The evaluation on the therapeutic effect of intravenous metoprolol on patients with rapid atrial fibrillation
Yixin Liu
Abstract
Yixin Liu
Abstract
Objective:To observe the therapeutic effect and safety of intravenous metoprolol on atrial fibrillation. Method:Forty-two patients were divided into metoprolol group and cedilanid group randomly. The twenty-one patients in metoprolol group were injected metoprolol intravenously at doses of 5~15 mg. The twenty-one patients in cedilanid group were injected intravenously at doses of 0.4~0.8 mg. The heart rate and blood pressure before the injection and 40 min, 60 min and 120 min after the injection were observed respectively. Result:1. There were twelve cases and eight cases respectively in two groups whose heart rate decreased to less than 100 bpm. There were no significant differences between the two groups ( P 0.05). 2. The average time in metoprolol group and cedilanid group whose heart rate decreased to less than 100 bpm is (18.33±12.31) min and (65.00±35.05) min respectively. There was significant difference between two groups ( P 0.01). 3. The average time of becoming effective of intravenous metoprolol is (14.00±9.95) min, while that of becoming effective of intravenous cedilanid is (62.50±41.66) min, There was significant difference between two groups ( P 0.01). 4. The total effective rate of intravenous metoprolol and cedilanid is 85.71% and 47.62% respectively, There was significant difference between two groups ( P 0.05). 5. The most frequent adverse effect of metoprolol observed during the study was hypotension. No cardiac insufficiency and severe arrhythmias occurred. Conclusion:It is effective and safe that administering intravenous metoprolol to patients with rapid atrial fibrillation. And intravenous metoprplol has been another credible way of treating rapid atrial fibrillation in emergency department.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Objective:To observe the therapeutic effect and safety of intravenous metoprolol on atrial fibrillation. Method:Forty-two patients were divided into metoprolol group and cedilanid group randomly. The twenty-one patients in metoprolol group were injected metoprolol intravenously at doses of 5~15 mg. The twenty-one patients in cedilanid group were injected intravenously at doses of 0.4~0.8 mg. The heart rate and blood pressure before the injection and 40 min, 60 min and 120 min after the injection were observed respectively. Result:1. There were twelve cases and eight cases respectively in two groups whose heart rate decreased to less than 100 bpm. There were no significant differences between the two groups ( P 0.05). 2. The average time in metoprolol group and cedilanid group whose heart rate decreased to less than 100 bpm is (18.33±12.31) min and (65.00±35.05) min respectively. There was significant difference between two groups ( P 0.01). 3. The average time of becoming effective of intravenous metoprolol is (14.00±9.95) min, while that of becoming effective of intravenous cedilanid is (62.50±41.66) min, There was significant difference between two groups ( P 0.01). 4. The total effective rate of intravenous metoprolol and cedilanid is 85.71% and 47.62% respectively, There was significant difference between two groups ( P 0.05). 5. The most frequent adverse effect of metoprolol observed during the study was hypotension. No cardiac insufficiency and severe arrhythmias occurred. Conclusion:It is effective and safe that administering intravenous metoprolol to patients with rapid atrial fibrillation. And intravenous metoprplol has been another credible way of treating rapid atrial fibrillation in emergency department.
Key concepts: Metoprolol, Medicine, Atrial fibrillation, Heart rate, Ventricular rate, Anesthesia, Significant difference, Intravenous use