Rate versus rhythm control in atrial fibrillation and clinical outcomes: Updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Real-world evidence of early rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The favorable benefits of early rhythm control (ERC) therapy in newly diagnosed patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) have been demonstrated in the EAST-AFNET 4 trial. However, the generalizability and applicability of ERC in real-world clinical settings remain inconclusive.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of the PubMed and Embase databases to identify observational studies published between January 2020 and February 2024 that focused on real-world evidence pertaining to ERC. The effectiveness and safety outcomes in our study were analogous to those evaluated in the EAST-AFNET 4 trial.

RESULTS

A total of 4 observational studies that fulfilled the inclusion criteria of EAST-AFNET 4 were included, involving 130,970 patients with AF, 30.7% of whom received ERC therapy. In our pooled analysis using the fixed-effects model, compared with rate control, ERC significantly decreased the occurrence risk of the primary composite outcome (hazard ratio [HR] 0.86, 95% confidence interval[CI] 0.82-0.91), cardiovascular death (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.78-0.98), stroke (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.73-0.87), and hospitalization with worsening heart failure (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.84-0.99) or acute coronary syndrome (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59-0.87). In terms of safety outcomes, there were no differences in the composite safety outcome (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.95-1.05) and all-cause death (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.82-1.06) between the two studied groups.

CONCLUSIONS

ERC therapy showed favorable effectiveness outcomes compared with rate control, whereas the safety outcomes between the two therapeutic strategies did not differ significantly, supporting the benefits of ERC therapy over rate control in selected real-world patients with AF.

REGISTRATION

The study protocol was registered to PROSPERO (CRD42023443569).

Re-Analyses of 8 Historical Trials in Cardiovascular Medicine Assessing Multimorbidity Burden and Its Association with Treatment Response

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to examine the multimorbidity burden of clinical trial participants and assess its association with treatment response.

METHODS

We conducted a reanalysis of patient level data. There were 29,954 participants from 8 clinical trials containing 11 comparisons between an intervention and control condition. Patients were classified by Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) score. The primary outcomes were the primary study endpoints as originally specified for each trial. A Cox model that included the CCI score groups, the randomized group, and their interaction, was used to compare the primary outcome between randomized groups. The interaction term between randomized group and comorbidity index allowed the treatment effect to differ by level of comorbidity index and comprised the primary effect of interest. Hazard ratios and risk differences were reported for all comparisons.

RESULTS

The mean CCI scores of trial populations ranged from 2.1 to 3.9 points, and the percentage of patients with scores ≥5 from 3% to 39%. Tests of interaction terms in models yielded P values ≤ .10 for 4/11 comparisons and ≤ .05 for 2/11 comparisons. In 3 additional comparisons, potentially important treatment variation on an absolute scale was observed despite interaction tests with P values > .10 on the relative scale.

CONCLUSIONS

These trials were mainly composed of patient populations with CCI scores ≤4. Despite this, biologically plausible treatment interactions were commonly suggested. These results are hypothesis generating; confirmation of results would require larger studies or studies targeted specifically toward patients with higher levels of multimorbidity.

Rhythm vs Rate Control Strategy for Atrial Fibrillation: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Rhythm control, either with antiarrhythmic drugs or catheter ablation, and rate control strategies are the cornerstones of atrial fibrillation (AF) management. Despite the increasing role of rhythm control over the past few years, it remains inconclusive which strategy is superior in improving clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

This study summarizes the total and time-varying evidence regarding the efficacy of rhythm- vs rate-control strategies in the management of AF.

METHODS

We systematically perused the MEDLINE, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and Web of Science databases for randomized controlled trials from inception to November 2023. We included studies that compared the efficacy of rhythm control (ie, antiarrhythmic drugs classes Ia, Ic, or III, AF catheter ablation, and electrical cardioversion) and rate control (ie, beta-blocker, digitalis, or calcium antagonist) strategies among patients with nonvalvular AF. The primary outcome was cardiovascular (CV) death, whereas secondary outcomes included all-cause death, stroke, hospitalization for heart failure (HF), sinus rhythm at the end of the follow-up, and rhythm control-related adverse events. A cumulative meta-analysis to assess temporal trends and a meta-regression analysis using the percentage of ablation use was performed.

RESULTS

We identified 18 studies with a total of 17,536 patients (mean age: 68.6 ± 9.7 years, 37.9% females) and a mean follow-up of 28.5 months. Of those, 31.9% had paroxysmal AF. A rhythm control strategy reduced CV death (HR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.62-0.96), stroke (HR: 0.801; 95% CI: 0.643-0.998), and hospitalization for HF (HR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.69-0.94) but not all-cause death (HR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.73-1.02) compared with a rate control strategy. This benefit was driven by contemporary studies, whereas more ablation use within the rhythm control arm was associated with improved outcomes, except stroke.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with AF, a contemporary rhythm control strategy leads to reduced CV mortality, HF events, and stroke compared with a rate control strategy.

Mortality benefit with AF ablation: Impact of normal sinus rhythm seen in CABANA and EAST AFnet

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is significantly associated with morbidity and mortality and erodes the quality and quantity of life. It is standard of care to treat patients with AF and an increased risk of stroke with oral anticoagulation therapy, but the more daunting question many clinicians face is whether to pursue a "rate-only" or "rhythm" control strategy. Historical studies over the years have sought to answer this question but have found no significant difference in major clinical outcomes between the two strategies. There are opportunities based on new data to improve the natural history of the disease. The EAST AFnet trial for the first time revealed a significant morbidity and mortality advantage to rhythm control therapy when performed early in the disease process of AF and in the setting of comprehensive medical management that was maintained. The CABANA trial clearly demonstrated that catheter ablation was a more effective long-term treatment of AF in general and significantly lowers risk of AF progression compared to medical therapy. Like multiple prior trials of rhythm management strategies, when rhythm control was effective in these trials, independent of therapy assignment, there was a significantly lower risk of adverse outcomes and death. These contemporary data provide optimism that the pervasive mortality risk in patients with AF observed over the past 50 years may be improved by the timing, use, and efficacy of use of therapeutic interventions.

Atrial fibrillation: stroke prevention

Stroke prevention is central to the management of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) which has moved towards a more holistic or integrative care approach. The published evidence suggests that management of AF patients following such a holistic approach based on the Atrial fibrillation Better Care (ABC) pathway is associated with a lower risk of stroke and adverse events. Risk assessment, re-assessment and use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are important for stroke prevention in AF. The stroke and bleeding risks of AF patients are not static and should be re-assessed regularly. Bleeding risk assessment is to address and mitigate modifiable bleeding risk factors, and to identify high bleeding risk patients for early review and follow-up. Well-controlled comorbidities and healthy lifestyles also play an important role to achieve a better clinical outcome. Digital health solutions are increasingly relevant in the diagnosis and management of patients with AF, with the potential to improve stroke prevention. In this review, we provide an update on stroke prevention in AF, including importance of holistic management, risk assessment/re-assessment, and stroke prevention for special AF populations. Evidence-based and structured management of AF patients would reduce the risk of stroke and other adverse events.

Which Is Better? Rate Versus Rhythm Control in Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common arrhythmia associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The optimal approach to managing AF, specifically rate control versus rhythm control, remains a topic of debate in clinical practice. This systematic review aims to compare the rate control and rhythm control strategies based on their clinical outcomes, quality of life, and adverse events associated with them. A comprehensive search was conducted using PubMed, Google Scholar, Science Direct, Research Gate, MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online), Scopus, and Embase (Excerpta Medica dataBASE) databases. A total of 1657 research papers were identified through the search strategy, and after applying the eligibility criteria, 28 studies were selected for the analysis. The studies encompassed a range of methodologies, including randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and meta-analyses. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed for study selection, data extraction, and analysis. The outcomes of interest included all: cause mortality, stroke, bleeding events, cardiovascular hospitalizations, quality of life, and adverse effects of treatment. Data were synthesized and presented in tables, charts, and forest plots for meta-analysis where appropriate. The results indicate that both rate control and rhythm control strategies have their own merits and limitations, with the outcomes varying based on patient characteristics and comorbidities. While rhythm control strategies may lead to better symptom control and improved quality of life, rate control strategies may be associated with lower risks of adverse events and complications. This systematic review provides a comprehensive overview of the current evidence regarding rate and rhythm control strategies in AF management, offering insights for clinical decision-making and highlighting the need for individualized treatment approaches.

Early rhythm control vs. rate control in atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

It has long been debated whether rhythm control vs. rate control strategies have differing effects on mortality and morbidity for atrial fibrillation (AF). Recently, several randomized controlled studies (RCTs) and observational trials described that an early rhythm management method was linked to a lower likelihood of negative clinical outcomes in individuals with AF. We wanted to see if an early rhythm management method may help patients with AF.

Methods

We performed a systematic search to retrieve studies assessing the outcomes of early rhythm control vs. rate control in AF by using PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase published between 01/01/2000 and 15/04/2022.

Results

Finally, two RCTs, one retrospective analysis of RCTs, and four observational studies were identified. Compared with rate control, early rhythm control has been linked to lower all-cause mortality. [risk ratio (RR), 0.76; 95% CI 0.69-0.83; P < 0.00001; I 2 = 77%]. The early rhythm control group was also associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular mortality (RR, 0.68; 95% CI 0.63-0.74; P < 0.00001; I 2 = 33), stroke (RR, 0.77; 95% CI 0.67-0.87; P < 0.001; I 2 = 64), and heart failure hospitalization (RR, 0.74; 95% CI 0.59-0.93; P = 0.0009; I 2 = 93%). We found no significant difference in nights spent in hospital per year, acute coronary syndrome, major bleeding, and cardiac arrest/ventricular arrhythmia between the groups.

Conclusion

In this meta-analysis, early rhythm therapy was linked to a lower risk of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, stroke, and heart failure hospitalization compared with the rate control group.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42022333592.

Effectiveness of early rhythm control in improving clinical outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend rhythm control for improving symptoms and quality of life in symptomatic patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, the long-term prognostic outcomes of rhythm control compared with rate control are still inconclusive. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to assess the effects of early rhythm control compared with rate control on clinical outcomes in newly diagnosed AF patients.

METHODS

We systematically searched the PubMed and Embase databases up to August 2022 for randomized and observational studies reporting the associations of early rhythm control (defined as within 12 months of AF diagnosis) with effectiveness outcomes. The primary outcome was a composite of death, stroke, admission to hospital for heart failure (HF), or acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) from each study were pooled using a random-effects model, complemented with an inverse variance heterogeneity or quality effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 8 studies involving 447,202 AF patients were included, and 23.5% of participants underwent an early rhythm-control therapy. In the pooled analysis using the random-effects model, compared with rate control, the early rhythm-control strategy was significantly associated with reductions in the primary composite outcome (HR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.86-0.89) and secondary outcomes, including stroke or systemic embolism (HR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.71-0.85), ischemic stroke (HR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.69-0.94), cardiovascular death (HR = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.70-0.99), HF hospitalization (HR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.88-0.92), and ACS (HR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.76-0.98). Reanalyses using the inverse variance heterogeneity or quality effects model yielded similar results.

CONCLUSIONS

Our current meta-analysis suggested that early initiation of rhythm control treatment was associated with improved adverse effectiveness outcomes in patients who had been diagnosed with AF within 1 year.

REGISTRATION

The study protocol was registered to PROSPERO (CRD42021295405).

Insights from computational modeling on the potential hemodynamic effects of sinus rhythm versus atrial fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common clinical tachyarrhythmia, posing a significant burden to patients, physicians, and healthcare systems worldwide. With the advent of more effective rhythm control strategies, such as AF catheter ablation, an early rhythm control strategy is progressively demonstrating its superiority not only in symptoms control but also in prognostic terms, over a standard strategy (rate control, with rhythm control reserved only to patients with refractory symptoms). This review summarizes the different impacts exerted by AF on heart mechanics and systemic circulation, as well as on cerebral and coronary vascular beds, providing computational modeling-based hemodynamic insights in favor of pursuing sinus rhythm maintenance in AF patients.

Safety, Efficacy and Prognostic Benefit of Atrial Fibrillation Ablation in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction

Up to 65% of patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) develop AF during the course of the disease. This occurrence is associated with adverse outcomes, including pump failure death. Because AF and HFpEF are mutually reinforcing risk factors, sinus rhythm restoration may represent a disease-modifying intervention. While catheter ablation exhibits acceptable safety and efficacy profiles, no randomised trials have compared AF ablation with medical management in HFpEF. However, catheter ablation has been reported to result in lower natriuretic peptides, lower filling pressures, greater peak cardiac output and improved functional capacity in HFpEF. There is growing evidence that catheter ablation may reduce HFpEF severity, hospitalisation and mortality compared to medical management. Based on indirect evidence, early catheter ablation and minimally extensive atrial injury should be favoured. Hence, individualised ablation strategies stratified by stepwise substrate inducibility provide a logical basis for catheter-based rhythm control in this heterogenous population. Randomised trials are needed for definitive evidence-based guidelines.

The Increasing Role of Rhythm Control in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: JACC State-of-the-Art Review

The considerable mortality and morbidity associated with atrial fibrillation (AF) pose a substantial burden on patients and health care services. Although the management of AF historically focused on decreasing AF recurrence, it evolved over time in favor of rate control. Recently, more emphasis has been placed on reducing adverse cardiovascular outcomes using rhythm control, generally by using safe and effective rhythm-control therapies (typically antiarrhythmic drugs and/or AF ablation). Evidence increasingly supports early rhythm control in patients with AF that has not become long-standing, but current clinical practice and guidelines do not yet fully reflect this change. Early rhythm control may effectively reduce irreversible atrial remodeling and prevent AF-related deaths, heart failure, and strokes in high-risk patients. It has the potential to halt progression and potentially save patients from years of symptomatic AF; therefore, it should be offered more widely.

Treatments of new-onset atrial fibrillation in critically ill patients: a systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

New-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) is common in hospitalised patients with critical illness and associated with worse outcomes. Several interventions are available in the management of NOAF, but the overall effectiveness and safety of these interventions compared with placebo or no treatment are unknown.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA) of randomised clinical trials (RCT) in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses, the Cochrane Collaboration, and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation statements. We searched RCTs assessing any pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment compared with placebo or no treatment in critically ill hospitalised patients with NOAF. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, adverse events, and health-related quality of life.

RESULTS

We included 16 trials (n = 1891) evaluating seven interventions. All trials were adjudicated 'some concerns' or 'high risk' of bias. The evidence is very uncertain for mortality (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.03-8.30), adverse events (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.85-1.92), and treatment efficacy i.e. rhythm control (RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.20-1.97; TSA-adjusted CI 0.56-4.53) between pharmacological treatment and placebo/no treatment (very low certainty evidence). There were no data for health-related quality of life or most of our secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The existing data are insufficient to firmly conclude on effects of any intervention against NOAF on any outcome in hospitalised patients with critical illness. Randomised trials of the most frequently used interventions against NOAF are warranted in these patients.

Rate and Rhythm Control Treatment in the Elderly and Very Elderly Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: An Observational Cohort Study of 1497 Patients

Stroke prevention and rate or rhythm control are crucial in the management of atrial fibrillation (AF). There is recent evidence for benefit of early rhythm control, yet rate control is the first choice in elderly patients. However, the efficacy and safety of rate and rhythm control in the elderly population remains largely unexplored. Therefore, we analyzed electronic health record data and investigated prescribing patterns and mortality of both strategies in elderly patients with AF. Data from patients with AF who were aged ≥75 years, used a pharmacological rate or rhythm control strategy, and visited Cardiology Centers of the Netherlands between 2007 and 2018 were extracted. Of the 1497 patients (54% female), 316 (21%) were prescribed rhythm control and 1181 (79%) rate control. Patients aged >85 years (OR: 2.28; 95% CI: 1.51-3.44, P< 0.001) and those with permanent AF (OR: 2.71; 95% CI: 1.67-4.41, P< 0.001) were more likely to receive rate control, whereas those with paroxysmal AF were less likely to receive rate control (OR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.32-0.56, P< 0.001). After correction for relevant confounders, the mortality risk for patients using rhythm control and patients using rate control was similar (HR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.70-1.12, P = 0.31). A more liberal approach towards prescribing a rhythm control strategy to the elderly patients with AF may be warranted and seems safe. Our data underscore the need for prospective studies to provide definite answers on efficacy and safety of rhythm control in elderly patients with AF.

Comparison of dronedarone vs. flecainide in the maintenance of sinus rhythm, following electrocardioversion in adults with persistent atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

To compare flecainide and dronedarone for sinus rhythm (SR) maintenance following electrocardioversion of persistent atrial fibrillation (AF), in patients with minimal or no structural heart disease.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A systematic search of publications using EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and MEDLINE (1989-2019), identified a total of 595 articles. No limitations were applied. Nine articles met the inclusion criteria [five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and four cohort studies], encompassing 1349 persistent AF candidates. Two retrospective studies compared flecainide with dronedarone, indicating a 6% reduced risk of AF recurrence with flecainide; however, results were not statistically significant [risk ratio (RR) 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71-1.24; P = 0.66]. One RCT compared dronedarone to placebo, demonstrating a 28% reduced risk of AF recurrence at 6 months (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.58-0.90; P = 0.004). Two RCTs compare flecainide to placebo, when a 16% decreased risk of AF recurrence at 6-12 months was indicated; however, these results were not statistically significant (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.66-1.07; P = 0.16). Within a 6- to 12-month follow-up period, a combined recurrence rate of AF was examined, in which flecainide and dronedarone maintained SR in 50% and 42%, respectively. Four articles satisfied quality appraisal, one of which focused on flecainide data.

CONCLUSION

Dronedarone and flecainide displayed similar efficacy in maintaining SR in patients following electrocardioversion for persistent AF. The SR maintenance was numerically but not statistically significant in the flecainide group. Side effects uncovered similar pro-arrhythmic activity. However, in light of the deficiency of volume and quality of available evidence, the writer acknowledges the requirement for future research.

Atrial fibrillation pattern and factors affecting the progression to permanent atrial fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) may progress from a non-permanent to a permanent form, and improvement in prediction may help in decision-making. In- and outpatients with non-permanent AF were enrolled in a prospective study and followed every 6 months. At baseline, 314 out of 523 patients (60%) had non-permanent AF (25.5% paroxysmal AF, 52.5% persistent, 2% first diagnosed AF). They were mostly males (188, 59.9%), median age 71 years [interquartile range (IQ) 62-77], median CHA₂DS₂VASc 3 (IQ 1-4), median HATCH score 1 (IQ 1-2). During a follow-up of 701 (IQ 437-902) days, 66 patients (21%) developed permanent AF. CHA₂DS₂VASc and HATCH scores were incrementally associated with AF progression (p for trend CHA₂DS₂VASc < 0.001, HATCH p = 0.001). Cox multivariable proportional hazard regression analysis showed that age [hazard ratio (HR) 1.042; 95%CI 1.005-1.080; p = 0.025], moderate-severe left atrial (LA) enlargement at echo (HR 2.072, 95%CI, 1.121-3.831; p = 0.020), antiarrhythmics drugs (HR 0.087, 95%CI 0.011-0.659, p = 0.018), EHRA score > 2 (HR 0.358, 95%CI 0.162-0.791, p = 0.011) and valvular disease (HR 2.196, 95%CI 1.072-4.499, p = 0.032) were significantly associated with AF progression. Adding "moderate-severe LA dilation" to clinical scores, eg. HATCH score (HATCH-LA) with 2 points (Cox multivariable regression analysis) improved prediction of AF progression vs. HATCH score (p = 0.0225). In patients without permanent AF, progression of AF was independently associated with age, LA dilation, AF symptoms severity, antiarrhythmic drugs and valvular disease. Adding LA dilation (moderate-severe volume increase) to clinical scores improved prediction of progression to permanent AF.

Clinical factors related to successful or unsuccessful cardioversion in the EdoxabaN versus warfarin in subjectS UndeRgoing cardiovErsion of Atrial Fibrillation (ENSURE-AF) randomized trial

BACKGROUND

EdoxabaN versus warfarin in subjectS UndeRgoing cardiovErsion of Atrial Fibrillation evaluated use of nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant edoxaban vs enoxaparin-warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation undergoing electrical cardioversion.

HYPOTHESIS

To assess clinical factors related to successful or unsuccessful cardioversion. To evaluate whether differences in adverse events based on anticoagulation strategy may exist.

METHODS

In this multicenter prospective randomized open-label blinded end-point evaluation trial, 2199 patients were randomized to edoxaban 60 mg once daily (30 mg for creatinine clearance 15-50 mL/min, weight ≤ 60 kg, and/or concomitant use of P-glycoprotein inhibitor) or enoxaparin-warfarin. Successful cardioversion was confirmed by 12-lead electrocardiography-documented sinus rhythm.

RESULTS

Cardioversion was successful in 1578 patients; in 355 patients, cardioversion was unsuccessful. Male, high body weight, high body mass index (BMI), coronary artery disease, concomitant aspirin, or prior statins use were more common in patients with unsuccessful cardioversion; international normalized ratio control did not differ by cardioversion success. On multivariate analysis, gender (P < .05), body weight (P = .0196) and BMI (P = .0377) emerged as independent predictors of successful cardioversion. There were no significant differences in primary efficacy (a composite of stroke, systemic embolic event, myocardial infarction, and cardiovascular death during overall study period) regardless of cardioversion success. There were no significant differences in bleeding rates, regardless of cardioversion outcome; notwithstanding low numbers, edoxaban and enoxaparin-warfarin did not differ.

CONCLUSIONS

Male gender, higher mean weight and higher mean BMI were associated with unsuccessful cardioversion. Efficacy and safety outcomes were low and did not differ by cardioversion success.

Comparing TEE- vs Non-TEE-guided cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: The ENSURE-AF trial

BACKGROUND

ENSURE-AF (NCT02072434) assessed therapy with edoxaban vs enoxaparin-warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing elective electrical cardioversion (ECV).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate clinical features and primary efficacy (composite of stroke, systemic embolic events, myocardial infarction and cardiovascular mortality during study period) and safety endpoints (composite of major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding during on-treatment period) in patients awaiting ECV of AF with a transesophageal echocardiography (TEE)-guided vs a non-TEE-guided strategy.

METHODS

In this prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded endpoint study, 2199 patients were randomized to edoxaban 60 mg once-daily (30 mg for creatinine clearance 15-50 mL/min, weight ≤60 kg and/or concomitant use of P-glycoprotein inhibitor) or enoxaparin-warfarin. Primary efficacy endpoint and safety endpoint were reported. Associates of TEE use, efficacy endpoint and safety endpoint were explored using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

In total, 589 patients from the edoxaban stratum and 594 from the enoxaparin-warfarin stratum were allocated to the TEE-guided strategy. Primary efficacy was similar regardless of TEE approach (P = .575). There were no significant differences in bleeding rates, regardless of TEE approach (P = .677). Independent predictors of TEE use were as follows: history of ischaemic stroke/ transient ischaemic attack, hypertension and valvular heart disease. Mean CHA₂ DS₂ VASc and HAS-BLED score were independent predictors of the efficacy endpoint whilst mean age was an independent predictor of the safety endpoint.

CONCLUSIONS

Thromboembolic and bleeding events were not different between patients undergoing TEE-guided strategy and in those undergoing an optimized conventional anticoagulation approach for ECV of AF.

Atrial arrhythmias in chronic lung disease-associated pulmonary hypertension

Atrial arrhythmias are common during episodes of acute respiratory failure in patients with chronic lung disease-associated pulmonary hypertension. Expert opinion suggests that management of atrial arrhythmias in patients with pulmonary hypertension should aim to restore sinus rhythm. This is clinically challenging in pulmonary hypertension patients with coexisting chronic lung disease, as there is controversy on the use of rhythm control agents; generally, in regard to either their pulmonary toxicity profile or the lack of evidence supporting their use. Rate control methods are largely focused on the use of beta blockers and calcium channel blockers. Concerns regarding their use involve their negative inotropic properties in cor pulmonale, the risk of bronchospasm associated with beta blockers, and the potential for ventilation/perfusion mismatching associated with calcium channel blockers. While digoxin has been associated with promising outcomes during acute right ventricular failure, there is limited evidence to suggest its routine use. Electrical cardioversion is associated with a high failure rate and it frequently requires multiple attempts. Radiofrequency catheter ablation is a more definitive approach, but concerns surrounding mechanical ventilation and sedation limit its applicability in decompensated pulmonary hypertension. Individual approaches are needed to address atrial arrhythmia management during acute episodes of respiratory failure.

Clinical Outcomes of Rate vs Rhythm Control for Atrial Fibrillation in Older People: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is highly prevalent in older adults and has been associated with increased morbidity and mortality. To reduce this AF-related morbidity in older adults, antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) are regularly used for rhythm control, assuming that increasing time in sinus rhythm reduces AF-related morbidity. However, whether AADs can improve clinical outcomes in older adults remains unclear because of the increased risk for adverse drug events compared with rate control. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of rhythm control versus rate control on clinical outcomes in older adults with AF.

DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis targeting patients aged ≥65 years with AF and using drugs to control rate or rhythm. Articles that met the following criteria were included: enrolled older patients (sample mean ≥75 years) with AF, compared pharmacological rate versus rhythm control, and reported all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, or ischemic stroke.

RESULTS

Five observational studies were included. In total, 86,926 patients with AF with a mean age ranging from 75 to 92 years were studied. No differences were found between rhythm and rate control for all-cause mortality (odds ratio [OR] 1.11; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78-1.59; I² = 79.6%; n = 28,526; four studies) and cardiovascular mortality (OR 1.09; 95% CI 0.81-1.47; I² = 0%; n = 2292; two studies). Rhythm control resulted in fewer strokes (OR 0.86; 95% CI 0.80-0.93; I² = 0%; n = 59,496), although this was mainly determined by one study.

CONCLUSION

All collected data were observational, which precluded making strong recommendations. Furthermore, all CIs were wide, increasing the uncertainty of the observed effects. As such, evidence was insufficient to recommend rhythm or rate control as the first-line therapy for AF in older adults. As AF is particularly prevalent in older people, more randomized controlled trials are needed in this population.

[Reverse remodelling of the heart after atrial fibrillation ablation in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction]

AIM

To evaluate the effect of atrial fibrillation (AF) catheter ablation (CA) on long-term freedom from AF and left heart reverse remodeling in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

METHODS

There were 47 patients (mean age 53.3 ± 10 years, 39 males) enrolled into single-center observational study, with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) &lt;40 %. Patients underwent CA for AF refractory to antiarrhythmic drugs. Baseline clinical data and diagnostic tests results were obtained during personal visits and / or via secure telemedical services. Personal contact with evaluation of recurrence of AF and echocardiographic values was performed with 30 (64 %) patients.

RESULTS

Paroxysmal AF was present in 12 (40 %) patients, persistent - in 18 (60 %). During mean follow-up of 3 years (0.5-6 years) redo ablation was performed in 9 patients (30 %) with average number of 1.3 procedures per patient. At 6 months 24 (80 %) patients were free from AF, at last follow-up - 16 (53 %). The mean time to first recurrence following CA was 15.6±13.3 months. Follow-up echocardiography revealed significant LVEF improvement (р&lt;0,0001), reduction of left atrium size (р&lt;0,0001), left ventricle end-diastolic volume (р&lt;0,002) and left ventricle endsystolic volume (p&lt;0,0001) and mitral regurgitation (р=0,001).

CONCLUSION

AF CA in patients with HFrEF is associated with improvement in systolic function and left heart reverse remodeling. Durable long-term antiarrhythmic effect often requires repeated procedures.

Antiarrhythmics for maintaining sinus rhythm after cardioversion of atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation is the most frequent sustained arrhythmia. Atrial fibrillation often recurs after restoration of normal sinus rhythm. Antiarrhythmic drugs have been widely used to prevent recurrence. This is an update of a review previously published in 2006, 2012 and 2015.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of long-term treatment with antiarrhythmic drugs on death, stroke, drug adverse effects and recurrence of atrial fibrillation in people who had recovered sinus rhythm after having atrial fibrillation.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated the searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase in January 2019, and ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP in February 2019. We checked the reference lists of retrieved articles, recent reviews and meta-analyses.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two authors independently selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any antiarrhythmic drug with a control (no treatment, placebo, drugs for rate control) or with another antiarrhythmic drug in adults who had atrial fibrillation and in whom sinus rhythm was restored, spontaneously or by any intervention. We excluded postoperative atrial fibrillation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed quality and extracted data. We pooled studies, if appropriate, using Mantel-Haenszel risk ratios (RR), with 95% confidence intervals (CI). All results were calculated at one year of follow-up or the nearest time point.

MAIN RESULTS

This update included one new study (100 participants) and excluded one previously included study because of double publication. Finally, we included 59 RCTs comprising 20,981 participants studying quinidine, disopyramide, propafenone, flecainide, metoprolol, amiodarone, dofetilide, dronedarone and sotalol. Overall, mean follow-up was 10.2 months.All-cause mortalityHigh-certainty evidence from five RCTs indicated that treatment with sotalol was associated with a higher all-cause mortality rate compared with placebo or no treatment (RR 2.23, 95% CI 1.03 to 4.81; participants = 1882). The number need to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) for sotalol was 102 participants treated for one year to have one additional death. Low-certainty evidence from six RCTs suggested that risk of mortality may be higher in people taking quinidine (RR 2.01, 95% CI 0.84 to 4.77; participants = 1646). Moderate-certainty evidence showed increased RR for mortality but with very wide CIs for metoprolol (RR 2.02, 95% CI 0.37 to 11.05, 2 RCTs, participants = 562) and amiodarone (RR 1.66, 95% CI 0.55 to 4.99, 2 RCTs, participants = 444), compared with placebo.We found little or no difference in mortality with dofetilide (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.27; moderate-certainty evidence) or dronedarone (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.09; high-certainty evidence) compared to placebo/no treatment. There were few data on mortality for disopyramide, flecainide and propafenone, making impossible a reliable estimation for those drugs.Withdrawals due to adverse eventsAll analysed drugs increased withdrawals due to adverse effects compared to placebo or no treatment (quinidine: RR 1.56, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.78; disopyramide: RR 3.68, 95% CI 0.95 to 14.24; propafenone: RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.46; flecainide: RR 15.41, 95% CI 0.91 to 260.19; metoprolol: RR 3.47, 95% CI 1.48 to 8.15; amiodarone: RR 6.70, 95% CI 1.91 to 23.45; dofetilide: RR 1.77, 95% CI 0.75 to 4.18; dronedarone: RR 1.58, 95% CI 1.34 to 1.85; sotalol: RR 1.95, 95% CI 1.23 to 3.11). Certainty of the evidence for this outcome was low for disopyramide, amiodarone, dofetilide and flecainide; moderate to high for the remaining drugs.ProarrhythmiaVirtually all studied antiarrhythmics showed increased proarrhythmic effects (counting both tachyarrhythmias and bradyarrhythmias attributable to treatment) (quinidine: RR 2.05, 95% CI 0.95 to 4.41; disopyramide: no data; flecainide: RR 4.80, 95% CI 1.30 to 17.77; metoprolol: RR 18.14, 95% CI 2.42 to 135.66; amiodarone: RR 2.22, 95% CI 0.71 to 6.96; dofetilide: RR 5.50, 95% CI 1.33 to 22.76; dronedarone: RR 1.95, 95% CI 0.77 to 4.98; sotalol: RR 3.55, 95% CI 2.16 to 5.83); with the exception of propafenone (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.39 to 4.47) for which the certainty of evidence was very low and we were uncertain about the effect. Certainty of the evidence for this outcome for the other drugs was moderate to high.StrokeEleven studies reported stroke outcomes with quinidine, disopyramide, flecainide, amiodarone, dronedarone and sotalol. High-certainty evidence from two RCTs suggested that dronedarone may be associated with reduced risk of stroke (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.95; participants = 5872). This result is attributed to one study dominating the meta-analysis and has yet to be reproduced in other studies. There was no apparent effect on stroke rates with the other antiarrhythmics.Recurrence of atrial fibrillationModerate- to high-certainty evidence, with the exception of disopyramide which was low-certainty evidence, showed that all analysed drugs, including metoprolol, reduced recurrence of atrial fibrillation (quinidine: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.88; disopyramide: RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.01; propafenone: RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.74; flecainide: RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.77; metoprolol: RR 0.83 95% CI 0.68 to 1.02; amiodarone: RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.58; dofetilide: RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.85; dronedarone: RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.91; sotalol: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.87). Despite this reduction, atrial fibrillation still recurred in 43% to 67% of people treated with antiarrhythmics.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is high-certainty evidence of increased mortality associated with sotalol treatment, and low-certainty evidence suggesting increased mortality with quinidine, when used for maintaining sinus rhythm in people with atrial fibrillation. We found few data on mortality in people taking disopyramide, flecainide and propafenone, so it was not possible to make a reliable estimation of the mortality risk for these drugs. However, we did find moderate-certainty evidence of marked increases in proarrhythmia and adverse effects with flecainide.Overall, there is evidence showing that antiarrhythmic drugs increase adverse events, increase proarrhythmic events and some antiarrhythmics may increase mortality. Conversely, although they reduce recurrences of atrial fibrillation, there is no evidence of any benefit on other clinical outcomes, compared with placebo or no treatment.

Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Should Be First-line Therapy in Patients with Heart Failure Reduced Ejection Fraction

Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction is associated with improvement in patient-centered outcomes, such as mortality, heart failure readmission, and atrial fibrillation recurrence, compared with standard medical therapy with or without device therapy. The evidence is not as robust in patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.

Ibrutinib increases the risk of hypertension and atrial fibrillation: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Ibrutinib is an oral covalent inhibitor of Bruton's tyrosine kinase approved for the treatment of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), mantle cell lymphoma and Waldenstrӧm’s macroglobulinemia. Ibrutinib has an increased risk of atrial fibrillation but the mechanism is unknown, and hypertension may play a role in the pathogenesis of this adverse drug reaction.

Methods

We aimed to review the risk of hypertension and atrial fibrillation as adverse events associated with ibrutinib through a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) retrieved in December 2018 on MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and ClinicalTrials.gov. The data were pooled using random-effects meta-analyses using the risk ratio (RR) with the 95% confidence interval (95%CI). The confidence on the pooled estimates was ascertained through the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach.

Results

There were 8 eligible RCTs (2580 patients), all reporting safety data of interest. Ibrutinib was associated with a significant increase in the risk of hypertension with a RR of 2.82 (95%CI 1.52–5.23) with moderate quality evidence. Ibrutinib increased significantly the risk of atrial fibrillation with a RR of 4.69 (95%CI 2.17–7.64) with high quality evidence.

Conclusions

Ibrutinib was associated with significantly increased risks of both hypertension and atrial fibrillation.

Improved Outcomes by Integrated Care of Anticoagulated Patients with Atrial Fibrillation Using the Simple ABC (Atrial Fibrillation Better Care) Pathway

BACKGROUND

Integrated care for the clinical management of atrial fibrillation patients is advocated as a holistic way to improve outcomes; the simple Atrial fibrillation Better Care (ABC) pathway has been proposed. The ABC pathway streamlines care as follows: 'A' Avoid stroke; 'B' Better symptom management; 'C' Cardiovascular and Comorbidity optimization.

METHODS

We performed a post hoc analysis of the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-Up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) trial. An 'integrated care' approach was defined according to the ABC pathway. Patients fulfilling all criteria were categorized as the 'ABC' group; those not fulfilling all criteria were the 'non-ABC' group. Trial-adjudicated all-cause death, composite outcome of stroke/major bleeding/cardiovascular death, and first hospitalization were the main study outcomes.

RESULTS

Among the 4060 patients in the original cohort, 3169 (78%) had available data to compare integrated care (ABC; n = 222; 7%) vs non-ABC (n = 2947; 93%) management. Over a median follow-up of 3.7 (interquartile range, 2.8-4.6) years, atrial fibrillation patients managed with integrated care (ABC group) had lower rates for all study outcomes (all P < .001) compared with the non-ABC group. A Cox multivariable regression analysis showed that atrial fibrillation patients managed in the ABC group had a significantly lower risk of all-cause death (hazard ratio [HR], 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.17-0.75), composite outcome (HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.18-0.68), and first hospitalization (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.53-0.80).

CONCLUSIONS

The simple ABC pathway allows the streamlining of integrated care for atrial fibrillation patients in a holistic manner and is associated with a lower risk of adverse outcomes (including mortality, stroke/major bleeding/cardiovascular death, and hospitalization).

The effects of rhythm control strategies versus rate control strategies for atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter: A systematic review with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis

Background

Atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter may be managed by either a rhythm control strategy or a rate control strategy but the evidence on the clinical effects of these two intervention strategies is unclear. Our objective was to assess the beneficial and harmful effects of rhythm control strategies versus rate control strategies for atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter.

Methods

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, Web of Science, BIOSIS, Google Scholar, clinicaltrials.gov, TRIP, EU-CTR, Chi-CTR, and ICTRP for eligible trials comparing any rhythm control strategy with any rate control strategy in patients with atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter published before November 2016. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, and quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were stroke and ejection fraction. We performed both random-effects and fixed-effect meta-analysis and chose the most conservative result as our primary result. We used Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA) to control for random errors. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed by visual inspection of forest plots and by calculating inconsistency (I²) for traditional meta-analyses and diversity (D²) for TSA. Sensitivity analyses and subgroup analyses were conducted to explore the reasons for substantial statistical heterogeneity. We assessed the risk of publication bias in meta-analyses consisting of 10 trials or more with tests for funnel plot asymmetry. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the body of evidence.

Results

25 randomized clinical trials (n = 9354 participants) were included, all of which were at high risk of bias. Meta-analysis showed that rhythm control strategies versus rate control strategies significantly increased the risk of a serious adverse event (risk ratio (RR), 1.10; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.02 to 1.18; P = 0.02; I² = 12% (95% CI 0.00 to 0.32); 21 trials), but TSA did not confirm this result (TSA-adjusted CI 0.99 to 1.22). The increased risk of a serious adverse event did not seem to be caused by any single component of the composite outcome. Meta-analysis showed that rhythm control strategies versus rate control strategies were associated with better SF-36 physical component score (mean difference (MD), 6.93 points; 95% CI, 2.25 to 11.61; P = 0.004; I² = 95% (95% CI 0.94 to 0.96); 8 trials) and ejection fraction (MD, 4.20%; 95% CI, 0.54 to 7.87; P = 0.02; I² = 79% (95% CI 0.69 to 0.85); 7 trials), but TSA did not confirm these results. Both meta-analysis and TSA showed no significant differences on all-cause mortality, SF-36 mental component score, Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire, and stroke.

Conclusions

Rhythm control strategies compared with rate control strategies seem to significantly increase the risk of a serious adverse event in patients with atrial fibrillation. Based on current evidence, it seems that most patients with atrial fibrillation should be treated with a rate control strategy unless there are specific reasons (e.g., patients with unbearable symptoms due to atrial fibrillation or patients who are hemodynamically unstable due to atrial fibrillation) justifying a rhythm control strategy. More randomized trials at low risk of bias and low risk of random errors are needed.

Trial registration

PROSPERO CRD42016051433

Atrial structure, function and arrhythmogenesis in aged and frail mice

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is prevalent in aging populations; however not all individuals age at the same rate. Instead, individuals of the same chronological age can vary in health status from fit to frail. Our objective was to determine the impacts of age and frailty on atrial function and arrhythmogenesis in mice using a frailty index (FI). Aged mice were more frail and demonstrated longer lasting AF compared to young mice. Consistent with this, aged mice showed longer P wave duration and PR intervals; however, both parameters showed substantial variability suggesting differences in health status among mice of similar chronological age. In agreement with this, P wave duration and PR interval were highly correlated with FI score. High resolution optical mapping of the atria demonstrated reduced conduction velocity and action potential duration in aged hearts that were also graded by FI score. Furthermore, aged mice had increased interstitial fibrosis along with changes in regulators of extracellular matrix remodelling, which also correlated with frailty. These experiments demonstrate that aging results in changes in atrial structure and function that create a substrate for atrial arrhythmias. Importantly, these changes were heterogeneous due to differences in health status, which could be identified using an FI.

The effects of rhythm control strategies versus rate control strategies for atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter: a protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation is the most common arrhythmia of the heart with a prevalence of approximately 2% in the western world. Atrial flutter, another arrhythmia, occurs less often with an incidence of approximately 200,000 new patients per year in the USA. Patients with atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter have an increased risk of death and morbidities. The management of atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter is often based on interventions aiming at either a rhythm control strategy or a rate control strategy. The evidence on the comparable effects of these strategies is unclear. This protocol for a systematic review aims at identifying the best overall treatment strategy for atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter.

METHODS

This protocol for a systematic review was performed following the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration and the eight-step assessment procedure suggested by Jakobsen and colleagues. We plan to include all relevant randomised clinical trials assessing the effects of any rhythm control strategy versus any rate control strategy. We plan to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, Science Citation Index Expanded on Web of Science, and BIOSIS to identify relevant trials. Any eligible trial will be assessed and classified as either high risk of bias or low risk of bias, and our conclusions will be based on trials with low risk of bias. The analyses of the extracted data will be performed using Review Manager 5 and Trial Sequential Analysis. For both our primary and secondary outcomes, we will create a 'Summary of Findings' table and use GRADE assessment to assess the quality of the evidence.

DISCUSSION

The results of this systematic review have the potential to benefit thousands of patients worldwide as well as healthcare systems and healthcare economy.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42016051433.

Patient-Reported Outcomes for Quality of Life Assessment in Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review of Measurement Properties

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation is a large and growing burden across all types of healthcare. Both incidence and prevalence are expected to double in the next 20 years, with huge impact on hospital admissions, costs and patient quality of life. Patient wellbeing determines the management strategy for atrial fibrillation, including the use of rhythm control therapy and the clinical success of heart rate control. Hence, evaluation of quality of life is an emerging and important part of the assessment of patients with atrial fibrillation. Although a number of questionnaires to assess quality of life in atrial fibrillation are available, a comprehensive overview of their measurement properties is lacking.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We performed a systematic review of the measurement properties of atrial fibrillation-specific health-related quality of life questionnaires. Methodological quality was assessed using the Consensus based Standards for selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist, with measurement properties rated for quality against optimal criteria and levels of evidence. We screened 2,216 articles, of which eight articles describing five questionnaires were eligible for inclusion: Atrial Fibrillation 6 (AF6), Atrial Fibrillation Effect on QualiTy-of-Life (AFEQT), Atrial Fibrillation Quality of Life Questionnaire (AFQLQ), Atrial Fibrillation Quality of Life (AFQoL), and Quality of Life in Atrial Fibrillation (QLAF). Good reliability (internal consistency and test-retest reliability) was demonstrated for AF6, AFEQT, AFQLQ and AFQoL. Content, construct and criterion validity were positively rated only in AFEQT. Responsiveness was positively rated only in AFEQT, but with limited evidence. Overall, AFEQT showed strong positive evidence for 2 of 9 measurement properties, compared to one for AFQoL and none for the remaining questionnaires.

INTERPRETATION

Given the low ratings for many measurement properties, no single questionnaire can be recommended, although AFEQT performed strongest. Further studies to robustly assess reliability, validity and responsiveness of AF-specific quality of life questionnaires are required. This review consolidates the current evidence for quality of life assessment in patients with atrial fibrillation and identifies priority areas for future research.

Cardiac Radiofrequency Ablation: A Clinical Update for Nurses

The field of electrophysiology (EP) has rapidly evolved from a focus on diagnostic procedures to an emphasis on interventions. Many cardiac arrhythmias traditionally treated with antiarrhythmic agents, cardioversion, or cardiac surgery are now routinely cured with cardiac ablation. To optimally manage the care of cardiac ablation patients, it is essential that nurses have an understanding of the EP procedures and related nursing implications. There are extensive evidence-based resources available in the medical literature; however, there are limited publications geared toward nurses caring for cardiac ablation patients.This article provides an overview of EP diagnostic and cardiac radio-frequency ablation procedures for select atrial and ventricular tachyarrhythmias. Evidence-based nursing practices related to postprocedure care will be addressed. The objective of this article is to increase nurses' knowledge of common cardiac ablation procedures and the nursing management of the patient postprocedure.

Administration of antiarrhythmic drugs to maintain sinus rhythm after catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Whether the short-term administration of antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) to maintain sinus rhythm following catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) can prevent the recurrence of AF is still a matter of debate. We searched the PubMed database and the Cochrane Library, and compiled a list of retrieved articles. We included only randomised controlled trials(RCTs) that compared any AADs against control (placebo or no treatment) or other AADs following CA for AF. Statistical analysis of the odds ratio (OR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to determine the overall effect of both outcomes. The Mantel-Haenszel method was used to pool data of the outcomes of AF recurrence into fixed effect model meta-analyses.

AIMS

We performed a systematic review to determine the effectiveness of short-term treatment with AADs on the recurrence of AF after CA.

RESULTS

Six RCTs were included in this study, with a total of 814 patients. Post-procedural temporary administration of AADs in patients after CA for AF reduced the early recurrence of AF (antiarrhythmic drug 103 patients [25.3%], control 162 patients [39.8%]; OR 0.47 [95% CI 0.34-0.64]; χ(2)  = 3.77; P = 0.58; I(2)  = 0%). No significant difference in patients after CA for AF in the late recurrence of AF (antiarrhythmic drug 148 patients [36.5%], control 171 patients [42.5%]; OR 0.77 [95% CI 0.57-1.03]; χ(2)  = 3.15; P = 0.68; I(2)  = 0%). The heterogeneity was zero in both analyses.

CONCLUSION

Although the continued administration of AADs after CA for AF can decrease early atrial tachycardias (ATa), this treatment does not prevent late ATa.

New-onset atrial fibrillation in critically ill patients

New-onset atrial fibrillation is a common problem in critically ill patients, with reported incidence ranging from 5% to 46%. It is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The present review summarizes studies investigating new-onset atrial fibrillation conducted in the critical care setting, focusing on the etiology, management of the hemodynamically unstable patient, rate versus rhythm control, ischemic stroke risk and anticoagulation. Recommendations for an approach to management in the intensive care unit are drawn from the results of these studies.

Drug Therapy for Rate and Rhythm Control in Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation: A Cross-sectional Study With Electronic Health Records in a Primary Care Cohort

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to describe the pharmacologic management of rate and rhythm and assess which factors are associated with the prescription of these drugs in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) from the Effectiveness, Safety, and Costs in Atrial Fibrillation study.

METHODS

This retrospective, cross-sectional study describes the pharmacologic rate and rhythm control management strategies adopted during 2012 in all patients diagnosed as having nonvalvular AF in 2007 to 2011. The data source is the Information System for the Improvement of Research in Primary Care database, which is based on primary care electronic health records. To answer the study objectives, 3 multivariate regression models to assess the independent factors associated with the prescription of these drugs were conducted for 2012. The rate and rhythm control drugs assessed were β-blockers, nondihydropyridine calcium channel blockers, antiarrhythmic agents, and digoxin.

FINDINGS

A total of 21,304 patients were diagnosed as having nonvalvular AF; 11,638 (54.6%) had at least one heart rate measure during 2012. Of them, 7777 (66.8%) received one or more rate and/or rhythm control drugs during 2012. Most patients (5751 [73.9%] of 7777) received only one drug for rate and/or rhythm control. Rate control agents were the most frequently used in 2012, with β-blockers the most prescribed group (4091 patients [52.6%]). A variety of different variables were associated with the prescription of rate and/or rhythm control drugs in the multivariate regression models.

IMPLICATIONS

The most used pharmacologic treatment of rate and rhythm control in our AF population is β-blockers, indicating that a rate control strategy is preferred in our setting, as widely recommended.

Long-Term Predictors of Thromboembolic Events in Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Patients Undergoing Electrical Cardioversion

BACKGROUND

Patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) who undergo electrical cardioversion (ECV) tend to be younger and have less comorbidity. Long-term anticoagulation after ECV should be based on thromboembolic risk. We sought to study the long-term incidence of thromboembolic events (TE), factors related to TE and compare the predictive value of the CHADS2and CHA2DS2-VASc scores in this particular population.

METHODS AND RESULTS

From January 2008 to June 2012, 571 ECV were performed in 406 consecutive patients with nonvalvular AF. Risk factors for TE and factors related to anticoagulation therapy after ECV were registered. During a follow-up of approximately 2 years, the annual incidence of TE was 1.9%. Factors associated with TE were: poor quality anticoagulation control (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.91; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.10-7.80; P=0.03), cessation of anticoagulation after ECV (HR: 8.80; 95% CI: 3.11-25.10; P<0.001), age ≥65 years (HR: 13.65; 95% CI: 1.74-107.16; P=0.01), CHADS2score (HR: 1.59; 95% CI: 1.10-2.29; P=0.01) and CHA2DS2-VASc score (HR: 1.67; 95% CI: 1.30-2.22; P<0.001). Both risk scores predicted TE [c-statistic for CHADS2: 0.68 (95% CI: 0.62-0.74; P=0.005), for CHA2DS2-VASc: 0.75 (95% CI: 0.70-0.80; P<0.001)]. Based on c-statistics, the predictive accuracy of CHA2DS2-VASc was superior (difference between areas: 0.064±0.031; P=0.0403).

CONCLUSIONS

Important determinants of long-term occurrence of TE after ECV were related to anticoagulant therapy (poor quality anticoagulation and cessation of this therapy over follow-up). The CHA2DS2-VASc score successfully predicts TE after ECV, having better predictive accuracy than the CHADS2score. (Circ J 2016; 80: 605-612).

Antiarrhythmics for maintaining sinus rhythm after cardioversion of atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation is the most frequent sustained arrhythmia. Atrial fibrillation frequently recurs after restoration of normal sinus rhythm. Antiarrhythmic drugs have been widely used to prevent recurrence, but the effect of these drugs on mortality and other clinical outcomes is unclear. This is an update of a review previously published in 2008 and 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To determine in patients who have recovered sinus rhythm after having atrial fibrillation, the effects of long-term treatment with antiarrhythmic drugs on death, stroke, embolism, drug adverse effects and recurrence of atrial fibrillation.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated the searches of CENTRAL in The Cochrane Library (2013, Issue 12 of 12), MEDLINE (to January 2014) and EMBASE (to January 2014). The reference lists of retrieved articles, recent reviews and meta-analyses were checked.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two independent authors selected randomised controlled trials comparing any antiarrhythmic drug with a control (no treatment, placebo, drugs for rate control) or with another antiarrhythmic drug in adults who had atrial fibrillation and in whom sinus rhythm was restored. Post-operative atrial fibrillation was excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed quality and extracted data. Studies were pooled, if appropriate, using Peto odds ratio (OR). All results were calculated at one year of follow-up.

MAIN RESULTS

In this update three new studies, with 534 patients, were included making a total of 59 included studies comprising 21,305 patients. All included studies were randomised controlled trials. Allocation concealment was adequate in 17 trials, it was unclear in the remaining 42 trials. Risk of bias was assessed in all domains only in the trials included in this update.Compared with controls, class IA drugs quinidine and disopyramide (OR 2.39, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.03 to 5.59, number needed to treat to harm (NNTH) 109, 95% CI 34 to 4985) and sotalol (OR 2.23, 95% CI 1.1 to 4.50, NNTH 169, 95% CI 60 to 2068) were associated with increased all-cause mortality. Other antiarrhythmics did not seem to modify mortality, but our data could be underpowered to detect mild increases in mortality for several of the drugs studied.Several class IA (disopyramide, quinidine), IC (flecainide, propafenone) and III (amiodarone, dofetilide, dronedarone, sotalol) drugs significantly reduced recurrence of atrial fibrillation (OR 0.19 to 0.70, number needed to treat to beneft (NNTB) 3 to 16). Beta-blockers (metoprolol) also significantly reduced atrial fibrillation recurrences (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.88, NNTB 9).All analysed drugs increased withdrawals due to adverse affects and all but amiodarone, dronedarone and propafenone increased pro-arrhythmia. Only 11 trials reported data on stroke. None of them found any significant difference with the exception of a single trial than found less strokes in the group treated with dronedarone compared to placebo. This finding was not confirmed in others studies on dronedarone.We could not analyse heart failure and use of anticoagulation because few original studies reported on these measures.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Several class IA, IC and III drugs, as well as class II drugs (beta-blockers), are moderately effective in maintaining sinus rhythm after conversion of atrial fibrillation. However, they increase adverse events, including pro-arrhythmia, and some of them (disopyramide, quinidine and sotalol) may increase mortality. Possible benefits on clinically relevant outcomes (stroke, embolism, heart failure) remain to be established.

Prevention of atrial fibrillation by bucindolol is dependent on the beta₁389 Arg/Gly adrenergic receptor polymorphism

OBJECTIVES

This study assessed the impact of bucindolol, a beta-blocker/sympatholytic agent, on the development of atrial fibrillation (AF) in advanced chronic heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFREF) patients enrolled in the BEST (Beta-Blocker Evaluation of Survival Trial).

BACKGROUND

β-blockers have modest efficacy for AF prevention in HFREF patients. Bucindolol's effects on HF and ventricular arrhythmic endpoints are genetically modulated by β₁- and α(2c)-adrenergic receptor (AR) polymorphisms that can be used to subdivide HFREF populations into those with bucindolol effectiveness levels that are enhanced, unchanged, or lost.

METHODS

BEST enrolled 2,708 New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III to IV HFREF patients. A substudy in which 1,040 patients' DNA was genotyped for the β₁-AR position 389 Arg/Gly and the α(2c)322-325 wild type (Wt)/deletion (Del) polymorphisms, and new-onset AF was assessed from adverse event case report forms or electrocardiograms at baseline and at 3 and 12 months.

RESULTS

In the entire cohort, bucindolol reduced the rate of new-onset AF compared to placebo by 41% (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.59 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.44 to 0.79], p = 0.0004). In the 493 β₁389 arginine homozygotes (Arg/Arg) in the DNA substudy, bucindolol reduced new-onset AF by 74% (HR: 0.26 [95% CI: 0.12 to 0.57]), with no effect in β₁389 Gly carriers (HR: 1.01 [95% CI: 0.56 to 1.84], interaction test = 0.008). When β₁389 Gly carriers were subdivided by α(2c) Wt homozygotes (n = 413, HR: 0.94 [95% CI: 0.48 to 1.82], p = 0.84) or Del variant carriers (n = 134, HR: 1.33 [95% CI: 0.32 to 5.64], p = 0.70), there was a positive interaction test (p = 0.016) when analyzed with β₁389 Arg homozygotes.

CONCLUSIONS

Bucindolol prevented new-onset AF; β₁ and α(2c) polymorphisms predicted therapeutic response; and the 47% of patients who were β₁389 Arg homozygotes had an enhanced effect size of 74%. (Beta-Blocker Evaluation in Survival Trial [BEST]; NCT00000560)

Diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation: an overview

Atrial fibrillation (AF) has been defined as the new cardiovascular "epidemic". Its prevalence is rising in developed countries, and the associated social and economic costs are high. In the last few years, there has been an increasing interest in understanding the mechanisms of AF and its management. New pharmacotherapies together with novel techniques for surgical and catheter treatment of AF have been developed, allowing the maintenance of sinus rhythm and the alleviation of symptoms in a large number of patients with AF. However, there are still some challenges that need to be addressed. This article gives an overview of the current state of the art on novel techniques for diagnosis and management of AF.

Adherence to guidelines and mortality in atrial fibrillation

OBJECTIVE

Determining the adherence to ACC/AHA/ESC 2006 guidelines and its influence on the survival of patients with atrial fibrillation.

METHODS

Prospective observational study of patients discharged during 2007 from an Internal Medicine department with a main or secondary diagnose of atrial fibrillation. The stroke risk was estimated with the CHADS2 score. The follow-up was carried out in outpatient medical office or via telephone.

RESULTS

We included 259 patients (mean age 80.9 years); 73% of them had a high risk of stroke. Oral anticoagulants were administered to 134 (51.7%), and antiplatelet drugs to 71 (27%) patients. A rate control strategy was chosen for 155 (59.8%) patients and a rhythm control one for 28 (10.8%). In 100 (38.6%) patients, treatment was adherent to the guidelines. Adherence to the guidelines was associated with age (0.95 95%CI 0.92-0.99; p=0.03), contraindication to the use of oral anticoagulants (0.38 95%CI 0.18-0.81; p=0.01) and mitral valve heart disease/valvular prosthesis (2.10 95%CI 1.04-4.25; p=0.04). The median follow-up was 727 days, and 191 patients died. Patients treated according to the guidelines had a higher rate of survival during the first three years (0.47 vs. 0.36; p=0.049). The use of oral anticoagulants was associated with a higher probability of survival over a 5 year period (0.34 vs 0.21; p=0.001) and the rate control strategy during the first year (0.69 vs 0.57; p=0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

In the real world, the treatment of atrial fibrillation according to the guidelines is associated with improved survival for up to three years during follow-up.

[Medicinal rate control in atrial fibrillation]

Atrial fibrillation is the most common form of persistent arrhythmia. Atrial fibrillation frequently causes rapid ventricular response with severe clinical symptoms requiring acute control of the ventricular rate. This leads to hemodynamic stabilization and improvement of symptoms. The long-term treatment target is to minimize patient symptoms and prevention of complications. As a rhythm control strategy does not provide a survival benefit compared to a rate control strategy, decisions on the best long-term treatment have to be individualized. Important factors affecting this decision are age of the patient, chances to re-establish and maintain sinus rhythm, tolerance of antiarrhythmic medication and accompanying diseases of the heart. For younger patients a rhythm control strategy will usually be the preferred option. For rate control beta blockers are considered first line therapy, alternative drugs include calcium antagonists and digoxin. Occasionally, amiodarone may also be used for rate control. If pharmacological rate management fails ablation of the atrioventricular (AV) node may be an option to control the ventricular rate.

Atrial Fibrillation and Cardiovascular Comorbidities, Survival and Mortality: A Real-Life Observational Study

Background

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac tachyarrhythmia encountered in clinical practice affecting up to 10% of the population over 60 years old and its prevalence rises with age. The main goals were to characterize the AF patient population after the initial diagnosis of AF and to determine overall survival.

Methods

It is a real-life observational study of 269 subjects with an AF diagnosis over 60 years old randomly selected. The collected variables were: sociodemographic, cardiovascular complications/comorbidities (CVCs) included in the CHA₂DS₂-VASc and HAS_BLED scores, drug assigned as clinical treatment, mean range INR and CVCs and death dates (all-cause mortality). The survival curve and the risk of death were assessed using Kaplan-Meier survival curve and comparisons with log-rank.

Results

The average following time was 6.2 ± 3.7 years (0.2-20.4). Eleven point five percent died. Sixty-five point four percent had some CVCs. There were no differences in the overall incidence of CVCs by gender. The survival probability was 0.86 ± DE 0.03 among men and 0.90 ± DE 0.04 among women without differences. Thirty-six point eight percent (95% CI: 30.8 - 42.7) were diagnosed vascular complications before AF diagnosis, being ischemic cardiopathy (24.2%) and ischemic stroke (23.2%) the most frequent. The mortality is higher (P < 0.036) among those who suffered ≥ 3 vascular complications and significantly lower among those treated with statins (P = 0.032). After AF diagnosis, the most frequent was the cardiac heart failure (46.7%), significantly higher among women (P = 0.037). The mortality is significantly lower in those treated with OAC (P = 0.003).

Conclusions

AF is associated with ischemic heart disease, ischemic stroke and congestive heart failure, but the average mortality age is not different from the global population in Spain and Catalonia.

Update on the management of atrial fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common arrhythmia, with a prevalence that increases markedly with increasing age. Presence of AF has implications for management of future stroke risk. If the patient's pulse is irregular, an electrocardiogram should be ordered. Key management decisions are whether to adopt a rhythm control or a rate control strategy and whether to initiate anticoagulation. The primary aim of a rhythm control strategy is improved symptom control. AF ablation may be considered in younger patients (aged < 65 years) with paroxysmal or early persistent AF. AF increases the risk of stroke, and anticoagulation should be considered on the basis of stroke risk - clearly indicated with a CHADS 2 score (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥ 75 years, diabetes, 1 point each; previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack, 2 points) of ≥ 2 - independent of the type of AF. In most patients with AF, the benefit of stroke reduction with systemic anticoagulation will outweigh its bleeding risks. All anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents increase the risk of bleeding. However, the new oral anticoagulants tend to have an improved safety profile, particularly in regard to intracranial bleeding, and are at least as effective as warfarin for stroke prevention.

Cost-Effectiveness of Atrial Fibrillation Ablation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a frequently encountered rhythm disorder, characterized by high recurrence rate, frequent hospitalizations, reduced quality-of-life and increased the risk of mortality, heart failure and stroke. Along with these clinical complications this type of arrhythmia is the major driver of health-related expenditures. Radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFA) of atrial fibrillation has been shown to improve freedom from arrhythmia survival, reduce re-hospitalization rate and provide better quality-of-life as compared with rate control and rhythm control with antiarrhythmic therapy. Efficacy of AF ablation in terms of outcomes and costs has an evolving importance. In this review, we aimed to highlight current knowledge on AF ablation clinical outcomes based on results of randomized clinical trials and community-based studies, and overview how this improvement in clinical end-points affects costs for arrhythmia care and cost-effectiveness of AF ablation.