Verapamil and diltiazem are non‑dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers classified as Class IV antiarrhythmics, primarily used to slow atrioventricular (AV) nodal conduction and control ventricular rate in supraventricular tachyarrhythmias such as atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter when left ventricular function is preserved.
Both agents inhibit L‑type calcium channels in nodal tissue, reduce SA/AV nodal automaticity and conduction, and prolong AV nodal refractoriness, which translates clinically into rate control rather than rhythm conversion in most scenarios.
Classification
Verapamil (a phenylalkylamine) and diltiazem (a benzothiazepine) belong to the non‑dihydropyridine subgroup of calcium channel blockers (CCBs) and differ from dihydropyridines by exerting prominent cardiac nodal effects in addition to vascular actions.
Compared with dihydropyridines, both verapamil and diltiazem depress AV nodal conduction and have negative inotropic and chronotropic effects, with verapamil generally exhibiting greater cardiac depressant action than diltiazem.
Mechanism of action
Class IV antiarrhythmics block voltage‑gated L‑type calcium channels, reducing calcium influx during phase 0 of nodal action potentials and thereby slowing conduction through the AV node and decreasing heart rate.
This nodal selectivity increases AV nodal refractory period and prolongs the PR interval on ECG, which underpins their clinical utility as rate‑control agents in supraventricular arrhythmias.
Electrophysiology
Both drugs slow SA node automaticity and AV nodal conduction, increase AV nodal refractory period, and characteristically prolong the PR interval without significantly affecting QRS duration or QT interval at therapeutic doses.
Verapamil generally produces the strongest AV nodal effects among CCBs, followed by diltiazem, consistent with frequency‑dependent depression of AV nodal properties observed in comparative studies.
Pharmacokinetics
Verapamil undergoes extensive first‑pass hepatic metabolism with variable oral bioavailability, is highly protein‑bound, and is metabolized primarily via CYP3A4 (among other enzymes), with elimination predominantly in the bile and urine; sustained‑release formulations extend its half‑life and smooth plasma levels.
Diltiazem is also subject to significant first‑pass hepatic metabolism via CYP3A4, displays a relatively short elimination half‑life in immediate‑release forms, and is available in extended‑release preparations to facilitate once‑daily dosing and steady rate control.
Formulations
Verapamil is available as immediate‑release tablets, multiple extended‑release oral formulations, and as an intravenous preparation suitable for acute rate control in monitored settings.
Diltiazem is available as immediate‑release tablets, multiple extended‑release oral products (e.g., CD, LA, ER), and as an IV formulation for acute rate control, with brand/generic products differing in release profiles.
Dosing principles
For acute rate control in atrial fibrillation/flutter, IV diltiazem is commonly administered as a bolus (e.g., 0.25 mg/kg followed by 0.35 mg/kg if needed) with a titratable infusion (e.g., 5–15 mg/h) under monitoring, while IV verapamil is given as small boluses (e.g., 2.5–5 mg over 2 minutes, repeat as needed) in settings without pre‑existing conduction disease or severe hypotension.
Oral maintenance often employs extended‑release products titrated to resting heart‑rate goals and symptoms, with verapamil and diltiazem dosed once daily in ER forms and divided doses for immediate‑release forms when used for hypertension, angina, or chronic rate control.
Clinical indications
Both drugs are widely used for ventricular rate control in atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter in patients without significant left ventricular systolic dysfunction, aligning with major society guidelines that endorse non‑DHP CCBs or beta‑blockers as first‑line rate‑control options in appropriate patients.
They are also effective for termination or prevention of AV nodal reentry tachycardia (AVNRT) and other AV node‑dependent supraventricular tachycardias, and they retain roles in angina and hypertension depending on comorbidity profiles and formulation selection.
Guideline context
The 2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS atrial fibrillation guideline emphasizes achieving resting heart rates typically below 100–110 bpm for symptom control and prevention of tachycardia‑mediated cardiomyopathy, with non‑DHP CCBs as acceptable rate‑control agents when LV function is preserved.
ESC guidance and subsequent analyses have refined rhythm‑vs‑rate control strategy selection, but still recognize rate control with agents like verapamil or diltiazem as integral when rhythm control is not prioritized or feasible in eligible patients.
Contraindications
Absolute or major contraindications include second‑ or third‑degree AV block or sick sinus syndrome in the absence of a functioning pacemaker, severe hypotension, and acute decompensated heart failure or significant left ventricular systolic dysfunction where negative inotropy may worsen hemodynamics.
In atrial fibrillation with Wolff‑Parkinson‑White (WPW) or similar preexcitation, AV nodal blockers like verapamil and diltiazem are contraindicated due to potential acceleration of conduction over accessory pathways and degeneration to ventricular fibrillation.
Adverse effects
Common adverse effects include bradycardia, hypotension, dizziness, fatigue, and peripheral edema due to combined cardiac and vascular effects, with ECG PR prolongation reflecting slowed AV conduction.
Verapamil is notably associated with constipation and can cause conduction block in susceptible patients, while both agents can precipitate heart failure symptoms in those with reduced ejection fraction due to negative inotropy.
Monitoring
Monitor heart rate, blood pressure, and ECG intervals (particularly PR) during initiation and titration, especially with IV administration or dose escalations.
Assess for signs of heart failure, excessive bradycardia, syncope, edema, and gastrointestinal intolerance, and adjust therapy accordingly or switch classes if intolerance or contraindications arise.
Drug interactions
Both agents are CYP3A4 substrates and moderate inhibitors, creating bidirectional interaction risks with strong CYP3A4 inhibitors/inducers and sensitive substrates; careful review of concomitant therapy is required.
Additive AV nodal depression with beta‑blockers or other rate‑slowing agents increases risk for bradycardia and AV block, and verapamil’s P‑gp inhibition can raise digoxin levels, necessitating caution and monitoring in combined regimens.
Special populations
In heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, non‑DHP CCBs are generally avoided due to negative inotropy and potential worsening of outcomes, favoring beta‑blockers or digoxin for rate control instead.
Hepatic impairment increases exposure due to reduced first‑pass and clearance, warranting lower starting doses and cautious titration; older adults may require conservative dosing and closer monitoring for conduction disturbances.
Verapamil highlights
Verapamil exerts strong AV nodal effects, making it effective in AVNRT and rate control, but its negative inotropic and chronotropic effects limit use in hypotension and HFrEF and increase risk of conduction block in susceptible patients.
Constipation is characteristically more frequent with verapamil, and clinically meaningful interactions occur via CYP3A4 and P‑gp pathways, particularly with digoxin and certain antiarrhythmics or antifungals.
Diltiazem highlights
Diltiazem presents an intermediate profile between dihydropyridines and verapamil, balancing vascular and nodal effects with somewhat less negative inotropy than verapamil, which can aid tolerability in some patients without LV dysfunction.
It is available in multiple extended‑release formulations that enable once‑daily dosing for chronic rate control or angina, and it shares interaction liabilities through CYP3A4 modulation and additive AV nodal suppression with other rate‑slowing agents.
Comparative profile
Practical scenarios
For hemodynamically stable atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular response and preserved LV function, IV diltiazem or IV verapamil can be used to slow AV nodal conduction and achieve rate targets, with careful blood pressure and conduction monitoring.
In patients with asthma or bronchospasm where beta‑blockers are undesirable, oral diltiazem/verapamil ER formulations are reasonable for chronic rate control when LV function is preserved and contraindications are absent.
When to avoid
Avoid both agents in AF with preexcitation (e.g., WPW) because preferential AV nodal blockade can facilitate conduction over the accessory pathway and precipitate life‑threatening ventricular rates.
Avoid or use extreme caution in acute decompensated heart failure, significant hypotension, advanced AV block without pacing, and severe bradycardia, per labeling and clinical practice guidance.
Overdose and toxicity
Overdose presents with profound bradycardia, hypotension, AV block, and cardiogenic shock due to excessive calcium channel blockade, and supportive care with vasopressors, calcium salts, high‑dose insulin euglycemia therapy, and lipid emulsion in select cases may be required.
Early recognition and aggressive multidisciplinary management improve outcomes in CCB toxicity, with verapamil overdoses particularly prone to severe conduction and hemodynamic compromise.
Guideline pearls
Major guidelines recommend tailoring rate‑ vs rhythm‑control strategies to symptoms, comorbidities, and patient preferences, with initial rate‑control targets commonly set at resting HR <100–110 bpm and non‑DHP CCBs appropriate when LV function is preserved and no preexcitation exists.
ESC documents and subsequent analyses reinforce a personalized approach while acknowledging the ongoing role of rate control with agents such as verapamil and diltiazem when rhythm control is not pursued or is unsuccessful.
Teaching notes
Verapamil and diltiazem act at distinct allosterically linked sites on the L‑type calcium channel relative to dihydropyridines, explaining their different qualitative cardiac effects despite a shared channel target.
Their frequency‑dependent AV nodal effects explain greater efficacy at higher heart rates in SVTs and the rank order of nodal depression (verapamil > diltiazem > dihydropyridines) observed experimentally and clinically.
Formulary and labeling
FDA and DailyMed labeling confirm multiple strengths and extended‑release formulations for both drugs, with clear contraindications for conduction disease without pacing and cautions regarding hypotension and heart failure.
Comprehensive package inserts also outline dosing adjustments, adverse reactions, and drug‑interaction warnings that should be reviewed when initiating or modifying therapy.
Key takeaways
Non‑DHP CCBs verapamil and diltiazem remain cornerstone agents for AV nodal‑dependent rate control in supraventricular arrhythmias when systolic function is preserved, provided contraindications are excluded and interactions are managed.
Choice between the two hinges on hemodynamics, comorbidities, adverse‑effect profiles, and formulation needs, with careful monitoring of heart rate, PR interval, blood pressure, and clinical tolerability over time.
Note: This article is intended for educational purposes and should not be considered as medical advice. Always consult with a healthcare professional for medical advice and treatment.
