ArticleClinical cardiology2024
Comparison between beta-blockers and calcium channel blockers in patients with atrial fibrillation according to renal function.
Article in Clinical cardiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rate control treatment with calcium channel blockers and beta blockers for patients with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European heart journal open · 2026Article
- Chronic β-Blockade and Systemic Homeostasis: Molecular Integration of Cardiorenal and Immune Pathways, a Narrative Review.Biomolecules · 2025Review
- Comparison between beta-blockers and calcium channel blockers in patients with atrial fibrillation according to renal function.Clinical cardiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRate control is the most commonly employed first-line management strategy for atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Principal agents used to control heart rate (HR) include beta-blockers (BB) and nondihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (ND-CCB). However, there is a paucity of published studies of the differences between those drugs in CKD patients. HYPOTHESIS: The present study aimed to investigate the differences, in terms of hospitalizations due to a poor HR control, in patients with AF under a rate-control strategy according to glomerular filtration rate (GFR).
methodsThe study cohort included 2804 AF patients under rate-control regime (BB or ND-CCB) between January 2014 and April 2020. The end point, determined by competing risk regression, was hospitalizations for AF with rapid ventricular response (RVR), slow ventricular response (SVR), and need for pacemaker.
resultsOn multivariate analysis, there were no statistical differences between ND-CCB and BB for subjects with GFR > 60 mL/min/1.73 m
conclusionIn patients with GFR ≥ 30 mL/min/1.73 m
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.