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 .
A Randomized Comparison of External and Internal Cardioversion of Chronic Atrial Fibrillation
Background Delivery of shocks within the right atrium has been reported to be more effective than conventional external shocks in converting atrial fibrillation ( AF ) , but these two cardioversion techniques have never been compared prospect ively . The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacies of external and internal cardioversion in patients with chronic AF unresponsive to prior attempts at electrical and /or pharmacological cardioversion . Low-dose amiodarone was used in all patients after cardioversion to suppress recurrences of AF . Methods and Results One hundred twelve patients with AF of at least 1 month in duration were r and omly assigned to undergo external cardioversion with 300–360-J shocks or internal cardioversion with 200–300-J shocks delivered through a st and ard electrode catheter within the right atrium . The patients were treated with amiodarone ( 200 mg/day 5–7 days/week ) for 1 month before electrical cardioversion and afterward if the cardioversion was successful . The patients were-evaluated at regular intervals during 1 year of follow-up . The efficacy of internal cardioversion was significantly greater than that of external cardioversion ( 91 % versus 67 % , p = 0.002 ) . The only variable that was associated with the outcome of cardioversion was body weight . Among patients in whom sinus rhythm was restored , AF recurred as often after internal and external cardioversion ; at 1 year of follow-up , 37 % of patients in whom external or internal cardioversion had been effective were still in sinus rhythm .  Patients who had undergone an attempt at electrical cardioversion before entry into this study were less likely to remain in sinus rhythm after cardioversion . The only complications of cardioversion were one instance of cerebral thromboembolism after external cardioversion and one instance of transient pulmonary edema after internal cardioversion . Therapy with amiodarone was discontinued because of an adverse drug effect in only three patients . Conclusions Internal cardioversion is more effective than external cardioversion in restoring sinus rhythm and is as safe as external cardioversion in patients with chronic AF . The recurrence rate of AF is the same after both types of cardioversion . If conventional electrical cardioversion is ineffective , internal cardioversion should be attempted . The combination of low-dose amiodarone and external or internal cardioversion may result in maintaining sinus rhythm long-term in patients with refractory AF
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 .