Anteroposterior Versus Anterolateral Electrode Position for Electrical Cardioversion of Atrial Fibrillation
NCT ID: NCT05511389
Last Updated: 2025-05-14
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
RECRUITING
NA
1500 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2023-02-22
2027-07-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
We believe health outcomes for patients with atrial fibrillation, and healthcare costs associated with treating atrial fibrillation could be improved by optimizing existing treatments for atrial fibrillation and maximizing the likelihood of restoring normal heart rhythm. This allows them to benefit from lower stroke risk, better heart function, fewer symptoms and increased quality of life. Restoring normal sinus rhythm earlier prevents atrial fibrillation from causing permanent structural damage to the heart that in turn, makes atrial fibrillation intractable. Furthermore, patients in whom initial attempts to control atrial fibrillation are unsuccessful frequently require more medications or invasive catheter ablation procedures which are costly and carry substantial risk.
Electrical cardioversion is the main way physicians restore normal heart rhythm. In this procedure, the heart is "shocked" back into normal rhythm using two electrodes on the chest. Done correctly, this procedure is safe and effective. Many things are known about electrical cardioversion, for example, the best type and amount of electricity to use. What we don't know is the best position of the electrodes on the chest and whether applying direct, physical pressure to the electrodes makes cardioversion more successful. Our prior research suggests that improving positioning and applying pressure may improve cardioversion, but this finding needs to be verified with a rigorous, dedicated trial.
This study will demonstrate whether front-to-back, or front-to-side placement of the electrodes is more effective for electrical cardioversion of atrial fibrillation. We will also demonstrate whether manually applying pressure to the electrodes makes cardioversion more effective. Should our trial demonstrate a benefit for these techniques, we expect them to be universally applied around the world. Because hundreds of thousands of cardioversions are done each year, even small increases in cardioversion success means thousands fewer patients progress to needing more medications or invasive procedures to manage their atrial fibrillation.
We will study consenting adults presenting for non-urgent cardioversion of their atrial fibrillation. After explaining the study to participants and gaining their consent, we will randomly assign them to front-to-side or front-to-back electrode placement. Patients who remain in atrial fibrillation after the first shock will randomly receive either manual pressure or not. We will compare the success of cardioversion for front-side versus front-back electrode placement, and for manual pressure versus none. We will evaluate success by using electrocardiograms to assess for restoration of the heart rhythm back to normal.
We hypothesize that anterolateral electrode positioning is superior to anteroposterior electrode positioning. We also hypothesize that manual pressure is effective relative to none, when applied in patients who have had one unsuccessful shock already.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Cryoablation as Standard Treatment of Atrial Flutter
NCT01604369
Clinical Decision Support for Atrial Fibrillation and Flutter
NCT05009225
Chemical vs Electrical Cardioversion for Emergency Department Patients With Acute Atrial Fibrillation
NCT01994070
Optimising Pacing Therapy, Integrated Medical Therapy, and Catheter AbLation for Atrial Fibrillation in Heart Failure Trial
NCT07238452
Shock Energy for Electrical Cardioversion of Persistent Atrial Fibrillation
NCT05903170
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Anterolateral shock vector
Patients with electrodes placed on the chest to obtain an anterolateral (front-to-side placement; also known as anteroapical) shock vector.
If first shock is unsuccessful, participants who proceed to a second shock will be randomized to manual pressure versus none but electrode placement will remain the same.
Anterolateral electrode position
As described previously
Manual pressure
Manual pressure applied to the anterior electrode
Anteroposterior shock vector
Patients with electrodes placed on the chest to obtain an anteroposterior (front-to-back placement) shock vector.
If first shock is unsuccessful, participants who proceed to a second shock will be randomized to manual pressure versus none but electrode placement will remain the same.
Anteroposterior electrode position
As described previously
Manual pressure
Manual pressure applied to the anterior electrode
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Anterolateral electrode position
As described previously
Anteroposterior electrode position
As described previously
Manual pressure
Manual pressure applied to the anterior electrode
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
2. Anatomic contraindication to anterolateral or anteroposterior placement (e.g. skin conditions or wounds)
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
McMaster University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Omar Ibrahim
Adult Cardiology Fellow
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Hamilton Health Sciences
Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
St Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton
Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
14093
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.