Epidemiology, prevention, and treatment of new-onset atrial fibrillation in critically ill: a systematic review

Table 6 Efficacy of treatment for new-onset atrial fibrillation

Author, year [ref]	Study design	Severity score		Observation period	Intervention	Conversion rate		Hospital mortality (%)
Balser JR, 1998 [58]	Randomized controlled	APACHE III	59	Within 2 h	Esmolol	59.1% [20/34]	p = 0.067	31
Balser JR, 1998 [58]	Randomized controlled	APACHE III	65	Within 2 h	Diltiazem	27.3% [6/22]	p = 0.067	38
Seguin P, 2006 [51]	Prospective observational	SAPS II	47	10 ± 10 h	DC	100% [3/3]	NA	31.2
					Amiodarone	100% [4/4]
					Digoxin	100% [1/1]
					No intervention	100% [4/4]
Sleeswijk ME, 2008 [59]	Prospective observational	APACHE II	19	Within 24 h	MgSO₄-amiodarone step-up scheme	93.1% [27/29]	NA	37.9
Meierhenrich R, 2010 [53]	Prospective observational	SAPS II	31^a	NA	DC (17/49)	85.7% [42/49]^c	NA	48^ad
			34^b		Amiodarone (36/49)			23^bd
					Digitalis (31/49)
					β-Blockers (25/49)
Kanji S, 2012 [55]	Retrospective observational	APACHE II	22.6	Within 24 h	DC^e	26.9% [7/26]	NA	32
					Amiodarone^f	87.4% [90/103]
					Sotalol	100% [2/2]
					Rate control	75% [21/28]

AF atrial fibrillation, DC direct current cardioversion, LOS length of stay, MgSO ₄ magnesium sulfate, NA not available.
^aNew-onset AF, no septic shock.
^bNew-onset AF and septic shock.
^cThe efficacy of each intervention was unknown because of a combination of these interventions.
^dSixty-day mortality.
^eEighteen of 26 had received amiodarone.
^fAmiodarone alone.