Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 20, 2026

Catheter Ablation in Combination With Left Atrial Appendage Closure for Atrial Fibrillation
Published on: February 26, 2013
Biphasic versus monophasic cardioversion in shock-resistant atrial fibrillation:
Yaariv Khaykin1, David Newman, Marnie Kowalewski
1Terrence Donnelly Heart Center, Department of Medicine, St Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Insights
Biphasic cardioversion is significantly more effective than monophasic cardioversion for treating atrial fibrillation, especially in patients resistant to initial monophasic shocks. This study recommends biphasic shocks as the preferred method for cardioversion due to higher success rates.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Electrophysiology
Background:
- Monophasic transthoracic shocks for atrial fibrillation cardioversion can be ineffective.
- Biphasic cardioversion uses less energy but its efficacy in refractory cases is not well-established.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the efficacy of biphasic versus monophasic waveform shocks in patients with atrial fibrillation previously refractory to monophasic cardioversion.
- To determine if biphasic shocks offer improved success rates in difficult-to-treat atrial fibrillation cases.
Main Methods:
- A randomized trial involving 56 patients with prior failed monophasic cardioversion.
- Patients received either 360-J monophasic shocks or escalating biphasic shocks (150 J, 200 J, 360 J).
- Cross-over design was implemented if initial therapy failed; logistic regression analyzed predictors of success.
Main Results:
- Biphasic shocks restored sinus rhythm in 61% of patients compared to 18% with monophasic shocks (P=0.001).
- Cross-over to biphasic shocks after monophasic failure yielded 78% success, versus 33% for monophasic after biphasic failure (P=0.02).
- Overall, 69% of patients receiving any biphasic shock were successfully cardioverted versus 21% with monophasic shocks (P<0.0001).
Conclusions:
- Ascending biphasic shocks (150-360 J) are more successful than a single 360-J monophasic shock for cardioversion.
- Biphasic shocks are recommended as the configuration of choice for all cardioversions due to superior efficacy.
Unlabelled:
Biphasic versus Monophasic Cardioversion.
Introduction:
Cardioversion of atrial fibrillation using monophasic transthoracic shocks occasionally is ineffective. Biphasic cardioversion requires less energy than monophasic cardioversion, but its efficacy in shock-resistant atrial fibrillation is unknown. Thus, we compared the efficacy of cardioversion using biphasic versus monophasic waveform shocks in patients with atrial fibrillation previously refractory to monophasic cardioversion.
Methods And Results:
Fifty-six patients with prior failed monophasic cardioversion were randomized to either a 360-J monophasic damped sinusoidal shock or biphasic truncated exponential shocks at 150 J, followed by 200 J and then 360 J, if necessary. If either waveform failed, patients were crossed over to the other waveform. The primary endpoint was defined as the proportion of patients achieving sinus rhythm following initial randomized therapy. Stepwise multivariate logistic regression examined independent predictors of shock success, including patient age, sex, left atrial diameter, body mass index, drug therapy, and waveform. Twenty-eight patients were randomized to the biphasic shocks and 28 to the monophasic shocks. Sinus rhythm was restored in 61% of patients with biphasic versus 18% with monophasic shocks (P = 0.001). Seventy-eight percent success was achieved in patients who crossed over to the biphasic shock after failing monophasic cardioversion, whereas only 33% were successfully cardioverted with a monophasic shock after crossover from biphasic shock (P = 0.02). Overall, 69% of patients who received a biphasic shock at any point in the protocol were cardioverted successfully, compared to 21% with the monophasic shock (P < 0.0001). The type of shock was the strongest predictor of shock success (P = 0.0001) in multivariate logistic regression.
Conclusion:
An ascending sequence of 150-, 200-, and 360-J transthoracic biphasic cardioversion shocks are successful more often than a single 360-J monophasic shock. Thus, biphasic shocks should be the recommended configuration of choice for all cardioversions.
More Related Videos
08:00Reduction of Iatrogenic Atrial Septal Defects with an Anterior and Inferior Transseptal Puncture Site when Operating the Cryoballoon Ablation Catheter
Published on: June 15, 2015
10:46Non-fluoroscopic Catheter Tracking for Fluoroscopy Reduction in Interventional Electrophysiology
Published on: May 26, 2015
Related Concept Videos
ECG Interpretation of Arrhythmias II: Atrial, Junctional and Ventricular Arrhythmias
Dysrhythmias VI: Management of Dysrhythmias
Disturbances in Heart Rhythm
Arrhythmias are categorized by their speed, rhythm, and origin. A slow heart...
Dysrhythmias IV: Characteristics of Bradyarrhythmias
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation III: AED Use
Dysrhythmias III: Characteristics of Dysrhythmias