Cargando…

Electrical energy by electrode placement for cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: Electrode patch position may not be critical for success when cardioverting atrial fibrillation (AF), but the relevance of applied electrical energy is unclarified. Our objective was to perform a meta-analysis of randomised trials to examine the dose–response relation between energy level...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vinter, Nicklas, Holst-Hansen, Mikkel Zacharias Bystrup, Johnsen, Søren Paaske, Lip, Gregory Y H, Frost, Lars, Trinquart, Ludovic
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10649887/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37945283
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/openhrt-2023-002456
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: Electrode patch position may not be critical for success when cardioverting atrial fibrillation (AF), but the relevance of applied electrical energy is unclarified. Our objective was to perform a meta-analysis of randomised trials to examine the dose–response relation between energy level and cardioversion success by electrode position in elective cardioversion. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, Google Scholar and Scopus Citations. Inclusion criteria were randomised controlled trials using biphasic shock waves and self-adhesive patches, and publication date from 2000 to 2023. We used random-effects dose-response models to meta-analyse the relation between energy level and cardioversion success by anterolateral and anteroposterior position. Random-effects models estimated pooled risk ratios (RR) for cardioversion success after the first and the final shocks between the two electrode positions. RESULTS: We included five randomised controlled trials (N=1078). After the first low-energy shock, the electrode position was not significantly associated with the likelihood of successful cardioversion (pooled RR anterolateral vs anteroposterior placement 1.28, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.76, with considerable heterogeneity). After a high-energy final shock, there was no evidence of an association between the electrode position and the cumulative chance of cardioversion success (pooled RR anterolateral vs anteroposterior 1.05, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.14). Regardless of electrode position, cardioversion success was significantly less likely with shock energy levels < 200J compared with 200J. CONCLUSION: Evidence from contemporary randomised trials suggests that higher level of electrical energy is associated with higher conversion rate when cardioverting AF with a biphasic shockwave. Positioning of electrodes can be based on convenience.