Comparative clinical outcomes of dronedarone and sotalol in Asian patients with atrial fibrillation: a nationwide cohort study

Figures

• 

  Figure 1. Weighted cumulative Kaplan–Meier curves of dronedarone versus sotalol groups in clinical outcomes (A) Primary outcome [Composite of CV hospitalization and all-cause death]; (B) Secondary outcome [CV hospitalization]; (C) Secondary outcome [All-cause death]; and (D) Exploratory outcome [Non-pharmacologic rhythm control]. CV, indicates cardiovascular; IPTW was estimated using logistic regression with patient age, sex, CHA2DS2-VASc score, mCCI, number of baseline AADs, type of baseline AADs, comorbidity, concomitant drugs, hospital type at index date, insurance type and index year.

• 

  Figure 2. Dronedarone versus sotalol: Hazard ratios of clinical outcomes. The sotalol group was used as a reference group. IPTW indicates inverse probability of treatment weight, IR incidence rate, PY person-year, HR hazard ratio, CI confidence interval, CV cardiovascular. IPTW was estimated using logistic regression with patient age, sex, CHA2DS2-VASc score, mCCI, number of AADs in baseline, type of AADs in baseline, comorbidity, concomitant drugs, hospital type at index date, insurance type and index year.

• 

  Figure 3. Hazard ratio for primary outcome according to various subgroups using sotalol as a reference. The sotalol group was used as a reference group. AADs antiarrhythmic drugs, mCCI modified Charlson comorbidity index; IPTW was estimated using logistic regression with patient age, sex, CHA2DS2-VASc score, mCCI, number of AADs in baseline, baseline AADs, comorbidity, concomitant drugs, hospital type at index date, insurance type and index year. P-value was derived from Cox regression with IPTW in each subgroup. P-for-interaction was value for interaction term with treatment and each subgroups.