TY - JOUR
T1 - Lenient versus Strict Rate Control in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation.
AU - Van Gelder, Isabelle C.
AU - Groenveld, Hessel F.
AU - Crijns, Harry J. G. M.
AU - Tuininga, Ype S.
AU - Tijssen, Jan G. P.
AU - Alings, A. Marco
AU - Hillege, Hans L.
AU - Bergsma-Kadijk, Johanna A.
AU - Cornel, Jan H.
AU - Kamp, Otto
AU - Tukkie, Raymond
AU - Bosker, Hans A.
AU - van Veldhuisen, Dirk J.
AU - Van den Berg, Maarten P.
PY - 2010/4/15
Y1 - 2010/4/15
N2 - Background: Rate control is often the therapy of choice for atrial fibrillation. Guidelines recommend strict rate control, but this is not based on clinical evidence. We hypothesized that lenient rate control is not inferior to strict rate control for preventing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation. Methods: We randomly assigned 614 patients with permanent atrial fibrillation to undergo a lenient rate-control strategy (resting heart rate
AB - Background: Rate control is often the therapy of choice for atrial fibrillation. Guidelines recommend strict rate control, but this is not based on clinical evidence. We hypothesized that lenient rate control is not inferior to strict rate control for preventing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation. Methods: We randomly assigned 614 patients with permanent atrial fibrillation to undergo a lenient rate-control strategy (resting heart rate
U2 - 10.1056/NEJMoa1001337
DO - 10.1056/NEJMoa1001337
M3 - Article
C2 - 20231232
SN - 0028-4793
VL - 362
SP - 1363
EP - 1373
JO - New England Journal of Medicine
JF - New England Journal of Medicine
IS - 15
ER -