ArticleScientific reports2022
Effectiveness of amiodarone versus digitalis for heart rate control in critically ill patients with new-onset atrial fibrillation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
- Treatment of supraventricular arrhythmias in critical care patients with sepsis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Atrial fibrillation in critical illness: state of the art.Intensive care medicine · 2025Review
- Beyond the Beat: A Multifaceted Review of Atrial Fibrillation in Sepsis: Risk Factors, Management Strategies, and Economic Impact.Cardiology research · 2025Review
- Evaluation of Amiodarone Administration in Patients with New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in Septic Shock.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
- Which Is Better? Rate Versus Rhythm Control in Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
New-onset of atrial fibrillation (NOAF) in critically ill patients is the most common acute cardiac dysrhythmia, but evidence-based data regarding treatment strategies are scarce. In this retrospective monocentric study, we compared effectiveness of amiodarone versus digitalis for heart rate control in critically ill patients with new-onset of atrial fibrillation. We identified a total of 209 patients for the main analysis. Amiodarone as compared to digitalis was associated with a clinically relevant faster time to heart rate control < 110 bpm (2 h (IQR: 1 h to 6 h) versus 4 h (2 h to 12 h); p = 0.003) and longer durations of sinus rhythm during the first 24 h of treatment (6 h (IQR: 6 h to 22 h) versus 0 h (IQR: 0 h to 16 h); p < 0.001). However, more bradycardic episodes occurred in association with amiodarone than with digitalis (7.7% versus 3.4%; p = 0.019). Use of amiodarone was associated with an increase of noradrenalin infusion rate compared to digitalis (23.9% versus 12.0%; p = 0.019). Within the tertile of patients with the highest CRP measurements, amiodarone treated patients presented with a higher decrease in heart rate than digoxin treated patients. Clinical trials comparing different NOAF treatment strategies are much needed and should report on concomitant sympathetic activity and inflammatory status.
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.