OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinical outcomes of patients who underwent cardioversion compared with those who did not have cardioverson in a large dataset of patients with recent onset non-valvular atrial fibrillation. DESIGN: Observational study using prospectively collected registry data (Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-AF-GARFIELD-AF). SETTING: 1317 participating sites in 35 countries. PARTICIPANTS: 52 057 patients aged 18 years and older with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation (up to six weeks' duration) and at least one investigator determined stroke risk factor. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Comparisons were made between patients who received cardioversion and those who had no cardioversion at baseline, and between patients who received direct current cardioversion and those who had pharmacological cardioversion. Overlap propensity weighting with Cox proportional hazards models was used to evaluate the effect of cardioversion on clinical endpoints (all cause mortality, non-haemorrhagic stroke or systemic embolism, and major bleeding), adjusting for baseline risk and patient selection. RESULTS: 44 201 patients were included in the analysis comparing cardioversion and no cardioversion, and of these, 6595 (14.9%) underwent cardioversion at baseline. The propensity score weighted hazard ratio for all cause mortality in the cardioversion group was 0.74 (95% confidence interval 0.63 to 0.86) from baseline to one year follow-up and 0.77 (0.64 to 0.93) from one year to two year follow-up. Of the 6595 patients who had cardioversion at baseline, 299 had a follow-up cardioversion more than 48 days after enrolment. 7175 patients were assessed in the analysis comparing type of cardioversion: 2427 (33.8%) received pharmacological cardioversion and 4748 (66.2%) had direct current cardioversion. During one year follow-up, event rates (per 100 patient years) for all cause mortality in patients who received direct current and pharmacological cardioversion were 1.36 (1.13 to 1.64) and 1.70 (1.35 to 2.14), respectively. CONCLUSION: In this large dataset of patients with recent onset non-valvular atrial fibrillation, a small proportion were treated with cardioversion. Direct current cardioversion was performed twice as often as pharmacological cardioversion, and there appeared to be no major difference in outcome events for these two cardioversion modalities. For the overall cardioversion group, after adjustments for confounders, a significantly lower risk of mortality was found in patients who received early cardioversion compared with those who did not receive early cardioversion. STUDY REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01090362.

Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology Centre IRCCS MultiMedica Group Sesto San Giovanni Milan Italy

Cardiology Clinical Academic Group Molecular and Clinical Sciences Research Institute St George's University of London London UK

Cardiology Department G B Grassi Hospital Rome Italy

Department of Cardiology Georges Pompidou Hospital René Descartes University Paris France

Department of Cardiology Oslo University Hospital Ullevål Oslo Norway

Department of Cardiovascular Surgery Motol University Hospital Prague Czech Republic

Hamar Hospital Innlandet Hospital Trust Hamar Norway

Institute of Clinical Medicine University of Oslo Oslo Norway

School of Medicine University of Zagreb Zagreb Croatia

Thrombosis Research Institute London UK

Warwick Medical School University of Warwick Medical School Coventry UK

See more in PubMed

Zhang YY, Qiu C, Davis PJ, et al. . Predictors of progression of recently diagnosed atrial fibrillation in REgistry on Cardiac Rhythm DisORDers Assessing the Control of Atrial Fibrillation (RecordAF)-United States cohort. Am J Cardiol 2013;112:79-84. 10.1016/j.amjcard.2013.02.056 PubMed DOI

Nattel S, Burstein B, Dobrev D. Atrial remodeling and atrial fibrillation: mechanisms and implications. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2008;1:62-73. 10.1161/CIRCEP.107.754564 PubMed DOI

Al-Khatib SM, Allen LaPointe NM, Chatterjee R, et al. . Rate- and rhythm-control therapies in patients with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med 2014;160:760-73. 10.7326/M13-1467 PubMed DOI

Chatterjee S, Sardar P, Lichstein E, Mukherjee D, Aikat S. Pharmacologic rate versus rhythm-control strategies in atrial fibrillation: an updated comprehensive review and meta-analysis. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2013;36:122-33. 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2012.03513.x PubMed DOI

de Denus S, Sanoski CA, Carlsson J, Opolski G, Spinler SA. Rate vs rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis. Arch Intern Med 2005;165:258-62. 10.1001/archinte.165.3.258 PubMed DOI

Roy D, Talajic M, Nattel S, et al. Atrial Fibrillation and Congestive Heart Failure Investigators . Rhythm control versus rate control for atrial fibrillation and heart failure. N Engl J Med 2008;358:2667-77. 10.1056/NEJMoa0708789 PubMed DOI

Wyse DG, Waldo AL, DiMarco JP, et al. Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) Investigators . A comparison of rate control and rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2002;347:1825-33. 10.1056/NEJMoa021328 PubMed DOI

Van Gelder IC, Hagens VE, Bosker HA, et al. Rate Control versus Electrical Cardioversion for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation Study Group . A comparison of rate control and rhythm control in patients with recurrent persistent atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2002;347:1834-40. 10.1056/NEJMoa021375 PubMed DOI

Kotecha D, Kirchhof P. Rate and rhythm control have comparable effects on mortality and stroke in atrial fibrillation but better data are needed. Evid Based Med 2014;19:222-3. 10.1136/ebmed-2014-110062 PubMed DOI

January CT, Wann LS, Alpert JS, et al. American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines . 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS guideline for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;64:e1-76. 10.1016/j.jacc.2014.03.022 PubMed DOI

Hindricks G, Potpara T, Dagres N, et al. ESC Scientific Document Group . 2020 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS): The Task Force for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Developed with the special contribution of the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J 2021;42:373-498. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa612. PubMed DOI

Kirchhof P, Camm AJ, Goette A, et al. EAST-AFNET 4 Trial Investigators . Early Rhythm-Control Therapy in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2020;383:1305-16. 10.1056/NEJMoa2019422 PubMed DOI

Kakkar AK, Mueller I, Bassand JP, et al. . International longitudinal registry of patients with atrial fibrillation at risk of stroke: Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD (GARFIELD). Am Heart J 2012;163:13-19.e1. 10.1016/j.ahj.2011.09.011 PubMed DOI

Kakkar AK, Mueller I, Bassand JP, et al. GARFIELD Registry Investigators . Risk profiles and antithrombotic treatment of patients newly diagnosed with atrial fibrillation at risk of stroke: perspectives from the international, observational, prospective GARFIELD registry. PLoS One 2013;8:e63479. 10.1371/journal.pone.0063479 PubMed DOI PMC

Fox KAA, Gersh BJ, Traore S, et al. GARFIELD-AF Investigators . Evolving quality standards for large-scale registries: the GARFIELD-AF experience. Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes 2017;3:114-22. 10.1093/ehjqcco/qcw058. PubMed DOI

Fox KAA, Lucas JE, Pieper KS, et al. GARFIELD-AF Investigators . Improved risk stratification of patients with atrial fibrillation: an integrated GARFIELD-AF tool for the prediction of mortality, stroke and bleed in patients with and without anticoagulation. BMJ Open 2017;7:e017157. 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017157 PubMed DOI PMC

Lip GY, Nieuwlaat R, Pisters R, Lane DA, Crijns HJ. Refining clinical risk stratification for predicting stroke and thromboembolism in atrial fibrillation using a novel risk factor-based approach: the euro heart survey on atrial fibrillation. Chest 2010;137:263-72. 10.1378/chest.09-1584 PubMed DOI

Li F, Thomas LE, Li F. Addressing Extreme Propensity Scores via the Overlap Weights. Am J Epidemiol 2019;188:250-7. 10.1093/aje/kwy201. PubMed DOI

Kirchhof P, Bax J, Blomstrom-Lundquist C, et al. . Early and comprehensive management of atrial fibrillation: executive summary of the proceedings from the 2nd AFNET-EHRA consensus conference ‘research perspectives in AF’. Eur Heart J 2009;30:2969-77c. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehp235 PubMed DOI

Van Gelder IC, Haegeli LM, Brandes A, et al. . Rationale and current perspective for early rhythm control therapy in atrial fibrillation. Europace 2011;13:1517-25. 10.1093/europace/eur192 PubMed DOI PMC

Cosio FG, Aliot E, Botto GL, et al. . Delayed rhythm control of atrial fibrillation may be a cause of failure to prevent recurrences: reasons for change to active antiarrhythmic treatment at the time of the first detected episode. Europace 2008;10:21-7. 10.1093/europace/eum276 PubMed DOI

Naccarelli GV, Dell’Orfano JT, Wolbrette DL, Patel HM, Luck JC. Cost-effective management of acute atrial fibrillation: role of rate control, spontaneous conversion, medical and direct current cardioversion, transesophageal echocardiography, and antiembolic therapy. Am J Cardiol 2000;85(10a):36D-45D. 10.1016/S0002-9149(00)00905-X PubMed DOI

Gallagher MM, Guo XH, Poloniecki JD, Guan Yap Y, Ward D, Camm AJ. Initial energy setting, outcome and efficiency in direct current cardioversion of atrial fibrillation and flutter. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;38:1498-504. 10.1016/S0735-1097(01)01540-6 PubMed DOI

Elhendy A, Gentile F, Khandheria BK, et al. . Predictors of unsuccessful electrical cardioversion in atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol 2002;89:83-6. 10.1016/S0002-9149(01)02172-5 PubMed DOI

Hagens VE, Ranchor AV, Van Sonderen E, et al. RACE Study Group . Effect of rate or rhythm control on quality of life in persistent atrial fibrillation. Results from the Rate Control Versus Electrical Cardioversion (RACE) Study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;43:241-7. 10.1016/j.jacc.2003.08.037 PubMed DOI

Singh BN, Singh SN, Reda DJ, et al. Sotalol Amiodarone Atrial Fibrillation Efficacy Trial (SAFE-T) Investigators . Amiodarone versus sotalol for atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2005;352:1861-72. 10.1056/NEJMoa041705 PubMed DOI

Dankner R, Shahar A, Novikov I, Agmon U, Ziv A, Hod H. Treatment of stable atrial fibrillation in the emergency department: a population-based comparison of electrical direct-current versus pharmacological cardioversion or conservative management. Cardiology 2009;112:270-8. 10.1159/000151703 PubMed DOI

Gitt AK, Smolka W, Michailov G, Bernhardt A, Pittrow D, Lewalter T. Types and outcomes of cardioversion in patients admitted to hospital for atrial fibrillation: results of the German RHYTHM-AF Study. Clin Res Cardiol 2013;102:713-23. 10.1007/s00392-013-0586-x PubMed DOI

Crijns HJ, Weijs B, Fairley AM, et al. . Contemporary real life cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: Results from the multinational RHYTHM-AF study. Int J Cardiol 2014;172:588-94. 10.1016/j.ijcard.2014.01.099 PubMed DOI

Chevalier P, Durand-Dubief A, Burri H, Cucherat M, Kirkorian G, Touboul P. Amiodarone versus placebo and class Ic drugs for cardioversion of recent-onset atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;41:255-62. 10.1016/S0735-1097(02)02705-5 PubMed DOI

Camm AJ, Capucci A, Hohnloser SH, et al. AVRO Investigators . A randomized active-controlled study comparing the efficacy and safety of vernakalant to amiodarone in recent-onset atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011;57:313-21. 10.1016/j.jacc.2010.07.046 PubMed DOI

Packer DL, Mark DB, Robb RA, et al. CABANA Investigators . Effect of Catheter Ablation vs Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy on Mortality, Stroke, Bleeding, and Cardiac Arrest Among Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: The CABANA Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA 2019;321:1261-74. 10.1001/jama.2019.0693 PubMed DOI PMC

Rhythm versus rate control in patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation - Observations from the GARFIELD-AF registry

See more in PubMed

ClinicalTrials.gov
NCT01090362