title: Is rhythm control better than rate control for new-onset atrial fibrillation in the emergency department?
abstract: In patients with new-onset atrial fibrillation and symptom onset within 48 hours, rhythm control is preferred over rate control if the patient is younger than 65 years. For patients with congestive heart failure, valvular heart disease, hypertension, or permanent atrial fibrillation, rate control remains the favored strategy.
authors.affiliation: Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Texas at Houston, Houston, TX.
authors.forename: Rohith R
authors.initials: RR
authors.lastname: Malya
authors.affiliation: Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Central Florida, Gainesville, FL; North Florida-South Georgia Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Lake City, FL.
authors.forename: Latha
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Ganti
mesh_terms: D000319:Adrenergic beta-Antagonists / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D000889:Anti-Arrhythmia Agents / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D001281:Atrial Fibrillation / Q000453:epidemiology* / Q000628:therapy*; D017147:Defibrillators, Implantable / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine; D006801:Humans
chemical_list: D000319:Adrenergic beta-Antagonists; D000889:Anti-Arrhythmia Agents