ArticleJournal of arrhythmia2026
Predictors and Outcomes of Pharmacological and Electrical Cardioversion for Atrial Fibrillation and Flutter in an Indian Emergency Department: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Journal of arrhythmia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cardioversion is widely used to restore sinus rhythm in atrial fibrillation (AF) and atrial flutter (AFL), yet real-world outcomes and predictors of success remain underexplored in populations with high rheumatic disease burden. The aim was to evaluate the success rate, in-hospital complications, and predictors of cardioversion among patients presenting with AF or AFL in the emergency department. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 324 patients who underwent cardioversion between December 2021 and March 2025. Demographic, clinical, and echocardiographic data were extracted. Outcomes assessed included cardioversion success and in-hospital complications. Logistic regression identified independent predictors of success. Results: Of 324 patients (median age 57 years; 61.4% male), 80.9% had AF and 19.1% had AFL; 57.1% had persistent arrhythmia and 31.5% had rheumatic heart disease. Overall, 68.2% achieved successful cardioversion. Success differed by strategy: electrical cardioversion (ECV) 94.3%, pharmacological cardioversion (PCV) 40.9%, and mixed 74.3%. Complications occurred in 4.9%, and in-hospital death occurred in 0.6%. In multivariable analysis, PCV (aOR 9.84; Conclusion: In a real world with a high rheumatic disease burden, cardioversion achieved a two-thirds success rate with a modest complication rate. ECV was most effective, and specific clinical predictors, including cardioversion strategy, medication use, and electrophysiologist involvement, were associated with outcomes. These findings provide actionable insights for optimizing acute rhythm-control strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.