Donate Help Contact The AHA Sign In Home
American Heart Association
Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
Search: search_blue_button Advanced Search
Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology. 2009;2:215-217
doi: 10.1161/CIRCEP.109.878355
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by MacRae, C. A.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by MacRae, C. A.
Related Collections
Right arrow Arrhythmias, clinical electrophysiology, drugs
Right arrowRelated Article

Editorials

Symptoms in Atrial Fibrillation

Why Keep Score?

Calum A. MacRae, MD, PhD

From the Cardiovascular Research Center and Cardiology Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Mass.

Correspondence to Calum A. MacRae, MD, PhD, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit St, Boston, MA 02114. E-mail cmacrae@partners.org

Key Words: Editorials • atrial fibrillation • symptoms • mechanisms • etiology


An extract of the first 250 words of the full text is provided, because this article has no abstract.
 


    Introduction
 
In practice, although the objective goals of therapeutic intervention in atrial fibrillation (AF) are usually framed in terms of the prevention of stroke and of heart failure, the majority of clinical decisions in AF are driven by symptoms.1 The risk of stroke among those with AF is highly heterogeneous and difficult to predict for the individual patient, but there are extensive empirical data supporting current anticoagulation algorithms. A simple awareness of the presence or absence of the arrhythmia is a factor in decisions regarding anticoagulation and cardioversion, but it correlates poorly with arrhythmic episodes.2 The pathophysiological relationship between AF and heart failure is more complex, and data linking intervention for the arrhythmia to a reduction in the incidence of heart failure are much less robust. In the absence of rigorous data on mortality benefit for most interventions in AF, evaluation of the subjective symptom burden in each patient is a central component of the risk-benefit calculation.3

Article see p 268

Symptoms in AF are notoriously variable and difficult to compare among individual patients.1–3 The clinical syndromes associated with AF run the gamut from an incidental ECG finding through acute heart failure to syncope. Nevertheless, approximately 25% to 30% of those with the arrhythmia are asymptomatic. Clinicians managing AF also must deal with the wide range in symptom severity observed in those with substantively similar physiology.2 There is also significant variation in the correlation between symptoms and objective findings for any given individual.

In the last few years, concerted efforts have . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Related Article

Mutations in Sodium Channel β1- and β2-Subunits Associated With Atrial Fibrillation
Hiroshi Watanabe, Dawood Darbar, Daniel W. Kaiser, Kim Jiramongkolchai, Sameer Chopra, Brian S. Donahue, Prince J. Kannankeril, and Dan M. Roden
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2009 2: 268-275. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]