Skip Navigation



European Heart Journal Advance Access published online on March 17, 2008
European Heart Journal, doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehn108
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
29/8/964    most recent
ehn108v1
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 Related articles in EHJ
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 Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Shah, D.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Shah, D.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2008. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Atrial fibrillation burden: a ‘hard’ indicator of therapeutic efficacy and a prognostic marker to boot ?

Dipen Shah*

Unite de Electrophysiologie, Service de Cardiologie, Hopital Cantonal Universitaire de Geneve, 24 Rue Micheli-du-Crest, 1211 Geneve 14, Switzerland

* Corresponding author. Tel: +41 22 3727197, Fax: +41 22 3727229, Email: dipen.shah@hcuge.ch

This editorial refers to ‘What is the real atrial fibrillation burden after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation? A prospective rhythm analysis in pacemaker patients with continuous atrial monitoring’ by D. Steven et al. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehn024

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with embolic accidents and heart failure as well as increased mortality.1 Associated heart disease is known to be an important factor determining mortality.1 On the other hand, the significance of the arrhythmia in patients with lone AF has been more difficult to prove perhaps because of the difficulty of measuring the time spent in AF, the burden of AF, and thus establishing a dose–effect relationship. Somewhat paradoxically, a recent consensus statement2 does not distinguish between the prognostic implications of paroxysmal vs long-standing chronic AF while at the same time recommending anticoagulation before cardioversion of long-lasting AF but not for AF . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Estimating AF burden


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?

Related articles in EHJ:

What is the real atrial fibrillation burden after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation? A prospective rhythm analysis in pacemaker patients with continuous atrial monitoring
Daniel Steven, Thomas Rostock, Boris Lutomsky, Hanno Klemm, Helge Servatius, Imke Drewitz, Kai Friedrichs, Rodolfo Ventura, Thomas Meinertz, and Stephan Willems
EHJ 2008 29: 1037-1042. [Abstract] [Full Text]