Lenient versus Strict Rate Control in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation.

Isabelle C. Van Gelder*, Hessel F. Groenveld, Harry J. G. M. Crijns, Ype S. Tuininga, Jan G. P. Tijssen, A. Marco Alings, Hans L. Hillege, Johanna A. Bergsma-Kadijk, Jan H. Cornel, Otto Kamp, Raymond Tukkie, Hans A. Bosker, Dirk J. van Veldhuisen, Maarten P. Van den Berg

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

536 Citations (Web of Science)

Abstract

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
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1363-1373
JournalNew England Journal of Medicine
Volume362
Issue number15
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 15 Apr 2010

Cite this