Key result
Enoxaparin for TEE-guided cardioversion reduced median length of stay (3 vs. 4 days; P<0.0001) and increased normal sinus rhythm at 5 weeks (76% vs. 57%; P=0.013) compared to unfractionated heparin.
Why the study?
Does enoxaparin improve safety and efficacy compared to unfractionated heparin in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing TEE-guided cardioversion?
RCT (n=155)
Randomized
Yes
Does enoxaparin improve safety and efficacy compared to unfractionated heparin in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing TEE-guided cardioversion?
Absolute Event Rate: 76% vs 57%
p-value: p=0.013
Enoxaparin is a safe and effective alternative to unfractionated heparin for TEE-guided cardioversion in atrial fibrillation, offering a shorter length of stay and potentially higher rates of normal sinus rhythm at 5 weeks.
Supports enoxaparin over unfractionated heparin for TEE-guided cardioversion; extends RCT evidence for LMWH in atrial fibrillation.
AIMS: To compare the feasibility and safety of transoesophageal echocardiograpy-guided cardioversion (CV) with enoxaparin and unfractionated heparin (UFH) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS AND RESULTS: The Assessment of Cardioversion Using Transoesophageal Echocardiography (ACUTE) II pilot trial compared the safety and efficacy of enoxaparin with UFH in 155 patients with AF who were scheduled for transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE)-guided CV. Safety outcomes over a 5-week period were ischaemic stroke, major or minor bleeding, and death. Efficacy outcomes were length of stay (LOS) and return to normal sinus rhythm (NSR). Of the 76 patients assigned to the enoxaparin group, 72 (94.7%) had a transoesophageal echocardiogram and 63 (82.9%) had early CV, of which 59 (93.7%) were successful. Of the 79 UFH patients, 66 (83.5%) had a transoesophageal echocardiogram and 58 (73.4%) had early CV, of which 54 (98.2%) were successful. There were no significant differences in embolic events, bleeding, or deaths between groups. The enoxaparin group had shorter median LOS compared with the UFH group [3(2-4) vs. 4(3-5)] days; P<0.0001). There was also more NSR at 5 weeks in the enoxaparin group (76 vs. 57%; P=0.013). CONCLUSION: In the ACUTE II trial, there were no differences in safety outcomes between the two strategies. However, the enoxaparin group had a shorter LOS. Thus, the TEE-guided enoxaparin strategy may be considered a safe and effective alternative strategy for AF. The shorter LOS may translate to lower costs using the enoxaparin TEE-guided approach.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Klein et al. (2006) conducted an RCT in Atrial fibrillation (n=155). Enoxaparin vs. Unfractionated heparin (UFH) was evaluated on Return to normal sinus rhythm at 5 weeks (p=0.013). Enoxaparin for TEE-guided cardioversion reduced median length of stay (3 vs. 4 days; P<0.0001) and increased normal sinus rhythm at 5 weeks (76% vs. 57%; P=0.013) compared to unfractionated heparin.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: