In patients with AF and HF , rate control compared with rhythm control showed inferior risk of hospitalisation
BACKGROUND Atrial fibrillation ( AF ) is a common arrhythmia that can promote or worsen heart failure ( HF ) .
Our purpose was to compare the effects of rate and rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure .
A randomised, controlled study of rate versus rhythm control in patients with chronic atrial fibrillation and heart failure: (CAFÉ-II Study)
Background : Atrial fibrillation ( AF ) and heart failure ( HF ) often coexist . The aim was to investigate whether restoring sinus rhythm ( SR ) could improve cardiac function , symptoms , exercise capacity and quality of life ( QoL ) in patients with chronic heart failure . Methods : Patients with HF and persistent AF receiving guideline -recommended treatments , including anticoagulants , were eligible for the study . Patients were r and omised to either rhythm ( treated with amiodarone for at least 3 months prior to attempting biphasic external cardioversion and continued amiodarone long-term if SR was restored ) or rate control . Anticoagulants were continued throughout the study regardless of rhythm , unless contraindications developed . Both groups were treated with beta blockers and /or digoxin to reduce the heart rate to < 80 bpm at rest and < 110 bpm after walking . Symptoms , walk distance ( 6-minute corridor walk test , 6MWT ) , QoL and cardiac function were assessed at baseline and 1 year . Results : 61 patients with HF and persistent AF ( median duration 14 months ( IQR 5 to 32 ) ) were r and omly assigned to a rate or rhythm control strategy . Of patients assigned to rhythm control ( n = 30 ) , 66 % were in SR at 1 year , and 90 % of those assigned to rate control ( n = 31 ) achieved the heart rate target . At 1 year , NYHA class ( p = 0.424 ) and 6MWT distance ( p = 0.342 ) were similar between groups but patients assigned to rhythm control had improved LV function ( p = 0.014 ) , NT-proBNP concentration ( p = 0.046 ) and QoL ( p = 0.019 ) compared with those assigned to rate control . Greatest improvement was seen in patients in whom SR was maintained . Conclusion : Restoring SR in patients with AF and heart failure may improve QoL and LV function when compared with a strategy of rate control
In patients with AF and HF , rate control compared with rhythm control showed inferior risk of hospitalisation
BACKGROUND Atrial fibrillation ( AF ) is a common arrhythmia that can promote or worsen heart failure ( HF ) .
Our purpose was to compare the effects of rate and rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure .