Evidence Hub

Temporary Rhythm Control with Flecainide in Atrial Fibrillation-Related Conversion Pauses Prior to Catheter Ablation: A Case of Successful Pharmacological Bridging

Oleksii Skakun, O. Varunkiv, A. Symchych, Khrystyna Symchych, Ihor Vandzhura, Y. Vandzhura, R. Denina, P. Zvonar et al.

International Medical Case Reports Journal, 2026

Abstract

Abstract The management of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation with conversion pauses remains challenging, with catheter ablation and permanent pacemaker implantation representing the main therapeutic strategies. Catheter ablation may eliminate atrial fibrillation paroxysms and prevent conversion pauses, whereas pacemaker implantation combined with antiarrhythmic therapy for rhythm control is another accepted option. We report a case of successful management of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation with conversion pauses using antiarrhythmic agents for rhythm control prior to catheter ablation. A 61-year-old woman had episodes of palpitations, dizziness, and presyncope. Ambulatory 12-lead 24-hour ECG monitoring showed 51 episodes of atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter with conversion pauses after each of them; the longest pause was 7460 ms. Atrial fibrillation lasted for 46.9% of the total monitoring time. When ambulatory 24-hour monitoring was performed, the patient was highly symptomatic (complaints of palpitations and fear of death were predominant, but dizziness episodes were also noted). Catheter ablation was unavailable in the short-term period and permanent pacemaker implantation was not accepted by the patient. Thus, flecainide at a dose of 100 mg BID under close supervision for rhythm control was administered. Also, anticoagulation with edoxaban was provided. The patient remained asymptomatic until ablation was performed. Pulmonary vein isolation with pulsed field ablation…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case report, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free