Incidence of new-onset atrial fibrillation following phenylephrine vs. norepinephrine use in septic shock patients: A retrospective cohort study.

Q3 Medicine
Qatar Medical Journal Pub Date : 2026-08-11 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.5339/qmj.2026.50
Laith Rhabneh, Ra'ed Ababneh, Ibrahim Dib, Qusai Alqudah, Abdel Rahman Alwardat, Mohammed Aloqaily
{"title":"Incidence of new-onset atrial fibrillation following phenylephrine vs. norepinephrine use in septic shock patients: A retrospective cohort study.","authors":"Laith Rhabneh, Ra'ed Ababneh, Ibrahim Dib, Qusai Alqudah, Abdel Rahman Alwardat, Mohammed Aloqaily","doi":"10.5339/qmj.2026.50","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Septic shock is a severe form of sepsis characterized by circulatory failure and organ dysfunction, often requiring vasopressor support to maintain adequate mean arterial pressure. Norepinephrine is the recommended first-line vasopressor, but new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common complication in septic shock patients receiving vasopressors, potentially influenced by vasopressor choice. This study compares the incidence of new-onset AF and related cardiac outcomes in septic shock patients treated with norepinephrine versus phenylephrine.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the incidence of new-onset AF within 72 hours of vasopressor initiation in adult septic shock patients treated with norepinephrine versus phenylephrine.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective observational cohort study was conducted using the TriNetX database, including adult septic shock patients without prior AF who received either norepinephrine or phenylephrine. Propensity score matching balanced baseline characteristics across cohorts. The primary outcome was incidence of new-onset AF; secondary outcomes included cardioversion events, rate control medication use, other arrhythmias, and embolic stroke incidence. Outcomes were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards models and Kaplan-Meier survival curves.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After matching, 138,051 patients were included in each group. New-onset AF occurred in 0.3% of norepinephrine-treated patients versus 0.01% in the phenylephrine group (OR 3.05; 95% CI: 2.55-3.65; <i>p</i> < 0.001). Norepinephrine use was also associated with significantly increased rates of electrical and pharmacological cardioversion, rate control medication utilization, other arrhythmias, and embolic stroke (all <i>p</i> < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier analysis confirmed higher AF incidence in the norepinephrine group (log-rank <i>p</i> < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In septic shock patients, norepinephrine is associated with a significantly higher risk of new-onset AF and related adverse cardiac events compared to phenylephrine. These findings suggest vasopressor choice may influence arrhythmia risk and highlight the need for prospective studies to guide optimal vasopressor selection and management strategies in this population.</p>","PeriodicalId":53667,"journal":{"name":"Qatar Medical Journal","volume":"2026 3","pages":"50"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13547784/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qatar Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5339/qmj.2026.50","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Septic shock is a severe form of sepsis characterized by circulatory failure and organ dysfunction, often requiring vasopressor support to maintain adequate mean arterial pressure. Norepinephrine is the recommended first-line vasopressor, but new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common complication in septic shock patients receiving vasopressors, potentially influenced by vasopressor choice. This study compares the incidence of new-onset AF and related cardiac outcomes in septic shock patients treated with norepinephrine versus phenylephrine.

Objective: To compare the incidence of new-onset AF within 72 hours of vasopressor initiation in adult septic shock patients treated with norepinephrine versus phenylephrine.

Methods: A retrospective observational cohort study was conducted using the TriNetX database, including adult septic shock patients without prior AF who received either norepinephrine or phenylephrine. Propensity score matching balanced baseline characteristics across cohorts. The primary outcome was incidence of new-onset AF; secondary outcomes included cardioversion events, rate control medication use, other arrhythmias, and embolic stroke incidence. Outcomes were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards models and Kaplan-Meier survival curves.

Results: After matching, 138,051 patients were included in each group. New-onset AF occurred in 0.3% of norepinephrine-treated patients versus 0.01% in the phenylephrine group (OR 3.05; 95% CI: 2.55-3.65; p < 0.001). Norepinephrine use was also associated with significantly increased rates of electrical and pharmacological cardioversion, rate control medication utilization, other arrhythmias, and embolic stroke (all p < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier analysis confirmed higher AF incidence in the norepinephrine group (log-rank p < 0.001).

Conclusion: In septic shock patients, norepinephrine is associated with a significantly higher risk of new-onset AF and related adverse cardiac events compared to phenylephrine. These findings suggest vasopressor choice may influence arrhythmia risk and highlight the need for prospective studies to guide optimal vasopressor selection and management strategies in this population.

感染性休克患者使用苯肾上腺素与去甲肾上腺素后新发房颤的发生率:一项回顾性队列研究
背景:脓毒性休克是一种以循环衰竭和器官功能障碍为特征的严重脓毒症,通常需要血管加压药物支持来维持足够的平均动脉压。去甲肾上腺素是推荐的一线血管加压药物,但新发心房颤动(AF)是接受血管加压药物治疗的脓毒性休克患者的常见并发症,可能受到血管加压药物选择的影响。本研究比较了去甲肾上腺素与苯肾上腺素治疗感染性休克患者的新发房颤发生率和相关心脏结局。目的:比较应用去甲肾上腺素和苯肾上腺素治疗的成人感染性休克患者开始使用升压药物72小时内新发房颤的发生率。方法:采用TriNetX数据库进行回顾性观察队列研究,纳入既往无房颤且接受去甲肾上腺素或苯肾上腺素治疗的成人感染性休克患者。倾向评分匹配各队列平衡基线特征。主要终点是新发房颤的发生率;次要结局包括心律转复事件、速率控制药物使用、其他心律失常和栓塞性卒中发生率。采用Cox比例风险模型和Kaplan-Meier生存曲线对结果进行分析。结果:配对后,两组共纳入138051例患者。去甲肾上腺素组新发房颤发生率为0.3%,而苯肾上腺素组为0.01% (OR 3.05; 95% CI: 2.55-3.65; p < 0.001)。去甲肾上腺素的使用还与电性和药理学心律转复、速率控制药物使用、其他心律失常和栓塞性中风的发生率显著增加相关(均p < 0.001)。Kaplan-Meier分析证实去甲肾上腺素组房颤发生率较高(log-rank p < 0.001)。结论:在感染性休克患者中,与苯肾上腺素相比,去甲肾上腺素与新发房颤和相关不良心脏事件的风险显著增加相关。这些发现表明,血管加压剂的选择可能会影响心律失常的风险,并强调需要前瞻性研究来指导该人群的最佳血管加压剂选择和管理策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Qatar Medical Journal
Qatar Medical Journal Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
77
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书