CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,585Atrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesCardiac pacing and defibrillation studiesHeart Failure Treatment and Management

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Rhythm Control versus Rate Control for Atrial Fibrillation and Heart Failure

Roy, Denis, Talajic, Mario, Nattel, Stanley, Wyse, D. George, Dorian, Paul, Lee, Kerry L., Bourassa, Martial G., Arnold, J. Malcolm O., Buxton, Alfred E., Camm, A. John, Connolly, Stuart J., Dubuc, Marc, Ducharme, Anique, Guerra, Peter G., Hohnloser, Stefan H., Lambert, Jean, Le Heuzey, Jean-Yves, O'Hara, Gilles, Pedersen, Ole Dyg, Rouleau, Jean-Lucien, Singh, Bramah N., Stevenson, Lynne Warner, Stevenson, William G., Thibault, Bernard, Waldo, Albert L.·2008·New England Journal of Medicine
DOI 10.1056/nejmoa0708789
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: It is common practice to restore and maintain sinus rhythm in patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure. This approach is based in part on data indicating that atrial fibrillation is a predictor of death in patients with heart failure and suggesting that the suppression of atrial fibrillation may favorably affect the outcome. However, the benefits and risks of this approach have not been adequately studied. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized trial comparing the maintenance of sinus rhythm (rhythm control) with control of the ventricular rate (rate control) in patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction of 35% or less, symptoms of congestive heart failure, and a history of atrial fibrillation. The primary outcome was the time to death from cardiovascular causes. RESULTS: A total of 1376 patients were enrolled (682 in the rhythm-control group and 694 in the rate-control group) and were followed for a mean of 37 months. Of these patients, 182 (27%) in the rhythm-control group died from cardiovascular causes, as compared with 175 (25%) in the rate-control group (hazard ratio in the rhythm-control group, 1.06; 95% confidence interval, 0.86 to 1.30; P=0.59 by the log-rank test). Secondary outcomes were similar in the two groups, including death from any cause (32% in the rhythm-control group and 33% in the rate-control group), stroke (3% and 4%, respectively), worsening heart failure (28% and 31%), and the composite of death from cardiovascular causes, stroke, or worsening heart failure (43% and 46%). There were also no significant differences favoring either strategy in any predefined subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with atrial fibrillation and congestive heart failure, a routine strategy of rhythm control does not reduce the rate of death from cardiovascular causes, as compared with a rate-control strategy. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00597077.)

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmoa0708789

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 41 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Carson PE, 1993, Circulation, 87, VI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 501–600 of 999

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Roy, D., Talajic, M., Nattel, S., Wyse, D. G., Dorian, P., Lee, K. L., Bourassa, M. G., Arnold, J. M. O., Buxton, A. E., Camm, A. J., Connolly, S. J., Dubuc, M., Ducharme, A., Guerra, P. G., Hohnloser, S. H., Lambert, J., Le Heuzey, J.-Y., O'Hara, G., Pedersen, O. D., Rouleau, J.-L., Singh, B. N., Stevenson, L. W., Stevenson, W. G., Thibault, B., & Waldo, A. L.
Affiliations
  • Montreal Heart Institute (CA)
  • Libin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta (CA)
  • St. Michael's Hospital (CA)
  • Duke Medical Center (US)
  • London Health Sciences Centre (CA)
  • Rhode Island Hospital (US)
  • St George's Hospital (GB)
  • Population Health Research Institute (CA)
  • Goethe University Frankfurt (DE)
  • Bispebjerg Hospital (DK)
  • VA West Los Angeles Medical Center (US)
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center (US)
ORCID
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Publisher
Massachusetts Medical Society
Published
2008-06-19
Volume
358
Issue
25
Pages
2667-2677
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
DOI
10.1056/nejmoa0708789
OpenAlex
W2131260805
Cited by
1,585
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 42 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 69 · 2023: 55 · 2022: 76 · 2021: 86 · 2020: 77 · 2019: 82 · 2018: 96 · 2017: 87 · 2016: 73 · 2015: 75 · 2014: 87 · 2013: 123 · 2012: 114
FWCI
97.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Libraries (Université catholique de Louvain (UCL), l'Université de Namur (UNamur) and the Université Saint-Louis (USL-B)) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Failure Treatment and Management
Keywords
atrial fibrillation, heart failure, rhythm control, rate control, sinus rhythm maintenance, ventricular rate control, cardiovascular mortality, congestive heart failure, stroke, worsening heart failure, left ventricular ejection fraction
MeSH terms
Adrenergic beta-Antagonists, Aged, Amiodarone, Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors, Anti-Arrhythmia Agents, Atrial Fibrillation, Cardiovascular Diseases, Combined Modality Therapy, Digitalis Glycosides, Electric Countershock, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Heart Failure, Heart Rate, Hospitalization, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Ventricular Dysfunction, Left, Kaplan-Meier Estimate

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