Grönefeld Gerian C, Lilienthal Jürgen, Kuck Karl Heinz, Hohnloser Stefan H
Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, J.W. Goethe University, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, 60590 Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Eur Heart J. 2003 Aug;24(15):1430-6. doi: 10.1016/s0195-668x(03)00261-6.
Despite the high prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF), there are only limited data on quality of life (QoL) stemming from prospective trials comparing rate versus rhythm control. This prospective study evaluated QoL in patients with symptomatic persistent AF randomized to therapy aiming at rate versus rhythm control.
Patients with symptomatic persistent AF (7 to 360 days duration) were prospectively randomized to ventricular rate control (n=125) or to cardioversion and maintenance of sinus rhythm (n=127). QoL was assessed by the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form health survey (SF-36) at baseline and during 1 year of follow-up. Changes in QoL were compared on an intent-to-treat basis, and subsequently between patients in sinus rhythm versus AF. At baseline, all SF-36 scales were reduced compared to healthy controls. At 1 year, six of eight items had improved significantly in patients assigned to rate control, and five of eight items on rhythm control (p=ns). The physical component summary showed a comparable increase with both treatment strategies (rate control: p=0.004; rhythm control: p<0.001) whereas no significant changes were found for the mental component summary. At 1 year, 55% of patients reported a positive health transition with no inter-group differences. There were no significant differences in QoL in patients in sinus rhythm or AF at the end of the observation period.
In patients with symptomatic persistent AF, the two treatment strategies of rate versus rhythm control are associated with similar improvements in QoL.
尽管心房颤动(AF)的患病率很高,但比较心率控制与节律控制的前瞻性试验中关于生活质量(QoL)的数据有限。这项前瞻性研究评估了随机接受心率控制或节律控制治疗的症状性持续性AF患者的生活质量。
症状性持续性AF(持续时间7至360天)患者被前瞻性随机分为心室率控制组(n = 125)或复律并维持窦性心律组(n = 127)。在基线和随访1年期间,通过医学结局研究简明健康调查(SF - 36)评估生活质量。在意向性治疗的基础上比较生活质量的变化,随后在窦性心律患者与AF患者之间进行比较。与健康对照相比,基线时所有SF - 36量表均降低。在1年时,心率控制组患者八项中的六项有显著改善,节律控制组八项中的五项有改善(p =无显著性差异)。躯体健康总结显示两种治疗策略的改善程度相当(心率控制:p = 0.004;节律控制:p < 0.001),而心理健康总结无显著变化。在1年时,55%的患者报告健康状况有积极转变,组间无差异。观察期末,窦性心律或AF患者的生活质量无显著差异。
在症状性持续性AF患者中,心率控制与节律控制这两种治疗策略在生活质量改善方面相似。