Rhythm control for patients with atrial fibrillation complicated with heart failure in the contemporary era of catheter ablation: a stratified pooled analysis of randomized data

2019 ◽  
Vol 41 (30) ◽  
pp. 2863-2873 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shaojie Chen ◽  
Helmut Pürerfellner ◽  
Christian Meyer ◽  
Willem-Jan Acou ◽  
Alexandra Schratter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Heart Failure ◽  
Catheter Ablation ◽  
Control Strategy ◽  
Rate Control ◽  
Similar Rate ◽  
Rhythm Control ◽  
Thromboembolic Events ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Abstract Aims The optimal treatment for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) has been a subject of debate for years. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rhythm control strategy in patients with AF complicated with HF regarding hard clinical endpoints. Methods and results Up-to-date randomized data comparing rhythm control using antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) vs. rate control (Subset A) or rhythm control using catheter ablation vs. medical therapy (Subset B) in AF and HF patients were pooled. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, re-hospitalization, stroke, and thromboembolic events. A total of 11 studies involving 3598 patients were enrolled (Subset A: 2486; Subset B: 1112). As compared with medical rate control, the AADs rhythm control was associated with similar all-cause mortality [odds ratio (OR): 0.96, P = 0.65], significantly higher rate of re-hospitalization (OR: 1.25, P = 0.01), and similar rate of stroke and thromboembolic events (OR: 0.91, P = 0.76,); however, as compared with medical therapy, catheter ablation rhythm control was associated with significantly lower all-cause mortality (OR: 0.51, P = 0.0003), reduced re-hospitalization rate (OR: 0.44, P = 0.003), similar rate of stroke events (OR: 0.59, P = 0.27), greater improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction [weighted mean difference (WMD): 6.8%, P = 0.0004], lower arrhythmia recurrence (29.6% vs. 80.1%, OR: 0.04, P < 0.00001), and greater improvement in quality of life (Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire score) (WMD: −9.1, P = 0.007). Conclusion Catheter ablation as rhythm control strategy substantially improves survival rate, reduces re-hospitalization, increases the maintenance rate of sinus rhythm, contributes to preserve cardiac function, and improves quality of life for AF patients complicated with HF.

3153Rate versus rhythm control and mortality in atrial fibrillation patients: a Danish nationwide cohort study

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
F Dalgaard ◽  
S Al-Khatib ◽  
J Pallisgaard ◽  
C Torp-Pedersen ◽  
T B Lindhardt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Control Strategy ◽  
Rate Control ◽  
Channel Blocker ◽  
Rhythm Control ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Control Therapy

Abstract Background Treatment of AF patients with rate or rhythm drug therapy have shown no difference in mortality in clinical trials. However, the generalizability of these trials to real-world populations can be questioned. Purpose We aimed to investigate the all-cause and cardiovascular (CV) mortality risk in a nationwide AF cohort by treatment strategy (rate vs. rhythm) and by individual drug classes. Methods We queried the Danish nationwide registries from 2000 to 2015 to identify patients with AF. A rate control strategy included the use of one or more of the following medications: beta-blocker, digoxin, and a class-4 calcium channel blocker (CCB). A rhythm control strategy included the use of an anti-arrhythmic drug (amiodarone and class-1C). Primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcome was CV mortality. Adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRR) were computed using Poisson regression with time-dependent covariates allowing patients to switch treatment during follow-up. Results Of 140,697 AF patients, 131,793 were on rate control therapy and n=8,904 were on rhythm control therapy. At baseline, patients on rhythm control therapy were younger (71 yrs [IQR: 62–78] vs 74 [65–82], p<0.001) more likely male (63.5% vs 51.7% p<0.001), had more prevalent heart failure (31.1% vs 19.4%, p<0.001) and ischemic heart disease (40.1% vs. 23.3%, p<0.001), and had more prior CV-related procedures; PCI (7.4% vs. 4.0% p<0.001) and CABG (15.0% vs. 2.3%, p<0.001). During a median follow up of 4.0 (IQR: 1.7–7.3) years, there were 64,653 (46.0%) deaths from any-cause, of which 27,025 (19.2%) were CVD deaths. After appropriate adjustments and compared to rate control therapy, we found a lower IRR of mortality and CV mortality in those treated with rhythm control therapy (IRR: 0.93 [95% CI: 0.90–0.97] and IRR 0.84 [95% CI: 0.79–0.90]). Compared with beta-blockers, digoxin was associated with increased risk of all-cause and CV mortality (IRR: 1.26 [95% CI: 1.24–1.29] and IRR: 1.32 [95% CI: 1.28–1.36]), so was amiodarone: IRR for all-cause mortality: 1.16 [95% CI: 1.11–1.21] and IRR for CV mortality: 1.12 [95% CI: 1.05–1.19]. Class-1C was associated with lower all-cause (0.43 [95% CI: 0.37–0.49]) and CV mortality (0.35 [95% CI: 0.28–0.44]). Figure 1. Models were adjusted for age, sex, ischemic heart disease, stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease, valvular atrial fibrillation, bleeding, diabetes, ablation, pacemaker, implantable cardioverter defibrillator, hypertension, heart failure, use of loop diuretics, calendar year, and time on treatment. Abbreviations; CCB; calcium channel blocker, PY; person years. Conclusions In a real-world AF cohort, we found that compared with rate control therapy, rhythm control therapy was associated with a lower risk of all-cause and CV mortality. The reduced mortality risk with rhythm therapy could reflect an appropriate patient selection. Acknowledgement/Funding The Danish Heart Foundation

scholarly journals Rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
S.Z Ramos ◽  
A.L.D Te-Rosano
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Risk Ratio ◽  
Control Strategy ◽  
Rate Control ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Rhythm Control ◽  
Forest Plot ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Abstract Background Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common arrhythmia that can promote or worsen heart failure (HF). Limited data exist to guide treatment for patients with AF with HF regarding rate versus rhythm control. Purpose To perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) in the determination of the efficacy of rhythm control as compared to rate control among patients with AF and HF. Methods Extensive search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Ovid, EMBASE, Google scholar, and Medline was done up to October 2020. Studies were limited to RCTs comparing rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure with rate control. Outcome measures include all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality. Statistical analysis was done using Review manager V5.3. Results A total of 9800 patients were included in the pooled analysis of the comparison of rhythm control versus rate control strategy in patients with AF and HF. All pooled analyses were done using random effects model. The pooled risk ratio for all-cause mortality of rate control vs rhythm control did not achieve significance at 1.15, with 95% CI 0.91 to 1.45, and p=0.24. There was statistically significant heterogeneity across the two studies with I2 of 54% and p=0.02 (Figure 1A). The pooled risk ratio for cardiovascular mortality in rate control strategy vs rhythm control is 1.19, with 95% CI 0.94 to 1.50, and p=0.15 (Figure 1B). Eight trials with 9987 participants reported stroke. The pooled risk ratio of stroke in rate control vs rhythm control is 1.11, with 95% CI 0.84 to 1.46, and p=0.47 (Figure 1C). The 95% CI for the pooled risk ratio cross 1.00, indicating an equivocal result. Our results do not indicate statistical heterogeneity across the studies with I2 of 28% and p=0.27. Seven trials with 8311 participants reported bleeding. The pooled risk ratio of hospitalization for bleeding in rate control vs rhythm control is 1.18, with 95% CI 0.81 to 1.73, and p=0.39 (Figure 1D). Thus, we have insufficient evidence to demonstrate whether rate or rhythm control have significantly higher or lower risk for bleeding. Four trials with 8468 participants reported hospitalization rate. The pooled risk ratio of hospitalization in rate control compared to rhythm control is 0.96, with 95% CI 0.86 to 1.07, and p=0.42 (Figure 1E). None of the studies individually showed statistically significant differences but AF–CHF showed benefit of rate control in the first year after enrolment (p=0.001) and a tendency favouring rate control (p=0.06) when the study was analysed in full length except for AF-CHF. Conclusion Among patients with AF and concomitant HF, there is no sufficient evidence between rate and rhythm control strategies in their effects to rates of mortality and major clinical outcomes; therefore, choosing an appropriate therapeutic strategy should consider individual variations such as patient preferences, comorbidities, and treatment cost. FUNDunding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None. Forest Plot A–C Forest Plot D–E

scholarly journals Atrial fibrillation ablation in heart failure

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (Supplement_E) ◽  
pp. E50-E53
Author(s):  
Cristina Balla ◽  
Riccardo Cappato
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Control Strategy ◽  
Rate Control ◽  
Pharmacological Therapy ◽  
Rhythm Control ◽  
Invasive Approach ◽  
Normal Cardiac Function

Abstract Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) commonly coexist in the same patient and either condition predisposes to the other. Several mechanisms promote the pathophysiological relationship between AF and HF, reducing quality of life, increasing the risk of stroke, and worsening HF progression. Although restoration and maintenance of sinus rhythm would be ideal for those patients, several trials comparing rhythm and rate control failed to show a benefit of rhythm control strategy, achieved with pharmacological therapy, in terms of hospitalization for HF or death. Catheter ablation is a well-established option for symptomatic AF patients, resistant to drug therapy, with normal cardiac function. Several recent studies have shown an improvement in clinical outcomes after AF ablation in HF patients highlighting the emerging role of the invasive approach in this subset of patients. However, several concerns regarding patients’ selection and standardization of the procedure still remain to be addressed.

scholarly journals Rate-control vs rhythm-control of atrial fibrillation in elderly patients. From new, age-oriented outcomes to a more complex management strategy

2018 ◽  
Vol 88 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefano Fumagalli ◽  
Serena Boni ◽  
Simone Pupo ◽  
Marta Migliorini ◽  
Irene Marozzi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Control Strategy ◽  
Rate Control ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Epidemiological Studies ◽  
Rhythm Control ◽  
Aged Patients ◽  
Aged People ◽  
Arrhythmia Management

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most frequent arrhythmia in elderly people. Findings derived from clinical trials seem to demonstrate that a rate-control strategy of AF in aged patients improves prognosis if compared to a rhythm-control one. However, epidemiological studies concordantly show that the arrhythmia is associated to increased hospitalization and mortality rates. In last years, the proportion of patients admitted to hospital for AF has progressively increased; this trend is observed in subjects >75 and >85 years, while no change was found in younger cohorts. Importantly, in aged individuals, probably because of the loss of atrial activity, the increase of heart rate and the irregularity of RR intervals, AF begins a vicious cycle, leading from heart failure, through the compromise of functional and neurocognitive status, to overt disability, dementia and increased mortality. Evidence specifically aimed at clarifying the effects of arrhythmia management on outcomes characteristic of aged people is completely lacking. In the elderly, the question regarding the effects of a rate- or a rhythm-control strategy of AF should be considered as an aspect of a more complex strategy, addressed to reduce disability and hospitalizations, and to improve quality of life and survival.

scholarly journals Quality indicators for the care and outcomes of adults with atrial fibrillation

EP Europace ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Arbelo ◽  
Suleman Aktaa ◽  
Andreas Bollmann ◽  
André D’Avila ◽  
Inga Drossart ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Risk Factor ◽  
Quality Indicators ◽  
Control Strategy ◽  
Rate Control ◽  
Rhythm Control ◽  
Patient Assessment ◽  
Risk Factor Management ◽  
Diagnosis And Management

Abstract Aims To develop quality indicators (QIs) that may be used to evaluate the quality of care and outcomes for adults with atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods and results We followed the ESC methodology for QI development. This methodology involved (i) the identification of the domains of AF care for the diagnosis and management of AF (by a group of experts including members of the ESC Clinical Practice Guidelines Task Force for AF); (ii) the construction of candidate QIs (including a systematic review of the literature); and (iii) the selection of the final set of QIs (using a modified Delphi method). Six domains of care for the diagnosis and management of AF were identified: (i) Patient assessment (baseline and follow-up), (ii) Anticoagulation therapy, (iii) Rate control strategy, (iv) Rhythm control strategy, (v) Risk factor management, and (vi) Outcomes measures, including patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). In total, 17 main and 17 secondary QIs, which covered all six domains of care for the diagnosis and management of AF, were selected. The outcome domain included measures on the consequences and treatment of AF, as well as PROMs. Conclusion This document defines six domains of AF care (patient assessment, anticoagulation, rate control, rhythm control, risk factor management, and outcomes), and provides 17 main and 17 secondary QIs for the diagnosis and management of AF. It is anticipated that implementation of these QIs will improve the quality of AF care.

scholarly journals Cabins, castles, and constant hearts: rhythm control therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (46) ◽  
pp. 3793-3799c ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephan Willems ◽  
Christian Meyer ◽  
Joseph de Bono ◽  
Axel Brandes ◽  
Lars Eckardt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Left Ventricular Function ◽  
Antiarrhythmic Drugs ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Rhythm Control ◽  
Af Ablation ◽  
Control Therapy

Abstract Recent innovations have the potential to improve rhythm control therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Controlled trials provide new evidence on the effectiveness and safety of rhythm control therapy, particularly in patients with AF and heart failure. This review summarizes evidence supporting the use of rhythm control therapy in patients with AF for different outcomes, discusses implications for indications, and highlights remaining clinical gaps in evidence. Rhythm control therapy improves symptoms and quality of life in patients with symptomatic AF and can be safely delivered in elderly patients with comorbidities (mean age 70 years, 3–7% complications at 1 year). Atrial fibrillation ablation maintains sinus rhythm more effectively than antiarrhythmic drug therapy, but recurrent AF remains common, highlighting the need for better patient selection (precision medicine). Antiarrhythmic drugs remain effective after AF ablation, underpinning the synergistic mechanisms of action of AF ablation and antiarrhythmic drugs. Atrial fibrillation ablation appears to improve left ventricular function in a subset of patients with AF and heart failure. Data on the prognostic effect of rhythm control therapy are heterogeneous without a clear signal for either benefit or harm. Rhythm control therapy has acceptable safety and improves quality of life in patients with symptomatic AF, including in elderly populations with stroke risk factors. There is a clinical need to better stratify patients for rhythm control therapy. Further studies are needed to determine whether rhythm control therapy, and particularly AF ablation, improves left ventricular function and reduces AF-related complications.

Quality of life and the associated risk of all-cause mortality in nonischemic heart failure

2020 ◽  
Vol 305 ◽  
pp. 92-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johan S. Bundgaard ◽  
Jens J. Thune ◽  
Gunnar Gislason ◽  
Emil L. Fosbøl ◽  
Christian Torp-Pedersen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Heart Failure ◽  
All Cause Mortality

scholarly journals Atrial Fibrillation Ablation in Patients with Heart Failure: One Size Does Not Fit All

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rahul K Mukherjee ◽  
Steven E Williams ◽  
Mark D O’Neill ◽  
◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Catheter Ablation ◽  
Rate Control ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Previous Treatment ◽  
Rhythm Control ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Limited Efficacy ◽  
Patients With Heart Failure

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in patients with heart failure and is associated with poorer clinical outcomes compared with patients with heart failure alone. Recent evidence has challenged previous treatment paradigms in which rate control was considered equivalent to rhythm control in this population. Catheter ablation has emerged as a safe and effective treatment strategy in selected patients and overcomes the issues of limited efficacy and drug toxicities associated with pharmacological rhythm control. Numerous studies have explored the benefits of catheter ablation in patients with heart failure, but these have included heterogeneous patient cohorts and variable ablation strategies. This state-of-the-art review explores the evidence from these trials and examines the need for tailored, patient-specific strategies for AF ablation in patients with heart failure.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document