ANTIARRHYTHMIC DRUG CLASSIFICATIONS - A CRITICAL-APPRAISAL OF THEIR HISTORY, PRESENT STATUS, AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Classification of antiarrhythmic drugs have developed because of a need to organise the large number of agents available according to pharmacological properties of clinical relevance. The current classification is a hybrid of classification systems developed in the early 1970s. It subdivides drugs according to 4 major pharmacological actions: (a) depression of phase 0 sodium current; (b) antagonism of adrenergic effects on the heart; (c) prolongation of action potential duration; and (d) calcium channel blockade. Further subdivision of sodium channel blockers is based on the kinetics of sodium channel blockade and drug effects on action potential duration. A critical analysis of selected aspects of the clinical actions of antiarrhythmic drugs indicates the value of the current classification, as well as some limitations in its ability to separate drugs into distinct groups with characteristic clinical properties. The strengths of the current classification are due to the clinical importance of the pharmacological properties on which it is based. These results in electrophysiological actions, indications, and adverse effects that are typical for each group of drugs. The limitations of the current system relate to the propensity of individual drugs to have actions of more than one class simultaneously, the way that the various actions of a given drug are dependent on concentration, rate, and tissue type, and to problems in subclass definition. Some of these shortcomings could be alleviated by returning to the concept, originally put forward by Singh and Vaughan Williams, of classes of drug action rather than classes of drug per se. This approach would be pharmacologically more realistic than trying to assign each antiarrhythmic agent to a single unique class, would be better able to incorporate the complexities of drug action, and would potentially be more flexible. The wide use of antiarrhythmic drug classifications attests to their value, and suggests that they are likely to continue to be important in the future.