A Randomized Comparison of Delivered Energy in Cardioversion of Atrial Fibrillation: Biphasic Truncated Exponential Versus Pulsed Biphasic Waveforms

被引:2
作者
Trendafilova, Elina [1 ]
Dimitrova, Elena [1 ]
Didon, Jean-Philippe [2 ]
Krasteva, Vessela [3 ]
机构
[1] Natl Cardiol Hosp, Cardiol Clin, Intens Cardiol Care Unit, 65 Konyovitza Str, Sofia 1309, Bulgaria
[2] Schiller Med SAS, 4 Rue L Pasteur, F-67160 Wissembourg, France
[3] Bulgarian Acad Sci, Inst Biophys & Biomed Engn, Acad G Bonchev Str Bl 105, Sofia 1113, Bulgaria
关键词
biphasic waveform defibrillation; atrial fibrillation; cardioversion; delivered energy; efficacy; safety; high-sensitivity troponin; TRANSTHORACIC CARDIOVERSION; EXTERNAL DEFIBRILLATORS; MONOPHASIC SHOCK; CONVERSION; EFFICACY; SAFETY;
D O I
10.3390/diagnostics11061107
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
A few randomized trials have compared impedance-compensated biphasic defibrillators in clinical use. We aim to compare pulsed biphasic (PB) and biphasic truncated exponential (BTE) waveforms in a non-inferiority cardioversion (CVS) study. This was a prospective monocentric randomized clinical trial. Eligible patients admitted for elective CVS of atrial fibrillation (AF) between February 2019 and March 2020 were alternately randomized to treatment with either a PB defibrillator (DEFIGARD TOUCH7, Schiller Medical, Wissembourg, France) or a BTE high-energy (BTE-HE) defibrillator (LIFEPAK15, Physio-Control Inc., Redmond, WA, USA). Fixed-energy protocol (200-200-200 J) was administered. CVS success was accepted if sinus rhythm was restored at 1 min post-shock. The study design considered non-inferiority testing of the primary outcome: cumulative delivered energy (CDE). Seventy-three out of 78 randomized patients received allocated intervention: 38 BTE-HE (52%), 35 PB (48%). Baseline characteristics were well-balanced between groups (p > 0.05). Both waveforms had similar CDE (mean +/- standard deviation, 95% confidence interval): BTE-HE (253.9 +/- 120.2 J, 214-293 J) vs. PB (226.0 +/- 109.8 J, 188-264 J), p = 0.31. Indeed, effective PB shocks delivered significantly lower energies by mean of 25.6 J (95% CI 24-27.1 J, p < 0.001). Success rates were similar (BTE-HE vs. PB): 1 min first-shock (84.2% vs. 82.9%), 1 min CVS (97.4% vs. 94.3%), 2 h CVS (94.7% vs. 94.3%), 24 h CVS (92.1% vs. 94.3%), p > 0.05. Safety analysis did not find CVS hazards, reporting insignificant changes of myocardial-specific biomarkers, transient and rare ST-segment deviations, and no case of harmful tachyarrhythmias and apnea. Cardioversion of AF with fixed-energy protocol 200-200-200 J was highly efficient and safe for both PB and BTE-HE waveforms. These similar performances were achieved despite differences in the waveforms' technical design, associated with significantly lower delivered energy for the effective PB shocks. Clinical Trial Registration: Registration number: NCT04032678, trial register: ClinicalTrials.gov.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [11] Comparing the efficacy and safety of a novel monophasic waveform delivered by the passive implantable atrial defibrillator with biphasic waveforms in cardioversion of atrial fibrillation
    Manoharan, G
    Evans, N
    Allen, D
    Anderson, J
    Adgey, J
    [J]. CIRCULATION, 2004, 109 (13) : 1686 - 1692
  • [12] Transthoracic cardioversion of atrial fibrillation - Comparison of rectilinear biphasic versus damped sine wave monophasic shocks
    Mittal, S
    Ayati, S
    Stein, KM
    Schwartzman, D
    Cavlovich, D
    Tchou, PJ
    Markowitz, SM
    Slotwiner, DJ
    Scheiner, MA
    Lerman, BB
    [J]. CIRCULATION, 2000, 101 (11) : 1282 - 1287
  • [13] Novel rectangular biphasic and monophasic waveforms delivered by a radiofrequency-powered defibrillator compared with conventional capacitor-based waveforms in transvenous cardioversion of atrial fibrillation
    Walsh, Simon J.
    Manoharan, Ganesh
    Escalona, Omar J.
    Santos, Jose
    Evans, Noel
    Anderson, John McC
    Stevenson, Mike
    Allen, J. Desmond
    Adgey, A. A. Jennifer
    [J]. EUROPACE, 2006, 8 (10): : 873 - 880
  • [14] Atrial Burst Pacing with Biphasic and Monophasic Waveforms for Atrial Fibrillation
    Barsheshet, Alon
    Wakslak, Menachem
    Mower, Morton M.
    Goldenberg, Ilan
    Hall, Burr
    [J]. ANNALS OF NONINVASIVE ELECTROCARDIOLOGY, 2012, 17 (01) : 22 - 27
  • [15] External cardioversion of atrial fibrillation:: comparison of biphasic vs monophasic waveform shocks
    Ricard, P
    Lévy, S
    Boccara, G
    Lakhal, E
    Bardy, G
    [J]. EUROPACE, 2001, 3 (02): : 96 - 99
  • [16] Biphasic versus monophasic shock for external cardioversion of atrial flutter
    Mortensen, Kai
    Risius, Tim
    Schwemer, Tjark F.
    Aydin, Muhammet Ali
    Koester, Ralf
    Klemm, Hanno U.
    Lutomsky, Boris
    Meinertz, Thomas
    Ventura, Rodolfo
    Willems, Stephan
    [J]. CARDIOLOGY, 2008, 111 (01) : 57 - 62
  • [17] External versus internal cardioversion for atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Aggarwal, Gaurav
    Anantha-Narayanan, Mahesh
    Robles, Julian
    Bandyopadhyay, Dhrubajyoti
    Abed, Mary
    Henry, Brandon Michael
    Aggarwal, Saurabh
    Alla, Venkata
    [J]. JOURNAL OF INTERVENTIONAL CARDIAC ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY, 2021, 61 (03) : 445 - 451
  • [18] Internal Cardioversion of Persistent Atrial Fibrillation Using Rectilinear Biphasic Waveform
    Georges H. Mairesse
    Monique Raepers
    Isabelle Legrand
    Imad Baroud
    Yvon Deheneffe
    Michel Emonts
    Jean-Louis Paquay
    Kamal Mitri
    [J]. Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology, 2003, 9 : 371 - 375
  • [19] Internal cardioversion of persistent atrial fibrillation using rectilinear biphasic waveform
    Mairesse, GH
    Raepers, M
    Legrand, I
    Baroud, I
    Deheneffe, Y
    Emonts, M
    Paquay, JL
    Mitri, K
    [J]. JOURNAL OF INTERVENTIONAL CARDIAC ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY, 2003, 9 (03) : 371 - 375
  • [20] Biphasic low energy internal cardioversion of atrial fibrillation induced during electrophysiologic study
    Karmelic, CF
    Cambón, AM
    González, R
    [J]. REVISTA ESPANOLA DE CARDIOLOGIA, 2000, 53 (03): : 337 - 343