Synopsis: Catecholamine vasopressors (ex. norepinephrine, epinephrine, dopamine and dobutamine) are the most common first-line medication used in distributive shock prescribed, but have important complications, including risk of atrial fibrillation and arrhythmias. Vasopressin is a non-catecholaminergic vasopressor that may decrease risk of arrhythmia due to decreased catecholamine receptor stimulation. This systematic review pooled data from 13 studies (N=1462 patients) to assess the incidence of atrial fibrillation in patients with distributive shock. The majority of studies included enrolled patients with septic shock, but several studies that enrolled patients with vasoplegia after cardiac surgery were included . In the pooled analysis, there was a significant reduction in the risk of atrial fibrillation associated with administration of vasopressin (RR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.67-0.88]). Importantly, the majority of this result (74.8% weight) was driven by results of a single-center study in post-cardiac surgery patients. When patients with septic shock and post-cardiac surgery vasoplegia were considered separately, there was a significant difference for post-cardiac surgery patients (RR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.67-0.88]) but there was not a significant difference in patients with septic shock (RR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.55-1.05]). A variety of secondary outcomes were also assessed, including 30-day mortality, need for renal replacement therapy, length of stay, stroke and digital ischemia. The results of these secondary analyses were inconclusive, primarily owing to differences in level of bias within individual studies and wide confidence intervals within the pooled analyses. In summary, in this systematic review and meta-analysis, patients with distributive shock had a lower risk of atrial fibrillation if treated with a combination of vasopressin plus catecholamine vasopressors compared to catecholamine vasopressors alone. However, in this study, the significance was primarily driven by the population of post-cardiac surgery patients. Further studies are needed to more clearly define additional benefits in patients with sepsis and on other clinically relevant outcomes, such as mortality and need for renal replacement therapy.