Literature DB >> 21917326

Cardiac remodeling with rhythm versus rate control strategies for atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure: insights from the AF-CHF echocardiographic sub-study.

Valérie Henrard1, Anique Ducharme, Paul Khairy, Alejandro Gisbert, Denis Roy, Sylvie Levesque, Mario Talajic, Bernard Thibault, Normand Racine, Michel White, Peter G Guerra, Jean-Claude Tardif.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In patients with heart failure and atrial fibrillation, the AF-CHF (Atrial Fibrillation and Congestive Heart Failure) trial did not demonstrate the superiority of rhythm control (RhyC) over a rate control (RaC) strategy on cardiovascular mortality. Nevertheless, deleterious hemodynamic effects of atrial fibrillation can lead to further decrease in left ventricular (LV) function and progression of symptoms. This echocardiographic sub-study was designed to compare the effects of the two treatment strategies on LV ejection fraction (LVEF), chamber volumes and dimensions, valvular regurgitation and functional status. METHODS AND
RESULTS: A total of 59 patients (29 RhyC, 30 RaC) aged 67±8 years (14% women), enrolled in the AF-CHF trial at the Montreal Heart Institute underwent standardized echocardiograms at baseline and at 12 months. Mean LVEF at baseline was severely depressed (RhyC: 27.0±4.9% and RaC: 27.6±7.4%, p=0.73), and improved to a similar degree in both groups (RhyC: +8.0±10.4% and RaC: +4.5±10.6, both p<0.05; p=0.19 for RhyC versus RaC). Other echocardiographic parameters, such as LV end-systolic volume index and degree of mitral and tricuspid regurgitation, remained unchanged. New York Heart Association functional class and distance walked in 6 min improved significantly in both groups (RhyC: +48.9±78.7 m and RaC: +47.2±96.7 m, both p≤0.01), with no difference between RhyC and RaC strategies.
CONCLUSIONS: Improvements in LVEF and functional status are observed after 12 months in patients with heart failure and atrial fibrillation, regardless of whether rate or rhythm control strategies are used.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21917326     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2011.08.077

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cardiol        ISSN: 0167-5273            Impact factor:   4.164


  5 in total

1.  Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation results in greater improvement in cardiac function in patients with low versus normal left ventricular ejection fraction.

Authors:  Zekeriya Kucukdurmaz; Ritsushi Kato; Alim Erdem; Ebru Golcuk; Takeshi Tobiume; Takahiko Nagase; Yoshifumi Ikeda; Yoshie Nakajima; Makoto Matsumura; Nobuyuki Komiyama; Shigeyuki Nishimura; Kazuo Matsumoto
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2013-04-30       Impact factor: 1.900

2.  Rate versus rhythm control for management of atrial fibrillation in clinical practice: results from the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF) registry.

Authors:  Benjamin A Steinberg; DaJuanicia N Holmes; Michael D Ezekowitz; Gregg C Fonarow; Peter R Kowey; Kenneth W Mahaffey; Gerald Naccarelli; James Reiffel; Paul Chang; Eric D Peterson; Jonathan P Piccini
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2013-02-20       Impact factor: 4.749

Review 3.  Atrial fibrillation in heart failure.

Authors:  Rasmus Havmöller; Sumeet S Chugh
Journal:  Curr Heart Fail Rep       Date:  2012-12

Review 4.  Atrial fibrillation in heart failure: drug therapies for rate and rhythm control.

Authors:  Rafik Tadros; Paul Khairy; Jean L Rouleau; Mario Talajic; Peter G Guerra; Denis Roy
Journal:  Heart Fail Rev       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 4.214

5.  Digoxin and Amiodarone on the Risk of Ischemic Stroke in Atrial Fibrillation: An Observational Study.

Authors:  Kuan-Cheng Lai; Sy-Jou Chen; Chin-Sheng Lin; Fu-Chi Yang; Cheng-Li Lin; Chin-Wang Hsu; Wen-Chen Huang; Chia-Hung Kao
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2018-05-07       Impact factor: 5.810

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.