ArticleChest2016
Practice Patterns and Outcomes of Treatments for Atrial Fibrillation During Sepsis: A Propensity-Matched Cohort Study.
Article in Chest, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 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
45 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 79 citations in OpenAlex.
- Managing new-onset atrial fibrillation in critically ill patients: a systematic narrative review.BMJ open · 2020Pooled it
- Landiolol for heart rate control in patients with septic shock and persistent tachycardia. A multicenter randomized clinical trial (Landi-SEP).Intensive care medicine · 2024Trial
- Association of anti-catecholaminergic antiarrhythmic drugs with survival in sepsis-associated new-onset atrial fibrillation.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Risk and mediation analysis of early β-blocker use on survival outcomes in sepsis patients and new-onset atrial fibrillation: an analysis of the MIMIC-IV database.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Definitions and outcomes reported in studies investigating the management of new onset atrial fibrillation in acutely unwell patients admitted to the intensive care unit: a scoping review.European heart journal open · 2026Review
- Epidemiology and pharmacological management of new onset atrial fibrillation in critically ill adults: A multicentre observational study.Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine · 2026Article
- Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation in adult patients admitted to an intensive care unit.Annals of intensive care · 2026Article
- Outcomes and Management of Stressor-Associated Atrial Fibrillation: JACC State-of-the-Art Review.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2025Review
- Landiolol bolus application for tachycardic dysrhythmia in the prehospital EMS setting - An observational study of a novel concept.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2025Observational
- Comparison of rhythm and rate control medications for new-onset atrial fibrillation in septic patients: MIMIC-IV database analysis.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Analyzing the association of critical illness and cardioversion success in patients with atrial fibrillation at the emergency department.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Is the P-wave dispersion a valuable tool in determining the atrial arrhythmia of newborn babies with sepsis?Northern clinics of Istanbul · 2025Article
- Research priorities for the study of atrial fibrillation during acute and critical illness: recommendations from the Symposium on Atrial Fibrillation in Acute and Critical Care.BMC proceedings · 2024Article
- Evaluation of Amiodarone Administration in Patients with New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in Septic Shock.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
- A Comparison of the Impact of Pharmacological Treatments on Cardioversion, Rate Control, and Mortality in Data-Driven Atrial Fibrillation Phenotypes in Critical Care.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in the Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients Hospitalized in the Intensive Care Unit.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- The role of beta-blocker drugs in critically ill patients: a SIAARTI expert consensus statement.Journal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care · 2023Article
- Development ofBMJ open · 2023Article
- Inflammatory signalling in atrial cardiomyocytes: a novel unifying principle in atrial fibrillation pathophysiology.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2023Review
- Underestimated Ischemic Heart Disease in Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events after Septicemia Discharge.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on byResponse.2016
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAtrial fibrillation (AF) during sepsis is associated with increased morbidity and mortality, but practice patterns and outcomes associated with rate- and rhythm-targeted treatments for AF during sepsis are unclear.
methodsThis was a retrospective cohort study using enhanced billing data from approximately 20% of United States hospitals. We identified factors associated with IV AF treatments (?-blockers [BBs], calcium channel blockers [CCBs], digoxin, or amiodarone) during sepsis. We used propensity score matching and instrumental variable approaches to compare mortality between AF treatments.
resultsAmong 39,693 patients with AF during sepsis, mean age was 77 ± 11 years, 49% were women, and 76% were white. CCBs were the most commonly selected initial AF treatment during sepsis (14,202 patients [36%]), followed by BBs (11,290 [28%]), digoxin (7,937 [20%]), and amiodarone (6,264 [16%]). Initial AF treatment selection differed according to geographic location, hospital teaching status, and physician specialty. In propensity-matched analyses, BBs were associated with lower hospital mortality when compared with CCBs (n = 18,720; relative risk [RR], 0.92; 95% CI, 0.86-0.97), digoxin (n = 13,994; RR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.75-0.85), and amiodarone (n = 5,378; RR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.61-0.69). Instrumental variable analysis showed similar results (adjusted RR fifth quintile vs first quintile of hospital BB use rate, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.58-0.79). Results were similar among subgroups with new-onset or preexisting AF, heart failure, vasopressor-dependent shock, or hypertension.
conclusionsAlthough CCBs were the most frequently used IV medications for AF during sepsis, BBs were associated with superior clinical outcomes in all subgroups analyzed. Our findings provide rationale for clinical trials comparing the effectiveness of AF rate- and rhythm-targeted treatments during sepsis.
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.