Key result
In patients with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy, chronic atrial fibrillation was associated with smaller left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (P<0.05) compared to sinus rhythm.
Why the study?
How do clinical, hemodynamic, and biomarker characteristics differ between idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy patients with chronic atrial fibrillation versus sinus rhythm?
Population
87 patients with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy (IDC)
Comparison
Chronic atrial fibrillation (AF) group (n=19) vs Sinus rhythm (SR) group (n=68)
Design
Cross-sectional
Authors
Loading...
Paradoxical smaller LVEDD with chronic AF suggests distinct remodeling; hypothesis-generating and should not yet change practice in idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy.
Observational (n=87)
How do clinical, hemodynamic, and biomarker characteristics differ between idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy patients with chronic atrial fibrillation versus sinus rhythm?
In patients with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy, chronic atrial fibrillation is associated with a more unfavorable prognostic profile but paradoxically smaller left ventricular size compared to sinus rhythm.
Tuomainen et al. (2013) conducted an observational in Idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy (n=87). Chronic atrial fibrillation vs. Sinus rhythm was evaluated on Clinical, echocardiographic, and hemodynamic characteristics. In patients with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy, chronic atrial fibrillation was associated with smaller left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (P<0.05) compared to sinus rhythm.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: