Revisiting the Role of Antiarrhythmic Drugs in Prevention of Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence: A Single Center Retrospective Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We conducted a retrospective analysis to revisit the efficacy of four different commonly used antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) in a single community hospital setting in the U.S. We used cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) to continuously monitor the patients for maintenance of sinus rhythm. The CIEDs in our study included insertable cardiac monitor (ICM), permanent pacemaker (PPM) and cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D). The aim was to compare efficacy of commonly used AADs for maintenance of sinus rhythm in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. METHODS: We conducted our retrospective study in a real world practice setting. We analyzed electronic medical records of 145 consecutive patients with paroxysmal and persistent AF who were treated with AADs for maintenance of sinus rhythm between the period of April 2014 and February 2018. RESULTS: Total 34 out of 145 patients (23.45%) had AF recurrence. The mean duration of first AF recurrence in total patient cohort was 18.01 ± 12 months. There was no major difference in efficacy in terms of prevention of first episode of AF recurrence among commonly used class III and class IC AADs. CONCLUSIONS: Higher doses clearly seem to be more effective in preventing the recurrence of AF in class III AADs; sotalol and amiodarone. Use of CIEDs helps to continuously monitor patients for recurrence of AF and detects proarrhythmic effects of AADs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".