Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 10, 2025

Catheter Ablation in Combination With Left Atrial Appendage Closure for Atrial Fibrillation
Published on: February 26, 2013
Electric Cardioversion vs. Pharmacological with or without Electric Cardioversion for Stable New-Onset Atrial
Paritosh Prasai1, Dhan Bahadur Shrestha2, Eltaib Saad1
1Department of Internal Medicine, Ascension Health St. Francis Hospital, Evanston, IL 60202, USA.
Pharmacological cardioversion and electrical cardioversion show similar success rates for new-onset atrial fibrillation. This meta-analysis found no significant differences in outcomes for stable patients, with electrical cardioversion having lower hypotension rates.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Emergency Medicine
- Clinical Research
Background:
- Lack of consensus exists regarding the preferred cardioversion method for hemodynamically stable new-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) patients in the emergency department (ED).
- Pharmacological cardioversion (PC) and electrical cardioversion (EC) are both utilized, necessitating a comparative analysis.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the efficacy and safety of pharmacological cardioversion (PC) versus electrical cardioversion (EC) for hemodynamically stable new-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) patients.
- To evaluate successful restoration of sinus rhythm and secondary outcomes including revisits, readmissions, length of stay, and adverse events.
Main Methods:
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies published up to March 7, 2022.
- Searched PubMed, PubMed Central, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane databases.
- Primary outcome: successful sinus rhythm restoration; Secondary outcomes: ED revisits, hospital readmissions, length of stay, adverse events.
Main Results:
- No significant difference in successful sinus rhythm restoration rates between PC and EC (88.66% vs. 85.25%).
- No statistical differences observed in ED revisits, hospital readmissions, or length of stay.
- Electrical cardioversion (EC) was associated with a lower incidence of hypotension compared to pharmacological cardioversion (PC).
Conclusions:
- Pharmacological cardioversion (PC) and electrical cardioversion (EC) demonstrate comparable success rates for restoring sinus rhythm in hemodynamically stable new-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) patients.
- Neither method showed superiority regarding revisits, readmissions, or length of hospital stay.
- Electrical cardioversion (EC) may be preferred due to a lower risk of hypotension.
Related Concept Videos
ECG Interpretation of Arrhythmias II: Atrial, Junctional and Ventricular Arrhythmias
Dysrhythmias VI: Management of Dysrhythmias
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation IV: Pharmacological Management
Electroconvulsive Therapy
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation III: AED Use
Dysrhythmias V: Evaluating Dysrhythmias

