ObjectiveTo assess mexiletine's long-term safety and effect on 6 minute walk distance in a well-defined cohort of myotonic dystrophy type-1 (DM1) patients.MethodsWe performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of mexiletine (150 mg 3 times daily) to evaluate its efficacy and safety in a homogenous cohort of adult ambulatory DM1 patients. The primary outcome was change in 6-minute walk distance at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included changes in hand grip myotonia, strength, swallowing, forced vital capacity, lean muscle mass, Myotonic Dystrophy Health Index scores, and 24-hour Holter and EKG results at 3 and 6 months.ResultsForty-two participants were randomized and 40 completed the 6-month follow-up (n = 20 in both groups). No significant effects of mexiletine were observed on 6-minute walk distance, but hand grip myotonia was improved with mexiletine treatment. There were no differences between the mexiletine and placebo groups with respect to the frequency or type of adverse events. Changes in PR, QRS, and QTc intervals were similar in mexiletine and placebo-treated participants.ConclusionsThere was no benefit of mexiletine on six-minute walk distance at 6 months. Although mexiletine had a sustained positive effect on objectively measured hand grip myotonia, this was not seen in measures reflecting participants' perceptions of their myotonia. No effects of mexiletine on cardiac conduction parameters were seen over the 6-month follow-up period.Classification of evidenceThis study provides Class I evidence that for ambulatory patients with DM1 mexiletine does not significantly change six-minute walk distance at 6 months.
Phenylephrine (PE) bolus and infusion methods have both been used to measure baroreflex sensitivity in humans. To determine whether the two methods produce the same values of baroreceptor sensitivity, we administered intravenous PE by both bolus injection and graded infusion methods to 17 normal subjects. Baroreflex sensitivity was determined from the slope of the linear relationship between the cardiac cycle length (R-R interval) and systolic arterial pressure. Both methods produced similar peak increases in arterial pressure and reproducible results of baroreflex sensitivity in the same subjects, but baroreflex slopes measured by the infusion method (9.9 +/- 0.7 ms/mmHg) were significantly lower than those measured by the bolus method (22.5 +/- 1.8 ms/mmHg, P less than 0.0001). Pretreatment with atropine abolished the heart rate response to PE given by both methods, whereas plasma catecholamines were affected by neither method of PE administration. Naloxone pretreatment exaggerated the pressor response to PE and increased plasma beta-endorphin response to PE infusion but had no effect on baroreflex sensitivity. Thus our results indicate that 1) activation of the baroreflex by the PE bolus and infusion methods, although reproducible, is not equivalent, 2) baroreflex-induced heart rate response to a gradual increase in pressure is less than that seen with a rapid rise, 3) in both methods, heart rate response is mediated by the vagus nerves, and 4) neither the sympathetic nervous system nor the endogenous opiate system has a significant role in mediating the baroreflex control of heart rate to a hypertensive stimulus in normal subjects.
The purpose of this report is to explore further how well currently employed electrocardiographic criteria for the diagnosis of left ventricular hypertrophy can be applied to a group of patients at necropsy who had complete left bundle-branch block. We also examine the electrocardiograms of a group of patients before and after the development of complete left bundle-branch block assessing its effect on the QRS voltage.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.