Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35743443›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2022

How to Optimize Cardioversion of Atrial Fibrillation.

K E Juhani Airaksinen

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

K E Juhani AiraksinenHeart Center, Turku University Hospital and University of Turku, 20521 Turku, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-0193-568X
University of Turku · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cardioversion (CV) is an essential component of rhythm control strategy in the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). Timing of CV is an important manageable factor in optimizing the safety and efficacy of CV. Based on observational studies, the success rate of CV seems to be best (≈95%) at 12−48 h after the onset of arrhythmic symptoms compared with a lower success rate of ≈85% in later elective CV. Early AF recurrences are also less common after acute CV compared with later elective CV. CV causes a temporary increase in the risk of thromboembolic complications. Effective anticoagulation reduces this risk, especially during the first 2 weeks after successful CV. However, even during therapeutic anticoagulation, each elective CV increases the risk of stroke 4-fold (0.4% vs. 0.1%) during the first month after the procedure, compared with acute (<48 h) CV or avoiding CV. Spontaneous CVs are common during the early hours of AF. The short wait-and-see approach, up to 24−48 h, is a reasonable option for otherwise healthy but mildly symptomatic patients who are using therapeutic anticoagulation, since they are most likely to have spontaneous rhythm conversion and have no need for active CV. The probability of early treatment failure and antiarrhythmic treatment options should be evaluated before proceeding to CV to avoid the risks of futile CVs.

Indexed as

antiarrhythmic drugsanticoagulationatrial fibrillationcardioversionrhythm controlstrokethromboembolic complication

Identifiers

PMID35743443
PMCPMC9225082
OpenAlexW4282541544

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.