AIMS: To compare the efficacy and safety of an escalating energy protocol with a non-escalating energy protocol using an impedance compensated biphasic defibrillator for direct current cardioversion of atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS AND RESULTS: This prospective multicentre randomised trial enrolled 380 patients (248 male, mean (SD) age 67 (10) years) with AF. Patients were randomised to either an escalating energy protocol (protocol A: 100 J, 150 J, 200 J, 200 J), or a non-escalating energy protocol (protocol B: 200 J, 200 J, 200 J). Cardioversion was performed using an impedance compensated biphasic waveform. First-shock success was significantly higher for those randomised to 200 J than 100 J (71% vs 48%; p<0.01) and for patients with a body mass index (BMI) >25 kg/m(2) (75% vs 44%; p = 0.01). In patients with a normal BMI there was no significant difference in first-shock success. There was also no significant difference between subsequent shocks or overall success. The use of a non-escalating protocol (protocol B) resulted in fewer shocks but with a higher cumulative energy. There was no difference in duration of procedure, amount of sedation administered or post-shock erythema between the groups. CONCLUSION:First-shock success was significantly higher, particularly in patients with a BMI >25 kg/m(2), when a non-escalating initial 200 J energy was selected. The overall success, duration of procedure and amount of sedation administered, however, did not differ significantly between the two protocols.
RCT Entities:
AIMS: To compare the efficacy and safety of an escalating energy protocol with a non-escalating energy protocol using an impedance compensated biphasic defibrillator for direct current cardioversion of atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS AND RESULTS: This prospective multicentre randomised trial enrolled 380 patients (248 male, mean (SD) age 67 (10) years) with AF. Patients were randomised to either an escalating energy protocol (protocol A: 100 J, 150 J, 200 J, 200 J), or a non-escalating energy protocol (protocol B: 200 J, 200 J, 200 J). Cardioversion was performed using an impedance compensated biphasic waveform. First-shock success was significantly higher for those randomised to 200 J than 100 J (71% vs 48%; p<0.01) and for patients with a body mass index (BMI) >25 kg/m(2) (75% vs 44%; p = 0.01). In patients with a normal BMI there was no significant difference in first-shock success. There was also no significant difference between subsequent shocks or overall success. The use of a non-escalating protocol (protocol B) resulted in fewer shocks but with a higher cumulative energy. There was no difference in duration of procedure, amount of sedation administered or post-shock erythema between the groups. CONCLUSION: First-shock success was significantly higher, particularly in patients with a BMI >25 kg/m(2), when a non-escalating initial 200 J energy was selected. The overall success, duration of procedure and amount of sedation administered, however, did not differ significantly between the two protocols.
Authors: Mouhannad M Sadek; Varsha Chaugai; Mark J Cleland; Timothy J Zakutney; David H Birnie; F Daniel Ramirez Journal: Clin Cardiol Date: 2018-05-11 Impact factor: 2.882
Authors: F Daniel Ramirez; Mouhannad M Sadek; Isabelle Boileau; Mark Cleland; Pablo B Nery; Girish M Nair; Calum J Redpath; Martin S Green; Darryl R Davis; Karen Charron; Joshua Henne; Timothy Zakutney; Rob S B Beanlands; Benjamin Hibbert; George A Wells; David H Birnie Journal: Europace Date: 2019-05-01 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: Anders S Schmidt; Kasper G Lauridsen; Kasper Adelborg; Peter Torp; Leif F Bach; Simon M Jepsen; Nete Hornung; Charles D Deakin; Hans Rickers; Bo Løfgren Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2017-03-08 Impact factor: 5.501