They also have an increased risk for thromboembolism .
Comparing with age-matched controls , the relative risk for stroke is increased 2- to 7-fold in patients with nonrheumatic atrial fibrillation ( 3 , 8 , 13 ) , and the absolute risk for stroke is between 1 % and 5 % per year , depending on clinical characteristics ( 3 , 12 , 14 - 16 ) .
Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation disrupts the lives of patients ( 17 ) , but this perception may not be associated with frequency or duration of symptoms .
Warfarin therapy affects quality of life because of frequent blood testing and recommendations for limiting some activities .
Data Synthesis Does Aggressive Rhythm Control Improve Mortality and Morbidity Compared with Rate Control ?
Atrial fibrillation is the most common type of arrhythmia in adults , accounting for about one third of hospitalizations for arrhythmia ( 1 ) .
The prevalence increases from less than 1 % in persons younger than 60 years of age to more than 8 % in those older than 80 years of age ( 2 - 6 ) .
The incidence ranges from 0.2 % per year for men 30 to 39 years of age to 2.3 % per year in men 80 to 89 years of age ( 7 , 8) .
The age-adjusted incidence for women is about half that of men ( 9 ) .
The cardiac conditions most commonly associated with atrial fibrillation are rheumatic mitral valve disease , coronary artery disease , congestive heart failure , and hypertension ( 8 , 10 ) .
Noncardiac causes include hyperthyroidism , hypoxic conditions , surgery , and alcohol intoxication .
A predisposing condition exists in more than 90 % of cases ( 5 , 11 , 12 ) ; the remaining cases have what is called lone atrial fibrillation .
Patients with atrial fibrillation frequently have symptoms of hemodynamic compromise , ranging from irregular palpitations to the more insidious feeling of malaise .
Little is known about the direct effects of antiarrhythmic therapy and rate-control therapy on quality of life .
The American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/European Society of Cardiology Task Force on Clinical Guidelines for the Management of Atrial Fibrillation classified atrial fibrillation into 4 types ( 20 ) : first detected episode , paroxysmal ( terminates spontaneously ) , persistent ( electrical or pharmacologic termination necessary ) , and permanent ( resistant to electrical or pharmacologic conversion or accepted by the physician ) .
The purpose of this review was to summarize the evidence that was available during formulation of the guidelines developed by the American College of Physicians ( ACP ) and the American Academy of Family Physicians ( AAFP ) for management of adult patients with nonpostoperative atrial fibrillation .
Although the relative benefits and risks of rate versus rhythm control are of paramount importance in the management of atrial fibrillation , studies directly addressed this issue only recently .
Efficacy and proarrhythmic hazards of pharmacologic cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: prospective comparison of sotalol versus quinidine.
OBJECTIVES This study compared the efficacy and safety of sotalol and quinidine for conversion and prevention of recurrent  atrial fibrillation .  BACKGROUND Atrial fibrillation is the most common arrhythmia . Pharmacologic therapy has been advocated for both immediate restoration of sinus rhythm and prevention of recurrent atrial fibrillation .  Quinidine is the therapeutic mainstay for both purpose s , but its safety has recently been question ed . Although sotalol has been used successfully to maintain sinus rhythm after direct current cardioversion , its efficacy in pharmacologically reverting atrial fibrillation has not been examined . METHODS Fifty consecutive patients with persistent atrial fibrillation were r and omized to receive quinidine or sotalol for up to 7 days to restore sinus rhythm . Patients were followed up for 6 months . RESULTS Quinidine was more effective than sotalol in terminating atrial fibrillation ( 60 % vs. 20 % , p = 0.009 ) . When nonresponders to drug therapy underwent subsequent direct current cardioversion , total conversion rates in the quinidine and sotalol groups were comparable ( 88 % vs. 68 % , p = 0.17 ) , as was the efficacy of the two drugs in preventing recurrent atrial fibrillation . Side effects necessitating drug discontinuation were more often observed with quinidine . No patient receiving sotalol but four patients receiving quinidine had drug-associated arrhythmia ( torsade de pointes in three patients , sustained ventricular tachycardia in one patient ) . Precordial QT dispersion determined on the surface electrocardiogram ( ECG ) increased with quinidine ( mean + /- SD 34 + /- 9 vs. 44 + /- 16 ms , p = 0.02 ) , indicating enhanced inhomogeneity in ventricular repolarization . There was no change in QT dispersion in patients receiving sotalol ( 36 + /- 18 vs. 40 + /- 17 ms , p = 0.44 ) . CONCLUSIONS Quinidine is more effective than sotalol in terminating atrial fibrillation but is associated with more side effects . The proarrhythmic risk may be related to quinidine 's propensity to increase disparity in ventricular repolarization . This risk warrants careful ECG monitoring during the 1st 4 to 7 days of therapy . Because most proarrhythmic effects occurred shortly after restoration of sinus rhythm , observation should continue > or = 2 to 3 days after sinus rhythm is reestablished
They also have an increased risk for thromboembolism .
Comparing with age-matched controls , the relative risk for stroke is increased 2- to 7-fold in patients with nonrheumatic atrial fibrillation ( 3 , 8 , 13 ) , and the absolute risk for stroke is between 1 % and 5 % per year , depending on clinical characteristics ( 3 , 12 , 14 - 16 ) .
Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation disrupts the lives of patients ( 17 ) , but this perception may not be associated with frequency or duration of symptoms .
Warfarin therapy affects quality of life because of frequent blood testing and recommendations for limiting some activities .
Data Synthesis Does Aggressive Rhythm Control Improve Mortality and Morbidity Compared with Rate Control ?
Atrial fibrillation is the most common type of arrhythmia in adults , accounting for about one third of hospitalizations for arrhythmia ( 1 ) .
The prevalence increases from less than 1 % in persons younger than 60 years of age to more than 8 % in those older than 80 years of age ( 2 - 6 ) .
The incidence ranges from 0.2 % per year for men 30 to 39 years of age to 2.3 % per year in men 80 to 89 years of age ( 7 , 8) .
The age-adjusted incidence for women is about half that of men ( 9 ) .
The cardiac conditions most commonly associated with atrial fibrillation are rheumatic mitral valve disease , coronary artery disease , congestive heart failure , and hypertension ( 8 , 10 ) .
Noncardiac causes include hyperthyroidism , hypoxic conditions , surgery , and alcohol intoxication .
A predisposing condition exists in more than 90 % of cases ( 5 , 11 , 12 ) ; the remaining cases have what is called lone atrial fibrillation .
Patients with atrial fibrillation frequently have symptoms of hemodynamic compromise , ranging from irregular palpitations to the more insidious feeling of malaise .
Little is known about the direct effects of antiarrhythmic therapy and rate-control therapy on quality of life .
The American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/European Society of Cardiology Task Force on Clinical Guidelines for the Management of Atrial Fibrillation classified atrial fibrillation into 4 types ( 20 ) : first detected episode , paroxysmal ( terminates spontaneously ) , persistent ( electrical or pharmacologic termination necessary ) , and permanent ( resistant to electrical or pharmacologic conversion or accepted by the physician ) .
The purpose of this review was to summarize the evidence that was available during formulation of the guidelines developed by the American College of Physicians ( ACP ) and the American Academy of Family Physicians ( AAFP ) for management of adult patients with nonpostoperative atrial fibrillation .
Although the relative benefits and risks of rate versus rhythm control are of paramount importance in the management of atrial fibrillation , studies directly addressed this issue only recently .