New concepts in atrial defibrillation

Increase in QT/QTc dispersion after low energy cardioversion of chronic persistent atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

The effects of atrial internal cardioversion on QT interval and QT dispersion (parameters associated with increased risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmias) are unknown. We investigated changes in QT interval, QTc and QT dispersion immediately after shock delivery for internal cardioversion in patients with chronic persistent atrial fibrillation.

METHOD

Twenty-two patients with chronic persistent atrial fibrillation (mean duration, 17+/-23 months) underwent transvenous low-energy internal atrial cardioversion with a step-up protocol of shocks delivered between catheters in the right atrium and coronary sinus. (successful shock, 7.2+/-4.2 J). RR interval, QT interval, QTc interval, QT dispersion, and QTc dispersion were all measured on three consecutive beats (at 75 mm/s on at least 9 of 12 leads) and then averaged both before and after (1) the last unsuccessful shock, and (2) sinus rhythm restoration.

RESULTS

All parameters remained similar in the minute before and after the last unsuccessful shock. At 1 min after the successful shock, abrupt increases in QT dispersion (+43.8% vs. pre-shock; P<0.001 at least significant difference analysis) and QTc dispersion (+30.0%; P<0.05) were observed, followed by a gradual return to pre-shock values at 15 min.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings strongly suggest the likely existence of a brief period of increased electrical vulnerability immediately after restoration of sinus rhythm by internal cardioversion. Particular caution should therefore be applied whenever class III antiarrhythmic drugs are administered immediately after successful internal atrial cardioversion.

Transvenous internal cardioversion for atrial fibrillation: a randomized comparison between catheters with different coil length

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of 2 different right atrial electrode coil lengths on energy and voltage requirements for transvenous atrial cardioversion.

METHODS

Twenty-six patients (mean age 61 +/- 11 years) with chronic persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) (mean duration 11 +/- 10 months) underwent transvenous cardioversion. A 6F catheter with a 5.5-cm coil was positioned in the coronary sinus. Another catheter with either a 5.5-cm or an 8-cm coil was positioned along the lateral wall of the right atrium, according to a randomized allocation. R wave-synchronized biphasic shocks were delivered according to a step-up protocol. After cardioversion of baseline AF, AF was reinduced, the right atrial catheter was substituted, and cardioversion was repeated with the alternative right atrial coil.

RESULTS

Successful cardioversion was obtained in all of the patients. Leading edge voltage of effective shocks was significantly lower when catheters with an 8-cm coil in right atrium were used compared with the alternative 5-cm coil catheters (301 +/- 80 volts vs 340 +/- 78 volts, P <.001), and delivered energy (6.75 +/- 4.25 joules vs 7.86 +/- 4.29 joules, P =.043) and shock impedance (60 +/- 9 ohm vs 66 +/- 10 ohm, P <.001) were lower. Moreover, shock-induced discomfort, evaluated by assessment of pain score, was reduced (3.69 +/- 1.09 vs 4.12 +/- 0.99, P =.035).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a longer right atrial coil results in lower shock impedance, lower energy and voltage requirements, and lower discomfort during transvenous atrial cardioversion. The results of the current study are of value either for transvenous internal cardioversion of chronic persistent AF or for implantable atrial defibrillators.

Current clinical perspectives on implantable devices for atrial defibrillation

The role of devices that deliver shock therapy for atrial fibrillation is still debated. Following technical improvements in catheter-based atrial defibrillation, implantable devices have become available either in the form of stand-alone atrial defibrillators or in the form of dual defibrillators. Although preliminary results do not support their use as a single, unique treatment for atrial fibrillation patients, in combination with drugs, pacing or other treatments such as ablation, atrial defibrillators should help appropriately selected groups of patients.