Improving survival for patients with atrial fibrillation and advanced heart failure.

OBJECTIVES: We attempted to determine whether changes in heart failure therapy since 1989 have altered the prognostic significance of atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation occurs in 15% to 30% of patients with heart failure. Despite the recognized potential for adverse effects, the impact of atrial fibrillation on prognosis is controversial.

METHODS: Two-year survival for 750 consecutive patients discharged from a single hospital after evaluation for heart transplantation from 1985 to 1989 (Group I, n = 359) and from 1990 to April 1993 (Group II, n = 391) was analyzed in relation to atrial fibrillation. In Group I, class I antiarrhythmic drugs and hydralazine vasodilator therapy were routinely allowed. In Group II, amiodarone and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors were first-line antiarrhythmic and vasodilating drugs.

RESULTS: A history of atrial fibrillation was present in 20% of patients in Group I and 24% of those in Group II. Patients with atrial fibrillation in the two groups had similar clinical and hemodynamic profiles. Among patients with atrial fibrillation, those in Group II had a markedly better 2-year survival (0.66 vs. 0.39, p = 0.001) and sudden death-free survival (0.84 vs. 0.70, p = 0.01) than those in Group I. In each time period, survival was worse for patients with than without atrial fibrillation in Group I (0.39 vs. 0.55, p = 0.002) but not in Group II (0.66 vs. 0.75, p = 0.09).

CONCLUSIONS: The prognosis of patients with advanced heart failure and atrial fibrillation is improving. These findings support the practice of avoiding class I antiarrhythmic drugs in this group and may reflect recent beneficial changes in heart failure therapy.