ArticleJACC. Advances2024
Prognostically Optimal Heart Rate at Discharge in Hospitalized Patients With Heart Failure and Atrial Fibrillation.
Article in JACC. Advances, 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.
- Comparative Effectiveness of Ivabradine versus Digoxin in Patients with Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction and Chronic Kidney Disease: A Real-World Multicenter Cohort Study.Cardiorenal medicine · 2026Article
- Effects of strict versus lenient rate control on exercise capacity in atrial fibrillation: a retrospective analysis.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2025Article
- Prognostic Significance of Ventricular Rate at Discharge in Patients With Persistent Atrial Fibrillation and HF.JACC. Advances · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Managing heart rate (HR) is crucial for enhancing clinical prognosis in patients with heart failure (HF) and atrial fibrillation (AF). Nevertheless, the prognostic impact of HR at discharge in hospitalized HF patients remains unclear. Objectives: This study aimed to determine the HR associated with the lowest risk of death and HF in patients hospitalized with HF and AF. Methods: In this observational study, 334 persistent AF patients were analyzed from a database of 1,930 consecutive HF hospitalizations. Exclusion criteria included sinus rhythm or paroxysmal AF, cardiac pacemakers, or unrecorded HR at discharge. Participants were divided into four groups based on HR at discharge in 10 beats/min increments. The primary endpoint was a composite of death from any cause and rehospitalization due to HF. The association between resting HR and the primary endpoint was determined using Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards models. Results: The median follow-up period was 389 days, with 133 patients (39.8%) reaching the primary endpoint. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed a significantly higher primary endpoint incidence in patients with HR >81 beats/min at discharge compared to those with HR <60 beats/min (log-rank test for trend: Conclusions: The findings suggest that controlling HR to less than 80 beats/min at discharge may lead to better clinical outcomes in patients with HF and persistent AF.
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.