ArticleJournal of veterinary internal medicine
Longitudinal analysis of echocardiographic and cardiac biomarker variables in dogs with atrial fibrillation: The optimal rate control in dogs with atrial fibrillation II study.
Article in Journal of veterinary internal medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of amiodarone, diltiazem, or both to achieve strict heart rate control in dogs with atrial fibrillation.Journal of veterinary internal medicine · 2026Article
- Non-linear RR interval metrics in canine atrial fibrillation and their relationship to 24-h mean heart rate.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Characterisation of patients who develop atrial fibrillation-induced cardiomyopathy.Open heart · 2024Article
- Longitudinal analysis of echocardiographic and cardiac biomarker variables in dogs with atrial fibrillation: The optimal rate control in dogs with atrial fibrillation II study.Journal of veterinary internal medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRate control (RC; meanHR HYPOTHESIS/
objectivesInvestigate echocardiographic and biomarker differences between RC and non-RC (NRC) dogs. Determine if changes post-anti-arrhythmic drugs (AAD) predict successful RC in subsequent Holter monitoring. Evaluate if early vs late RC affects survival. ANIMALS: Fifty-two dogs with AF.
methodsHolter-derived mean heart rate, echocardiographic and biomarker variables from dogs receiving AAD were analyzed prospectively at each re-evaluation and grouped into RC or NRC. The primary endpoint was successful RC. Between group comparisons of absolute values, magnitude of change from admission to re-evaluations and end of study were performed using Mann-Whitney tests or unpaired t-tests. Logistic regression explored variables associated with inability to achieve RC at subsequent visits. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to compare survival time of early vs late RC.
resultsAt visit 2, 11/52 dogs were RC; at visit 3, 14/52 were RC; and at visit 4, 4/52 were RC. At the end of study, 25/52 remained NRC. At visit 2, both groups had increased cardiac dimensions, but NRC dogs had larger dimensions; biomarkers did not differ. At the end of study, RC showed decreased cardiac dimensions and end-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) compared with NRC. No variables were useful at predicting RC success in subsequent visits. Survival analysis found no differences between early vs late RC. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: The RC dogs had decreased cardiac dimensions and NT-proBNP, suggesting HR-mediated reverse-remodeling might benefit survival, even with delayed RC achievement. Pursuit of RC is crucial despite initial failures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.