Comparison of monophasic and biphasic shocks for transthoracic cardioversion of atrial fibrillation
- PMID: 12923020
- PMCID: PMC1767835
- DOI: 10.1136/heart.89.9.1032
Comparison of monophasic and biphasic shocks for transthoracic cardioversion of atrial fibrillation
Abstract
Objective: To compare the efficacy of cardioversion in patients with atrial fibrillation between monophasic damped sine waveform and rectilinear biphasic waveform shocks at a high initial energy level and with a conventional paddle position.
Design: Prospective randomised study.
Patients and setting: 227 patients admitted for cardioversion of atrial fibrillation to a tertiary referral centre.
Results: 70% of 109 patients treated with an initial 200 J monophasic shock were cardioverted to sinus rhythm, compared with 80% of 118 patients treated with an initial 120 J biphasic shock (NS). After the second shock (360 J monophasic or 200 J biphasic), 90% of the patients were in sinus rhythm in both groups. The mean cumulative energy used for successful cardioversion was 306 J for monophasic shocks and 159 J for biphasic shocks (p < 0.001).
Conclusions: A protocol using monophasic waveform shocks in a 200-360 J sequence has the same efficacy (90%) as a protocol using rectilinear biphasic waveform shocks in a 120-200 J sequence. This equal efficacy is achieved with a significantly lower mean delivered energy level using the rectilinear biphasic shock waveform. The potential advantage of lower energy delivery for cardioversion of atrial fibrillation needs further study.
Figures
Comment in
-
Importance of using biphasic shock waveforms for cardioversion from atrial fibrillation: an unresolved issue.Heart. 2004 Oct;90(10):1105-6. doi: 10.1136/hrt.2003.015040. Heart. 2004. PMID: 15367497 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Transthoracic cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: comparison of rectilinear biphasic versus damped sine wave monophasic shocks.Circulation. 2000 Mar 21;101(11):1282-7. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.101.11.1282. Circulation. 2000. PMID: 10725288 Clinical Trial.
-
[Impact of electrical shock waveform and paddle positions on efficacy of direct current cardioversion for atrial fibrillation].Medicina (Kaunas). 2008;44(9):665-72. Medicina (Kaunas). 2008. PMID: 18971603 Clinical Trial. Lithuanian.
-
External cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: comparison of biphasic vs monophasic waveform shocks.Europace. 2001 Apr;3(2):96-9. doi: 10.1053/eupc.2001.0156. Europace. 2001. PMID: 11333061 Clinical Trial.
-
Monophasic and biphasic shock for transthoracic conversion of atrial fibrillation: Systematic review and network meta-analysis.Resuscitation. 2016 Mar;100:66-75. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2015.12.009. Epub 2016 Jan 8. Resuscitation. 2016. PMID: 26777209
-
An update on electrical cardioversion of atrial fibrillation.Card Electrophysiol Rev. 2003 Sep;7(3):285-9. doi: 10.1023/B:CEPR.0000012397.29446.16. Card Electrophysiol Rev. 2003. PMID: 14739729 Review.
Cited by
-
Importance of using biphasic shock waveforms for cardioversion from atrial fibrillation: an unresolved issue.Heart. 2004 Oct;90(10):1105-6. doi: 10.1136/hrt.2003.015040. Heart. 2004. PMID: 15367497 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Simplified cardioversion service with intravenous midazolam.Heart. 2004 Dec;90(12):1447-9. doi: 10.1136/hrt.2003.033050. Heart. 2004. PMID: 15547026 Free PMC article.
-
Absence of Arrhythmogenicity with Biphasic Pulsed Electric Fields Delivered to Porcine Airways.Ann Biomed Eng. 2024 Jan;52(1):1-11. doi: 10.1007/s10439-023-03190-5. Epub 2023 Apr 25. Ann Biomed Eng. 2024. PMID: 37185926 Free PMC article.
-
Trends in the use of electrical cardioversion for atrial fibrillation: influence of major trials and guidelines on clinical practice.BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2012 Jun 18;12:42. doi: 10.1186/1471-2261-12-42. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2012. PMID: 22708978 Free PMC article.
-
Intracardiac atrial defibrillation.Heart Rhythm. 2007 Mar;4(3 Suppl):S51-6. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2006.12.030. Epub 2006 Dec 28. Heart Rhythm. 2007. PMID: 17336885 Free PMC article. Review.
References
-
- Levy S, Breithardt G, Campbell RW, et al. Atrial fibrillation: current knowledge and recommendations for management. Working group on arrhythmias of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 1998;19:1294–320. - PubMed
-
- Mittal S, Ayati S, Stein KM, et al. Transthoracic cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: comparison of rectilinear biphasic versus damped sine wave monophasic shocks. Circulation 2000;101:1282–7. - PubMed
-
- Ricard P, Levy S, Boccara G, et al. External cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: comparison of biphasic vs monophasic waveform shocks. Europace 2001;3:96–9. - PubMed
-
- Ricard P, Levy S, Trigano J, et al. Prospective assessment of the minimum energy needed for external electrical cardioversion of atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol 1997;79:815–16. - PubMed
-
- Fain ES, Sweeney MB, Franz MR. Improved internal defibrillation efficacy with a biphasic waveform. Am Heart J 1989;117:358–64. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous