Objectives: This study sought to assess the impact of rhythm- versus rate-control treatment strategies and of underlying rhythm on quality of life and functional capacity in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and congestive heart failure (CHF).
Background: Although intention-to-treat and efficacy analyses have demonstrated similar cardiovascular outcomes in patients with AF and CHF randomized to rhythm or rate control, effects on quality of life remain to be determined.
Methods: The AF-CHF (Atrial Fibrillation and Congestive Heart Failure) trial randomized 1,376 patients to rhythm- or rate-control strategies. For this pre-specified substudy, Medical Outcomes Short Form-36 questionnaires were administered at baseline and 4 months. Six-min walk tests were conducted at baseline, 3 weeks, 4 months, and 1 year.
Results: Quality of life improved across all domains to a similar extent with rhythm and rate control. However, a higher proportion of time spent in sinus rhythm was associated with a modestly greater improvement in quality of life scores. Six-min walk distance (p = 0.2328) and New York Heart Association functional class (p = 0.1712) improved to a similar degree with rhythm and rate control. A higher proportion of time spent in sinus rhythm was associated with a greater improvement in New York Heart Association functional class (p < 0.0001) but not in 6-min walk distance (p = 0.1308).
Conclusions: Improvements in quality of life and functional capacity were similar in patients with AF and CHF randomized to rhythm- versus rate-control strategies. By contrast, sinus rhythm was associated with beneficial effects on New York Heart Association functional class and modest gains in quality of life. (Atrial Fibrillation and Congestive Heart Failure [AF-CHF]; NCT88597077).
Copyright © 2013 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.