Cited by 53Atrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesHeart rate and cardiovascular healthCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies

Pharmacological rate control of atrial fibrillation

Tamariz, Leonardo J, Bass, Eric B·2004·Cardiology Clinics

Abstract

To control ventricular rate in patients with AF, physicians should seek to control heart rate at rest and with exertion. The goal has to be achieved while minimizing costs and adverse effects. For emergency use, i.v. diltiazem or esmolol are drugs useful because of their rapid onset of action. They have to be used with caution in patients with concomitant left ventricular failure symptoms, however. For most patients with AF, chronic control of the ventricular rate can be achieved with one drug. For the chronic control of ventricular rate in patients with AF and normal ventricular function, diltiazem, atenolol, are metoprolol are probably the drugs of choice. For patients with AF and structurally abnormal hearts, atenolol, metoprolol, or carvedilol are appropriate choices. Adequate ventricular rate control by pharmacological agents should be evaluated by either 24-hour Holter monitoring or a submaximal stress test to determine the resting and exercise ventricular rate. If the mean ventricular rate is not close to 80 beats per minute, or the heart rate on moderate exertion is not between 90 to 115 beats per minute, a second agent to control the rate should be added. Excessive reductions in ventricular rates that could limit exercise tolerance should be avoided.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0733-8651(03)00111-5

Cites

70 of 70 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Compared with stroke prevention and rhythm control, very little robust evidence exists to inform the best type and intensity of rate control treatment, with the majority of data derived from short-term crossover trials and observational studies.

    “Compared with stroke prevention and rhythm control, very little robust evidence exists to inform the best type and intensity of rate control treatment, with the majority of data derived from short-term crossover trials and observational studies.41,[526][527][528]”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tamariz, L. J., & Bass, E. B.
Affiliations
Johns Hopkins University (US)
Corresponding author
Tamariz, Leonardo J
Venue
Cardiology Clinics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2004-02
Volume
22
Issue
1
Pages
35-45
ISSN
0733-8651 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2003014483
Cited by
53
References
70
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 5
FWCI
0.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cardiology Clinics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5t32hl007180-45)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (T32 HL07180)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart rate and cardiovascular health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Keywords
atrial fibrillation, rate control, ventricular rate, diltiazem, esmolol, atenolol, metoprolol, carvedilol, beta-blockers, left ventricular failure, heart rate response to exercise, Holter monitoring, adverse drug reactions
MeSH terms
Amiodarone, Atenolol, Atrial Fibrillation, Cardiotonic Agents, Digoxin, Diltiazem, Heart Rate, Humans, Metoprolol, Verapamil, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review