Key result
Permanent atrial fibrillation represents a high-risk subset comprising nearly half of all AF patients, yet adequate rate control is achieved in only 50.2% of cases.
Why the study?
Does permanent atrial fibrillation differ from nonpermanent atrial fibrillation in clinical characteristics, management, and control rates?
Population
10,491 patients with atrial fibrillation from an international, observational, cross-sectional survey…
Comparison
Permanent atrial fibrillation vs Nonpermanent atrial fibrillation
Design
Cross-sectional
Authors
Loading...
Permanent AF patients show higher risk with rate control in only half; leaves open whether optimizing control improves symptoms or HF outcomes.
Cross-Sectional (n=10,491)
Yes
Does permanent atrial fibrillation differ from nonpermanent atrial fibrillation in clinical characteristics, management, and control rates?
Permanent atrial fibrillation represents a high-risk subset with higher CHADS2 scores and comorbidities, yet adequate rate control is achieved in only about half of patients.
Murín et al. (2014) conducted a cross-sectional in Atrial Fibrillation (n=10,491). Permanent Atrial Fibrillation vs. Nonpermanent Atrial Fibrillation was evaluated on Successful atrial fibrillation control (heart rate ≤80 bpm or sinus rhythm). Permanent atrial fibrillation represents a high-risk subset comprising nearly half of all AF patients, yet adequate rate control is achieved in only 50.2% of cases.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: