Key result
Pharmacologic cardioversion with dofetilide and ibutilide achieved conversion rates of 31% and 29-31% for atrial fibrillation, and 54% and 38-63% for atrial flutter, respectively.
Why the study?
Does pharmacologic cardioversion compared with electrical cardioversion effectively and safely restore sinus rhythm in patients with atrial flutter and fibrillation?
Population
Patients with atrial flutter and fibrillation
Comparison
Pharmacologic cardioversion vs Electrical cardioversion
Design
Review
Authors
Loading...
May support pharmacologic cardioversion options in select AF/AFL cases; leaves open randomized comparisons to electrical cardioversion.
Does pharmacologic cardioversion compared with electrical cardioversion effectively and safely restore sinus rhythm in patients with atrial flutter and fibrillation?
Pharmacologic cardioversion with pure class III agents like dofetilide and ibutilide offers an alternative to electrical cardioversion for restoring sinus rhythm in atrial fibrillation and flutter, though proarrhythmia remains a significant risk.
Gallik et al. (1997) conducted a review in Atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter. Pharmacologic cardioversion (dofetilide, ibutilide) vs. Electrical cardioversion was evaluated on Conversion to sinus rhythm. Pharmacologic cardioversion with dofetilide and ibutilide achieved conversion rates of 31% and 29-31% for atrial fibrillation, and 54% and 38-63% for atrial flutter, respectively.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: