TY - JOUR
T1 - Physician stated atrial fibrillation management in light of treatment guidelines: data from an international, observational prospective survey
AU - Kowey, Peter R
AU - Breithardt, Günter
AU - Camm, John
AU - Crijns, Harry
AU - Dorian, Paul
AU - Le Heuzey, Jean-Yves
AU - Pedrazzini, Laurence
AU - Prystowsky, Eric N
AU - Salette, Geneviève
AU - Schwartz, Peter J
AU - Torp-Pedersen, Christian
AU - Weintraub, William
N1 - Copyright (c) 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
PY - 2010/3/1
Y1 - 2010/3/1
N2 - Background: The Registry on Cardiac Rhythm Disorders Assessing the Control of Atrial Fibrillation (Record AF) study is the first worldwide, prospective, survey of real-life management of atrial fibrillation (AF) in recently diagnosed patients (n=5604) with a 1-year follow-up. Hypothesis: Surveys of AF management have identified a divergence between guidelines and clinical practice, and an overinterpretation of guidelines in low-risk patients. Methods: Physicians' theoretical approaches to rhythm and rate control were investigated using a pre-study questionnaire. Results: One cardiologist, from each of the 583 sites in 6 regions, completed a questionnaire on their practice andmanagement of AF patients. In AF patients with structural heart disease (SHD), amiodarone was the most frequent choice of first-line rhythm control agents in all regions. Amiodarone or sotalol tended to be the preferred second-line rhythm control agents, 1 exception being Central/South America. β-Blockers were the first-line rate control agents for patients with AF and SHD in all regions, and calcium channel blockers and cardiac glycosides were the most common second-line rate control treatments in all regions, except Asia. In lone AF patients, propafenone (30.6%), flecainide (24.1%), and amiodarone (21.7%) were the most common global choices of first-line rhythm control, and amiodarone or sotalol were the preferred second-line rhythm control agents, 1 exception being Central/South America. Conclusions: These results highlight points of divergence from the American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA)/European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines for the management of AF in terms of first-line drug selection in patientswith associated SHD or coronary artery disease.
AB - Background: The Registry on Cardiac Rhythm Disorders Assessing the Control of Atrial Fibrillation (Record AF) study is the first worldwide, prospective, survey of real-life management of atrial fibrillation (AF) in recently diagnosed patients (n=5604) with a 1-year follow-up. Hypothesis: Surveys of AF management have identified a divergence between guidelines and clinical practice, and an overinterpretation of guidelines in low-risk patients. Methods: Physicians' theoretical approaches to rhythm and rate control were investigated using a pre-study questionnaire. Results: One cardiologist, from each of the 583 sites in 6 regions, completed a questionnaire on their practice andmanagement of AF patients. In AF patients with structural heart disease (SHD), amiodarone was the most frequent choice of first-line rhythm control agents in all regions. Amiodarone or sotalol tended to be the preferred second-line rhythm control agents, 1 exception being Central/South America. β-Blockers were the first-line rate control agents for patients with AF and SHD in all regions, and calcium channel blockers and cardiac glycosides were the most common second-line rate control treatments in all regions, except Asia. In lone AF patients, propafenone (30.6%), flecainide (24.1%), and amiodarone (21.7%) were the most common global choices of first-line rhythm control, and amiodarone or sotalol were the preferred second-line rhythm control agents, 1 exception being Central/South America. Conclusions: These results highlight points of divergence from the American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA)/European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines for the management of AF in terms of first-line drug selection in patientswith associated SHD or coronary artery disease.
U2 - http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/clc.20737
DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/clc.20737
M3 - Journal article
SN - 0160-9289
VL - 33
SP - 172
EP - 178
JO - Clinical Cardiology
JF - Clinical Cardiology
IS - 3
ER -