Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24497948›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Clinical characteristics, management, and control of permanent vs. nonpermanent atrial fibrillation: insights from the RealiseAF survey.

Jan Murin, Lisa Naditch-Brûlé, Sandrine Brette, Chern-En Chiang, James O'Neill, P Gabriel Steg

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Class I Histone Deacetylase Inhibition for the Treatment of Sustained Atrial Fibrillation.The Journal of pharmacology and experimental therapeutics · 2016
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Jan MurinDepartment of Internal Medicine and Cardiology, Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovakia.
Lisa Naditch-BrûléGlobal Strategic Unit Cardio-Thrombosis, Sanofi, Paris, France.
Sandrine BretteStatistician, Lincoln, Boulogne-Billancourt, France.
Chern-En ChiangGeneral Clinical Research Center, Taipei Veterans General Hospital and National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan.
James O'NeillConnolly/Mater Hospitals/Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
P Gabriel StegInstitut national de la santé et de la recherche médicale-U698, Paris, France; Université Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cite, Paris, France; Assistance publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Bichat, Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAtrial fibrillation can be categorized into nonpermanent and permanent atrial fibrillation. There is less information on permanent than on nonpermanent atrial fibrillation patients. This analysis aimed to describe the characteristics and current management, including the proportion of patients with successful atrial fibrillation control, of these atrial fibrillation subsets in a large, geographically diverse contemporary sample. METHODS AND

resultsData from RealiseAF, an international, observational, cross-sectional survey of 10,491 patients with atrial fibrillation, were used to characterize permanent atrial fibrillation (N = 4869) and nonpermanent atrial fibrillation (N = 5622) patients. Permanent atrial fibrillation patients were older, had a longer time since atrial fibrillation diagnosis, a higher symptom burden, and were more likely to be physically inactive. They also had a higher mean (SD) CHADS2 score (2.2 [1.3] vs. 1.7 [1.3], p<0.001), and a higher frequency of CHADS2 score ≥2 (67.3% vs. 53.0%, p<0.001) and comorbidities, most notably heart failure. Physicians indicated using a rate-control strategy in 84.2% of permanent atrial fibrillation patients (vs. 27.5% in nonpermanent atrial fibrillation). Only 50.2% (N = 2262/4508) of permanent atrial fibrillation patients were controlled. These patients had a longer time since atrial fibrillation diagnosis, a lower symptom burden, less obesity and physical inactivity, less severe heart failure, and fewer hospitalizations for acute heart failure than uncontrolled permanent atrial fibrillation patients, but with more arrhythmic events. The most frequent causes of hospitalization in the last 12 months were acute heart failure and stroke.

conclusionPermanent atrial fibrillation is a high-risk subset of atrial fibrillation, representing half of all atrial fibrillation patients, yet rate control is only achieved in around half. Since control is associated with lower symptom burden and heart failure, adequate rate control is an important target for improving the management of permanent atrial fibrillation patients.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAmiodaroneAnti-Arrhythmia AgentsAtrial FibrillationCardiovascular DiseasesCross-Sectional StudiesDigoxinEchocardiographyElectrocardiographyFemaleHealth SurveysHeartHospitalizationHumansLogistic ModelsAmiodaroneAnti-Arrhythmia AgentsDigoxinSotalol

Identifiers

PMID24497948
PMCPMC3908888

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.