ArticleCirculation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes2015
Comparisons of hospitalization rates among younger atrial fibrillation patients receiving different antiarrhythmic drugs.
Article in Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Dronedarone versus sotalol in patients with atrial fibrillation: A systematic literature review and network meta-analysis.Clinical cardiology · 2023Pooled it
- Safety and efficacy of long-term sodium channel blocker therapy for early rhythm control: the EAST-AFNET 4 trial.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2024Trial
- Flecainide How and When: A Practical Guide in Supraventricular Arrhythmias.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAntiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) are used to reduce the frequency, severity, and duration of atrial fibrillation (AF) events, which should reduce hospitalizations; however, little is known about the associations between different AADs and hospitalization—particularly among younger AF patients without structural heart disease. METHODS AND
resultsUsing MarketScan® claims data, we identified AF patients without coronary artery disease or heart failure who received their first AAD prescription (amiodarone, sotalol, dronedarone, or Class Ic) within 14 days post-first AF encounter. The primary outcome was time from first AAD prescription to AF hospitalization, and secondary outcomes included time to cardiovascular and all-cause hospitalizations. We used inverse probability-weighted estimators to adjust for differences in treatment allocation in the Cox proportional hazards model for each outcome. Among 8562 AF patients with a median age of 56 years (interquartile range 49, 61), risk of AF hospitalization was greater with dronedarone than Class Ic (hazard ratio [HR] 1.59; 95% confidence interval 1.13-2.24), amiodarone (HR 2.63; 1.77-3.89), and sotalol (HR 1.72; 1.17-2.54), but lower with amiodarone versus Class Ic (HR 0.68; 0.57-0.80) and sotalol (HR 0.63; 0.53-0.75). Risk of cardiovascular hospitalization was lower with amiodarone than Class Ic (HR 0.80; 0.70-0.92), but not non-AF cardiovascular hospitalization (HR 1.26; 1.01-1.57). There was no difference in all-cause hospitalization between amiodarone, Class Ic, and sotalol.
conclusionsDifferences in hospitalization rates were found between AADs in younger AF patients without structural heart disease. Amiodarone had the lowest risk of AF hospitalization and dronedarone had the greatest risk. Additional research is needed to better understand associations between AADs and hospitalization risk.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.