Key result
A conservative 'rate-and-wait' ED pathway for acute uncomplicated AF/AFL reduced ED cardioversions (3.4% vs 17.6%) and admissions (30.3% vs 43.4%) compared to the pre-pathway cohort.
Why the study?
AF/AFL causes high rates of ED presentations and admissions, but evidence suggests delaying cardioversion for acute uncomplicated AF is safe as many revert spontaneously.
Does a conservative 'rate-and-wait' pathway reduce cardioversions and hospitalisations in patients presenting to the ED with acute uncomplicated AF/AFL?
Cohort (n=360)
No
Does a conservative 'rate-and-wait' pathway reduce cardioversions and hospitalisations in patients presenting to the ED with acute uncomplicated AF/AFL?
Absolute Event Rate: 3.4% vs 17.6%
A conservative 'rate-and-wait' strategy with early follow-up for acute uncomplicated AF/AFL safely reduces unnecessary ED cardioversions and hospital admissions without increasing adverse events.
May support conservative ED AF pathways; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation.
OBJECTIVE: Atrial fibrillation/flutter (AF/AFL) accounts for high rates of ED presentations and hospital admissions. There is increasing evidence to suggest that delaying cardioversion for acute uncomplicated AF is safe, and that many patients will spontaneously revert to sinus rhythm (SR). We conducted a before-and-after evaluation of AF/AFL management after a change in ED pathway using a conservative 'rate-and-wait' approach, incorporating next working day outpatient clinic follow-up and delayed cardioversion if required. METHODS: We performed a before-and-after retrospective cohort study examining outcomes for patients who presented to the ED in Christchurch, New Zealand, with acute uncomplicated AF/AFL in the 1-year period before and after the implementation of a new conservative management pathway. RESULTS: A total of 360 patients were included in the study (182 'Pre-pathway' vs 178 'Post-Pathway'). Compared to the pre-pathway cohort, those managed under the new pathway had an 81.2% reduction in ED cardioversions (n = 32 vs n = 6), and 50.7% reduction in all cardioversions (n = 65 vs n = 32). There was a 31.6% reduction in admissions from ED (n = 54 vs n = 79). ED length of stay (3.9 h vs 3.8 h, net difference -0.1 h, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.6 to 0.3), 1-year ED AF representation (32.4% vs 26.4%, net difference -6.0% [95% CI -16.0% to 3.9%]), 1-year ED ischaemic stroke presentation (2.2% in both groups) and 7-day all-cause mortality rates (hazard ratio 1.05 [95% CI 0.6 to 1.9]) were all similar. CONCLUSIONS: Using a conservative 'rate-and-wait' strategy with early follow-up for patients presenting to ED with AF/AFL can safely reduce unnecessary cardioversions and avoidable hospitalisations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Addy et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Acute uncomplicated atrial fibrillation/flutter (n=360). Conservative 'rate-and-wait' pathway vs. Pre-pathway cohort was evaluated on ED cardioversions. A conservative 'rate-and-wait' ED pathway for acute uncomplicated AF/AFL reduced ED cardioversions (3.4% vs 17.6%) and admissions (30.3% vs 43.4%) compared to the pre-pathway cohort.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: