[Rate versus rhythm control with and without heart failure]

Atrial fibrillation and congestive heart failure are frequently associated with complex interactions. Patients with both diseases bear a sophisticated therapeutic challenge for the attending physician. The approach to treat atrial fibrillation differs for patients with and without heart failure in several aspects. Basic requirements are the treatment of the underlying diseases and prophylaxis of thromboembolic complications. Rate and rhythm control are the two main therapeutic strategies for atrial fibrillation according to the current guidelines. Large trials including the recently published AF-CHF study (Atrial Fibrillation - Congestive Heart Failure) failed to demonstrate a difference in mortality for both strategies. Thus, the therapeutic decision is mainly based on the patient's symptoms to improve quality of life. Rate control should be applied to asymptomatic patients or if rhythm control has already failed. If beta-blockers and digoxin have failed to control heart rate, His ablation with pacemaker implantation can be considered. In patients without heart disease, class I antiarrhythmic drugs and, in case of ineffectiveness, amiodarone or catheter ablation are recommended for rhythm control. First data concerning catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation in heart failure are promising and randomized studies are on the way. Rhythm control remains first-line therapy in recent-onset or highly symptomatic paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation patients with and without heart failure.