Comparison of rate control and rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation after percutaneous mitral balloon valvotomy: a randomised controlled study

Outcomes and care quality metrics for people living with rheumatic heart disease and atrial fibrillation in Uganda

Background

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common complication of rheumatic heart disease (RHD) and is challenging to treat in lower-resourced settings in which RHD remains endemic.

Objective

We characterized demographics, treatment outcomes, and factors leading to care retention for participants with RHD and AF in Uganda.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective analysis of the Uganda national RHD registry between June 2009 and May 2018. Participants with AF or atrial flutter were included. Demographics, survival, and care metrics were compared with participants without AF. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with retention in care among participants with AF.

Results

A total of 1530 participants with RHD were analyzed and 293 (19%) had AF. The median age was 24 (interquartile range 14-38) years. Mortality was similar in both groups (adjusted hazard ratio 1.183, P = .77) over a median follow-up of 203 (interquartile range 98-275) days. A total of 79% of AF participants were prescribed anticoagulation, and 43% were aware of their target international normalized ratio. Retention in care was higher in participants with AF (18% vs 12%, P < .01). Factors associated with decreased retention in care include New York Heart Association functional class III/IV (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.30-0.76) and distance to nearest health center (adjusted OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.90-0.99). Anticoagulation prescription was associated with enhanced care retention (adjusted OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.24-2.79).

Conclusion

Participants with RHD and AF in Uganda do not experience higher mortality than those without AF. Anticoagulation prescription rates are high. Although retention in care is poor among RHD participants, those with concurrent AF are more likely to be retained.

The impact of rate and rhythm control strategies on quality of life for patients with atrial fibrillation: a protocol for a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common heart arrhythmia globally and it adversely affects the quality of life (QoL). Available rate and rhythm control strategies equally reduce mortality but may impact QoL differently. A number of systematic reviews have focused on the impact of specific strategies on QoL, though a 2006 review synthesized the evidence on the effect of all strategies on QoL, allowing for a clinically important comparison between the types of strategies. Many trials have been published since the review undertook the search in 2005; therefore, an update is needed. This systematic review aims to provide an update to the 2006 review on the impact of all rate and rhythm control strategies on QoL in people with AF.

METHODS

The following four databases and three clinical trial registries will be searched for primary studies: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ClinicalTrialsRegister.eu. No language restriction will be applied. The search will be limited to 2004 or later publication year to allow overlap with the search conducted by the 2006 review authors. Any randomized control trial that reports the QoL of adult (≥ 18 years) AF patients following an eligible rate or rhythm control intervention will be eligible for inclusion. Eligible interventions (and comparators) include pacing, atrioventricular node junction and bundle of HIS ablation, pharmacological therapy, radio frequency catheter ablation, cryoablation, pulmonary vein isolation, maze operation, pace maker implantation, and defibrillator implantation. Two reviewers will independently screen for eligible studies, extract the data using a piloted tool, and assess bias by QoL outcome using the RoB 2 tool. The suitability of conducting a meta-analysis will be assessed by the clinical and methodology similarities of included studies. If it is feasible, standardized mean differences will be pooled using a random-effects model and assessed appropriately.

DISCUSSION

The findings from this review will allow for meaningful comparisons between various rate and rhythm control strategies regarding their impact on QoL. This review will be useful for a wide range of stakeholders and will be crucial for optimizing the overall wellbeing of AF patients.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42021290542.

Management of atrial fibrillation in rheumatic heart disease

Rheumatic heart disease (RHD) is the underlying cause of a significant proportion of atrial fibrillation (AF) in the low- and middle-income countries, while nonvalvular AF is the most common cause of AF in high-income countries. RHD is also common among African Americans, migrants, and the indigenous population of high-income countries. The onset of AF in RHD patients is a clinical marker of worse outcomes and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Despite RHD being a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the young in many parts of the world, it is often neglected by policymakers, the media, and even the medical fraternity. Stroke risk assessment using various risk scores has not been systematically evaluated in rheumatic AF patients. Rate control may not be ideal for symptom control in rheumatic AF patients considering the young age and an active lifestyle. There is limited information regarding the nonpharmacological management of rheumatic AF. The current management guidelines based on nonvalvular AF do not apply to rheumatic AF patients who are often younger, are women, and have fewer comorbidities. This review critically looks at specific areas such as stroke prevention with reference to direct oral anticoagulants, cardioversion, rate and rhythm control strategies, and the role of nonpharmacological methods in rheumatic AF management. Future recommendations must be cognizant of local health care systems and resourcing considering the geographic distribution of the disease.

Combined atrial fibrillation ablation and balloon mitral commissurotomy in patients with rheumatic mitral stenosis

INTRODUCTION

Ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) is usually not considered in patients with rheumatic mitral stenosis (RMS). We analyzed the results of a combined procedure of AF ablation and percutaneous balloon mitral commissurotomy (PBMC).

METHODS

We prospectively included 22 patients with severe RMS to undergo a combined PBMC + AF ablation procedure. Noninvasive mapping of the atria was also performed. A historical sample of propensity-scored matched patients who underwent PBMC alone was used as controls. The primary endpoint was freedom from AF/AT at 1-year. Multivariate analysis evaluated sinus rhythm (SR) predictors.

RESULTS

Successful pulmonary vein isolation and electrocardiographic imaging-based drivers ablation was performed in 20 patients following PBMC. At 1-year, 75% of the patients in the combined group were in SR compared to 40% in the propensity-score matched group (p = 0.004). The composite of AF recurrence, need for mitral surgery and all-cause mortality was also more frequent in the control group (65% vs. 30%; p = 0.005). Catheter ablation (odds ratio [OR] 1.58; 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.17-17.37]; p = 0.04) and AF type (OR 1.46; 95% CI [1.05-82.64]; p < 0.001) were the only independent predictors of SR at 1-year. Noninvasive mapping in the combined group showed that the number of simultaneous rotors (OR 2.10; 95% CI [1.41-10.2]; p = 0.04) was the only independent predictor of AF.

CONCLUSION

A combined procedure of AF ablation and PBMC significantly increased the proportion of patients in sinus rhythm at 1-year. Noninvasive mapping may help to improve AF characterization and guide personalized AF treatment.

The 40th Anniversary of Percutaneous Balloon Valvuloplasty for Mitral Stenosis: Current Status

Percutaneous balloon mitral valvuloplasty (PBMV), once the most complex of percutaneous cardiac procedures and essentially the first adult structural heart intervention, set the stage for a host of new technologies. Randomized studies comparing PBMV to surgery were the first to provide a high-level evidence base in structural heart. The devices used have changed little in 40 years, but the advent of improved imaging and the expertise gained in interventional cardiology has provided some additional procedural safety. However, with the decline in rheumatic heart disease, PBMV is being performed in fewer patients in industrialized nations; in turn, these patients have more comorbidities, less favorable anatomy, and thus a higher rate of procedure-related complications. There remain relatively few experienced operators, and the procedure is distinct enough from the rest of the structural heart intervention world that it has its own steep learning curve. This article reviews the use of PBMV in a variety of clinical settings, the influence of anatomic and physiologic factors on outcomes, the changes in the guidelines, and alternative approaches. PBMV remains the procedure of choice in patients with mitral stenosis with ideal anatomy and a useful tool in patients with less than ideal anatomy who are poor surgical candidates. In the 40 years since its first performance, PBMV has revolutionized the care of mitral stenosis patients in developing countries and remains an important option for suitable patients in industrialized nations.

Safety and Efficacy of Ibutilide for Acute Pharmacological Cardioversion of Rheumatic Atrial Fibrillation

INTRODUCTION

Ibutilide is indicated for acute cardioversion of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF). However, its efficacy and safety in the pharmacological cardioversion of rheumatic AF are unknown.

METHODS

Patients with mild-to-moderate rheumatic mitral valve (MV) disease with symptomatic, paroxysmal, or persistent AF were included in the analysis. Intravenous ibutilide was administered at doses tailored to body weight (0.5-2.0 mg) for over 10 min. The primary end point was efficacy, assessed as the rate of conversion of AF to sinus rhythm. The secondary end point was safety, including arrhythmic events and death within 24 h of drug initiation.

RESULTS

From June 2016 to October 2018, 165 patients (94 with mitral stenosis, 23 with mitral regurgitation, 11 with mixed MV disease, and 37 with MV replacement) received ibutilide (mean dose 0.90 ± 0.54 mg). Ibutilide successfully converted AF to sinus rhythm in 127/165 (76.9%) patients, with a conversion time of 7.9 ± 4.1 min. The QTc increased from 419.9 ± 15.8 to 487.5 ± 34 ms after ibutilide administration (p < 0.001). The mean change in QTc after ibutilide administration (∆QTc) was 72.01 ± 36.03. There were no deaths, but 3 patients (1.8%) developed torsades de pointes (TdP) requiring defibrillation 55 ± 37 min after infusion.

CONCLUSION

Ibutilide cardioverted 77% of rheumatic AF to sinus rhythm, indicating its potential as a clinically useful option for pharmacological cardioversion of rheumatic AF. TdP is a potentially serious adverse event that requires careful monitoring.

A pilot study on the acute conversion and maintenance of sinus rhythm in rheumatic atrial fibrillation using oral flecainide

Background

Achievement of sinus rhythm (SR) is an important goal in rheumatic atrial fibrillation (AF). Studies in rheumatic AF have often used amiodarone for rhythm control. Flecainide has not been studied in these patients due to concerns of underlying structural heart disease.

Methods

Pharmacological cardioversion by oral single loading dose (SLD) of Flecainide (4 mg/kg, ≤300 mg) was tested in 50 patients with rheumatic AF (MVA 1.51 ± 0.19 mm², age 46.2 ± 10.28 yrs, AF duration 3.10 ± 1.7 yrs, LA size: 44.42 ± 7.48 mm). Non-converters underwent DC cardioversion (DCC) at 24 h. All patients received oral flecainide and ββ/diltiazem at discharge.

Results

At 24 h, 38/50 (76%) achieved SR (2 with SLD; 36 after DCC). At 30 days (mean Flecainide dose 116.5 ± 10.5 mg) successful maintenance of SR was noted in 31/38 (89%). At 1 year, 30/38 (79%) of the initial converters and 60% of the overall population maintained SR. Those in SR had significantly better NYHA Class (1.1 ± 0.12 vs 1.3 ± 0.10, p = 0.03) and mean PCS8 score (50.11 ± 5.337 vs 46.84 ± 5.379, p = 0.02). AF duration (OR 0.594 CI 0.375–0.940, p = 0.02) and LA size (OR 0.840, CI 0.757–0.933, p = 0.001) were found to be the only significant predictors of successful outcomes. Patients with AF duration <3.5 years and LA size <51 mm had 85% and 75% chance of maintaining SR at 1 year, respectively.

Conclusion

Flecainide is safe and effective for achieving and maintaining SR in patients of rheumatic AF who are unlikely to have underlying coronary artery disease or ventricular dysfunction.

Rheumatic Mitral Valve Stenosis: Diagnosis and Treatment Options

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review provides an update on rheumatic mitral stenosis. Acute rheumatic fever (RF), the sequela of group A β-hemolytic streptococcal infection, is the major etiology for mitral stenosis (MS).

RECENT FINDINGS

While the incidence of acute RF in the Western world had substantially declined over the past five decades, this trend is reversing due to immigration from non-industrialized countries where rheumatic heart disease (RHD) is higher. Pre-procedural evaluation for treatment of MS using a multimodality approach with 2D and 3D transthoracic and transesophageal echo, stress echo, cardiac CT scanning, and cardiac MRI as well as hemodynamic assessment by cardiac catheterization is discussed. The current methods of percutaneous mitral balloon commissurotomy (PMBC) and surgery are also discussed. New data on long-term follow-up after PMBC is also presented. For severe rheumatic MS, medical therapy is ineffective and definitive therapy entails PMBC in patients with suitable morphological mitral valve (MV) characteristics, or surgery. As procedural outcomes depend heavily on appropriate case selection, definitive imaging and interpretation are crucial. It is also important to understand the indications as well as morphological MV characteristics to identify the appropriate treatment with PMBC or surgery.

Different Characteristics, Clinical Outcomes, and Left Atrial Reverse Remodeling in Patients with Mitral Stenosis Maintaining Sinus Rhythm for at Least 10 Years after Successful Percutaneous Mitral Valvuloplasty

BACKGROUND

We aimed to investigate the characteristics and echocardiographic changes in patients with severe mitral stenosis (MS) who maintained sinus rhythm (SR) for at least 10 years after successful percutaneous mitral balloon valvuloplasty (PMV).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 107 patients who had successful PMV and follow-up echocardiography for at least 10 years without mitral valve surgery. Preprocedural, immediate postprocedural (PMV), and long-term follow-up echocardiography (at least 10 years after PMV) data were reviewed.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up time after PMV was 15 ± 4 years for SR patients (n = 50) and 16 ± 4 years (p = 0.172) for atrial fibrillation (AF) patients (n = 57). The left atrial diameter was significantly decreased in SR patients in the follow-up echocardiography images compared to its pre-PMV value (46.7 ± 6.3 vs. 43.3 ± 6.2 mm, respectively), whereas it was significantly increased in patients with AF (53.9 ± 7.1 vs. 58.1 ± 8.7 mm). In multivariate analysis, preprocedural AF (odds ratio [OR] 14.50, p = 0.001) and LA diameter ≥50 mm (OR 8.81, p < 0.001) were independently associated with increased risk for the presence of AF after successful PMV.

CONCLUSION

Very long-term maintenance of SR after successful PMV was associated with preprocedural SR and LA diameter < 50 mm.

Management of atrial fibrillation in patients with rheumatic mitral stenosis

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is frequent in patients with rheumatic mitral stenosis (MS). Pressure overload leads to marked structural and electrical remodelling of left atrium. The frequency of persistent AF increases with age and paroxysmal, asymptomatic, AF seems even more frequent. The occurrence of AF worsens the haemodynamic tolerance of MS and markedly increases the risk of thromboembolic events. AF has a negative impact on the natural history of MS and on its outcome after commissurotomy. The respective indications of rhythm and rate control should be adapted to patient characteristics, particularly the consequences of MS, and take into account the high risk of recurrence of AF. Oral anticoagulant therapy is mandatory when AF complicates MS, regardless of its severity and CHA2DS2-VASc score. Non-vitamin K antagonists oral anticoagulants are not recommended in moderate-to-severe MS due to the lack of data. Percutaneous mitral commissurotomy does not appear to prevent the occurrence of AF in MS but should be considered as the first-line therapy when AF is associated with severe symptomatic MS, followed by the discussion of cardioversion or ablation. AF ablation should be considered in patients with mitral disease requiring intervention, but the ideal timing and techniques are difficult to determine due to the lack of appropriate specific randomised trials in patients with MS.

The effects of rhythm control strategies versus rate control strategies for atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter: A systematic review with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis

Background

Atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter may be managed by either a rhythm control strategy or a rate control strategy but the evidence on the clinical effects of these two intervention strategies is unclear. Our objective was to assess the beneficial and harmful effects of rhythm control strategies versus rate control strategies for atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter.

Methods

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, Web of Science, BIOSIS, Google Scholar, clinicaltrials.gov, TRIP, EU-CTR, Chi-CTR, and ICTRP for eligible trials comparing any rhythm control strategy with any rate control strategy in patients with atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter published before November 2016. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, and quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were stroke and ejection fraction. We performed both random-effects and fixed-effect meta-analysis and chose the most conservative result as our primary result. We used Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA) to control for random errors. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed by visual inspection of forest plots and by calculating inconsistency (I²) for traditional meta-analyses and diversity (D²) for TSA. Sensitivity analyses and subgroup analyses were conducted to explore the reasons for substantial statistical heterogeneity. We assessed the risk of publication bias in meta-analyses consisting of 10 trials or more with tests for funnel plot asymmetry. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the body of evidence.

Results

25 randomized clinical trials (n = 9354 participants) were included, all of which were at high risk of bias. Meta-analysis showed that rhythm control strategies versus rate control strategies significantly increased the risk of a serious adverse event (risk ratio (RR), 1.10; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.02 to 1.18; P = 0.02; I² = 12% (95% CI 0.00 to 0.32); 21 trials), but TSA did not confirm this result (TSA-adjusted CI 0.99 to 1.22). The increased risk of a serious adverse event did not seem to be caused by any single component of the composite outcome. Meta-analysis showed that rhythm control strategies versus rate control strategies were associated with better SF-36 physical component score (mean difference (MD), 6.93 points; 95% CI, 2.25 to 11.61; P = 0.004; I² = 95% (95% CI 0.94 to 0.96); 8 trials) and ejection fraction (MD, 4.20%; 95% CI, 0.54 to 7.87; P = 0.02; I² = 79% (95% CI 0.69 to 0.85); 7 trials), but TSA did not confirm these results. Both meta-analysis and TSA showed no significant differences on all-cause mortality, SF-36 mental component score, Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire, and stroke.

Conclusions

Rhythm control strategies compared with rate control strategies seem to significantly increase the risk of a serious adverse event in patients with atrial fibrillation. Based on current evidence, it seems that most patients with atrial fibrillation should be treated with a rate control strategy unless there are specific reasons (e.g., patients with unbearable symptoms due to atrial fibrillation or patients who are hemodynamically unstable due to atrial fibrillation) justifying a rhythm control strategy. More randomized trials at low risk of bias and low risk of random errors are needed.

Trial registration

PROSPERO CRD42016051433

Sinus Rhythm in Rheumatic Mitral Stenosis after Balloon Mitral Valvotomy: Is it Feasible?

INTRODUCTION

Atrial Fibrillation (AF) is largely present in patients with rheumatic valvular disease, leading to hospitalizations.

AIM

We aimed to study the restoration and maintenance of Sinus Rhythm (SR) in rheumatic patients with Mitral Stenosis (MS) and AF after Balloon Mitral Valvotomy (BMV) and evaluated the factors which affect the maintenance of SR.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 50 patients who underwent BMV at U. N. Mehta Institute of Cardiology and Research Centre from 2010 November to 2013 January were included in the study. Subsequently, all patients were treated with amiodarone and electrical cardioversion was applied in patients in whom it was necessary. The patients were followed for six months for conversion and maintenance of SR.

RESULTS

Total 34 (68%) patients reverted to SR. Twelve patients reverted to SR with amiodarone and 22 patients with electrical cardioversion and amiodarone. Out of the total, 29 patients and 26 patients remained in SR at the end of follow up at 3 months and 6 months respectively.

CONCLUSION

Smaller Left Atrial (LA) size and greater Mitral Valve Area (MVA) are the chief predictors of restoration and maintenance of SR. Combining BMV with an aggressive anti-arrhythmic strategy offers the best prospect of rhythm control.

Evaluation of early direct current cardioversion for maintenance of sinus rhythm in rheumatic atrial fibrillation following successful balloon mitral valvotomy

Background

Patients with rheumatic mitral stenosis (MS) and atrial fibrillation (AF) are at risk for thromboembolism and restoration of sinus rhythm (SR) may be the preferred strategy. Percutaneous balloon mitral valvotomy (PBMV) improves hemodynamics, but may not be enough to restore SR.

Methods

Prospective randomized study aimed at evaluating efficacy of early direct current cardioversion (DCCV) following successful PBMV in patients with long-standing AF. Group 1 (n = 20) had patients of rheumatic MS with AF who underwent successful PBMV. Group 2 (n = 15) patients were DC cardioverted and administered oral Amiodarone for 6 weeks. Primary endpoint was maintenance of SR after 6 months. Secondary endpoints were functional capacity, number of embolic episodes, adverse drug effects, and all-cause mortality.

Results

In Group 2, all patients underwent successful cardioversion. At a mean follow-up of 7.6 months, 95% in Group 1 were in AF. In Group 2, 87% patients were in SR and 13% had reverted to AF. Difference in rate of SR was 0.82 (95% CI 0.2, 1.01) (p = 0.001), with relative risk of 7.1 (1.95, 25.9, 95% CI, p = 0.001) for patients to be in AF who underwent only successful PBMV, i.e. Group 1. There was significant improvement in quality of life (SF36) score in Group 2 (p = 0.001), with no deaths, stroke, or adverse drug effects in either group.

Conclusion

In patients with rheumatic MS and AF, early DCCV and a short-duration oral Amiodarone, following successful PBMV, may be a reasonable strategy to attain long-term SR.

Examining the safety of amiodarone

INTRODUCTION

Amiodarone is the most widely used antiarrhythmic agent, with demonstrated effectiveness against all the spectrum of cardiac tachyarrhythmias. The risk of adverse effects acts as a limiting factor to its utilization especially in the long term. This article systematically reviews the published evidence on amiodarone versus placebo to examine its safety as an antiarrhythmic drug.

AREAS COVERED

Authors collected data on adverse effects reported in 49 randomized placebo-controlled trials with amiodarone. Adverse effects were classified according to the organ/system involved. Pooled estimates of the number needed to treat (NNT) and to harm (NNH) versus placebo were calculated.

EXPERT OPINION

Amiodarone is effective for both the acute conversion of atrial fibrillation (AF) (11 trials, NNT = 4 at 24 h; p = 0.003) and the prevention of postoperative AF (18 trials, NNT = 8; p < 0.001), although with an increased risk of bradycardia, hypotension, nausea or phlebitis (pooled NNH = 4; p < 0.001). Amiodarone administration for the maintenance of sinus rhythm has a favorable net clinical benefit (pooled NNT = 3; p < 0.001 versus pooled NNH for either thyroid toxicity, gastrointestinal discomfort, skin toxicity or eye toxicity = 11; p < 0.001). Treatment with amiodarone for the prophylaxis of sudden cardiac death has less favorable net clinical benefit (15 trials, NNT = 38; p < 0.001 versus NNH for either thyroid toxicity, hepatic toxicity, pulmonary toxicity or bradycardia = 14; p < 0.001). Amiodarone treatment in this setting should be used in only selected cases.

Mitral stenosis

Mitral stenosis is a common disease that causes substantial morbidity worldwide. The disease is most prevalent in developing countries, but is increasingly being identified in an atypical form in developed countries. All treatments that increase valve area improve morbidity. Mortality improves with surgery; the benefit of percutaneous balloon valvuloplasty to mortality might be similar to that of surgery but needs further study. Percutaneous balloon valvuloplasty is the treatment of choice for patients in whom treatment is indicated, except for those with suboptimum valve morphology, and even these patients are sometimes treated with this procedure if surgery is not feasible or if surgical risk is prohibitive. We review the pathology, diagnosis, and treatment options for patients with mitral stenosis.

Benefits and risks of long-term amiodarone therapy for persistent atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether amiodarone, as part of a strategy to achieve sinus rhythm, is safe and effective compared with a placebo or rate control drug in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) of more than 30 days' duration.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials comparing amiodarone with a placebo or rate control drug were identified through the EMBASE (January 1, 1988, to October 18, 2008), MEDLINE (January 1, 1966, to October 18, 2008), and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (second issue 2008) databases with no language restrictions.

RESULTS

Twelve randomized controlled trials that involved a total of 5060 patients with persistent AF were considered. Amiodarone was more effective than a placebo or rate control drug in achieving sinus rhythm (21.3 vs 9.2 per 100 patient-years in sinus rhythm; relative risk [RR], 3.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.9-5.5), and its use was not associated with an increased risk of long-term mortality (4.7 vs 3.9 per 100 patient-years; RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.8-1.1; P=.51; I2=0%). Cessation of amiodarone therapy because of intolerable adverse effects was more common compared with a placebo or rate control drug (10.7 vs 1.9 per 100 patient-years; RR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.4-6.2; P<.001; I2=70%), but amiodarone was not associated with an increased incidence of hospitalizations (RR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.6-2.1; P=.77; I2=90%).

CONCLUSION

Amiodarone, as part of a strategy to achieve and maintain sinus rhythm, appears to be safe and effective in patients with persistent AF. However, some patients may not tolerate the adverse effects of this agent.

Benefits and risks of long-term amiodarone therapy for persistent atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether amiodarone, as part of a strategy to achieve sinus rhythm, is safe and effective compared with a placebo or rate control drug in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) of more than 30 days' duration.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials comparing amiodarone with a placebo or rate control drug were identified through the EMBASE (January 1, 1988, to October 18, 2008), MEDLINE (January 1, 1966, to October 18, 2008), and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (second issue 2008) databases with no language restrictions.

RESULTS

Twelve randomized controlled trials that involved a total of 5060 patients with persistent AF were considered. Amiodarone was more effective than a placebo or rate control drug in achieving sinus rhythm (21.3 vs 9.2 per 100 patient-years in sinus rhythm; relative risk [RR], 3.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.9-5.5), and its use was not associated with an increased risk of long-term mortality (4.7 vs 3.9 per 100 patient-years; RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.8-1.1; P=.51; I2=0%). Cessation of amiodarone therapy because of intolerable adverse effects was more common compared with a placebo or rate control drug (10.7 vs 1.9 per 100 patient-years; RR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.4-6.2; P<.001; I2=70%), but amiodarone was not associated with an increased incidence of hospitalizations (RR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.6-2.1; P=.77; I2=90%).

CONCLUSION

Amiodarone, as part of a strategy to achieve and maintain sinus rhythm, appears to be safe and effective in patients with persistent AF. However, some patients may not tolerate the adverse effects of this agent.

Atrial fibrillation: Rhythm control offers no advantage over rate control for some, but not all

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is not a benign condition. Although AF is the most common sustained cardiac arrhythmia, the management of AF remains controversial. In recent years, several clinical trials comparing rhythm control with rate control for AF management found that rhythm control offers no advantage over rate control, but the findings may not apply equally to all patients. The main point is the high risk of AF recurrence in these trials and the toxic effects and poor efficacy of presently available antiarrhythmic drugs negate the benefit of rhythm control. Rhythm control should be considered as the preferred initial therapy if sinus rhythm had been maintained in a higher proportion of patients. For the moment, the optimal strategy to treat AF should be individualized, with a bias towards rate control if patients are at high risk for arrhythmias or can be kept asymptomatic. Rhythm control may still be justified in younger patients or patients who still have symptoms despite adequate rate control. In addition, patients with new or first-episode AF often warrant at least an initial trial of rhythm control.