Clinical review: clinical management of atrial fibrillation - rate control versus rhythm control.
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share
Key result
Rhythm control shows no benefit over rate control as primary therapy for persistent AF.
Why the study?
Although rhythm-control strategies for atrial fibrillation have plausible benefits, recent randomized trials have not shown their superiority over rate-control strategies.
Population
Patients with atrial fibrillation
Comparison
Rhythm-control strategy versus rate-control strategy
Design
Clinical review of randomized trials
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Implication
Rate control acceptable as primary strategy in persistent AF; reinforces trial data but leaves optimal patient selection open.
PICO
P
Population
Atrial fibrillation
I
Intervention / Comparator
Rate control vs Rhythm control
Cite This Study
Lim et al. (2004) conducted a review in Atrial fibrillation. Rate control vs. Rhythm control was evaluated. Recent randomized trials have failed to demonstrate the superiority of rhythm control over rate control, establishing rate control as an acceptable primary approach for persistent atrial fibrillation.
Topics
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share