Anders S Schmidt1,2,3, Kasper G Lauridsen1,2,3, Peter Torp2, Leif F Bach4, Hans Rickers2, Bo Løfgren2,3,5,6. 1. Clinical Research Unit, Randers Regional Hospital, Skovlyvej 15, 8930 Randers NE, Denmark. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, Randers Regional Hospital, Skovlyvej 15, 8930 Randers NE, Denmark. 3. Research Center for Emergency Medicine, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 161, Aarhus N, Denmark. 4. Department of Anesthesiology, Randers Regional Hospital, Skovlyvej 15, 8930 Randers NE, Denmark. 5. Department of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, 8200 Aarhus N, Denmark. 6. Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, 8200 Aarhus N, Denmark.
Abstract
AIMS: Direct-current cardioversion is one of the most commonly performed procedures in cardiology. Low-escalating energy shocks are common practice but the optimal energy selection is unknown. We compared maximum-fixed and low-escalating energy shocks for cardioverting atrial fibrillation. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a single-centre, single-blinded, randomized trial, we allocated elective atrial fibrillation patients to cardioversion using maximum-fixed (360-360-360 J) or low-escalating (125-150-200 J) biphasic truncated exponential shocks. The primary endpoint was sinus rhythm 1 min after cardioversion. Safety endpoints were any arrhythmia, myocardial injury, skin burns, and patient-reported pain after cardioversion. We randomized 276 patients, and baseline characteristics were well-balanced between groups (mean ± standard deviation age: 68 ± 9 years, male: 72%, atrial fibrillation duration >1 year: 30%). Sinus rhythm 1 min after cardioversion was achieved in 114 of 129 patients (88%) in the maximum-fixed energy group, and in 97 of 147 patients (66%) in the low-escalating energy group (between-group difference; 22 percentage points, 95% confidence interval 13-32, P < 0.001). Sinus rhythm after first shock occurred in 97 of 129 patients (75%) in the maximum-fixed energy group compared to 50 of 147 patients (34%) in the low-escalating energy group (between-group difference; 41 percentage points, 95% confidence interval 30-51). There was no significant difference between groups in any safety endpoint. CONCLUSION: Maximum-fixed energy shocks were more effective compared with low-escalating energy shocks for cardioverting atrial fibrillation. We found no difference in any safety endpoint. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
AIMS: Direct-current cardioversion is one of the most commonly performed procedures in cardiology. Low-escalating energy shocks are common practice but the optimal energy selection is unknown. We compared maximum-fixed and low-escalating energy shocks for cardioverting atrial fibrillation. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a single-centre, single-blinded, randomized trial, we allocated elective atrial fibrillation patients to cardioversion using maximum-fixed (360-360-360 J) or low-escalating (125-150-200 J) biphasic truncated exponential shocks. The primary endpoint was sinus rhythm 1 min after cardioversion. Safety endpoints were any arrhythmia, myocardial injury, skin burns, and patient-reported pain after cardioversion. We randomized 276 patients, and baseline characteristics were well-balanced between groups (mean ± standard deviation age: 68 ± 9 years, male: 72%, atrial fibrillation duration >1 year: 30%). Sinus rhythm 1 min after cardioversion was achieved in 114 of 129 patients (88%) in the maximum-fixed energy group, and in 97 of 147 patients (66%) in the low-escalating energy group (between-group difference; 22 percentage points, 95% confidence interval 13-32, P < 0.001). Sinus rhythm after first shock occurred in 97 of 129 patients (75%) in the maximum-fixed energy group compared to 50 of 147 patients (34%) in the low-escalating energy group (between-group difference; 41 percentage points, 95% confidence interval 30-51). There was no significant difference between groups in any safety endpoint. CONCLUSION: Maximum-fixed energy shocks were more effective compared with low-escalating energy shocks for cardioverting atrial fibrillation. We found no difference in any safety endpoint. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
Authors: David Ferreira; Philo Mikhail; Michael McGee; Andrew Boyle; Aaron Sverdlov; Maged William; Nicholas Jackson; Malcolm Barlow; James Leitch; Nicholas Collins; Thomas Ford; Bradley Wilsmore Journal: Open Heart Date: 2021-09
Authors: Jasmeet Soar; Bernd W Böttiger; Pierre Carli; Keith Couper; Charles D Deakin; Therese Djärv; Carsten Lott; Theresa Olasveengen; Peter Paal; Tommaso Pellis; Gavin D Perkins; Claudio Sandroni; Jerry P Nolan Journal: Notf Rett Med Date: 2021-06-08 Impact factor: 0.826
Authors: Axel Brandes; Harry J G M Crijns; Michiel Rienstra; Paulus Kirchhof; Erik L Grove; Kenneth Bruun Pedersen; Isabelle C Van Gelder Journal: Europace Date: 2020-08-01 Impact factor: 5.214