The New England Journal of Medicine
e-mail icon  FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |    Advanced Search
Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe
 
Editorial
PreviousPrevious
Volume 347:1883-1884 December 5, 2002 Number 23
NextNext

Management of Atrial Fibrillation — Radical Reform or Modest Modification?

Since this article has no abstract, we have provided an extract of the first 100 words of the full text and any section headings.

 Sign up for free e-toc
 

This Article
-Full Text
- PDF
-PDA Full Text
-Purchase this article

Tools and Services
-Add to Personal Archive
-Add to Citation Manager
-Notify a Friend
-E-mail When Cited

More Information
-Related Article
 by The Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) Investigators
-Related Article
 by Van Gelder, I. C.
-PubMed Citation
The concept that the restoration of sinus rhythm in patients with atrial fibrillation is always an important goal has been largely uncontested for many years. Now, in this issue of the Journal, two trials comparing heart-rate control with rhythm control have tested this assumption and have found it wanting. Both the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management, a North American study,1 and the Rate Control versus Electrical Cardioversion for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation Study, conducted in Europe,2 tested the hypothesis that among patients with atrial fibrillation, attempted maintenance of sinus rhythm would be equivalent in outcome to control of the . . . [Full Text of this Article]


This article has been cited by other articles:



HOME  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SEARCH  |  CURRENT ISSUE  |  PAST ISSUES  |  COLLECTIONS  |  PRIVACY  |  HELP  |  beta.nejm.org

Comments and questions? Please contact us.

The New England Journal of Medicine is owned, published, and copyrighted © 2008 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.