Rhythm control versus rate control for atrial fibrillation and heart failure

Montreal Heart Institute and the Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC H1T 1C8, Canada.
New England Journal of Medicine (Impact Factor: 54.42). 07/2008; 358(25):2667-77. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa0708789
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT It is common practice to restore and maintain sinus rhythm in patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure. This approach is based in part on data indicating that atrial fibrillation is a predictor of death in patients with heart failure and suggesting that the suppression of atrial fibrillation may favorably affect the outcome. However, the benefits and risks of this approach have not been adequately studied.
We conducted a multicenter, randomized trial comparing the maintenance of sinus rhythm (rhythm control) with control of the ventricular rate (rate control) in patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction of 35% or less, symptoms of congestive heart failure, and a history of atrial fibrillation. The primary outcome was the time to death from cardiovascular causes.
A total of 1376 patients were enrolled (682 in the rhythm-control group and 694 in the rate-control group) and were followed for a mean of 37 months. Of these patients, 182 (27%) in the rhythm-control group died from cardiovascular causes, as compared with 175 (25%) in the rate-control group (hazard ratio in the rhythm-control group, 1.06; 95% confidence interval, 0.86 to 1.30; P=0.59 by the log-rank test). Secondary outcomes were similar in the two groups, including death from any cause (32% in the rhythm-control group and 33% in the rate-control group), stroke (3% and 4%, respectively), worsening heart failure (28% and 31%), and the composite of death from cardiovascular causes, stroke, or worsening heart failure (43% and 46%). There were also no significant differences favoring either strategy in any predefined subgroup.
In patients with atrial fibrillation and congestive heart failure, a routine strategy of rhythm control does not reduce the rate of death from cardiovascular causes, as compared with a rate-control strategy. ( number, NCT00597077.)

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained clinical arrhythmia and is associated with significant morbidity, mostly secondary to heart failure and stroke, and an estimated two-fold increase in premature death. Efforts to increase our understanding of AF and its complications have focused on unravelling the mechanisms of electrical and structural remodelling of the atrial myocardium. Yet, it is increasingly recognised that AF is more than an atrial disease, being associated with systemic inflammation, endothelial dysfunction and adverse effects on the structure and function of the left ventricular myocardium that may be prognostically important. Here we review the molecular and in vivo evidence that underpins current knowledge regarding the effects of human or experimental AF on the ventricular myocardium. Potential mechanisms are explored including diffuse ventricular fibrosis, focal myocardial scarring and impaired myocardial perfusion and perfusion reserve. The complex relationship between AF, systemic inflammation and endothelial/microvascular dysfunction and the effects of AF on ventricular calcium handling and oxidative stress are also addressed. Finally, consideration is given to the clinical implications of these observations and concepts, with particular reference to rate versus rhythm control. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2015. For permissions please email:
    Cardiovascular Research 01/2015; 105(3). DOI:10.1093/cvr/cvv001 · 5.81 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Despite significant advances in our understanding of atrial fibrillation (AF) mechanisms in the last 15 years, ablation outcomes remain suboptimal. A potential reason is that many ablation techniques focus on anatomic, rather than patient-specific functional targets for ablation. Panoramic contact mapping, incorporating phase analysis, repolarization and conduction dynamics, and oscillations in AF rate, overcomes many prior difficulties with mapping AF. This approach provides evidence that the mechanisms sustaining human AF are deterministic, largely due to stable electrical rotors and focal sources in either atrium. Ablation of such sources (Focal Impulse and Rotor Modulation: FIRM ablation) has been shown to improve ablation outcome compared with conventional ablation alone; independent laboratories directly targeting stable rotors have shown similar results. Clinical trials examining the role of stand-alone FIRM ablation are in progress. Looking forward, translating insights from patient-specific mapping to evidence-based guidelines and clinical practice is the next challenge in improving patient outcomes in AF management.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This review addresses current treatment strategies for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) and their potential impact on thromboembolic risk and complications. It updates current classification schemes for the arrhythmia and discusses specific treatment alternatives including rate control, pharmacologic rhythm suppression, catheter ablation, and left atrial appendage obliteration, each in context of thromboembolic risks and stroke prevention.
    Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis 02/2015; DOI:10.1007/s11239-015-1181-y · 2.04 Impact Factor


Available from
Feb 26, 2015