Why the study?
Does rhythm control improve prognosis and QOL compared to rate control in Japanese patients with atrial fibrillation?
Does rhythm control improve prognosis and QOL compared to rate control in Japanese patients with atrial fibrillation?
In Japanese patients, rhythm control is viable for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation to maintain QOL, whereas rate control is preferred for persistent atrial fibrillation due to the side effects of antiarrhythmic drugs.
No abstract yet. The journal hasn't published one we can show.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Haruaki Nakaya (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: