Loading…
External versus internal cardioversion for atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Background Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) often require rhythm control strategy for amelioration of symptoms. It is unclear if there is any difference between external cardioversion (ECV) and internal cardioversion (ICV) for successful conversion of AF to normal sinus rhythm. Methods We perf...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology 2021-09, Vol.61 (3), p.445-451 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Subjects: | |
| Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c352t-a1a64dc300e773a241fbf742b6e38ba34aab2a6968426646252cf4a37c5b11793 |
|---|---|
| cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c352t-a1a64dc300e773a241fbf742b6e38ba34aab2a6968426646252cf4a37c5b11793 |
| container_end_page | 451 |
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 445 |
| container_title | Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology |
| container_volume | 61 |
| creator | Aggarwal, Gaurav Anantha-Narayanan, Mahesh Robles, Julian Bandyopadhyay, Dhrubajyoti Abed, Mary Henry, Brandon Michael Aggarwal, Saurabh Alla, Venkata |
| description | Background
Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) often require rhythm control strategy for amelioration of symptoms. It is unclear if there is any difference between external cardioversion (ECV) and internal cardioversion (ICV) for successful conversion of AF to normal sinus rhythm.
Methods
We performed a meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating success of cardioversion using ECV versus ICV.
Results
In the pooled analysis of 5 RCTS, there was no difference in success of cardioversion using ECV versus ICV (OR 1.69, 95% CI 0.24–11.83,
p
= 0.6). In the subgroup analysis, there was no difference between ECV and direct electrode ICV (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.09–1.83,
p
= 0.24). However, ECV was significantly better compared with ICV using ICD (OR 11.97, 95% CI 1.87–76.73,
p
= 0.009).
Conclusions
There was no difference between ECV versus ICV in effectiveness for termination of AF. Larger well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm our findings. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10840-020-00836-5 |
| format | article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2429770121</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2562647020</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c352t-a1a64dc300e773a241fbf742b6e38ba34aab2a6968426646252cf4a37c5b11793</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU1LxDAQhoMouK7-AU8BL16q-U7rTZb1Axa8KHgL0zaVLG2zJq24_nqzW0Hw4GGYyczzDmFehM4puaKE6OtISS5IRlgKknOVyQM0o1KzLJeFPEw1z3mWa_l6jE5iXBNCCsLUDPnl52BDDy3-sCGOEbv-511BqJ3fdZ3vceMDhiG4NGhcGVzbwpD6NxhwZwfIIEm20UXsGxygr33nvmyNK98PwbdtKvfieIqOmpTs2U-eo5e75fPiIVs93T8ubldZxSUbMqCgRF1xQqzWHJigTdlowUpleV4CFwAlA1WoXDClhGKSVY0AritZUqoLPkeX095N8O-jjYPpXKxs-nZv_RgNE6zQmlBGE3rxB137cXeCREnFlNDprIliE1UFH2OwjdkE10HYGkrMzgMzeWASbPYeGJlEfBLFBPdvNvyu_kf1DVbYivs</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2562647020</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>External versus internal cardioversion for atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials</title><source>Springer Link</source><creator>Aggarwal, Gaurav ; Anantha-Narayanan, Mahesh ; Robles, Julian ; Bandyopadhyay, Dhrubajyoti ; Abed, Mary ; Henry, Brandon Michael ; Aggarwal, Saurabh ; Alla, Venkata</creator><creatorcontrib>Aggarwal, Gaurav ; Anantha-Narayanan, Mahesh ; Robles, Julian ; Bandyopadhyay, Dhrubajyoti ; Abed, Mary ; Henry, Brandon Michael ; Aggarwal, Saurabh ; Alla, Venkata</creatorcontrib><description>Background
Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) often require rhythm control strategy for amelioration of symptoms. It is unclear if there is any difference between external cardioversion (ECV) and internal cardioversion (ICV) for successful conversion of AF to normal sinus rhythm.
Methods
We performed a meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating success of cardioversion using ECV versus ICV.
Results
In the pooled analysis of 5 RCTS, there was no difference in success of cardioversion using ECV versus ICV (OR 1.69, 95% CI 0.24–11.83,
p
= 0.6). In the subgroup analysis, there was no difference between ECV and direct electrode ICV (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.09–1.83,
p
= 0.24). However, ECV was significantly better compared with ICV using ICD (OR 11.97, 95% CI 1.87–76.73,
p
= 0.009).
Conclusions
There was no difference between ECV versus ICV in effectiveness for termination of AF. Larger well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm our findings.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1383-875X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1572-8595</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10840-020-00836-5</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Cardiac arrhythmia ; Cardiology ; Cardioversion ; Clinical trials ; Fibrillation ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Meta-analysis ; Rhythm ; Subgroups</subject><ispartof>Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology, 2021-09, Vol.61 (3), p.445-451</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2020</rights><rights>Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2020.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c352t-a1a64dc300e773a241fbf742b6e38ba34aab2a6968426646252cf4a37c5b11793</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c352t-a1a64dc300e773a241fbf742b6e38ba34aab2a6968426646252cf4a37c5b11793</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-8180-9287</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>315,786,790,27957,27958</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Aggarwal, Gaurav</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anantha-Narayanan, Mahesh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Robles, Julian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bandyopadhyay, Dhrubajyoti</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Abed, Mary</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Henry, Brandon Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aggarwal, Saurabh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alla, Venkata</creatorcontrib><title>External versus internal cardioversion for atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials</title><title>Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology</title><addtitle>J Interv Card Electrophysiol</addtitle><description>Background
Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) often require rhythm control strategy for amelioration of symptoms. It is unclear if there is any difference between external cardioversion (ECV) and internal cardioversion (ICV) for successful conversion of AF to normal sinus rhythm.
Methods
We performed a meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating success of cardioversion using ECV versus ICV.
Results
In the pooled analysis of 5 RCTS, there was no difference in success of cardioversion using ECV versus ICV (OR 1.69, 95% CI 0.24–11.83,
p
= 0.6). In the subgroup analysis, there was no difference between ECV and direct electrode ICV (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.09–1.83,
p
= 0.24). However, ECV was significantly better compared with ICV using ICD (OR 11.97, 95% CI 1.87–76.73,
p
= 0.009).
Conclusions
There was no difference between ECV versus ICV in effectiveness for termination of AF. Larger well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm our findings.</description><subject>Cardiac arrhythmia</subject><subject>Cardiology</subject><subject>Cardioversion</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Fibrillation</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Rhythm</subject><subject>Subgroups</subject><issn>1383-875X</issn><issn>1572-8595</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kU1LxDAQhoMouK7-AU8BL16q-U7rTZb1Axa8KHgL0zaVLG2zJq24_nqzW0Hw4GGYyczzDmFehM4puaKE6OtISS5IRlgKknOVyQM0o1KzLJeFPEw1z3mWa_l6jE5iXBNCCsLUDPnl52BDDy3-sCGOEbv-511BqJ3fdZ3vceMDhiG4NGhcGVzbwpD6NxhwZwfIIEm20UXsGxygr33nvmyNK98PwbdtKvfieIqOmpTs2U-eo5e75fPiIVs93T8ubldZxSUbMqCgRF1xQqzWHJigTdlowUpleV4CFwAlA1WoXDClhGKSVY0AritZUqoLPkeX095N8O-jjYPpXKxs-nZv_RgNE6zQmlBGE3rxB137cXeCREnFlNDprIliE1UFH2OwjdkE10HYGkrMzgMzeWASbPYeGJlEfBLFBPdvNvyu_kf1DVbYivs</recordid><startdate>20210901</startdate><enddate>20210901</enddate><creator>Aggarwal, Gaurav</creator><creator>Anantha-Narayanan, Mahesh</creator><creator>Robles, Julian</creator><creator>Bandyopadhyay, Dhrubajyoti</creator><creator>Abed, Mary</creator><creator>Henry, Brandon Michael</creator><creator>Aggarwal, Saurabh</creator><creator>Alla, Venkata</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8180-9287</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210901</creationdate><title>External versus internal cardioversion for atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials</title><author>Aggarwal, Gaurav ; Anantha-Narayanan, Mahesh ; Robles, Julian ; Bandyopadhyay, Dhrubajyoti ; Abed, Mary ; Henry, Brandon Michael ; Aggarwal, Saurabh ; Alla, Venkata</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c352t-a1a64dc300e773a241fbf742b6e38ba34aab2a6968426646252cf4a37c5b11793</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Cardiac arrhythmia</topic><topic>Cardiology</topic><topic>Cardioversion</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Fibrillation</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Rhythm</topic><topic>Subgroups</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Aggarwal, Gaurav</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anantha-Narayanan, Mahesh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Robles, Julian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bandyopadhyay, Dhrubajyoti</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Abed, Mary</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Henry, Brandon Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aggarwal, Saurabh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alla, Venkata</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest_Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Aggarwal, Gaurav</au><au>Anantha-Narayanan, Mahesh</au><au>Robles, Julian</au><au>Bandyopadhyay, Dhrubajyoti</au><au>Abed, Mary</au><au>Henry, Brandon Michael</au><au>Aggarwal, Saurabh</au><au>Alla, Venkata</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>External versus internal cardioversion for atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials</atitle><jtitle>Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology</jtitle><stitle>J Interv Card Electrophysiol</stitle><date>2021-09-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>61</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>445</spage><epage>451</epage><pages>445-451</pages><issn>1383-875X</issn><eissn>1572-8595</eissn><notes>ObjectType-Article-2</notes><notes>SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1</notes><notes>ObjectType-Feature-1</notes><notes>content type line 23</notes><abstract>Background
Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) often require rhythm control strategy for amelioration of symptoms. It is unclear if there is any difference between external cardioversion (ECV) and internal cardioversion (ICV) for successful conversion of AF to normal sinus rhythm.
Methods
We performed a meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating success of cardioversion using ECV versus ICV.
Results
In the pooled analysis of 5 RCTS, there was no difference in success of cardioversion using ECV versus ICV (OR 1.69, 95% CI 0.24–11.83,
p
= 0.6). In the subgroup analysis, there was no difference between ECV and direct electrode ICV (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.09–1.83,
p
= 0.24). However, ECV was significantly better compared with ICV using ICD (OR 11.97, 95% CI 1.87–76.73,
p
= 0.009).
Conclusions
There was no difference between ECV versus ICV in effectiveness for termination of AF. Larger well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm our findings.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><doi>10.1007/s10840-020-00836-5</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8180-9287</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1383-875X |
| ispartof | Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology, 2021-09, Vol.61 (3), p.445-451 |
| issn | 1383-875X 1572-8595 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2429770121 |
| source | Springer Link |
| subjects | Cardiac arrhythmia Cardiology Cardioversion Clinical trials Fibrillation Medicine Medicine & Public Health Meta-analysis Rhythm Subgroups |
| title | External versus internal cardioversion for atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
| url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-09-22T09%3A33%3A04IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=External%20versus%20internal%20cardioversion%20for%20atrial%20fibrillation:%20a%20meta-analysis%20of%20randomized%20controlled%20trials&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20interventional%20cardiac%20electrophysiology&rft.au=Aggarwal,%20Gaurav&rft.date=2021-09-01&rft.volume=61&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=445&rft.epage=451&rft.pages=445-451&rft.issn=1383-875X&rft.eissn=1572-8595&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10840-020-00836-5&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2562647020%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c352t-a1a64dc300e773a241fbf742b6e38ba34aab2a6968426646252cf4a37c5b11793%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2562647020&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |