Reiffel James A, Naccarelli Gerald V
Columbia University Medical Center, 161 Fort Washington Ave., New York, NY 10032, USA.
Clin Cardiol. 2006 Mar;29(3):97-102. doi: 10.1002/clc.4960290303.
The AFFIRM study showed no clear survival advantage for a rhythm versus rate control strategy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, rhythm control with antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) is appropriate in a large number of patients with AF. The American College of Cardiology/ American Heart Association/European Society of Cardiology AF management guidelines include a safety-based algorithm for selection of AAD therapy. Class 1C agents are recommended as first-line therapy in patients without or with minimal structural heart disease. However, market research and clinical study data indicate a growing use of class III agents (mainly amiodarone) despite long-term safety and tolerability concerns, suggesting that clinical practice does not adhere to current guidelines.
AFFIRM研究表明,在心房颤动(AF)患者中,节律控制策略与心率控制策略相比,并无明显的生存优势。然而,对于大量AF患者而言,使用抗心律失常药物(AAD)进行节律控制是合适的。美国心脏病学会/美国心脏协会/欧洲心脏病学会的AF管理指南包含了一种基于安全性的AAD治疗选择算法。对于无结构性心脏病或仅有轻微结构性心脏病的患者,推荐将1C类药物作为一线治疗药物。然而,市场研究和临床研究数据表明,尽管存在长期安全性和耐受性问题,但III类药物(主要是胺碘酮)的使用却越来越多,这表明临床实践并未遵循当前指南。