Transthoracic versus transesophageal cardioversion of atrial fibrillation under light sedation: a prospective randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Electrical cardioversion (ECV) of atrial fibrillation (AF) is limited by a 5-10% failure rate and by the expense arising from a perceived need for general anesthesia. A transesophageal approach using light sedation has been proposed as a means of augmenting the success rate and avoiding the need for general anesthesia. We hypothesized that the high rate of success and the lower energy requirement associated with biphasic cardioversion might eliminate any advantage of the transesophageal approach. METHODS: We randomly assigned 60 patients attending for ECV of persistent AF to a transesophageal or a transthoracic approach. Sedation of moderate depth was achieved with intravenous midazolam. The dose of midazolam was titrated in the same manner in both groups. RESULTS: Sinus rhythm was restored in 29/30 patients (97%) in each group using a similar number of shocks for both groups (1.3 +/- 0.6 transesophageal vs 1.4 +/- 0.7 transthoracic, P = NS) with a similar procedure duration (14.1 +/- 8.2 minutes vs 13.8 +/- 7.5 minutes, P = NS). Both groups received similar doses of midazolam (4.2 +/- 2.7 mg vs 4.4 +/- 2.8 mg, P = NS) and both reported a similar discomfort score in (0.9 +/- 1.3 vs 1.1 +/- 1.8, P = NS). No complication occurred in either group. CONCLUSION: AF may be cardioverted safely and effectively by either a transthoracic or a transesophageal approach. The use of sedation of moderate depth renders cardioversion by either approach acceptable. As transesophageal ECV shows no clear advantage, transthoracic cardioversion should remain the approach of first choice.

Outpatient oesophageal-precordial electrical cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: an effective and safe technique to restore sinus rhythm.

OBJECTIVE: External electrical cardioversion is commonly used in the management of atrial fibrillation (AF), but usually involves general anaesthesia. We tested the efficacy, safety and tolerability of a minimally invasive cardioversion technique, not requiring general anaesthesia, performed on an outpatient basis. METHODS: We performed outpatient oesophageal cardioversion in 87 consecutive patients (mean age: 67.5 +/- 9.6 years; weight: 77.47 +/- 12.34 kg; left atrium diameter: 46.25 +/- 6.85 mm; LVEF: 55.5 +/- 16%) with persistent AF (mean duration: 6.99 +/- 11.55 months). A biphasic shock was delivered via an oesophageal decapolar lead (cathode) and two precordial patches (anode) under a mild sedation (midazolam 2.5-5 mg). In the first 25 patients, a step-up protocol (from 10 to 100 J) was performed whereas, in the other 62, a first shock at 50 J and a second one at 100 J, were delivered. RESULTS: Patients described the level of discomfort caused by the procedure according a five-grade scale. Cardioversion was achieved in 97.7% of patients using a mean effective energy of 51.2 +/- 15.7 J. In 88.5% of patients, sinus rhythm was restored by using 50 J or less. No complications occurred and no patient required hospital admission. Mean discomfort score was 1.56 +/- 0.74 out of 5. Sinus rhythm persisted in 62.6% of patients at the 1-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient oesophageal cardioversion is a safe, acceptable and effective way to cardiovert patients with AF. It may be a useful alternative to external cardioversion. A relatively high starting energy (50 J) was demonstrated to be superior to a low-energy step-up technique.

Electrical cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: different methods for a safe and effective technique.

Atrial fibrillation is the most common cardiac arrhythmia observed in clinical practice. Many different therapeutic approaches are available at present but none may be considered the gold standard treatment. Antiarrhythmic drugs are not very effective agents to cardiovert persistent atrial fibrillation and, therefore, the technique most frequently used to restore sinus rhythm is external direct current cardioversion, which has proved to be safe and very effective. Esophageal cardioversion is an alternative method that could obviate some of the limitations of the external technique, such as the high energy required, need for anesthesia and longer hospital stay. Another technique performed during the last two decades is internal cardioversion, but at present, the advantage of this technique is limited to the small proportion of cases of unsuccessful external cardioversion.