BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) commonly observed in patients with heart failure and cardioversion was often needed to restore the sinus rhythm. Previously, there is no study evaluating usefulness of internal cardioversion with implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) device. In this study, we aimed to compare the efficacy and long-term effects of internal cardioversion with ICD devices compared to conventional external cardioversion in patients with AF and heart failure. METHODS: Seventy patients with AF and heart failure who underwent electrical cardioversion were enrolled in the study. Forty patients (mean age 65.36 ± 10.37, 35 male) were assigned to undergo internal cardioversion with approximately 35 J shocks delivered through the ICD electrode. Standard external cardioversion was performed for the remaining patients (30 patients; mean age 66.20 ± 11.89; 24 male) that were similar with regard to baseline, and electrocardiographic characteristics. RESULTS: Sinus rhythm was restored in 32 of 40 patients (80.0%) assigned to internal cardioversion compared with 25 of 30 patients (83.3%) assigned to external cardioversion (P = 0.725). We did not witness any serious complication during the procedure and hospitalization. On the follow-up, there was no statistically significant difference in recurrence of AF and incidence of major cardiovascular events between the internal and external cardioversion groups. CONCLUSIONS: Internal cardioversion with ICD device is an effective and safe method to restore sinus rhythm in heart failure patients with AF.
BACKGROUND:Atrial fibrillation (AF) commonly observed in patients with heart failure and cardioversion was often needed to restore the sinus rhythm. Previously, there is no study evaluating usefulness of internal cardioversion with implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) device. In this study, we aimed to compare the efficacy and long-term effects of internal cardioversion with ICD devices compared to conventional external cardioversion in patients with AF and heart failure. METHODS: Seventy patients with AF and heart failure who underwent electrical cardioversion were enrolled in the study. Forty patients (mean age 65.36 ± 10.37, 35 male) were assigned to undergo internal cardioversion with approximately 35 J shocks delivered through the ICD electrode. Standard external cardioversion was performed for the remaining patients (30 patients; mean age 66.20 ± 11.89; 24 male) that were similar with regard to baseline, and electrocardiographic characteristics. RESULTS: Sinus rhythm was restored in 32 of 40 patients (80.0%) assigned to internal cardioversion compared with 25 of 30 patients (83.3%) assigned to external cardioversion (P = 0.725). We did not witness any serious complication during the procedure and hospitalization. On the follow-up, there was no statistically significant difference in recurrence of AF and incidence of major cardiovascular events between the internal and external cardioversion groups. CONCLUSIONS: Internal cardioversion with ICD device is an effective and safe method to restore sinus rhythm in heart failurepatients with AF.
Authors: Valentin Fuster; Lars E Rydén; David S Cannom; Harry J Crijns; Anne B Curtis; Kenneth A Ellenbogen; Jonathan L Halperin; Jean-Yves Le Heuzey; G Neal Kay; James E Lowe; S Bertil Olsson; Eric N Prystowsky; Juan Luis Tamargo; Samuel Wann; Sidney C Smith; Alice K Jacobs; Cynthia D Adams; Jeffery L Anderson; Elliott M Antman; Jonathan L Halperin; Sharon Ann Hunt; Rick Nishimura; Joseph P Ornato; Richard L Page; Barbara Riegel; Silvia G Priori; Jean-Jacques Blanc; Andrzej Budaj; A John Camm; Veronica Dean; Jaap W Deckers; Catherine Despres; Kenneth Dickstein; John Lekakis; Keith McGregor; Marco Metra; Joao Morais; Ady Osterspey; Juan Luis Tamargo; José Luis Zamorano Journal: Europace Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: A John Camm; Paulus Kirchhof; Gregory Y H Lip; Ulrich Schotten; Irene Savelieva; Sabine Ernst; Isabelle C Van Gelder; Nawwar Al-Attar; Gerhard Hindricks; Bernard Prendergast; Hein Heidbuchel; Ottavio Alfieri; Annalisa Angelini; Dan Atar; Paolo Colonna; Raffaele De Caterina; Johan De Sutter; Andreas Goette; Bulent Gorenek; Magnus Heldal; Stefan H Hohloser; Philippe Kolh; Jean-Yves Le Heuzey; Piotr Ponikowski; Frans H Rutten Journal: Europace Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: John J V McMurray; Stamatis Adamopoulos; Stefan D Anker; Angelo Auricchio; Michael Böhm; Kenneth Dickstein; Volkmar Falk; Gerasimos Filippatos; Cândida Fonseca; Miguel Angel Gomez-Sanchez; Tiny Jaarsma; Lars Køber; Gregory Y H Lip; Aldo Pietro Maggioni; Alexander Parkhomenko; Burkert M Pieske; Bogdan A Popescu; Per K Rønnevik; Frans H Rutten; Juerg Schwitter; Petar Seferovic; Janina Stepinska; Pedro T Trindade; Adriaan A Voors; Faiez Zannad; Andreas Zeiher Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2012-05-19 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: R Ammer; E Alt; G Ayers; G Lehmann; C Schmitt; J Pasquantonio; K Pütter; M Schmidt; A Schömig Journal: Pacing Clin Electrophysiol Date: 1997-01 Impact factor: 1.976
Authors: Denis Roy; Mario Talajic; Stanley Nattel; D George Wyse; Paul Dorian; Kerry L Lee; Martial G Bourassa; J Malcolm O Arnold; Alfred E Buxton; A John Camm; Stuart J Connolly; Marc Dubuc; Anique Ducharme; Peter G Guerra; Stefan H Hohnloser; Jean Lambert; Jean-Yves Le Heuzey; Gilles O'Hara; Ole Dyg Pedersen; Jean-Lucien Rouleau; Bramah N Singh; Lynne Warner Stevenson; William G Stevenson; Bernard Thibault; Albert L Waldo Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-06-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: G Altamura; L Bianconi; F Lo Bianco; S Toscano; F Ammirati; C Pandozi; A Castro; M Cardinale; M Mennuni; M Santini Journal: Pacing Clin Electrophysiol Date: 1995-01 Impact factor: 1.976
Authors: J Lüker; A Sultan; T Plenge; J van den Bruck; C-H Heeger; S Meyer; K Mischke; R R Tilz; D Vollmann; G Nölker; B Schäffer; S Willems; D Steven Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2017-11-18 Impact factor: 5.460