Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • News & Views
  • Published:

Atrial fibrillation

Dronedarone and amiodarone—the safety versus efficacy debate

Amiodarone effectively maintains sinus rhythm in patients with atrial fibrillation, and although dronedarone is less effective it has a better safety profile. The choice of antiarrhythmic drug (or nonpharmacological strategy) depends on the ultimate goal of therapy, which should be considered in the context of the patient's clinical presentation and the treatment tailored to the individual.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Proposed treatment algorithm for the use of dronedarone in the therapy of patients with atrial fibrillation.

References

  1. Piccini, J. P. et al. Comparative efficacy of dronedarone and amiodarone for the maintenance of sinus rhythm in patients with atrial fibrillation. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 54, 1089–1095 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Fuster, V. et al. ACC/AHA/ESC 2006 guidelines for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the European Society of Cardiology Committee for Practice Guidelines (Writing committee to revise the 2001 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation). J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 48, e149–e246 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Singh, B. N. et al. for the EURIDIS and ADONIS Investigators. Dronedarone for maintenance of sinus rhythm in atrial fibrillation or flutter. N. Engl. J. Med. 357, 987–999 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Wyse, D. G. et al. for the AFFIRM Investigators. A comparison of rate control and rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation. N. Engl. J. Med. 347, 1825–1833 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Barquet, P. DIONYSOS study results showed the respective profiles of dronedarone and amiodarone. sanofi-aventis press release [online], (2008).

  6. Kober, L. et al. for the Dronedarone Study Group. Increased mortality after dronedarone therapy for severe heart failure. N. Engl. J. Med. 358, 2678–2687 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hohnloser, S. H. et al. for the ATHENA Investigators. Effect of dronedarone on cardiovascular events in atrial fibrillation. N. Engl. J. Med. 360, 668–678 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. sanofi-aventis. Important information on the use of Multaq® (dronedarone) [online], (2009).

  9. Bardy, G. H. et al. for the SCD-HeFT Investigators. Amiodarone or an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator for congestive heart failure. N. Engl. J. Med. 352, 225–237 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Prystowsky, E. Dronedarone and amiodarone—the safety versus efficacy debate. Nat Rev Cardiol 7, 5–6 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrcardio.2009.221

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrcardio.2009.221

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing