Abstract 4145565: A comparison of the efficacy of initial high energy versus initial low energy biphasic shocks for cardioversion of atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter – a real-life experience

Background: In patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), biphasic energy is superior to monophasic energy for cardioversion (CV). However, the optimal initial biphasic energy for CV is unknown. There are no studies in the US comparing the different biphasic energy levels. Objective: To compare the efficacy of initial high energy (IHE, 300-360J) versus initial low energy (ILE, ≤200J) biphasic shocks for CV of AF. Methods: Patients who received CVs at our institution for AF over a year were identified using the ICD-10 code. Patients who received internal CV, CV during other procedures, or CV for hemodynamic instability were excluded. Shocks were delivered using Lifepak® 20 through self-adhesive electrodes placed in an anteroposterior direction. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM® SPSS® Statistics software. The primary endpoint was conversion to sinus rhythm after the first shock (CSRF) and the secondary endpoint was conversion to sinus rhythm (SR) using multiple shocks. Results: A total of 594 patients were screened and 409 patients were included for final analysis. Results are shown in the table. Patients in the ILE group had lower BMI and lower rates of prior ablation. Patients in the IHE group had higher rates of CSRF (95.5% vs 87.6%, p=0.018). On subgroup analysis, higher rates of CSRF were observed with IHE even in patients with BMI>30 (97.4% vs 84.2%, p=0.019). More patients in the ILE group required multiple shocks. Even when multiple shocks were used, there was a higher rate of conversion to SR in IHE vs ILE (95.5% vs 92%, p=0.24). On multivariate analysis, the odds of CSRF were 6-fold higher with IHE after adjusting for sex, ejection fraction, prior ablation, obesity, and history of heart failure. Conclusion: Our study shows that IHE is better than ILE at converting AF into SR with the first shock. Even though the latest AF guidelines recommend 200J for initial cardioversion, select patients may benefit from >300J to avoid multiple shock attempts.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Circulation
Published
2024-11-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1161/circ.150.suppl_1.4145565
Primary Topic
Cardiovascular Effects of Exercise
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Abstract 4145565: A comparison of the efficacy of initial high energy versus initial low energy biphasic shocks for cardioversion of atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter – a real-life experience

Dinesh Voruganti, Ramarao Vunnam, Sai Vikram Alampoondi Venkataramanan, Shane Tsai
Circulation
Cardiovascular Effects of Exercise
article

Abstract 4145565: A comparison of the efficacy of initial high energy versus initial low energy biphasic shocks for cardioversion of atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter – a real-life experience

Dinesh Voruganti, Ramarao Vunnam, Sai Vikram Alampoondi Venkataramanan, Shane Tsai
article en

Abstract

Background: In patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), biphasic energy is superior to monophasic energy for cardioversion (CV). However, the optimal initial biphasic energy for CV is unknown. There are no studies in the US comparing the different biphasic energy levels. Objective: To compare the efficacy of initial high energy (IHE, 300-360J) versus initial low energy (ILE, ≤200J) biphasic shocks for CV of AF. Methods: Patients who received CVs at our institution for AF over a year were identified using the ICD-10 code. Patients who received internal CV, CV during other procedures, or CV for hemodynamic instability were excluded. Shocks were delivered using Lifepak® 20 through self-adhesive electrodes placed in an anteroposterior direction. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM® SPSS® Statistics software. The primary endpoint was conversion to sinus rhythm after the first shock (CSRF) and the secondary endpoint was conversion to sinus rhythm (SR) using multiple shocks. Results: A total of 594 patients were screened and 409 patients were included for final analysis. Results are shown in the table. Patients in the ILE group had lower BMI and lower rates of prior ablation. Patients in the IHE group had higher rates of CSRF (95.5% vs 87.6%, p=0.018). On subgroup analysis, higher rates of CSRF were observed with IHE even in patients with BMI>30 (97.4% vs 84.2%, p=0.019). More patients in the ILE group required multiple shocks. Even when multiple shocks were used, there was a higher rate of conversion to SR in IHE vs ILE (95.5% vs 92%, p=0.24). On multivariate analysis, the odds of CSRF were 6-fold higher with IHE after adjusting for sex, ejection fraction, prior ablation, obesity, and history of heart failure. Conclusion: Our study shows that IHE is better than ILE at converting AF into SR with the first shock. Even though the latest AF guidelines recommend 200J for initial cardioversion, select patients may benefit from >300J to avoid multiple shock attempts.

CirculationVol. 150(Suppl_1)
University of Nebraska Medical Center (US)
Affordable and clean energy
Openalex Percentile: Top 61%
Cardiovascular Effects of Exercise
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.