Effect of Multifactorial Risk Factor Interventions on Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Evidence supports the benefit of managing atrial fibrillation (AF) specific risk factors in secondary prevention of AF. However, a comprehensive summary of the effect of multifactorial risk factor interventions on outcomes of patients with AF over long-term is lacking. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases from inception to October 2021 for both randomized controlled trials (RCT) and observational studies comparing multifactorial risk factor interventions to usual care in patients with AF. Fifteen studies (10 RCT, 5 observational) with 3786 patients were included (mean age 63.8 years, 64.0% males). Follow-up ranged from 3 to 42 months. We found no significant effects of multifactorial risk factor interventions on AF recurrence [pooled relative risk (RR): 0.93, 95% CI: 0.74-1.16, P = 0.51, I² = 54%], AF-related rehospitalization at 12 months (RR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.43-1.11, P= 0.13, I² = 0%), cardiovascular rehospitalization at 12 months (RR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.53-1.09, P= 0.13, I² = 53%), or AF-related adverse events at 12 and 15 months. However, multifactorial interventions were associated with reduced AF-related symptoms and improved health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at all studied time points. Current evidence does not support consistent associations between multifactorial risk factor interventions and AF recurrence after rhythm control therapy or AF-related or cardiovascular hospitalization in patients with AF. However, these interventions are associated with clinically relevant improvement in AF-related symptoms and HRQoL. Additional randomized studies are required to evaluate the impact of multifactorial risk factor interventions on patient-centered health outcomes.

Comprehensive metabolomic characterization of atrial fibrillation

Background

Using human humoral metabolomic profiling, we can discover the diagnostic biomarkers and pathogenesis of disease. The specific characterization of atrial fibrillation (AF) subtypes with metabolomics may facilitate effective and targeted treatment, especially in early stages.

Objectives

By investigating disturbed metabolic pathways, we could evaluate the diagnostic value of biomarkers based on metabolomics for different types of AF.

Methods

A cohort of 363 patients was enrolled and divided into a discovery and validation set. Patients underwent an electrocardiogram (ECG) for suspected AF. Groups were divided as follows: healthy individuals (Control), suspected AF (Sus-AF), first diagnosed AF (Fir-AF), paroxysmal AF (Par-AF), persistent AF (Per-AF), and AF causing a cardiogenic ischemic stroke (Car-AF). Serum metabolomic profiles were determined by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and liquid chromatography–quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry (LC-QTOF-MS). Metabolomic variables were analyzed with clinical information to identify relevant diagnostic biomarkers.

Results

The metabolic disorders were characterized by 16 cross-comparisons. We focused on comparing all of the types of AF (All-AFs) plus Car-AF vs. Control, All-AFs vs. Car-AF, Par-AF vs. Control, and Par-AF vs. Per-AF. Then, 117 and 94 metabolites were identified by GC/MS and LC-QTOF-MS, respectively. The essential altered metabolic pathways during AF progression included D-glutamine and D-glutamate metabolism, glycerophospholipid metabolism, etc. For differential diagnosis, the area under the curve (AUC) of specific metabolomic biomarkers ranged from 0.8237 to 0.9890 during the discovery phase, and the predictive values in the validation cohort were 78.8–90.2%.

Conclusions

Serum metabolomics is a powerful way to identify metabolic disturbances. Differences in small–molecule metabolites may serve as biomarkers for AF onset, progression, and differential diagnosis.

A Nurse-Led Integrated Chronic Care E-Enhanced Atrial Fibrillation (NICE-AF) Clinic in the Community: A Preliminary Evaluation

The current physician-centric model of care is not sustainable for the rising tide of atrial fibrillation. The integrated model of care has been recommended for managing atrial fibrillation. This study aims to provide a preliminary evaluation of the effectiveness of a Nurse-led Integrated Chronic care E-enhanced Atrial Fibrillation (NICE-AF) clinic in the community. The NICE-AF clinic was led by an advanced practice nurse (APN) who collaborated with a family physician. The clinic embodied integrated care and shifted from hospital-based, physician-centric care. Regular patient education, supplemented by a specially curated webpage, fast-tracked appointments for hospital-based specialised investigations, and teleconsultation with a hospital-based cardiologist were the highlights of the clinic. Forty-three participants were included in the six-month preliminary evaluation. No significant differences were observed in cardiovascular hospitalisations (p-value = 0.102) and stroke incidence (p-value = 1.00) after attending the NICE-AF clinic. However, significant improvements were noted for AF-specific QoL (p = 0.001), AF knowledge (p < 0.001), medication adherence (p = 0.008), patient satisfaction (p = 0.020), and depression (p = 0004). The preliminary evaluation of the NICE-AF clinic demonstrated the clinical utility of this new model of integrated care in providing safe and effective community-based AF care. Although a full evaluation is pending, the preliminary results highlighted its promising potential to be expanded into a permanent, larger-scale service.

Research Priorities in the Secondary Prevention of Atrial Fibrillation: A National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Virtual Workshop Report

There has been sustained focus on the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease and heart failure; yet, apart from stroke prevention, the evidence base for the secondary prevention of atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence, AF progression, and AF-related complications is modest. Although there are multiple observational studies, there are few large, robust, randomized trials providing definitive effective approaches for the secondary prevention of AF. Given the increasing incidence and prevalence of AF nationally and internationally, the AF field needs transformative research and a commitment to evidenced-based secondary prevention strategies. We report on a National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute virtual workshop directed at identifying knowledge gaps and research opportunities in the secondary prevention of AF. Once AF has been detected, lifestyle changes and novel models of care delivery may contribute to the prevention of AF recurrence, AF progression, and AF-related complications. Although benefits seen in small subgroups, cohort studies, and selected randomized trials are impressive, the widespread effectiveness of AF secondary prevention strategies remains unknown, calling for development of scalable interventions suitable for diverse populations and for identification of subpopulations who may particularly benefit from intensive management. We identified critical research questions for 6 topics relevant to the secondary prevention of AF: (1) weight loss; (2) alcohol intake, smoking cessation, and diet; (3) cardiac rehabilitation; (4) approaches to sleep disorders; (5) integrated, team-based care; and (6) nonanticoagulant pharmacotherapy. Our goal is to stimulate innovative research that will accelerate the generation of the evidence to effectively pursue the secondary prevention of AF.

Nurse-led vs. usual-care for atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Nurse-led integrated care is expected to improve outcome of patients with atrial fibrillation compared with usual-care provided by a medical specialist.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We randomized 1375 patients with atrial fibrillation (64 ± 10 years, 44% women, 57% had CHA2DS2-VASc ≥ 2) to receive nurse-led care or usual-care. Nurse-led care was provided by specialized nurses using a decision-support tool, in consultation with the cardiologist. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular death and cardiovascular hospital admissions. Of 671 nurse-led care patients, 543 (81%) received anticoagulation in full accordance with the guidelines against 559 of 683 (82%) usual-care patients. The cumulative adherence to guidelines-based recommendations was 61% under nurse-led care and 26% under usual-care. Over 37 months of follow-up, the primary endpoint occurred in 164 of 671 patients (9.7% per year) under nurse-led care and in 192 of 683 patients (11.6% per year) under usual-care [hazard ratio (HR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 to 1.04, P = 0.12]. There were 124 vs. 161 hospitalizations for arrhythmia events (7.0% and 9.4% per year), and 14 vs. 22 for heart failure (0.7% and 1.1% per year), respectively. Results were not consistent in a pre-specified subgroup analysis by centre experience, with a HR of 0.52 (95% CI 0.37-to 0.71) in four experienced centres and of 1.24 (95% CI 0.94-1.63) in four less experienced centres (P for interaction <0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our trial failed to show that nurse-led care was superior to usual-care. The data suggest that nurse-led care by an experienced team could be clinically beneficial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01740037).

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01740037).

Variation in use and dosing escalation of renin angiotensin system, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor and beta-blocker therapies in heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: Association of comorbidities

BACKGROUND

In patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi), angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB), or angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA), and beta-blockers (βB) are underutilized. It is unknown if patients with and without comorbidities have similar ACEi/ARB/ARNI, MRA, and βB prescription patterns.

METHODS

Baseline data from the CHAMP-HF (Change the Management of Patients with Heart Failure) registry were categorized by history of atrial fibrillation, asthma/chronic lung disease, obstructive sleep apnea, and depression. Using multivariate hierarchical logistic models, associations of ACEi/ARB/ARNI, MRA and βB medication use and dose by comorbidities were assessed after adjusting for patient characteristics.

RESULTS

Of 4,815 HFrEF patients from 152 CHAMP-HF sites, ACEi/ARB/ARNI use was lower in patients with more comorbidities, and generally, MRA use was low and βB use was high. In adjusted analyses, patients with HFrEF and comorbid obstructive sleep apnea, vs. without, were more likely to be prescribed ARNI (OR [95% CI]: 1.25 [1.00, 1.55]); P = .047 and MRA (1.31 [1.11, 1.55]); P = .002 and less likely to be prescribed ACEi (0.74 [0.63, 0.88]); P < .001. Patients with atrial fibrillation, vs. without, were less likely to receive ACEi/ARB (0.82 [0.71, 0.95]); P = .006 and any study medication (0.81 [0.67, 0.97]); P = .020. Comorbid lung disease and history of depression were not associated with HFrEF prescriptions.

CONCLUSIONS

Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone blockade therapy prescription and dose varied by comorbidity status, but βB therapy did not. In quality efforts, leaders need to consider use and dosing of prescriptions in light of prevalent comorbidities.

Antiarrhythmic drugs in patients with early persistent atrial fibrillation and heart failure: results of the RACE 3 study

AIMS

Maintaining sinus rhythm in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) is challenging. We explored the efficacy of class I and III antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) in patients with persistent AF and mild to moderate heart failure (HF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

In the RACE 3 trial, patients with early persistent symptomatic AF and short history of mild to moderate HF with preserved or reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) were randomized to targeted or conventional therapy. Both groups received AF and HF guideline-driven treatment. Additionally, the targeted-group received mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, statins, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and/or receptor blockers, and cardiac rehabilitation. Class I and III AADs could be instituted in case of symptomatic recurrent AF. Eventually, pulmonary vein isolation could be performed. Primary endpoint was sinus rhythm on 7-day Holter after 1-year. Included were 245 patients, age 65 ± 9 years, 193 (79%) men, AF history was 3 (2-6) months, HF history 2 (1-4) months, 72 (29.4%) had HF with reduced LVEF. After baseline electrical cardioversion (ECV), 190 (77.6%) had AF recurrences; 108 (56.8%) received class I/III AADs; 19 (17.6%) flecainide, 36 (33.3%) sotalol, 3 (2.8%) dronedarone, 50 (46.3%) amiodarone. At 1-year 73 of 108 (68.0%) patients were in sinus rhythm, 44 (40.7%) without new AF recurrences. Maintenance of sinus rhythm was significantly better with amiodarone [n = 29/50 (58%)] compared with flecainide [n = 6/19 (32%)] and sotalol/dronedarone [n = 9/39 (23%)], P = 0.0064. Adverse events occurred in 27 (25.0%) patients, were all minor and reversible.

CONCLUSION

In stable HF patients with early persistent AF, AAD treatment was effective in nearly half of patients, with no serious adverse effects reported.

Cabins, castles, and constant hearts: rhythm control therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation

Recent innovations have the potential to improve rhythm control therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Controlled trials provide new evidence on the effectiveness and safety of rhythm control therapy, particularly in patients with AF and heart failure. This review summarizes evidence supporting the use of rhythm control therapy in patients with AF for different outcomes, discusses implications for indications, and highlights remaining clinical gaps in evidence. Rhythm control therapy improves symptoms and quality of life in patients with symptomatic AF and can be safely delivered in elderly patients with comorbidities (mean age 70 years, 3–7% complications at 1 year). Atrial fibrillation ablation maintains sinus rhythm more effectively than antiarrhythmic drug therapy, but recurrent AF remains common, highlighting the need for better patient selection (precision medicine). Antiarrhythmic drugs remain effective after AF ablation, underpinning the synergistic mechanisms of action of AF ablation and antiarrhythmic drugs. Atrial fibrillation ablation appears to improve left ventricular function in a subset of patients with AF and heart failure. Data on the prognostic effect of rhythm control therapy are heterogeneous without a clear signal for either benefit or harm. Rhythm control therapy has acceptable safety and improves quality of life in patients with symptomatic AF, including in elderly populations with stroke risk factors. There is a clinical need to better stratify patients for rhythm control therapy. Further studies are needed to determine whether rhythm control therapy, and particularly AF ablation, improves left ventricular function and reduces AF-related complications.

Paradigm shifts in pathophysiology and management of atrial fibrillation-a tale of the RACE trials in the Netherlands

In the past 20 years the Netherlands-based RACE trials have investigated important concepts in clinical atrial fibrillation (AF). Their scope ranged from rhythm versus rate control to early or delayed cardioversion and also included early comprehensive management of AF in two trials, one focusing on early 'upstream therapy' and risk factor management and the other on integrated chronic nurse-led care. Studies were mostly triggered by simple clinical observations including futility of electrical cardioversion in persistent AF; many patients with permanent AF tolerating day-after-day 'uncontrolled' resting heart rates of up till 110 beats/min; patients being threatened more by vascular risks than AF itself; and insufficient guideline-based treatments for AF. Also the observation that recent-onset atrial fibrillation generally converts spontaneously, obviating cardioversion, triggered one of the studies. The RACE trials shifted a number of paradigms and by that could change the AF guidelines. The initial 'shock-and-forget' attitude made place for increased attention for anticoagulation, and in turn, broader vascular risks were recognised. In a nutshell, the adage eventually became: 'look beyond the ECG, treat the patient'.

Outcome reporting from clinical trials of non-valvular atrial fibrillation treated with traditional Chinese medicine or Western medicine: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To examine variation in outcomes, outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) and measurement times in clinical trials of non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and to identify outcomes for prioritisation in developing a core outcome set (COS) in this field.

DESIGN

This study was a systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

Clinical trials published between January 2015 and March 2019 were obtained from PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Wanfang Database, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure and SinoMed.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies were considered. Interventions included traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine. The required treatment duration or follow-up time was ≥4 weeks. The required sample size was ≥30 and≥50 in each group in RCTs and observational studies, respectively. We excluded trials that aimed to investigate the outcome of complications of NVAF, to assess the mechanisms or pharmacokinetics, or for which full text could not be acquired.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

The general information and outcomes, OMIs and measurement times were extracted. The methodological and outcome reporting quality were assessed. The results were analysed by descriptive analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 218 articles were included from 25 255 articles. For clinical trials of antiarrhythmic therapy, 69 outcomes from 16 outcome domains were reported, and 28 (31.82%, 28/88) outcomes were reported only once; the most frequently reported outcome was ultrasonic cardiogram. Thirty-one outcomes (44.93%, 31/69) were provided definitions or OMIs; the outcome measurement times ranged from 1 to 20 with a median of 3. For clinical trials of anticoagulation therapy, 82 outcomes from 18 outcome domains were reported; 38 (29.23%, 38/130) outcomes were reported only once. The most frequently reported outcome was ischaemic stroke. Forty (48.78%, 40/82) outcomes were provided OMIs or definitions; and the outcome measurement times ranged from 1 to 27 with a median of 8.

CONCLUSION

Outcome reporting in NVAF is inconsistent. Thus, developing a COS that can be used in clinical trials is necessary.

Integrated specialized atrial fibrillation clinics reduce all-cause mortality: post hoc analysis of a randomized clinical trial

Aims

An integrated chronic care programme in terms of a specialized outpatient clinic for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), has demonstrated improved clinical outcomes. The aim of this study is to assess all-cause mortality in patients in whom AF management was delivered through a specialized outpatient clinic offering an integrated chronic care programme.

Methods and results

Post hoc analysis of a Prospective Randomized Open Blinded Endpoint Clinical trial to assess all-cause mortality in AF patients. The study included 712 patients with newly diagnosed AF, who were referred for AF management to the outpatient service of a University hospital. In the specialized outpatient clinic (AF-Clinic), comprehensive, multidisciplinary, and patient-centred AF care was provided, i.e. nurse-driven, physician supervised AF treatment guided by software based on the latest guidelines. The control group received usual care by a cardiologist in the regular outpatient setting.

After a mean follow-up of 22 months, all-cause mortality amounted 3.7% (13 patients) in the AF-Clinic arm and 8.1% (29 patients) in usual care [hazard ratio (HR) 0.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.23–0.85; P = 0.014]. This included cardiovascular mortality in 4 AF-Clinic patients (1.1%) and 14 patients (3.9%) in usual care (HR 0.28; 95% CI 0.09–0.85; P = 0.025). Further, 9 patients (2.5%) died in the AF-Clinic arm due to a non-cardiovascular reason and 15 patients (4.2%) in the usual care arm (HR 0.59; 95% CI 0.26–1.34; P = 0.206).

Conclusion

An integrated specialized AF-Clinic reduces all-cause mortality compared with usual care. These findings provide compelling evidence that an integrated approach should be widely implemented in AF management.