{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019525801952580194, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002789400278940028, 'mean_word_length': 5.527272727272727, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Imminent Ganglionic Ventricular Rate Control During Atrial Fibrillation

The treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF), a well-known major clinical burden, mainly involves one of two approaches, rhythm or rate control. The first approach aims at reestablishing and maintaining sinus rhythm. The second approach applies to a majority of patients and aims at slowing the ventricular rate to a hemodynamically optimal level. As supported by abundant data, rate control is largely equivalent to rhythm control in terms of mortality and cardiovascular morbidity,1 even in systolic heart failure patients.2 The present comment concerns the long-term clinical applicability of the developing strategy of ganglionic rate control.