D. Restoration of sinus rhythm for monophasic vs. biphasic waveforms .
Another study showed that PVI result ed in long-term restoration
Atrial fibrillation ( AF ) is a major public health problem in the United States .
More than 2.3 million Americans are estimated to have AF ( 1 ) .
The known association between AF and substantial mortality , morbidity , and health care costs compounds the effect of this condition .
Not only is the risk for death in patients with AF twice that of patients without it , but AF can result in myocardial ischemia and infa rct ion , exacerbate heart failure ( HF ) , and cause tachycardia-induced cardiomyopathy if the ventricular rate is not well-controlled ( 25 ) .
The most dreaded complication of AF is thromboembolism , especially stroke ( 6 ) .
In some patients , AF or therapies to manage this condition can severely depreciate quality of life ( 710 ) .
Furthermore , the management of AF and its complications is responsible for nearly $ 16 billion in additional costs to the U.S. health care system per year ( 11 ) .
We conducted this systematic review to evaluate the comparative safety and effectiveness of rate- versus rhythm-control strategies ;  medications used for ventricular rate control ; strict versus more lenient rate-control strategies ; nonpharmacologic rate-control therapies  versus medications ; electrical cardioversion and antiarrhythmic medications  for restoration of sinus rhythm ;  and  catheter ablation , surgical ablation , and antiarrhythmic medications  for maintenance of sinus rhythm .
Effects of Amiodarone and Diltiazem on Persistent Atrial Fibrillation Conversion and Recurrence Rates: A Randomized Controlled Study
Abstract Purpose : To assess the effects of amiodarone and diltiazem on atrial fibrillation ( AF ) induced atrial electrical remodeling and their clinical implication s. Methods : Persistent AF patients were r and omly assigned to three treatment groups over a period from 6 weeks before to 6 weeks after internal cardioversion : group A ( 35 patients , oral diltiazem ) , group B ( 34 patients , oral amiodarone ) and group C ( 37 patients , no antiarrhythmic drugs ) . Several electrophysiological parameters were assessed 5 min and 24 h after cardioversion . Results : Compared with controls , group B patients had significantly higher conversion rates ( 83 % vs. 100 % , p = 0.041 ) and a higher probability to maintain sinus rhythm ( p = 0.037 ) . Patients of group B had longer fibrillatory cycle length intervals than patients of group A and C ( 180 ± 18 ms vs. 161 ± 17 ms vs. 164 ± 19 ms , p = 0.001 ) and longer atrial effective refractory periods ( 211 ± 22 ms vs. 198 ± 16 ms vs. 194 ± 17 ms , p = 0.003 ) as assessed 5 min after conversion . Post-conversion density of supraventricular ectopics was significantly lower in group B compared to groups A and C ( p = 0.001 ) . Conclusions : Oral amiodarone  increases conversion rates , prolongs fibrillatory cycle length and atrial effective refractory period and preserves sinus rhythm after cardioversion in persistent AF patients by suppressing the atrial ectopics that trigger AF
D. Restoration of sinus rhythm for monophasic vs. biphasic waveforms .
Another study showed that PVI result ed in long-term restoration
Atrial fibrillation ( AF ) is a major public health problem in the United States .
More than 2.3 million Americans are estimated to have AF ( 1 ) .
The known association between AF and substantial mortality , morbidity , and health care costs compounds the effect of this condition .
Not only is the risk for death in patients with AF twice that of patients without it , but AF can result in myocardial ischemia and infa rct ion , exacerbate heart failure ( HF ) , and cause tachycardia-induced cardiomyopathy if the ventricular rate is not well-controlled ( 25 ) .
The most dreaded complication of AF is thromboembolism , especially stroke ( 6 ) .
In some patients , AF or therapies to manage this condition can severely depreciate quality of life ( 710 ) .
Furthermore , the management of AF and its complications is responsible for nearly $ 16 billion in additional costs to the U.S. health care system per year ( 11 ) .
We conducted this systematic review to evaluate the comparative safety and effectiveness of rate- versus rhythm-control strategies ;  medications used for ventricular rate control ; strict versus more lenient rate-control strategies ; nonpharmacologic rate-control therapies  versus medications ; electrical cardioversion and antiarrhythmic medications  for restoration of sinus rhythm ;  and  catheter ablation , surgical ablation , and antiarrhythmic medications  for maintenance of sinus rhythm .