Key result
Electrical cardioversion in the emergency department reduced time to cardioversion (1.03 vs 4.17 days; p<0.001) and hospital stay (1.5 vs 7.2 days; p<0.001) compared to the cardiology ward.
Why the study?
Current literature focuses on cardioversion for AF when patients are unstable, present within 48 hours, or are anticoagulated, leaving ED pathways for AF over 48 hours requiring TEE unevaluated against direct cardiology admission.
Does performing TEE and electrical cardioversion in the emergency department reduce time to cardioversion and length of hospital stay in patients with atrial fibrillation >48 hours compared to the cardiology ward?
Observational (n=151)
Does performing TEE and electrical cardioversion in the emergency department reduce time to cardioversion and length of hospital stay in patients with atrial fibrillation >48 hours compared to the cardiology ward?
Performing TEE-guided electrical cardioversion for atrial fibrillation >48 hours in the emergency department significantly reduces time to cardioversion and hospital length of stay without increasing complications compared to admission to the cardiology ward.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
ED cardioversion pathway shortens time to procedure in AF>48h; hypothesis-generating for adoption pending randomized safety data.
Background: The current emergency medicine literature on cardioversion for atrial fibrillation (AF), describes its performance on those who are hemodynamically unstable, present within 48 hours of the onset of the arrhythmia, or are on long term anticoagulants. This article describes a clinical pathway comparing patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with atrial fibrillation (AF) of more than 48 hours who underwent a transesophageal echocardiogram (TEE) and subsequent cardioversion in the ED. The objective of this study is to evaluate such a pathway looking at the time to cardioversion, length of hospital stay, rate of successful cardioversion, and the rate of complications compared to the traditional pathway of admitting patients directly to the cardiology department for evaluation and treatment. Methods: This was a retrospective observational study of patients who presented to the ED with AF for more than 48 hours, underwent a transesophageal echocardiogram, and then were electrically cardioverted either in the emergency department versus the cardiology ward. Results: Electrical cardioversion was performed in the ED on 92 patients (61%) and the cardiology department on 59 (39%). Over 90% of cardioversions were successful in both groups. Time to cardioversion was significantly less in the ED group versus the cardiology group (1.03 ± 0.8 days versus 4.17 ± 1.9; p<0.001). Similarly, the mean length of hospital stay was less for the ED group (1.5± 1.5 days versus 7.2 ± 3.5; p<0.001). Conclusion: Patients who present in atrial fibrillation for more than 48 hours and then have a TEE, undergo electrical cardioversion faster in the ED compared to the cardiology ward. This clinical pathway also results in a shorter length of hospital stay without having more side effects.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zaro et al. (2021) conducted an observational in Atrial fibrillation >48 hours (n=151). Electrical cardioversion in the emergency department vs. Electrical cardioversion in the cardiology ward was evaluated on Time to cardioversion (days) (p=<0.001). Electrical cardioversion in the emergency department reduced time to cardioversion (1.03 vs 4.17 days; p<0.001) and hospital stay (1.5 vs 7.2 days; p<0.001) compared to the cardiology ward.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: