Table 3 Studies of rate versus rhythm control
From: Clinical review: Clinical management of atrial fibrillation – rate control versus rhythm control
Study | Number of patients | Primary end-point | Results | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
PIAF [14] | 252 | Proportion of patients with symptomatic improvement | Improved exercise tolerance with rhythm control | More frequent hospital admission with rhythm control |
STAF [15] | 200 | Death, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, cerebrovascular event, systemic embolus | No difference in treatment strategies | Proportion of patients assigned to rhythm control low |
RACE [16] | 522 | Cardiovascular death, heart failure, thromboembolism, bleeding, pacemaker implantation, severe adverse effects of drugs | No difference between treatment strategies | Lower risk of adverse drug effects with rate control |
AFFIRM [17] | 4060 | Total mortality | No difference between treatment strategies | Lower risk for adverse drug effects with rate control |