Antiarrhythmic therapy for atrial fibrillation: current guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (ESC/EACTS)
https://doi.org/10.15829/1728-8800-2021-2962
Abstract
The treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF) remains one of the most difficult tasks in modern cardiology. In 2020, the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), together with the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS), published guidelines for the diagnosis and management of AF, which include several new directives.
ESC experts have formulated a novel concept for treatment of AF patients. The first component of treatment ‘A' (Anticoagulation/ Avoid stroke) is anticoagulant therapy in patients with increased risk of thromboembolic events. The second line of treatment ‘B' (Better symptom control) is the control of arrhythmia symptoms, selection of a rhythm control strategy or ventricular rate control. The third direction ‘C' includes cardiovascular risk factors and comorbid conditions management.
The most challenging tasks in AF treatment are the control of arrhythmia symptoms. As in the previous version of 2016 guidelines, the latest ones identify 2 following strategies in treatment of AF: rhythm control and ventricular rate control.
According to the current ESC/EACTS guidelines (2020), antiarrhythmic therapy continues to be one of the important directions in AF management. Early prescription f antiarrhythmic and anticoagulant agents with an increased risk of thromboembolic events, catheter ablation can not only improve the quality of life, but also the prognosis of patients with AF.
About the Authors
A. I. Tarzimanova
I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Moscow.
Tel.: +7 (903) 621-00-75
V. L. Doshchitsin
Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Moscow.
References
1. Benjamin EJ, Muntner P, Alonso A. American Heart Association Council on Epidemiology and Prevention Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee. Heart disease and stroke statistics 2019 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2019;139:e56-528. doi:10.1161/CIR.0000000000000659.
2. Hindricks G, Potpara T, Dagres N, et al. 2020 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with the European Association of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur Heart J. 2020;ehaa612. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa612.
3. Kirchhof P, Camm AJ, Goette A, et al. Early rhythm-control therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(14):1305-16. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2019422.
4. Khan IA. Single oral loading dose of propafenone for pharmacological cardioversion of recent-onset atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;37(2):542-7. doi:10.1016/s0735-1097(00)01116-5.
5. Heldal M, Atar D. Pharmacological conversion of recent-onset atrial fibrillation: a systematic review. Scand Cardiovasc J. 2013;Suppl.47:2-10. doi:10.3109/14017431.2012.740572.
6. Podzolkov VI, Tarzimanov AI. Propafenone in the Treatment of Cardiac Arrhythmias Kardiologiia. 2012;5:70-3. (In Russ.)
7. Kochiadakis GE, Igoumenidis NE, Hamilos ME, et al. A comparative study of the efficacy and safety of procainamide versus propafenone versus amiodarone for the conversion of recent-onset atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol. 2007;99:1721-5. doi:10.1016/j.amjcard.2007.01.059
8. Andrade JG, MacGillivray J, Macle L, et al. Clinical effectiveness of a systematic “pill-in-the-pocket” approach for the manage-ment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Heart Rhythm. 2018;15(1):9-16. doi:10.1016/j.hrthm.2017.10.002.
9. Miller ON, Starichkov SA, Pozdnyakov YuM, et al. Efficacy and safety of propafenone (propanorm) and amiodarone (cordarone) in patients with atrial fibrillation on the background of arterial hypertension, coronary heart disease and chronic heart failure with preserved systolic function of the left ventricle. Russian Journal of Cardiology. 2010;(4):55-71. (In Russ.)
10. Valembois L, Audureau E, Takeda A, et al. Antiarrhythmics for maintaining sinus rhythm after cardioversion of atrial fibrillation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;9(9):CD005049. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD005049.pub5.
11. Mark DB, Anstrom KJ, Sheng S, et al. Effect of catheter ablation vs medical therapy on quality of life among patients with atrial fibrillation: the CABANA randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2019;321:1275-85. doi:10.1001/jama.2019.0692. Erratum in: JAMA. 2019;321(23):2370. doi:10.1001/jama.2019.7682
12. Van Gelder IC, Groenveld HF, Crijns HJ, et al. RACE II Investigators. Lenient versus strict rate control in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:1363-73. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1001337.
13. Lim KT, Davis MJ, Powell A, et al. Ablate and pace strategy for atrial fibrillation: long-term outcome of AIRCRAFT trial. Europace. 2007;9:498-505. doi:10.1093/europace/eum091.
Supplementary files
Review
For citations:
Tarzimanova A.I., Doshchitsin V.L. Antiarrhythmic therapy for atrial fibrillation: current guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (ESC/EACTS). Cardiovascular Therapy and Prevention. 2021;20(5):2962. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15829/1728-8800-2021-2962
Views:
892
Email this article 
