No other antiarrhythmic showed a significant effect on mortality compared with controls .
Class IA , IC , and III drugs are effective in maintaining sinus rhythm but increase adverse effects , and class IA drugs may increase mortality
BACKGROUND A variety of antiarrhythmic drugs have been used to prevent recurrence of atrial fibrillation after conversion to sinus rhythm .
We performed a systematic review to determine the effect of long-term treatment with those drugs on death , embolisms , adverse effects , and atrial fibrillation recurrence .
Long-term maintenance of normal sinus rhythm in patients with current symptomatic atrial fibrillation: amiodarone vs propafenone, both in low doses.
STUDY OBJECTIVES To compare the efficacy and safety of amiodarone and propafenone when used for the prevention of  atrial fibrillation ( AF ) and maintenance of normal sinus rhythm in patients with refractory AF . DESIGN Prospect i ve , r and omized , single-blind trial . SETTING Tertiary cardiac referral center . PATIENTS One hundred forty-six consecutive patients ( 72 men ; mean age , 63 + /- 10 years [ + /- SD ] ) with recurrent symptomatic AF . INTERVENTIONS We studied 146 patients after restoration of sinus rhythm ; patients were r and omized to amiodarone , 200 mg/d , or propafenone , 450 mg/d . Follow-up clinical evaluations were conducted at the first , second , fourth , and sixth months , and at 3-month intervals thereafter . The proportion of patients relapsing to AF and /or experiencing side effects was calculated for each group using the Kaplan-Meier method . End point of the study was recurrence of AF or occurrence of side effects necessitating discontinuation of medication . MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS Of 146 patients , 72 received amiodarone and 74 received propafenone . The two groups were clinical ly similar . Of the 72 patients receiving amiodarone , AF developed in 25 patients , after an average of 9.8 months , compared to 33 of the 74 patients receiving propafenone after an average of 3.8 months . Twelve patients receiving amiodarone and 2 patients receiving propafenone had side effects necessitating withdrawal of medication while still in sinus rhythm . CONCLUSIONS Amiodarone tends to be more effective than propafenone in maintaining sinus rhythm in patients with AF , but this advantage is offset by a higher incidence of side effects
No other antiarrhythmic showed a significant effect on mortality compared with controls .
Class IA , IC , and III drugs are effective in maintaining sinus rhythm but increase adverse effects , and class IA drugs may increase mortality
BACKGROUND A variety of antiarrhythmic drugs have been used to prevent recurrence of atrial fibrillation after conversion to sinus rhythm .
We performed a systematic review to determine the effect of long-term treatment with those drugs on death , embolisms , adverse effects , and atrial fibrillation recurrence .