Observational studyJournal of the American Heart Association2026
Long-Term Outcomes With Class 1C Antiarrhythmic Drug Use in Atrial Fibrillation.
Observational study in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Atrial Fibrillation Burden: Assessment, Clinical Significance, and Therapeutic Implications.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRhythm control with class 1C antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) is a widely used treatment among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), but cardiovascular benefits of class 1C pharmacotherapy over rate control strategy are still unclear.
methodsAdult patients with AF (n=100 748; 45% women) evaluated at a multihospital health system between 2010 and 2023 were assessed on clinical characteristics and class 1C AAD use and long-term outcomes ascertained. Covariate balance across 36 factors was achieved using propensity score matching. Adjusted Cox modeling with competing risk analysis was used to compare patients using rhythm control (class 1C) with those offered a rate control strategy.
resultsPatients receiving a class 1C AAD (n=5239 [5%]) (70% flecainide) were significantly younger with lower cardiovascular risk factors (hypertension, diabetes, coronary artery disease, heart failure) and less comorbidity burden. Over a mean follow-up of 5±3 years, matched patients receiving a class 1C AAD had significantly less all-cause death (14% versus 19%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.65 [95% CI, 0.57-0.74];
conclusionsIn a real-world contemporary registry of patients with AF from a North American health care system, use of class 1C AADs for rhythm control was associated with improved survival and hospitalization for stroke compared with rate control.
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.