Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Systematic, early rhythm control strategy for atrial fibrillation in patients with or without symptoms: the EAST-AFNET 4 trial

  • Stephan Willems
  • , Katrin Borof
  • , Axel Brandes
  • , Günter Breithardt
  • , A John Camm
  • , Harry J G M Crijns
  • , Lars Eckardt
  • , Nele Gessler
  • , Andreas Goette
  • , Laurent M Haegeli
  • , Hein Heidbuchel
  • , Josef Kautzner
  • , G André Ng
  • , Renate B Schnabel
  • , Anna Suling
  • , Lukasz Szumowski
  • , Sakis Themistoclakis
  • , Panos Vardas
  • , Isabelle C van Gelder
  • , Karl Wegscheider
  • Paulus Kirchhof*
*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

144 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

AIMS: Clinical practice guidelines restrict rhythm control therapy to patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF). The EAST-AFNET 4 trial demonstrated that early, systematic rhythm control improves clinical outcomes compared to symptom-directed rhythm control.

METHODS AND RESULTS: This prespecified EAST-AFNET 4 analysis compared the effect of early rhythm control therapy in asymptomatic patients (EHRA score I) to symptomatic patients. Primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, stroke, or hospitalization with worsening of heart failure or acute coronary syndrome, analyzed in a time-to-event analysis. At baseline, 801/2633 (30.4%) patients were asymptomatic [mean age 71.3 years, 37.5% women, mean CHA2DS2-VASc score 3.4, 169/801 (21.1%) heart failure]. Asymptomatic patients randomized to early rhythm control (395/801) received similar rhythm control therapies compared to symptomatic patients [e.g. AF ablation at 24 months: 75/395 (19.0%) in asymptomatic; 176/910 (19.3%) symptomatic patients, P = 0.672]. Anticoagulation and treatment of concomitant cardiovascular conditions was not different between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. The primary outcome occurred in 79/395 asymptomatic patients randomized to early rhythm control and in 97/406 patients randomized to usual care (hazard ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval [0.6; 1.03]), almost identical to symptomatic patients. At 24 months follow-up, change in symptom status was not different between randomized groups (P = 0.19).

CONCLUSION: The clinical benefit of early, systematic rhythm control was not different between asymptomatic and symptomatic patients in EAST-AFNET 4. These results call for a shared decision discussing the benefits of rhythm control therapy in all patients with recently diagnosed AF and concomitant cardiovascular conditions (EAST-AFNET 4; ISRCTN04708680; NCT01288352; EudraCT2010-021258-20).

Original languageEnglish
Article numberehab593
Pages (from-to)1219–1230
Number of pages12
JournalEuropean Heart Journal
Volume43
Issue number12
Early online date27 Aug 2021
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 21 Mar 2022

Bibliographical note

© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.

Keywords

  • Atrial fibrillation
  • Symptoms
  • Rhythm control
  • Ablation
  • Antiarrhythmic drugs
  • Clinical trial

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Systematic, early rhythm control strategy for atrial fibrillation in patients with or without symptoms: the EAST-AFNET 4 trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this