| pathology | Demonstrated benefit and harm | k | | | |
|---|
| atrial fibrillation | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
|---|
| Carunchio (flecainide vs placebo), 1995 | flecainide vs placebo | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.41 [0.20; 0.83] | | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Withdrawals due to adverse effects NaN [NaN; NaN] Pro-arrhythmia ∞ [NaN; ∞] | | Van Gelder, 1989 | flecainide vs no treatment | | | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Withdrawals due to adverse effects ∞ [NaN; ∞] Pro-arrhythmia ∞ [NaN; ∞] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.81 [0.55; 1.20] |
| Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
|---|
| Carunchio (flecainide vs placebo), 1995 | Flecainide 200 mg/d (n=20) vs. placebo (n=26) | patients with recurrent AF with > 3 episodes in previous 1 year
| open Parallel groups Sample size: 20/26 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months | | Van Gelder, 1989 | Flecainide 200-300 mg/d (n=36) vs. no treatment (n=37) | Any persistent AF or AFl | open Parallel groups Sample size: 36/37 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months |
|
| atrial fibrillation | versus Class Ia No demonstrated result for efficacy flecainide inferior to quinidine in terms of Withdrawals due to adverse effects in Naccarelli, 1996 | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
|---|
| Naccarelli, 1996 | flecainide vs quinidine | | Withdrawals due to adverse effects 1.66 [1.04; 2.65] | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Pro-arrhythmia 1.49 [0.59; 3.78] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 1.04 [0.91; 1.19] |
| Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
|---|
| Naccarelli, 1996 | Flecainide 200-300 mg/d (n=117) vs. Quinidine 1-1,5 g/d (n=122) | Any documented symptomatic AF | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 117/122 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months |
|
| atrial fibrillation | versus Class Ic No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
|---|
| Aliot, 1996 | flecainide vs propafenone | Withdrawals due to adverse effects 0.23 [0.05; 1.00] | | all cause mortality 0.00 [0.00; NaN] Pro-arrhythmia 0.00 [0.00; NaN] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.75 [0.48; 1.16] |
| Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
|---|
| Aliot, 1996 | Flecainide 100-200mg/d (n=48) vs. Propafenone 600 mg/d (n=49) | patients with paroxysmal AF documented any time before | open Parallel groups Sample size: 48/49 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months |
|
| atrial fibrillation | versus digoxin No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
|---|
| Steinbeck (flecainide vs digoxin), 1988 | flecainide vs digoxin | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.46 [0.24; 0.88] | | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Withdrawals due to adverse effects NaN [NaN; NaN] Pro-arrhythmia 1.00 [0.07; 14.55] |
| Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
|---|
| Steinbeck (flecainide vs digoxin), 1988 | flecainide 200-300 mg/d (+ digoxine) (n=15) vs. (n=15)
| Paroxysmal symptomatic AF of any duration
| open Parallel groups Sample size: 15/15 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months
|
|
