Comparative clinical outcomes of dronedarone and sotalol in Asian patients with atrial fibrillation: a nationwide cohort study

So Ryoung Lee, Eue Keun Choi, Ji Hyun Kim, Jung Ae Kim, Tae Yeon Kwon, Young Eun Lee, Seil Oh

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of dronedarone versus sotalol in real-world practice in Asian patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Using the Korean nationwide claims database from August 2013 to December 2016, we identified patients with AF recently prescribed dronedarone or sotalol and analyzed the hospitalization risk and all-cause death until December 2017. Overall, 3119 and 1575 patients treated with dronedarone and sotalol, respectively, were included. After propensity score weighting, no significant differences were observed between the treatment groups. Dronedarone use was associated with a lower risk of all-cause hospitalization than sotalol use (hazard ratio [HR], 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70–0.88). The dronedarone group demonstrated a significantly lower risk of cardiovascular (CV) hospitalization than the sotalol group (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.53–0.72); however, no significant difference was observed in non-CV hospitalization. No difference in the risk of all-cause death was observed between groups. The dronedarone group was significantly less likely to receive nonpharmacological treatment for AF than the sotalol group (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.51–0.77). In a large-scale population of Asian patients with AF, dronedarone was associated with a lower risk of CV hospitalization and a lower need for nonpharmacological treatment for AF than sotalol.

Original languageEnglish
Article number16102
JournalScientific Reports
Volume10
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Dec 2020

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comparative clinical outcomes of dronedarone and sotalol in Asian patients with atrial fibrillation: a nationwide cohort study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this