Why the study?
Whether pharmacological rhythm control of AF reduces the risk of dementia compared to rate control remains unclear.
Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Population
3382 AF patients aged ≥65 years from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Database
Comparison
Pharmacological rhythm control vs rate control medications
Design
Nationwide cohort study
Follow-up
4.86 ± 3.38 years
May support rhythm control to lower dementia risk in older AF patients; leaves open confirmation in randomized trials.
Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) increases the risk of dementia. Whether the pharmacological rhythm control of AF can reduce the risk of dementia compared to the rate control strategy remains unclear. We hypothesize that the rhythm control strategy is better than the rate control strategy in preventing dementia. Methods: AF patients aged ≥65 years were identified from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Database. Patients receiving anti-arrhythmic drugs at a cumulative defined daily dose (cDDD) of >30 within the first year of enrollment constituted the rhythm control group. Patients who used rate control medications for a cDDD of >30 constituted the rate control group. A multivariate Cox hazards regression model was used to determine the hazard ratio (HR) for dementia. Results: A total of 3382 AF patients (698 in the rhythm control group; 2684 in the rate control group) were analyzed. During a 4.86 ± 3.38 year follow-up period, 414 dementia events occurred. The rhythm control group had a lower rate of dementia than the rate control group (adjust HR: 0.75, p = 0.031). The rhythm control strategy reduced the risk of dementia particularly in those receiving aspirin (p = 0.03). Conclusions: In patients with AF, pharmacological rhythm control was associated with a lower risk of dementia than rate control over a long-term follow-up period, particularly in patients receiving aspirin treatment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lin et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: