Atrial fibrillation and flutter: maintaining stability of sinus rhythm versus ventricular rate control

Two major treatment strategies have emerged for managing atrial fibrillation: maintaining sinus rhythm by chronic administration of suppressive antiarrhythmic agents versus controlling the ventricular rate and chronic anticoagulation. Potential benefits of maintenance of sinus rhythm include improvement of the hemodynamic profile of the patient, a decreased risk of cerebrovascular accidents, reduced symptoms, and, if atrial fibrillation is successfully suppressed, possible elimination of the need for the chronic anticoagulation. When selecting long-term antiarrhythmic drug therapy for suppression of atrial fibrillation, it should be recalled that at least 50% of patients have a recurrence of the arrhythmia within the first year and the majority of other patients have a recurrence within the next 3 to 5 years. In addition, the risk of proarrhythmia and sudden cardiac death must be considered; this has stimulated interest in nonpharmacologic approaches to maintaining sinus rhythm. Large multicenter randomized trials are now under way to compare the benefits and risks of maintaining sinus rhythm versus controlling the ventricular rate and chronically anticoagulating patients in atrial fibrillation. Important endpoints of these trials include mortality, functional capacity, and quality of life.