External electrical and pharmacological cardioversion for atrial fibrillation, atrial flutter or atrial tachycardias: a network meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most frequent sustained arrhythmia. Cardioversion is a rhythm control strategy to restore normal/sinus rhythm, and can be achieved through drugs (pharmacological) or a synchronised electric shock (electrical cardioversion). OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of pharmacological and electrical cardioversion for atrial fibrillation (AF), atrial flutter and atrial tachycardias. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (CPCI-S) and three trials registers (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP and ISRCTN) on 14 February 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) at the individual patient level. Patient populations were aged ≥ 18 years with AF of any type and duration, atrial flutter or other sustained related atrial arrhythmias, not occurring as a result of reversible causes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodology to collect data and performed a network meta-analysis using the standard frequentist graph-theoretical approach using the netmeta package in R. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence which we presented in our summary of findings with a judgement on certainty. We calculated differences using risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) as well as ranking treatments using a P value. We assessed clinical and statistical heterogeneity and split the networks for the primary outcome and acute procedural success, due to concerns about violating the transitivity assumption. MAIN RESULTS: We included 112 RCTs (139 records), from which we pooled data from 15,968 patients. The average age ranged from 47 to 72 years and the proportion of male patients ranged from 38% to 92%. Seventy-nine trials were considered to be at high risk of bias for at least one domain, 32 had no high risk of bias domains, but had at least one domain classified as uncertain risk, and one study was considered at low risk for all domains. For paroxysmal AF (35 trials), when compared to placebo, anteroapical (AA)/anteroposterior (AP) biphasic truncated exponential waveform (BTE) cardioversion (RR 2.42; 95% CI 1.65 to 3.56), quinidine (RR 2.23; 95% CI 1.49 to 3.34), ibutilide (RR 2.00; 95% CI 1.28 to 3.12), propafenone (RR 1.98; 95% CI 1.67 to 2.34), amiodarone (RR 1.69; 95% CI 1.42 to 2.02), sotalol (RR 1.58; 95% CI 1.08 to 2.31) and procainamide (RR 1.49; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.97) likely result in a large increase in maintenance of sinus rhythm until hospital discharge or end of study follow-up (certainty of evidence moderate). The effect size was larger for AA/AP incremental and was progressively smaller for the subsequent interventions. Despite low certainty of evidence, antazoline may result in a large increase (RR 28.60; 95% CI 1.77 to 461.30) in this outcome. Similarly, low-certainty evidence suggests a large increase in this outcome for flecainide (RR 2.17; 95% CI 1.68 to 2.79), vernakalant (RR 2.13; 95% CI 1.52 to 2.99), and magnesium (RR 1.73; 95% CI 0.79 to 3.79). For persistent AF (26 trials), one network was created for electrical cardioversion and showed that, when compared to AP BTE incremental energy with patches, AP BTE maximum energy with patches (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.55) likely results in a large increase, and active compression AP BTE incremental energy with patches (RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.131) likely results in an increase in maintenance of sinus rhythm at hospital discharge or end of study follow-up (certainty of evidence high). Use of AP BTE incremental with paddles (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.09; certainty of evidence low) may lead to a slight increase, and AP MDS Incremental paddles (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.05; certainty of evidence low) may lead to a slight decrease in efficacy. On the other hand, AP MDS incremental energy using patches (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.87), AA RBW incremental energy with patches (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.88), AP RBW incremental energy with patches (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.86), AA MDS incremental energy with patches (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.86) and AA MDS incremental energy with paddles (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.83) probably result in a decrease in this outcome when compared to AP BTE incremental energy with patches (certainty of evidence moderate). The network for pharmacological cardioversion showed that bepridil (RR 2.29, 95% CI 1.26 to 4.17) and quindine (RR 1.53, (95% CI 1.01 to 2.32) probably result in a large increase in maintenance of sinus rhythm at hospital discharge or end of study follow-up when compared to amiodarone (certainty of evidence moderate). Dofetilide (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.44), sotalol (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.18), propafenone (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.25) and pilsicainide (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.02 to 7.01) may result in a reduction in this outcome when compared to amiodarone, but the certainty of evidence is low. For atrial flutter (14 trials), a network could be created only for antiarrhythmic drugs. Using placebo as the common comparator, ibutilide (RR 21.45, 95% CI 4.41 to 104.37), propafenone (RR 7.15, 95% CI 1.27 to 40.10), dofetilide (RR 6.43, 95% CI 1.38 to 29.91), and sotalol (RR 6.39, 95% CI 1.03 to 39.78) probably result in a large increase in the maintenance of sinus rhythm at hospital discharge or end of study follow-up (certainty of evidence moderate), and procainamide (RR 4.29, 95% CI 0.63 to 29.03), flecainide (RR 3.57, 95% CI 0.24 to 52.30) and vernakalant (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.05 to 27.37) may result in a large increase in maintenance of sinus rhythm at hospital discharge or end of study follow-up (certainty of evidence low). All tested electrical cardioversion strategies for atrial flutter had very high efficacy (97.9% to 100%). The rate of mortality (14 deaths) and stroke or systemic embolism (3 events) at 30 days was extremely low. Data on quality of life were scarce and of uncertain clinical significance. No information was available regarding heart failure readmissions. Data on duration of hospitalisation was scarce, of low quality, and could not be pooled. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Despite the low quality of evidence, this systematic review provides important information on electrical and pharmacological strategies to help patients and physicians deal with AF and atrial flutter. In the assessment of the patient comorbidity profile, antiarrhythmic drug onset of action and side effect profile versus the need for a physician with experience in sedation, or anaesthetics support for electrical cardioversion are key aspects when choosing the cardioversion method.