Abstract
Background
Current criteria for rate control in atrial fibrillation (AF) treatment are empirical and based on a small amount of scientific data.
Hypothesis
This study was designed to analyze the influence of heart rate (HR, measured by the 6‐minute walk test [6MWT] and 24‐hour Holter monitoring) on quality of life (QoL).
Methods
A total of 89 male patients with chronic atrial fibrillation (AF) and resting HR < 90 bpm were included. QoL (assessed by the Short Form‐36 Health Survey [SF‐36] questionnaire) was compared among 3 groups of patients classified by HR testing results: group 1 had HR ≤ 110 bpm on 6MWT and ≤ 80 bpm on Holter monitor; group 2 had HR in the target area by 1 but not both tests; and group 3 had HR > 110 bpm on 6MWT and > 80 bpm on Holter monitor.
Results
There were significant differences among the 3 groups in physical and mental component summary scores (285.9 ± 73.9; 276.6 ± 80.8; 230.3 ± 91.0, P = .035; and 319.8 ± 70.2; 294.7 ± 76.0; 255.0 ± 107.1, P = .026, respectively).
When the methods were analyzed separately, there was a significant difference on QoL in physical and mental summary scores in patients with maximal HR ≤ 110 bpm on 6MWT in comparison with HR > 110 bpm (P = .04 and P = .01, respectively) and in the physical summary score in patients with average HR ≤ 80 bpm on Holter monitor in comparison with HR > 80 bpm (P = .02).
Conclusions
Holter monitoring and 6MWT should be performed as complementary methods to better predict QoL. Copyright © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (242.6 KB).
REFERENCES
- 1. Wyse DG, Waldo AL, DiMarco JP, et al; Atrial Fibrillation Follow‐up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) Investigators. A comparison of rate control and rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2002; 347: 1825–1833. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Van Gelder IC, Hagens VE, Bosker HA, et al. A comparison of rate control and rhythm control in patients with recurrent persistent atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2002; 347: 1834–1840. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Carlsson J, Miketic S, Windeler J, et al. Randomized trial of rate‐control versus rhythm‐control in persistent atrial fibrillation: the Strategies of Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (STAF) study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003; 41: 1690–1696. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Hohnloser SH, Kuck KH, Lilienthal J. Rhythm or rate control in atrial fibrillation—Pharmacological Intervention in Atrial Fibrillation (PIAF): a randomised trial. Lancet 2000; 356: 1789–1794. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Opolski G, Torbicki A, Kosior D, et al. Rhythm control versus rate control in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation. Results of the HOT CAFÉ Polish Study. Kardiol Pol 2003; 59: 1–16. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Wood MA. Ventricular rate control as an endpoint for treatment of atrial fibrillation. Heart Rhythm 2004; 1: B45–51. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Ware JE Jr, Kosinski M, Bayliss MS, et al. Comparison of methods for the scoring and statistical analysis of SF‐36 health profile and summary measures: summary of results from the Medical Outcomes Study. Med Care 1995; 33: AS64–79. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Brooks D, Solway S, Gibbons WJ. ATS statement on six‐minute walk test. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2003; 167: 1287. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Cooper HA, Bloomfield DA, Bush DE, et al; AFFIRM Investigators. Relation between achieved heart rate and outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation (from the Atrial Fibrillation Follow‐up Investigation of Rhythm Management [AFFIRM] Study). Am J Cardiol 2004; 93: 1247–1253. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Olshansky B, Rosenfeld LE, Warner AL, et al; AFFIRM Investigators: The Atrial Fibrillation Follow‐up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) Study. Approaches to control rate in atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004; 43: 1201–1208. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Fuster V, Ryden LE, Cannom DS, et al. ACC/AHA/ESC 2006 guidelines for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation—executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines and the European Society of Cardiology for Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 2001 Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Atrial Fibrillation). Eur Heart J 2006; 27: 1979–2030. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Rawles JM. What is meant by a “controlled” ventricular rate in atrial fibrillation? Br Heart J 1990; 63: 157–161. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Newman D. Quality of life as an endpoint for atrial fibrillation research: pitfalls and practice. Heart Rhythm 2004; 1: B20–25. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Gronefeld GC, Lilienthal J, Kuck KH, Hohnloser SH. Impact of rate versus rhythm control on quality of life in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation. Results from a prospective randomized study. Eur Heart J 2003; 24: 1430–1436. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Hagens VE, Ranchor AV, Van Sonderen E, et al. Effect of rate or rhythm control on quality of life in persistent atrial fibrillation. Results from the Rate Control versus Electrical Cardioversion (RACE) Study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004; 43: 241–247. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Jenkins LS, Brodsky M, Schron E, et al. Quality of life in atrial fibrillation: the Atrial Fibrillation Follow‐up Investigaton of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) study. Am Heart J 2005; 149: 112–120. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Van Gelder IC, Wyse DG, Chandler ML, et al. Does intensity of rate‐control influence outcome in atrial fibrillation? An analysis of pooled data from RACE and AFFIRM studies. Europace 2006; 8: 935–942. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]