vasopressor agent was used prior to administration, a significant decrease in BP was not seen at the start of administration and 1 and 6 h after dosing. The HR significantly decreased 1 h after LDL administration and lasted for 6 h after dosing | A mixed ICU including 15% non-surgical patients, 19% gastrointestinal surgery patients, 30% large-vessel surgery patients, and 26% heart surgery patients. |
Oishi et al. 2014 [25] | Retrospective study on tachyarrhythmias in critically ill patients with sepsis Compare patients that developed de novo tachyarrhythmias to patients without tachyarrhythmias during ICU admission Compare the incidence of arrhythmias in septic patients as well as the response to treatment. | 43% (63/147) of patients developed de novo arrhythmias: AF, 60; Aflut; PSVT, 7; VT, 3 Exclusion criteria: ICU stay < 24 h Hemofiltration Trauma History of AF | Digoxin (n = 55): 0.125 to 0.250 mg LDL added to digoxin (n = 24): 0.4 to 12.5 μg/kg/min Milrinone use and norepinephrine use were significantly higher in the arrhythmia group | In the 60 patients with AF: 65% (39/60) SR conversion within 24 h (50% at 6 h, 57% at 18 h) PSVT and VT: SR conversion for 3 patients at <6 h | 78% reached the HR target (24 h) HR control was achieved in 58% (35/60) of patients at 6 h and 66% (40/60) of patients at 18 h | Landiolol was used in 24 patients in association with digoxin. Patients not converting to SR were associated with higher mortality. Significantly higher ICU mortality (22%; 14/63 cases) and in-hospital mortality (35%; 22/63 cases) in the arrhythmic group compared with the non-arrhythmic group (10%; 8/84 cases and 19%; 16/84 cases, respectively). |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Levy, B.; Slama, M.; Lakbar, I.; Maizel, J.; Kato, H.; Leone, M.; Okada, M. Landiolol for Treatment of New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in Critical Care: A Systematic Review. J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13, 2951. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13102951
Levy B, Slama M, Lakbar I, Maizel J, Kato H, Leone M, Okada M. Landiolol for Treatment of New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in Critical Care: A Systematic Review. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2024; 13(10):2951. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13102951
Chicago/Turabian StyleLevy, Bruno, Michel Slama, Ines Lakbar, Julien Maizel, Hiromi Kato, Marc Leone, and Motoi Okada. 2024. "Landiolol for Treatment of New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in Critical Care: A Systematic Review" Journal of Clinical Medicine 13, no. 10: 2951. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13102951
APA StyleLevy, B., Slama, M., Lakbar, I., Maizel, J., Kato, H., Leone, M., & Okada, M. (2024). Landiolol for Treatment of New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in Critical Care: A Systematic Review. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 13(10), 2951. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13102951