Cost-effectiveness of digoxin, pacing, and direct current cardioversion for conversion of atrial flutter in neonates.

IntroductionNewborn atrial flutter can be treated by medications, pacing, or direct current cardioversion. The purpose is to compare the cost-effectiveness of digoxin, pacing, and direct current cardioversion for the treatment of atrial flutter in neonates.Materials and methodsA decision tree model was developed comparing the efficacy and cost of digoxin, pacing, and direct current cardioversion based on a meta-analysis of published studies of success rates of cardioversion of neonatal atrial flutter (age<2 months). Patients who failed initial attempt at cardioversion progressed to the next methodology until successful. Data were analysed to assess the cost-effectiveness of these methods with cost estimates obtained from 2015 Medicare reimbursement rates. RESULTS: The cost analysis for cardioversion of atrial flutter found the most efficient method to be direct current cardioversion at a cost of $10 304, pacing was next at $11 086, and the least cost-effective was digoxin at $14 374. The majority of additional cost, regardless of method, was from additional neonatal ICU day either owing to digoxin loading or failure to covert. Direct current cardioversion remains the most cost-effective strategy by sensitivity analyses performed on pacing conversion rate and the cost of the neonatal ICU/day. Direct current cardioversion remains cost-effective until the assumed conversion rate is below 64.6%. CONCLUSION: The most cost-efficient method of cardioverting a neonate with atrial flutter is direct current cardioversion. It has the highest success rates based on the meta-analysis, shorter length of stay in the neonatal ICU owing to its success, and results in cost-savings ranging from $800 to $4000 when compared with alternative approaches.

Healthcare utilization and clinical outcomes after catheter ablation of atrial flutter.

Atrial flutter ablation is associated with a high rate of acute procedural success and symptom improvement. The relationship between ablation and other clinical outcomes has been limited to small studies primarily conducted at academic centers. We sought to determine if catheter ablation of atrial flutter is associated with reductions in healthcare utilization, atrial fibrillation, or stroke in a large, real world population. California Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project databases were used to identify patients undergoing atrial flutter ablation between 2005 and 2009. The adjusted association between atrial flutter ablation and healthcare utilization, atrial fibrillation, or stroke was investigated using Cox proportional hazards models. Among 33,004 patients with a diagnosis of atrial flutter observed for a median of 2.1 years, 2,733 (8.2%) underwent catheter ablation. Atrial flutter ablation significantly lowered the adjusted risk of inpatient hospitalization (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.84-0.92, p<0.001), emergency department visits (HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.54-0.65, p<0.001), and overall hospital-based healthcare utilization (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.90-0.98, p = 0.001). Atrial flutter ablation was also associated with a statistically significant 11% reduction in the adjusted hazard of atrial fibrillation (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81-0.97, p = 0.01). Risk of acute stroke was not significantly reduced after ablation (HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.81-1.45, p = 0.57). In a large, real world population, atrial flutter ablation was associated with significant reductions in hospital-based healthcare utilization and a reduced risk of atrial fibrillation. These findings support the early use of catheter ablation for the treatment of atrial flutter.

Estimation of potential cost savings associated with reduced rates of cardiovascular hospitalization among atrial fibrillation/flutter patients treated with dronedarone in the ATHENA trial.

The aim of this study was to estimate, from a US payer perspective, potential cost savings resulting from the reduction in cardiovascular (CV) hospitalizations obtained with dronedarone in the ATHENA (A Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind, Parallel Arm Trial to Assess the Efficacy of Dronedarone 400 mg bid for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Hospitalization or Death from any Cause in PatiENts with Atrial Fibrillation/Atrial Flutter) trial. ATHENA randomized atrial fibrillation/flutter patients to dronedarone (n=2301) or placebo (n=2327) plus standard care. Dronedarone significantly reduced first CV hospitalization/all-cause mortality over 12-30 months of follow-up. CV hospitalization costs (2008 values) from a US cohort of ATHENA-like atrial fibrillation/flutter patients with Medicare supplemental insurance (n=10,200) and diagnosis-related group costs of adverse event-related hospitalizations were applied to hospitalizations occurring in ATHENA. The impact of cost variation was assessed using Monte Carlo simulation. In ATHENA, dronedarone reduced the overall CV hospitalization rate (vs. placebo) by 29% over the first 12 months (33.36 vs. 47.19 events per 100 patients) and by 25% over the full study (51.15 vs. 68.55 events per 100 patients). Adverse event-related hospitalization rates (dronedarone vs. placebo) were low (0.48 vs. 0.21 and 0.56 vs. 0.26 events per 100 patients over 12 months and the full study, respectively). Overall hospitalization cost savings were estimated at $1329 and $1763 per patient over 12 months and the full study, respectively. Cost savings were relatively stable [mean (95% confidence interval): $1330 ($994-$1676) for the first 12 months and $1763 ($1369-$2184) for the full study] over 10,000 cycles of random variation.

The burden of atrial fibrillation on the hospital sector in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common disease that frequently requires acute hospital care; however, the cost of hospital care in Canada has not been reported. The purpose of this study was to estimate the cost of AF related to hospital-based care in Canada. METHODS: Analyses were conducted with 2 national administrative databases for the fiscal year 2007-2008. Databases included information for hospital admissions, day operations, and ambulatory care. Records with a most responsible diagnosis of AF, atrial flutter, or a diagnosis related to AF with a concomitant comorbidity of AF were included. Hospital costs were estimated, in 2010 Canadian dollars, by applying an average cost per weighted case to the resource intensity weight for each admission or visit and then adding the separate billable fee for admissions, surgical procedures, and interventions. RESULTS: In 2007-2008, the number of acute care admissions with AF as the most responsible diagnosis was 22,823, same-day surgical procedures was 5707, and emergency department visits was 58,066. The hospital costs attributable to AF were $815 million in 2010 Canadian dollars: $710 million for hospitalizations; $32 million for same-day surgical procedures; and $73 million for emergency department visits. Most of the acute care costs were for hospitalizations when AF was listed as a comorbidity ($558 million, or 69%). CONCLUSION: AF results in a substantial cost burden to the acute care hospital sector. Current hospital costs in AF patients are driven by the consequences of AF, while the costs for specific treatments for AF are relatively low.

Hospital readmissions in US atrial fibrillation patients: occurrence and costs.

The aim of the study was to examine the temporal readmission pattern, proportion of readmissions attributed to cardiovascular (CV) causes, and the duration and costs associated with readmission in hospitalized patients with atrial fibrillation/flutter (AF/AFL). This retrospective cohort study used medical claims data from the PharMetrics Patient-Centric database (IMS Health, Watertown, MA) between January 2007 and March 2008. The patients hospitalized with a primary diagnosis of AF/AFL and with ≥12 months' continuous medical and prescription coverage before and after the initial AF/AFL hospitalization were identified from this database. The main outcome measures were rehospitalization patterns [all-cause, all CV-related (including AF/AFL), and AF/AFL-related only], which were assessed over the 12-month post-index period, and costs of initial and subsequent AF/AFL-related hospitalizations that were compared. The study included 8035 patients with AF/AFL (mean age 66.1 years; 57.6% males). Rehospitalization was common (37.9% of patients), with the most frequent causes being CV (34.1%) and, specifically, AF/AFL-related (26.8%). The highest proportion of rehospitalizations occurred within 30 days of the initial hospitalization (25%). Readmissions with a primary diagnosis of AF/AFL (n = 1238) were significantly longer (4.0 vs. 3.6 days; P = 0.0229) and more costly (US$8966 vs. US$7080; P < 0.0001) than the index hospitalization. Hospitalized AF/AFL patients experience high rates of CV- and AF/AFL-related readmissions, particularly within the first 30 days. Subsequent AF/AFL-related readmissions incur higher costs than the initial AF/AFL hospitalization. Treatments resulting in reduced readmissions would improve patient outcomes, quality of life and the cost burden associated with AF/AFL.

Incremental cost burden to US healthcare payers of atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter patients with additional risk factors.

INTRODUCTION: Atrial fibrillation (AF) and atrial flutter (AFL) patients often have cardiovascular (CV) comorbidities, and have an increased risk of hospitalization and death. Little is known about the real-world cost burden of AF/AFL patients with additional risk factors (ARF). We evaluated the medical resource use and cost burden of AF/AFL patients with ≥1 ARF (other than heart failure [HF]), in comparison with non-AF/AFL controls. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included patients from the MarketScan Medicare database who had ≥1 inpatient or ≥2 outpatient AF/AFL claims. Patients were (1) ≥75 years of age or (2) 70-74 years of age with ≥1 ARF (hypertension, diabetes, systemic embolism, or stroke/transient ischemic attack), but without HF. The AF/AFL patients were matched on age, gender, region, and enrollment status with non-AF/AFL patients. Hospital resource use and costs over the 12-month post-index period were compared across cohorts. The impacts of comorbidity were seen by subcategorizing hospitalization as all-cause, CV-related, and AF/AFL-related. RESULTS: AF/AFL patients with ≥1 ARF had a higher prevalence of comorbidity than non-AF/AFL patients (n=58,555/cohort). Hospitalizations (all-causality) were more than three times more frequent and of longer duration in AF/AFL patients with ≥1 ARF than in non-AF/AFL controls (mean [SD]: 0.72 [0.87] vs. 0.21 [0.51] hospitalizations per patient per year and 3.85 [9.30] and 1.03 [4.53] days, respectively; both P<0.0001). Overall mean (SD) costs over the 12-month post-index period were higher in AF/AFL patients with ≥1 ARF versus the non-AF/AFL control patients for inpatient ($9613 [25,407] vs. $2625 [11,597]; P<0.0001; incremental cost $6988), outpatient ($9447 [15,062] vs. $4906 [11,715]; P<0.0001; incremental cost $4541), and prescription drug costs ($3430 [3637] vs. $2618 [3374]; P<0.0001; incremental cost $812). CONCLUSION: AF/AFL patients with ≥1 ARF had significantly greater levels of comorbidity, hospitalizations, prescription, and outpatient claims than non-AF/AFL patients. The incremental costs of AF/AFL patients with ≥1 ARF are largely due to higher CV-related inpatient costs.

In-hospital management of atrial fibrillation: the CHADS2 score predicts increased cost.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalizations for atrial fibrillation (AF) impose a substantial burden on our health care system, and AF management strategies are increasingly focused on hospitalization reduction. The objectives of this study were to determine the cost of hospitalization for AF and to identify the main determinants of this cost in a Canadian setting. METHODS: Our study population consisted of patients hospitalized for AF and/or atrial flutter at a tertiary care hospital in Canada between April 1, 2001, and March 31, 2007. Patient-level demographics and data on clinical resource use and cost of treatment were collected from a computerized resource use and cost accounting system. The main determinants of in-hospital costs were identified through Bayesian model averaging. RESULTS: Data were collected on 325 consecutive hospitalizations for AF. The median length of stay was 5 days (interquartile range [IQR], 3-9). The mean cost of an AF admission was CAD$4740 (SD = CAD$4457), and the median was CAD$3532 (IQR, CAD$2013-CAD$5944). Multivariate analysis identified 2 independent predictors of increased cost: CHADS2 score (relative increase in cost: 1.24; 95% CI, 1.16-1.33) and warfarin use (relative increase in cost: 1.41; 95% CI, 1.20-1.67). These 2 variables were also independent predictors of increased length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: The main clinical determinants of increased cost and increased length of stay were CHADS2 score and warfarin use. Strategies for reducing AF-related costs should focus on preventing hospitalization or decreasing its length in patients with high CHADS2 scores and on finding alternatives to the use of warfarin or using outpatient bridging anticoagulation to facilitate earlier hospital discharge.

Economic impact to employers of treatment options for cardiac arrhythmias in the US health system.

OBJECTIVE: To measure relative employer-sponsored postablation costs for cardiac arrhythmias (CA), specifically atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS: Regression-Controlled Employee/Spouse Database study (2001 to 2008) comparing CA patients with and without ablation and AF patients with and without ablation. Regression-adjusted monthly medical, pharmacy, sick leave, and short-term disability costs were calculated 11 months before index to 36 months after index (first ablation date or average date for nonablation patients). Relative pre/postindex comparisons between ablation and nonablation cohorts were calculated and time until ablation procedure cost recovery extrapolated. RESULTS: Few CA (280 of 11,291; 2.48%) and AF (93 of 3062; 3.04%) patients received ablation. Ablation cohorts cost less than nonablation cohorts postablation. Estimated total ablation-period costs were recovered 38 to 50 months postablation, including employee absence payment recovery within 18 months. CONCLUSION: Current ablation use in employer-sponsored health plans may improve health care and absence costs over time.

Dronedarone for the treatment of atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter.

This paper presents a summary of the evidence review group (ERG) report on the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of dronedarone for the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF) or atrial flutter based upon a review of the manufacturer's submission to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) as part of the single technology appraisal process. The population considered in the submission were adult clinically stable patients with a recent history of or current non-permanent AF. Comparators were the current available anti-arrhythmic drugs: class 1c agents (flecainide and propafenone), sotalol and amiodarone. Outcomes were AF recurrence, all-cause mortality, stroke, treatment discontinuations (due to any cause or due to adverse events) and serious adverse events. The main evidence came from four phase III randomised controlled trials, direct and indirect meta-analyses from a systematic review, and a synthesis of the direct and indirect evidence using a mixed-treatment comparison. Overall, the results from the different synthesis approaches showed that the odds of AF recurrence appeared statistically significantly lower with dronedarone and other anti-arrhythmic drugs than with non-active control, and that the odds of AF recurrence are statistically significantly higher for dronedarone than for amiodarone. However, the results for outcomes of all-cause mortality, stroke and treatment discontinuations and serious adverse events were all uncertain. A discrete event simulation model was used to evaluate dronedarone versus antiarrhythmic drugs and standard therapy alone. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of dronedarone was relatively robust and less than 20,000 pounds per quality-adjusted life-year. Exploratory work undertaken by the ERG identified that the main drivers of cost-effectiveness were the benefits assigned to dronedarone for all-cause mortality and stroke. Dronedarone is not cost-effective relative to its comparators when the only effect of treatment is a reduction in AF recurrences. In conclusion, uncertainties remain in the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of dronedarone. In particular, the clinical evidence for the major drivers of cost-effectiveness (all-cause mortality and stroke), and consequently the additional benefits attributed in the economic model to dronedarone compared to other anti-arrhythmic drugs are highly uncertain. The final guidance, issued by NICE on 25 August 2010, states that: Dronedarone is recommended as an option for the treatment of non-permanent atrial fibrillation only in people: whose atrial fibrillation is not controlled by first-line therapy (usually including beta-blockers), that is, as a second-line treatment option, and who have at least one of the following cardiovascular risk factors: - hypertension requiring drugs of at least two different classes, diabetes mellitus, previous transient ischaemic attack, stroke or systemic embolism, left atrial diameter of 50 mm or greater, left ventricular ejection fraction less than 40% (noting that the summary of product characteristics [SPC] does not recommend dronedarone for people with left ventricular ejection fraction less than 35% because of limited experience of using it in this group) or age 70 years or older, and who do not have unstable New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III or IV heart failure. Furthermore, 'People who do not meet the criteria above who are currently receiving dronedarone should have the option to continue treatment until they and their clinicians consider it appropriate to stop'.

Cost burden of cardiovascular hospitalization and mortality in ATHENA-like patients with atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The ATHENA trial (A placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel arm Trial to assess the efficacy of dronedarone 400 mg bid for the prevention of cardiovascular Hospitalization or death from any cause in patiENts with Atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter) demonstrated that dronedarone reduced the risk of cardiovascular (CV) hospitalization/death by 24% (P < 0.001) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and atrial flutter (AFL). HYPOTHESIS: In order to estimate the cost savings associated with dronedarone use, we estimated the costs associated with CV hospitalizations and inpatient mortality in a large cohort of ATHENA-like patients. METHODS: In this retrospective analysis, we evaluated the cost of CV hospitalization/mortality in real-world ATHENA-like patients without heart failure and with employer-sponsored Medicare supplemental insurance in the United States. Patients similar to those in ATHENA (age > or = 70 years with AF/AFL and > or = 1 stroke risk factor, without heart failure) who were hospitalized between January 2, 2005, and January 1, 2007, were identified from the MarketScan databases from Thomson Reuters. Health care costs were evaluated during the 12 months following the index hospitalization. RESULTS: The analysis included 10 200 ATHENA-like patients. Hospitalization for CV causes occurred in 53.9% of patients, with a total of 6700 CV hospitalizations for fatal/nonfatal causes. The most common nonfatal causes of CV hospitalizations were AF/other supraventricular rhythm disorders (20.2% of all CV hospitalizations), congestive heart failure (CHF; 14.3%), and transient ischemic attack (TIA)/stroke (10.7%). Mean costs per CV hospitalization for nonfatal causes were $10,908. Inpatient deaths from CV causes occurred in 264 (2.6%) patients; the most common causes of CV inpatient death were intracranial/gastrointestinal hemorrhage (24.2% of CV deaths), TIA/stroke (17.0%), and CHF (15.9%). Mean hospitalization costs per CV inpatient death were $18,565. CONCLUSIONS: Health care costs associated with CV hospitalizations and inpatient deaths among ATHENA-like patients in the US are high. Novel antiarrhythmic therapies such as dronedarone, with the potential to reduce CV hospitalizations/mortality in similar patients, could decrease health care costs if adopted in clinical practice.

Uninterrupted warfarin for periprocedural anticoagulation in catheter ablation of typical atrial flutter: a safe and cost-effective strategy.

INTRODUCTION: Many patients undergoing catheter ablation of atrial flutter (AFL) require periprocedural anticoagulation. We compared a strategy of conversion to low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) periprocedure to uninterrupted warfarinization in a nonrandomized, case-controlled study. METHODS: One hundred and one consecutive patients requiring periprocedural anticoagulation for catheter ablation of typical AFL were studied. The first 51 patients underwent conversion to LMWH (enoxaparin 1 mg/kg bd) with a warfarin pause (LMWH group), the subsequent 50 continued with uninterrupted oral anticoagulation (Warfarin group). Primary endpoint was a composite of major and minor bleeding complications and groin symptoms. RESULTS: Fewer patients in the Warfarin group reached the primary endpoint (36.0% vs 56.8%, P = 0.013). Four patients in the LMWH group but no patient in the Warfarin group required hospital admission for bleeding-related complications. Cost analysis showed mean cost per patient of anticoagulation with LMWH to be pounds sterling 100.9 (95% CI 94.46-107.30) compared to pounds sterling 10.23 (4.49-15.97) in the Warfarin group (P < 0.0001). Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) was performed prior to ablation in 11 patients in the Warfarin group and in 3 patients in the LMWH (P = 0.019). When TEE costs were included, costs were pounds sterling 125.00 ($188.25) (96.80-153.60) for the LMWH strategy and pounds sterling 108.5 ($163.40) (54.92-162.1) for the Warfarin group (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Catheter ablation of typical AFL without interruption of warfarin appears safer and more cost-effective than periprocedural conversion to LMWH. It could be used as a routine anticoagulation strategy for the ablation of right-sided arrhythmias.

Effect of electroanatomically guided versus conventional catheter ablation of typical atrial flutter on the fluoroscopy time and resource use: a prospective randomized multicenter study.

AIMS: Radiofrequency catheter ablation of typical atrial flutter is one of the most frequent indications for catheter ablation in electrophysiology laboratories today. Clinical utility of electroanatomic mapping systems on treatment results and resource utilization compared with conventional ablation has not been systematically investigated in a prospective multicenter study. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this prospective, randomized multicenter study, the results of catheter ablation to cure typical atrial flutter using conventional ablation strategy were compared with electroanatomically guided mapping and ablation (Carto). Primary endpoints of the study were procedure duration and fluoroscopy exposure time, secondary endpoints were acute success rate, recurrence rate, and resource utilization. A total of 210 patients (169 men, 41 women, mean age 63 +/- 10 years) with documented typical atrial flutter were included in the study. Acute ablation success, that is, demonstration of bidirectional isthmus block, was achieved in 99 of 105 patients (94%) in the electroanatomically guided ablation group and in 102 of 105 patients (97%) in the conventional ablation group (P > 0.05). Total procedure duration was comparable between both study groups (99 +/- 57 minutes vs 88 +/- 54 minutes, P > 0.05). Fluoroscopy exposure time was significantly shorter in the electroanatomically guided ablation group (7.7 +/- 7.3 minutes vs 14.8 +/- 11.9 minutes; P < 0.05). Total recurrence rate of typical atrial flutter at 6 months of follow-up was comparable between the 2 groups (respectively for the CARTO and conventional group 6.6% vs 5.7%, P > 0.05). The material costs per procedure in the electroanatomically guided and conventional groups (NaviStar DS vs Celsius DS) was 3035 euro (USD 3,870) and 2133 euro (USD 2,720), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This multicenter study documented that cavotricuspid isthmus ablation to cure typical atrial flutter was highly effective and safe, both in the conventional and the electroanatomically guided ablation group. The use of electroanatomical mapping system significantly reduced the fluoroscopy exposure time by almost 50%, however, at the expense of increased cost of the procedure.

Pharmacologic prophylaxis for postoperative atrial tachyarrhythmia in general thoracic surgery: evidence from randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Atrial tachyarrhythmia is the most common complication after general thoracic surgery and is associated with significant morbidity, longer hospital stay, and higher costs. We sought to determine whether the use of antiarrhythmic medications is associated with a reduced rate of postoperative atrial tachyarrhythmia. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of clinical trials (1980-2003), and reference lists of relevant articles were searched for randomized controlled trials with placebo control, general thoracic patients, and noncombined and prophylactic use of the medications. Search, data abstraction, and analyses were performed and confirmed by at least 2 authors. A fixed-effects model was used to perform meta-analyses. RESULTS: There were 11 unique trials (total n = 1294) that met the inclusion criteria. Calcium-channel blockers and beta-blockers reduced the risk of atrial tachyarrhythmia in 4 and 2 trials, respectively (relative risk of 0.50 and 95% confidence interval of 0.34-0.73; relative risk of 0.40 and 95% confidence interval of 0.17-0.95, respectively). However, beta-blockers tended to increase the risk of pulmonary edema (relative risk, 2.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.74-6.23). Magnesium tested in one unblinded trial also reduced the risk of atrial tachyarrhythmia (relative risk, 0.4; 95% confidence interval, 0.21-0.78). On the other hand, digitalis preparations were found to be harmful because they increased the risk of atrial tachyarrhythmia in 3 trials (relative risk, 1.51; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-2.28). Finally, 2 other medications, flecainide and amiodarone, were each tested in a single small trial, and their effects were associated with great uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS: Calcium-channel blockers and beta-blockers are effective in reducing postoperative atrial tachyarrhythmia. The use of these medications should be individualized, and possible adverse events of beta-blockers should be taken into account. Randomized clinical trials do not support the use of digitalis in general thoracic surgery. The value of magnesium as a supplement to a main prophylactic regimen should be explored.

Flecainide versus ibutilide for immediate cardioversion of atrial fibrillation of recent onset.

AIMS: This study compared the efficacy and safety of intravenous flecainide and ibutilide for immediate cardioversion of atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a prospective, randomised trial, including 207 patients with AF of recent onset (< or = 48 h). Flecainide was given over 20 min at a dose of 2 mg/kg body weight (maximum 200 mg), ibutilide was infused at a dose of 1 mg (or 0.01 mg/kg if less than 60 kg) over 10 min, followed by a 10 min observation period and an identical second dose if AF did not convert to sinus rhythm (SR). Treatment was considered successful if SR occurred within 90 min of starting medication. The conversion rates were 56.4% in patients given flecainide and 50.0% in patients given ibutilide (P=0.34). Multivariate analysis revealed that a lower age for women independently increased the probability of conversion. None of the other variables, including left atrial size, left ventricular systolic function, presence of left ventricular hypertrophy, plasma levels of potassium or magnesium at baseline, or concomitant use of digoxin, beta-blocker, diltiazem or verapamil were predictors of conversion. The frequency of adverse events was comparable in the two treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in the cardioversion efficacy or in the risk of adverse events between flecainide and ibutilide in patients with AF of recent onset. In patients without contraindications to both medications, the physician's choice has to be governed by other factors.

Clinical and cost comparison of ibutilide and direct-current cardioversion for atrial fibrillation and flutter.

The clinical effectiveness and cost to convert recent-onset atrial fibrillation or flutter to sinus after 3 to 4 weeks of anticoagulation with intravenous ibutilide was compared with direct-current cardioversion. The low success rate with ibutilide made direct-current cardioversion the more clinical and cost-effective method to restore sinus rhythm.

Electrical cardioversion of atrial fibrillation or flutter with conscious sedation in the age of cost containment.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare the safety, efficacy, and cost of conscious sedation administered by electrophysiologists certified in the use of conscious sedation with sedation administered by anesthesiologists during cardioversion of atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter to sinus rhythm. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with hemodynamically stable persistent atrial fibrillation and flutter were included in this study. Group 1 patients (n = 33) were sedated by an anesthesiologist and group 2 patients (n = 26) were sedated by an electrophysiologist. Anesthesiologists used propofol and electrophysiologists used midazolam and morphine for sedation. A cost analysis based on professional charges and cost of medications was performed for both groups and compared. Hospital charges were similar for both groups and were excluded from the cost analysis. Although time to sedation in group 1 was shorter than that in group 2, sedation was adequate in both groups such that no patient in group 1 and only 1 patient in group 2 recalled being shocked. There were no complications in either group. The cost incurred in group 2 was less than that in group 1. CONCLUSIONS: Sedation administered by electrophysiologists for cardioversion of atrial arrhythmias is safe and cost effective. Midazolam and morphine, the sedative agents administered by electrophysiologists, were effective and well tolerated by patients.

Effectiveness and costs of digoxin treatment for atrial fibrillation and flutter.

Clinical outcomes and costs associated with the use of digoxin in atrial fibrillation and flutter were evaluated in a prospective, observational study at 18 academic medical centers in the United States. Data were collected on 115 patients (aged > 18 years) with atrial fibrillation or flutter who were treated with digoxin for rapid ventricular rate (> or = 120 beats/min). The median time to ventricular rate control (i.e., resting ventricular rate < 100 beats/min, decrease in ventricular rate of > 20%, or sinus rhythm) was 11.6 hours from the first dose of digoxin for all evaluable patients (n = 105) and 9.5 hours for those only receiving digoxin (n = 64). Before ventricular rate control, the mean +/- SD dose of digoxin administered was 0.80 +/- 0.74 mg, and a mean of 1.4 +/- 1.8 serum digoxin concentrations were ordered per patient. Concomitant beta-blocker or calcium antagonist therapy was instituted in 47 patients (41%); in 19 of these, combination therapy was initiated within 2 hours. Adenosine was administered to 13 patients (11%). Patients spent a median of 4 days (range 1 to 25) in the hospital; 28% spent time in a coronary/intensive care unit and 79% in a telemetry bed. Loss of control (i.e., resting ventricular rate returned to > 120 beats/min) occurred at least once in 50% of patients and was associated with a longer hospital stay (p < 0.05). Based on 1991 data, the estimated mean hospital bed cost for patients with atrial fibrillation or flutter was $3,169 +/- $3,174.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)