RACE II
Rate Control Efficacy in Permanent Atrial Fibrillation: Lenient Versus Strict Rate Control II
Patient / Population Intervention / Exposition Comparaison Critère de jugement
In 614 patients with permanent atrial fibrillation, lenient rate control (resting heart rate <110 bpm) was non-inferior for a composite of cardiovascular events compared with strict rate control.
N
614
Schéma
Open-label non-inferiority RCT
Critère
Composite of CV death, HF hospitalisation, stroke, systemic embolism, bleeding, and life-threatening arrhythmic events
Pertinence
2
Résultat3-year cumulative incidence 12.9% (lenient) vs 14.9% (strict); difference -2.0 points (90% CI -7.6 to 3.5), within the 10-point non-inferiority margin (P<0.001 for non-inferiority).
Van Gelder IC, et al. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(15):1363-1373. 10.1056/NEJMoa1001337
Discussion et critique
Event rates lower than expected and patients relatively young with preserved function, limiting generalisability. Established lenient rate control (<110 bpm) as an acceptable, simpler strategy in permanent AF.