Elton Dudink1, Brigitte Essers2, Wouter Holvoet3, Bob Weijs3, Justin Luermans1, Hemanth Ramanna4, Anho Liem5, Jurren van Opstal6, Lukas Dekker7, Vincent van Dijk8, Timo Lenderink9, Otto Kamp10, Lennert Kulker11, Michiel Rienstra12, Bas Kietselaer1, Marco Alings13, Jos Widdershoven14, Joan Meeder15, Martin Prins2, Isabelle van Gelder12, Harry Crijns16. 1. Department of Cardiology, Maastricht University Medical Center and Cardiovascular Research Institute Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands. 2. Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technology Assessment, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands. 3. Department of Cardiology, Maastricht University Medical Center and Cardiovascular Research Institute Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands; Department of Cardiology, VieCuri Medical Center, Venlo, the Netherlands. 4. Department of Cardiology, Haga Teaching Hospital, The Hague, the Netherlands. 5. Department of Cardiology, Sint Franciscus Hospital, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. 6. Department of Cardiology, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands. 7. Department of Cardiology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands. 8. Department of Cardiology, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands. 9. Department of Cardiology, Zuyderland Medical Center, Heerlen, the Netherlands. 10. Department of Cardiology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. 11. Department of Cardiology, Alrijne Hospital, Leiderdorp, the Netherlands. 12. Department of Cardiology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands. 13. Department of Cardiology, Amphia Hospital, Breda, the Netherlands. 14. Department of Cardiology, Elisabeth-TweeSteden Hospital, Tilburg, the Netherlands. 15. Department of Cardiology, VieCuri Medical Center, Venlo, the Netherlands. 16. Department of Cardiology, Maastricht University Medical Center and Cardiovascular Research Institute Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands. Electronic address: hjgm.crijns@mumc.nl.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Current standard of care for patients with recent-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) in the emergency department aims at urgent restoration of sinus rhythm, although paroxysmal AF is a condition that resolves spontaneously within 24 hours in more than 70% of the cases. A wait-and-see approach with rate-control medication only and when needed cardioversion within 48 hours of onset of symptoms is hypothesized to be noninferior, safe, and cost-effective as compared with current standard of care and to lead to a higher quality of life. DESIGN: The ACWAS trial (NCT02248753) is an investigator-initiated, randomized, controlled, 2-arm noninferiority trial that compares a wait-and-see approach to the standard of care. Consenting adults with recent-onset symptomatic AF in the emergency department without urgent need for cardioversion are eligible for participation. A total of 437 patients will be randomized to either standard care (pharmacologic or electrical cardioversion) or the wait-and-see approach, consisting of symptom reduction through rate control medication until spontaneous conversion is achieved, with the possibility of cardioversion within 48 hours after onset of symptoms. Primary end point is the presence of sinus rhythm on 12-lead electrocardiogram at 4 weeks; main secondary outcomes are adverse events, total medical and societal costs, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness for 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: The ACWAS trial aims at providing evidence for the use of a wait-and-see approach for patients with recent-onset symptomatic AF in the emergency department.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Current standard of care for patients with recent-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) in the emergency department aims at urgent restoration of sinus rhythm, although paroxysmal AF is a condition that resolves spontaneously within 24 hours in more than 70% of the cases. A wait-and-see approach with rate-control medication only and when needed cardioversion within 48 hours of onset of symptoms is hypothesized to be noninferior, safe, and cost-effective as compared with current standard of care and to lead to a higher quality of life. DESIGN: The ACWAS trial (NCT02248753) is an investigator-initiated, randomized, controlled, 2-arm noninferiority trial that compares a wait-and-see approach to the standard of care. Consenting adults with recent-onset symptomatic AF in the emergency department without urgent need for cardioversion are eligible for participation. A total of 437 patients will be randomized to either standard care (pharmacologic or electrical cardioversion) or the wait-and-see approach, consisting of symptom reduction through rate control medication until spontaneous conversion is achieved, with the possibility of cardioversion within 48 hours after onset of symptoms. Primary end point is the presence of sinus rhythm on 12-lead electrocardiogram at 4 weeks; main secondary outcomes are adverse events, total medical and societal costs, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness for 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: The ACWAS trial aims at providing evidence for the use of a wait-and-see approach for patients with recent-onset symptomatic AF in the emergency department.
Authors: Leon M Ptaszek; Christopher W Baugh; Steven A Lubitz; Jeremy N Ruskin; Grace Ha; Margaux Forsch; Samer A DeOliveira; Samia Baig; E Kevin Heist; Jason H Wasfy; David F Brown; Paul D Biddinger; Ali S Raja; Benjamin Scirica; Benjamin A White; Moussa Mansour Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2019-09-12 Impact factor: 5.501