Approaches to rhythm control: Impact of electrical cardioversion versus pharmacological management on left atrial size and systolic performance in atrial fibrillation and flutter.

Q2 Medicine
Emir Bećirović, Minela Bećirović, Amir Bećirović, Lejla Tupković Rakovac, Amira Jagodić Ejubović, Begajeta Čaušević, Malik Ejubović, Aida Ribić, Lamija Ferhatbegović, Ammar Brkić, Semir Hadžić, Maida Skokić, Emir Begagić
{"title":"Approaches to rhythm control: Impact of electrical cardioversion versus pharmacological management on left atrial size and systolic performance in atrial fibrillation and flutter.","authors":"Emir Bećirović, Minela Bećirović, Amir Bećirović, Lejla Tupković Rakovac, Amira Jagodić Ejubović, Begajeta Čaušević, Malik Ejubović, Aida Ribić, Lamija Ferhatbegović, Ammar Brkić, Semir Hadžić, Maida Skokić, Emir Begagić","doi":"10.17392/1830-22-01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To compare the impact of electrical cardioversion (ECV) and pharmacological cardioversion (PCV) on left atrial size (LA) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), as well as to identify predictors of rhythm disorder recurrence in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) or atrial flutter (AFL).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective observational cohort study was conducted on 105 patients with persistent AF or AFL at the University Clinical Centre Tuzla. The patients were divided into two groups: 53 underwent ECV and 52 received PCV. Demographic and clinical data, including ECG and transthoracic echocardiography, were collected. Follow-up assessments were conducted at 7 days, 1 month, and subsequently every 3 months for a year.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. Recurrence of rhythm disorder within one year was observed in 52.4% of cases, with ECV showing a slightly lower, though not significantly different, primary failure rate at 7 days compared to PCV (13.2% vs. 23.1%). Significant predictors of recurrence included longer duration of disorder (p< 0.001), hypertension (p=0.016), lack of pre-cardioversion amiodarone (p=0.027), and larger LA (p< 0.001). Both ECV and PCV significantly reduced LA over time, with no significant differences in LVEF between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both ECV and PCV are effective in restoring sinus rhythm, with a trend towards lower recurrence in the ECV group. Predictors such as disorder duration, hypertension, lack of pre-cardioversion amiodarone, and LA should be considered when planning cardioversion to optimize patient outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":51129,"journal":{"name":"Medicinski Glasnik","volume":"22 1","pages":"26-32"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicinski Glasnik","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17392/1830-22-01","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: To compare the impact of electrical cardioversion (ECV) and pharmacological cardioversion (PCV) on left atrial size (LA) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), as well as to identify predictors of rhythm disorder recurrence in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) or atrial flutter (AFL).

Methods: A prospective observational cohort study was conducted on 105 patients with persistent AF or AFL at the University Clinical Centre Tuzla. The patients were divided into two groups: 53 underwent ECV and 52 received PCV. Demographic and clinical data, including ECG and transthoracic echocardiography, were collected. Follow-up assessments were conducted at 7 days, 1 month, and subsequently every 3 months for a year.

Results: Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. Recurrence of rhythm disorder within one year was observed in 52.4% of cases, with ECV showing a slightly lower, though not significantly different, primary failure rate at 7 days compared to PCV (13.2% vs. 23.1%). Significant predictors of recurrence included longer duration of disorder (p< 0.001), hypertension (p=0.016), lack of pre-cardioversion amiodarone (p=0.027), and larger LA (p< 0.001). Both ECV and PCV significantly reduced LA over time, with no significant differences in LVEF between groups.

Conclusion: Both ECV and PCV are effective in restoring sinus rhythm, with a trend towards lower recurrence in the ECV group. Predictors such as disorder duration, hypertension, lack of pre-cardioversion amiodarone, and LA should be considered when planning cardioversion to optimize patient outcomes.

心律控制方法:电转复与药物治疗对心房颤动和扑动患者左房大小和收缩性能的影响
目的:比较电复律(ECV)和药理学复律(PCV)对左房大小(LA)和左室射血分数(LVEF)的影响,并确定心房颤动(AF)或心房扑动(AFL)患者心律障碍复发的预测因素。方法:对图兹拉大学临床中心的105例持续性房颤或AFL患者进行前瞻性观察队列研究。患者分为两组:53例接受ECV治疗,52例接受PCV治疗。收集了人口统计学和临床资料,包括心电图和经胸超声心动图。随访时间为第7天、第1个月,随后每3个月随访1年。结果:两组间基线特征相似。52.4%的病例在一年内再次出现节律障碍,与PCV相比,ECV在7天的原发性失败率略低,但没有显著差异(13.2%比23.1%)。复发的重要预测因素包括疾病持续时间较长(p< 0.001)、高血压(p=0.016)、缺乏转复前胺碘酮(p=0.027)和LA较大(p< 0.001)。随着时间的推移,ECV和PCV均显著降低了LA,两组间LVEF无显著差异。结论:ECV组和PCV组均能有效恢复窦性心律,且ECV组复发率较低。在计划复律以优化患者预后时,应考虑诸如疾病持续时间、高血压、缺乏复律前胺碘酮和LA等预测因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Medicinski Glasnik
Medicinski Glasnik 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Medicinski Glasnik (MG) is the official publication (two times per year) of the Medical Association of Zenica-Doboj Canton. Manuscripts that present of original basic and applied research from all fields of medicine (general and clinical practice, and basic medical sciences) are invited.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信