Key result
Early rhythm-control therapy was associated with a 14% lower risk of the primary composite cardiovascular outcome compared to rate-control therapy in non-frail older adults with atrial fibrillation.
Why the study?
It was unknown whether frailty affects the cardiovascular outcomes of early rhythm-control versus rate-control therapy in older patients with AF.
Does early rhythm-control therapy reduce the composite of cardiovascular mortality, MI, HF hospitalization, and ischemic stroke compared to rate-control therapy in older adults with atrial fibrillation across different frailty levels?
Cohort (n=20,611)
Does early rhythm-control therapy reduce the composite of cardiovascular mortality, MI, HF hospitalization, and ischemic stroke compared to rate-control therapy in older adults with atrial fibrillation across different frailty levels?
Hazard Ratio: 0.86 (95% CI 0.79–0.93)
Absolute Event Rate: 7.3% vs 8.6%
Absolute Risk Reduction: 1.4%
p-value: p=<0.001
Early rhythm-control therapy in older adults with AF is associated with better cardiovascular outcomes in non-frail patients, with a consistent but attenuated benefit in frail patients.
Frailty may modify early rhythm-control benefits in older AF; hypothesis-generating, requires prospective confirmation before practice change.
Purpose Rhythm-control therapy administered early following the initial diagnosis of atrial fibrillation (AF) has superior cardiovascular outcomes compared to rate-control therapy. Frailty is a key factor in identifying older patients’ potential for improvement after rhythm-control therapy. This study evaluated whether frailty affects the outcome of early rhythm-control therapy in older patients with AF. Methods From the Korean National Health Insurance Service database (2005–2015), we collected 20,611 populations aged ≥65 years undergoing rhythm- or rate-control therapy initiated within 1 year of AF diagnosis. Participants were emulated by the EAST-AFNET4 trial, and stratified into non-frail, moderately frail, and highly frail groups based on the hospital frailty risk score (HFRS). A composite outcome of cardiovascular-related mortality, myocardial infarction, hospitalization for heart failure, and ischemic stroke was compared between rhythm- and rate-control. Results Early rhythm-control strategy showed a 14% lower risk of the primary composite outcome in the non-frail group [weighted incidence 7.3 vs. 8.6 per 100 person-years; hazard ratio (HR) 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79–0.93, p < 0.001] than rate-control strategy. A consistent trend toward a lower risk of early rhythm-control was observed in the moderately frail (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.81–1.02, p = 0.09) and highly frail (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.75–1.17, p = 0.55) groups. Conclusion Although the degree attenuated with increasing frailty, the superiority of cardiovascular outcomes of early rhythm-control in AF treatment was maintained without increased risk for safety outcomes. An individualized approach is required on the benefits of early rhythm-control therapy in older patients with AF, regardless of their frailty status.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yu et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Atrial fibrillation (n=20,611). Early rhythm-control therapy vs. Early rate-control therapy was evaluated on Composite of cardiovascular-related mortality, myocardial infarction, hospitalization for heart failure, and ischemic stroke (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.79-0.93, p=<0.001). Early rhythm-control therapy was associated with a 14% lower risk of the primary composite cardiovascular outcome compared to rate-control therapy in non-frail older adults with atrial fibrillation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: