Digoxin for atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter: A systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomised clinical trials

Atrial Fibrillation in End-Stage Heart Failure

End-stage heart failure (HF) accounts for 1% to 10% of all HF cases. It is frequently associated with coexistent atrial fibrillation due in part to structural changes related to altered hemodynamics, increased wall stress, and neurohormonal activation. The treatment remains challenging because of frequent atrial remodeling, comorbidities, and high recurrence rates. Studies have found no benefit of medical rhythm control compared with rate control. However, recent data suggest that catheter ablation might be associated with a reduction in HF symptomatology and all-cause mortality. Alternative treatment options including AV nodal ablation are available for refractory cases, but should not delay urgent heart transplantation.

Efficacy and safety of different antiarrhythmic protocols used for rate control in dogs with secondary atrial fibrillation

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES

Studies comparing the effects of antiarrhythmic protocols used for rate control in dogs with secondary atrial fibrillation (AF) are currently limited; therefore, this study aimed to report detailed data on the efficacy and therapy-related side-effects (TRSEs) of different antiarrhythmic protocols in dogs with secondary AF.

ANIMALS, MATERIALS, AND METHODS

Dogs with secondary AF treated with combination therapy with diltiazem and digoxin (CTDilt+Digox), diltiazem monotherapy (MTDilt), digoxin monotherapy (MTDigox), or amiodarone monotherapy (MTAmiod) were retrospectively evaluated. Signalment, clinical, diagnostic, therapeutic, and outcome data were retrieved. Electrocardiographically, antiarrhythmic efficacy was defined by a reduction in the mean heart rate on Holter monitoring ≤125 beats/minutes. Statistical analysis was performed to compare selected data, including the rate of efficacy and TRSEs as well as the median survival time, between dogs treated with different antiarrhythmic protocols.

RESULTS

Fifty-four dogs were included, with 28 receiving the CTDilt+Digox and 26 receiving monotherapies (MTDigox = 16; MTDilt = 5; MTAmiod = 5). The efficacy rate documented in dogs treated with CTDilt+Digox was significantly higher than that observed in dogs from the composite monotherapy group (i.e., MTDilt+MTDigox+MTAmiod) (P=0.048). The rate of TRSEs documented in dogs treated with CTDilt+Digox was similar to that observed in dogs from the composed monotherapy group (P=0.129). The median survival time documented in dogs treated with CTDilt+Digox was significantly longer than that observed in dogs of the MTDigox group (P=0.01).

DISCUSSION

In dogs with secondary AF we included, CTDilt+Digox was well tolerated and provided clinically relevant benefits compared to the use of a single antiarrhythmic drug.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective design; heterogeneous sample size of categories analyzed; clinicopathological data available for many, but not all, dogs.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support the indication to generally consider CTDilt+Digox as a first-line antiarrhythmic treatment in dogs with secondary AF.

[Principles of Outpatient Care of Patients With Heart Failure]

These guidelines combine the key provisions for the management of patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) at the outpatient stage based on current data from clinical studies, new 2024 clinical guidelines of the Russian Society of Cardiology for the management of CHF patients, and the provisions of the current order of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation on the procedure for conducting dispensary observation. CHF is a progressive disease characterized by a high risk of death, rehospitalizations, and disability. Reducing the risk of CHF decompensation and improving the prognosis is possible only with regular monitoring of the patient's condition and timely correction of therapy. The priority task of the outpatient unit is to expand the coverage of dispensary follow-up of CHF patients, preventive counseling, and telemedicine monitoring for timely identification of the patients at a high risk of CHF progression, improving their quality of life, and prolonging their life duration.

Combination therapy of beta-blockers and digoxin is associated with increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality in patients with atrial fibrillation: a report from the GLORIA-AF registry

The effect of digoxin and beta-blockers on cardiovascular outcomes and mortality remains unclear. The study aimed to determine differences in cardiovascular (CV) outcomes and death rates among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who were prescribed with beta-blockers, digoxin or combination therapy. Data from phase II/III of the prospective Global Registry on Long-Term Oral Anti-thrombotic Treatment in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation (GLORIA-AF) were analysed. The risk of major cardiovascular events (MACE) and death among patients with different prescriptions using COX proportional hazard regression was considered. Propensity score (PS) matching and weighting were further used to adjust for potential confounders of prescription use. A total of 14,201 patients [median age: 71.0 (IQR 64.0-77.0) years; 46.2% female] were recruited. After a median follow-up of 3.0 (IQR 2.4-3.1) years, 864 MACE, and 988 all-cause deaths were recorded. The incidence rate (IR) of MACE was 22.4 (95%CI 21.0-24.0) per 1000 person-years, while the IR of all-cause death was 25.4 (95%CI 23.8-27.0) per 1000 person-years. After multivariate adjustment with Cox regression, the risk of MACE (HR 1.35, 95% CI 1.09-1.68) and the risk of all-cause death (HR 1.28, 95%CI 1.04-1.57) were significantly higher in the combination therapy group, compared to the beta-blockers alone group. The risks of MACE and all-cause death remained significant in both PS matched and PS weighted cohort Among AF patients, combination therapy of beta-blockers and digoxin was associated with higher risks of MACE and all-cause death compared to beta-blockers alone.

Thirty-day risk of digoxin toxicity among older adults co-prescribed trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole versus amoxicillin: A population-based cohort study

IMPORTANCE

Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) may increase digoxin concentration, a medication with a narrow therapeutic index. Small changes in digoxin concentration could predispose individuals to the risk of toxicity.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the risk of digoxin toxicity in older adults taking digoxin following co-prescription of TMP-SMX compared with co-prescription of amoxicillin.

DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS

Retrospective population-based cohort study in Ontario, Canada (2002-2020) using linked health care data. Participants comprised 47,961 older adults taking digoxin (58% women; median age 80 years [interquartile range 74-86]) who were newly treated with TMP-SMX (n = 10,273) compared with those newly treated with amoxicillin (n = 37,688).

EXPOSURE

Co-prescription of TMP-SMX versus amoxicillin in older adults concurrently taking digoxin.

MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURE

The primary outcome was a hospital encounter (i.e., hospital admission or emergency department visit) with digoxin toxicity within 30 days of the antibiotic prescription. Inverse probability of treatment weighting on the propensity score was used to balance comparison groups on indicators of baseline health. Weighted risk ratios (RR) were obtained using modified Poisson regression and weighted risk differences (RD) using binomial regression. The number needed to harm (NNH) was calculated as 1/RD.

RESULTS

A hospital encounter with digoxin toxicity occurred in 49/10,273 (0.48%) patients treated with TMP-SMX versus 32/37,688 (0.08%) in those treated with amoxicillin (weighted RR, 5.71 [95% confidence interval (CI), 3.19 to 10.24]; weighted RD, 0.39% [95% CI, 0.25% to 0.53%]; NNH 256 [95% CI, 233 to 400]).

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

In older adults taking digoxin, the 30-day risk of a hospital encounter with digoxin toxicity was nearly 6 times higher in those co-prescribed TMP-SMX versus amoxicillin, although the absolute risk difference was low (0.4%). Physicians should prescribe an alternative antibiotic when clinically appropriate. If TMP-SMX must be co-prescribed with digoxin (if the benefit is believed to outweigh the risk), digoxin should be dose-reduced on an individual basis.

Atrial fibrillation-induced cardiomyopathy presenting with bilateral intermittent claudication associated with intracardiac thrombi

Systemic thromboembolism associated with atrial fibrillation (AF) is usually caused by thrombi in the left atrial appendage and acute onset. We experienced an unusual case of a woman in her 60s who presented to the outpatient district having bilateral intermittent claudication for more than 1 month, which turned out to be multiple thromboembolism from asymptomatic AF with tachycardia. She was also complicated with non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy with reduced ejection fraction, consistent with arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy (AiCM), along with left atrial and left ventricular thrombi and thromboembolism in multiple organs. Rate control with beta-blockers was not effective. With the administration of amiodarone after adequate anticoagulation therapy, she returned to sinus rhythm, and the ejection fraction was restored. This case is instructive in that AiCM with AF can cause thrombosis in the left ventricle, and the patient may present with worsening intermittent claudication as a result of systemic embolism.

Safety and Effectiveness of Antidysrhythmic Drugs for Pharmacologic Cardioversion of Recent-Onset Atrial Fibrillation: a Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The available evidence to determine which antidysrhythmic drug is superior for pharmacologic cardioversion of recent-onset (onset within 48 h) atrial fibrillation (AF) is uncertain. We aimed to identify the safest and most effective agent for pharmacologic cardioversion of recent-onset AF in the emergency department.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science from inception to February 21, 2023 (PROSPERO: CRD42018083781). Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials that enrolled adult participants with AF ≤ 48 h, compared a guideline-recommended antidysrhythmic drug with another antidysrhythmic drug or a different formulation of the same drug or placebo and reported specific adverse events. The primary outcome was immediate, serious adverse event - cardiac arrest, sustained ventricular tachydysrhythmia, atrial flutter 1:1 atrioventricular conduction, hypotension, and bradycardia. Additional analyses included the outcomes of conversion to sinus rhythm within 4 h and 24 h. We extracted data according to PRISMA-NMA and appraised trials using Cochrane RoB 2. We performed Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) using a Markov Chain Monte Carlo method with random-effect model and vague prior distribution to calculate odds ratios with 95% credible intervals. We assessed confidence using CINeMA. We used surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to rank agent(s).

RESULTS

The systematic review initially identified 5545 studies. Twenty-five studies met eligibility criteria, and 22 studies (n = 3082) provided data for NMA, which demonstrated that vernakalant (SUCRA = 70.9%) is most likely to be safest. Additional effectiveness NMA demonstrated that flecainide (SUCRA = 89.0%) is most likely to be superior for conversion within 4 h (27 studies; n = 2681), and ranolazine-amiodarone IV (SUCRA 93.7%) is most likely to be superior for conversion within 24 h (24 studies; n = 3213). Confidence in the NMA estimates is variable and limited mostly by within-study bias and imprecision.

CONCLUSIONS

Among guideline-recommended antidysrhythmic drugs, the combination of digoxin IV and amiodarone IV is definitely among the least safe for cardioversion of recent onset AF; flecainide, vernakalant, ibutilide, propafenone, and amiodarone IV are definitely among the most effective for cardioversion within 4 h; flecainide is definitely among the most effective for cardioversion within 24 h. Further, randomized controlled trials with predetermined and strictly defined, hemodynamic adverse event outcomes are recommended.

A case of digoxin intoxication caused by short-term massive overdose: Case report

RATIONALE

Digoxin is a frequently prescribed medication for the management of both acute and chronic cardiac insufficiency. The overdose ingestion of digoxin can result in a range of arrhythmias, with severe cases potentially leading to malignant arrhythmias and fatal outcomes. To date, there is a lack of documented cases related to acute digoxin intoxication resulting from the administration of massive digoxin overdose in the short term.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 37-year-old female patient was admitted to the emergency department following a suicide attempt involving the administration of 330 tablets of digoxin (each tablet containing 0.25 mg). The patient exhibited symptoms of confusion, nausea, and vomiting for around 30 minutes. The patient had a history of depression.

DIAGNOSES

The patient was diagnosed with digoxin intoxication.

INTERVENTIONS

The patient underwent many medical interventions including stomach lavage, administration of laxatives, correction of cardiac arrhythmias, provision of myocardial nutrition, diuresis, correction of acid-base balance, and management of electrolyte disturbances, among others.

OUTCOMES

Following a treatment of 9 days, the patient exhibited no signs of discomfort, maintained consciousness, and the serum concentration of digoxin was indeterminable. Upon reevaluation of the electrocardiogram, it was determined that no arrhythmia was present. Consequently, the patient was authorized to be discharged from the hospital.

CONCLUSIONS

There is currently no documented evidence of cases involving a significant overdose of digoxin resulting in intoxication. The patient had a comprehensive treatment regimen consisting of stomach lavage, administration of a laxative, correction of cardiac arrhythmias, provision of myocardial nutrition, fluid replacement, diuresis, and supportive therapy, resulting in successful outcomes.

LESSONS

There have been no known cases of intoxication resulting from a significant overdose of digoxin, specifically with the consumption of 330 tablets (0.25 mg/tablet). However, in the event of ingesting excessive amounts of digoxin, it is imperative to promptly administer stomach lavage, administration of a laxative, and arrhythmia correction. The administration of temporary pacemaker therapy is recommended for patients presenting with high atrioventricular block, whereas hemoperfusion is advised for patients with renal insufficiency as a means to eliminate digoxin from the body.

Cavotricuspid Isthmus-Dependent Atrial Flutter. Beyond Simple Linear Ablation

The demonstration of a peritricuspid circular movement with a zone of slow conduction in the cavotricuspid isthmus, together with the high efficacy of linear ablation and widely accepted acute endpoints, has established typical flutter as a disease with a well-defined physiopathology and treatment. However, certain aspects regarding its deeper physiopathology, ablation targets, and methods for verifying the results remain to be clarified. While current research efforts have primarily been focused on the advancement of effective ablation techniques, it is crucial to continue exploring the intricate electrophysiological, ultrastructural, and pharmacological pathways that underlie the development of atrial flutter. This ongoing investigation is essential for the development of targeted preventive strategies that can act upon the specific mechanisms responsible for the initiation and maintenance of this arrhythmia. In this work, we will discuss less ascertained aspects alongside the most widely recognized general data, as well as the most recent or less commonly used contributions regarding the electrophysiological evaluation and ablation of typical atrial flutter. Regarding electrophysiological characteristics, one of the most intriguing findings is the presence of low voltage zones in some of these patients together with the presence of a functional, unidirectional line of block between the two vena cava. It is theorized that episodes of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation can trigger this line of block, which may then allow the onset of stable atrial flutter. Without this, the patient will either remain in atrial fibrillation or return to sinus rhythm. Another of the most important pending tasks is identifying patients at risk of developing post-ablation atrial fibrillation. Discriminating between individuals who will experience a complete arrhythmia cure and those who will develop atrial fibrillation after flutter ablation, remains essential given the important prognostic and therapeutic implications. From the initial X-ray guided linear cavotricuspid ablation, several alternatives have arisen in the last decade: electrophysiological criteria-directed point applications based on entrainment mapping, applications directed by maximum voltage criteria or by wavefront speed and maximum voltage criteria (omnipolar mapping). Electro-anatomical navigation systems offer substantial support in all three strategies. Finally, the electrophysiological techniques to confirm the success of the procedure are reviewed.

Beta-Blockers, Digoxin, or Both Following an Incident Diagnosis of Atrial Fibrillation: A Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation is one of the most common arrhythmias, but the optimal drug choice for a rate control strategy remains uncertain.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort claims database study of patients with an incident hospital discharge diagnosis of atrial fibrillation between 2011 and 2015. The exposure variables were a discharge prescription for beta-blockers, digoxin, or both. The primary outcome was a composite of total in-hospital mortality or a repeat cardiovascular (CV) hospitalization. Baseline confounding was controlled with propensity score inverse probability weighting using a entropy balancing algorithm and the prespecified estimand was the average treatment effect among the treated. Treatment effects for the weighted samples were calculated from a Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

A total of 12,723 patients were discharged on beta-blockers alone, 406 on digoxin alone, and 1499 discharged on combined beta-blocker and digoxin therapy with a median follow-up time of 356 days. After baseline covariate adjustment, the digoxin alone (hazard ratio [HR], 1.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85-1.81) and the combined group (HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.90-1.31) were not associated with increased risk for the composite endpoint compared with the beta- blocker-alone group. These results were robust to sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients hospitalized for incident atrial fibrillation and discharged on digoxin alone or the combination of digoxin and a beta-blocker were not associated with an increase in the composite outcome of recurrent CV hospitalizations and death compared with those discharged on isolated beta-blocker therapy. However, additional studies are required to refine the precision of these estimates.

The Association Between Digoxin Use and Long-Term Mortality After Acute Coronary Syndrome

Digoxin is used to treat atrial fibrillation and heart failure. Previous studies have reported an association between digoxin and higher mortality, but the results have been conflicting. This study assessed the association between digoxin use and all-cause mortality using comprehensive health data of patients treated for acute coronary syndrome (ACS). This was a retrospective analysis of 8,388 consecutive ACS patients treated in Tays Heart Hospital between 2007 and 2017, with a follow-up until the end of 2018. The adjusted Cox regression model was used to analyze the association between digoxin treatment and all-cause mortality with and without the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method. IPTW was applied to estimate the residual confounding by the treatment selection. Clinical phenotype data were collected from various sources, including a prospectively updated online database maintained by physicians. The median follow-up time was 6.0 years (interquartile range 3.5 to 9.0 years). During the follow-up, 30.8% (n = 2,580) of the patients died. Altogether, 4.0% (n = 333) of the patients were treated with digoxin during hospitalization. In the Cox regression model, digoxin associated with increased mortality (age- and sex-adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.76 [1.51 to 2.05], p <0.001 and in the full risk factor-adjusted HR 1.23 [1.04 to 1.45], p = 0.016). The IPTW Cox analysis average treatment effect HR was 1.71 (1.12 to 2.62, p = 0.013), standardized average treatment effect HR was 1.35 (0.96 to 1.90, p = 0.082), and treatment effect among the treated HR was 1.32 (1.09 to 1.59, p = 0.004). In conclusion, digoxin treatment during ACS associates with increased mortality, despite adjusting for other risk factors and after accounting for factors explaining the residual confounding by selection bias.

Effect of digoxin on all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in patients with atrial fibrillation with and without heart failure: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and 12 meta-analyses

PURPOSE

To perform a systematic umbrella review with meta-analysis to evaluate the certainty of evidence on mortality risk associated with digoxin use in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) with or without heart failure (HF).

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science databases from inception to 19 October 2021. We included systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies investigating digoxin effects on mortality of adult patients with AF and/or HF. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality; secondary outcome was cardiovascular mortality. Certainty of evidence was evaluated by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool and the quality of systematic reviews/meta-analyses by the A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR2) tool.

RESULTS

Eleven studies accounting for 12 meta-analyses were included with a total of 4,586,515 patients. AMSTAR2 analysis showed a high quality in 1, moderate in 5, low in 2, and critically low in 3 studies. Digoxin was associated with an increased all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 1.19, 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 1.14-1.25) with moderate certainty of evidence and with an increased cardiovascular mortality (HR 1.19, 95%CI 1.06-1.33) with moderate certainty of evidence. Subgroup analysis showed that digoxin was associated with all-cause mortality both in patients with AF alone (HR 1.23, 95%CI 1.19-1.28) and in those with AF and HF (HR 1.14, 95%CI 1.12-1.16).

CONCLUSION

Data from this umbrella review suggests that digoxin use is associated with a moderate increased risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in AF patients regardless of the presence of HF.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022325321).

Acute Heart Failure: Diagnostic-Therapeutic Pathways and Preventive Strategies-A Real-World Clinician's Guide

Acute heart failure (AHF) is the most frequent cause of unplanned hospital admission in patients of >65 years of age and it is associated with significantly increased morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs. Different AHF classification criteria have been proposed, mainly reflecting the clinical heterogeneity of the syndrome. Regardless of the underlying mechanism, peripheral and/or pulmonary congestion is present in the vast majority of cases. Furthermore, a marked reduction in cardiac output with peripheral hypoperfusion may occur in most severe cases. Diagnosis is made on the basis of signs and symptoms, laboratory, and non-invasive tests. After exclusion of reversible causes, AHF therapeutic interventions mainly consist of intravenous (IV) diuretics and/or vasodilators, tailored according to the initial hemodynamic status with the addition of inotropes/vasopressors and mechanical circulatory support if needed. The aim of this review is to discuss current concepts on the diagnosis and management of AHF in order to guide daily clinical practice and to underline the unmet needs. Preventive strategies are also discussed.

An Integrative Comparative Study Between Digoxin and Amiodarone as an Emergency Treatment for Patients With Atrial Fibrillation With Evidence of Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The emergency treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF) involves utilizing two strategies. The first strategy normally involves permitting the atrial fibrillation to persevere as the ventricular rate is controlled. The other method involves utilizing anti-arrhythmic drugs in cardioversion and attempting to maintain sinus rhythm. Different pharmacological treatments, including digoxin and amiodarone, have been used to manage AF. A literature review on amiodarone and digoxin in the treatment of AF among patients with heart failure (HF) has shown that both drugs have potential risks. Therefore, we are conducting this systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness of amiodarone and digoxin in the treatment of AF among patients with evidence of HF. A literature search of relevant articles was conducted on six electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Medline, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar) from 2000 to 2022. The search yielded seven studies that had met the inclusion criteria. Our meta-analysis of four studies showed that there was no significant difference in the reduction of heart rate after treatment with either amiodarone or digoxin (mean difference (MD): -5.44; 95% confidence interval (CI): -9.53 to -1.34; I2 = 25%; p = 0.26). On the other hand, the statistical analysis showed that amiodarone had a better effect on the conversion to sinus rhythm than digoxin (63% versus 35%, respectively). Based on evidence from our meta-analysis, the clinical effect of amiodarone and digoxin in the emergency treatment of AF on heart rate control was unclear. However, amiodarone has a significant impact on the restoration of sinus rhythm compared with digoxin and can be considered the first-line drug regimen in conversion to sinus rhythm for AF patients with evidence of heart failure. However, the use of amiodarone and digoxin is complicated by adverse events and all-cause mortality.

Research Progress in Pharmacological Activities and Applications of Cardiotonic Steroids

Cardiotonic steroids (CTS) are a group of compounds existing in animals and plants. CTS are commonly referred to cardiac glycosides (CGs) which are composed of sugar residues, unsaturated lactone rings and steroid cores. Their traditional mechanism of action is to inhibit sodium-potassium ATPase to strengthen the heart and regulate heart rate, so it is currently widely used in the treatment of cardiovascular diseases such as heart failure and tachyarrhythmia. It is worth noticing that recent studies have found an avalanche of inestimable values of CTS applications in many fields such as anti-tumor, anti-virus, neuroprotection, and immune regulation through multi-molecular mechanisms. Thus, the pharmacological activities and applications of CTS have extensive prospects, which would provide a direction for new drug research and development. Here, we review the potential applications of CTS in cardiovascular system and other systems. We also provide suggestions for new clinical practical strategies of CTS, for many diseases. Four main themes will be discussed, in relation to the impact of CTS, on 1) tumors, 2) viral infections, 3) nervous system diseases and 4) immune-inflammation-related diseases.

Digoxin Impact on Heart Failure Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Digoxin is a cardiac glycoside, derived from the plant Digitalis purpurea. For many years digitalis has been widely used in the treatment of heart failure (HF), owing to its cardiotonic and neurohormonal effects and atrial fibrillation (AF), due to its parasympathomimetic effect on the AV node.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this paper is to evaluate the available evidence on the safety and efficacy of digoxin in patients with HF and AF, by reviewing the pertinent literature.

METHODS

We conducted a PubMed/MEDLINE and SCOPUS search to evaluate the currently available evidence on the administration of digoxin and its association with all-cause mortality risk in patients with AF and HF.

RESULTS

Several observational analyses of clinical trials and meta-analyses have shown conflicting results on the safety and efficacy of digoxin administration in patients with AF and HF. According to these results, digoxin should be avoided in patients without HF, as it is associated with worse outcomes. On the other hand, in patients with AF and HF digoxin should be used with caution.

CONCLUSION

The impact of digoxin on all-cause mortality and adverse effects in these patients remains unclear based on the current evidence. More trials at low risk of bias evaluating the effects of digoxin are needed.

2021 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure: Developed by the Task Force for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). With the special contribution of the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC

Document Reviewers: Rudolf A. de Boer (CPG Review Coordinator) (Netherlands), P. Christian Schulze (CPG Review Coordinator) (Germany), Magdy Abdelhamid (Egypt), Victor Aboyans (France), Stamatis Adamopoulos (Greece), Stefan D. Anker (Germany), Elena Arbelo (Spain), Riccardo Asteggiano (Italy), Johann Bauersachs (Germany), Antoni Bayes-Genis (Spain), Michael A. Borger (Germany), Werner Budts (Belgium), Maja Cikes (Croatia), Kevin Damman (Netherlands), Victoria Delgado (Netherlands), Paul Dendale (Belgium), Polychronis Dilaveris (Greece), Heinz Drexel (Austria), Justin Ezekowitz (Canada), Volkmar Falk (Germany), Laurent Fauchier (France), Gerasimos Filippatos (Greece), Alan Fraser (United Kingdom), Norbert Frey (Germany), Chris P. Gale (United Kingdom), Finn Gustafsson (Denmark), Julie Harris (United Kingdom), Bernard Iung (France), Stefan Janssens (Belgium), Mariell Jessup (United States of America), Aleksandra Konradi (Russia), Dipak Kotecha (United Kingdom), Ekaterini Lambrinou (Cyprus), Patrizio Lancellotti (Belgium), Ulf Landmesser (Germany), Christophe Leclercq (France), Basil S. Lewis (Israel), Francisco Leyva (United Kingdom), AleVs Linhart (Czech Republic), Maja-Lisa Løchen (Norway), Lars H. Lund (Sweden), Donna Mancini (United States of America), Josep Masip (Spain), Davor Milicic (Croatia), Christian Mueller (Switzerland), Holger Nef (Germany), Jens-Cosedis Nielsen (Denmark), Lis Neubeck (United Kingdom), Michel Noutsias (Germany), Steffen E. Petersen (United Kingdom), Anna Sonia Petronio (Italy), Piotr Ponikowski (Poland), Eva Prescott (Denmark), Amina Rakisheva (Kazakhstan), Dimitrios J. Richter (Greece), Evgeny Schlyakhto (Russia), Petar Seferovic (Serbia), Michele Senni (Italy), Marta Sitges (Spain), Miguel Sousa-Uva (Portugal), Carlo G. Tocchetti (Italy), Rhian M. Touyz (United Kingdom), Carsten Tschoepe (Germany), Johannes Waltenberger (Germany/Switzerland) All experts involved in the development of these guidelines have submitted declarations of interest. These have been compiled in a report and published in a supplementary document simultaneously to the guidelines. The report is also available on the ESC website www.escardio.org/guidelines For the Supplementary Data which include background information and detailed discussion of the data that have provided the basis for the guidelines see European Heart Journal online.

Digoxin use and clinical outcomes in elderly Chinese patients with atrial fibrillation: a report from the Optimal Thromboprophylaxis in Elderly Chinese Patients with Atrial Fibrillation (ChiOTEAF) registry

AIMS

Prior studies have reported conflicting results on digoxin's impact on clinical outcomes and quality of life, and there are limited data from Asia. The aim of this study is to evaluate the use of digoxin and its impact on clinical outcomes and quality of life in a high-risk cohort of elderly Chinese atrial fibrillation (AF) patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The Optimal Thromboprophylaxis in Elderly Chinese Patients with Atrial Fibrillation (ChiOTEAF) registry is a prospective, multicentre nationwide study conducted from October 2014 to December 2018. Endpoints of interest were the composite outcome of all-cause death/any thromboembolism (TE), all-cause death, cardiovascular death, sudden cardiac death, and TE events, as well as the quality of life. The eligible cohort for this analysis included 6391 individuals, of whom 751 (11.8%) patients were treated with digoxin. On multivariate analysis, the use of digoxin was associated with a higher odds ratio (OR) of composite outcome [OR: 1.71; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.32-2.22], all-cause death (OR: 1.62; 95% CI: 1.23-2.14), and any TE (OR: 1.78; 95% CI: 1.08-2.95). Results were consistent in a subgroup of patients with diagnosed heart failure (HF) and patients with permanent AF. The use of digoxin was associated with worse health-related quality of life (mean EQ index: 0.76 ± 0.19 vs. 0.84 ± 0.18; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this nationwide cohort study, digoxin use was associated with an overall higher risk of the composite outcome of all-cause death/any TE, all-cause death, and any TE, regardless of HF diagnosis. Patients treated with digoxin had a worse health-related quality of life.

Rate control strategies for atrial fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is one of the main cardiac arrhythmias associated with higher risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. AF can cause adverse symptoms and reduced quality of life. One of the strategies for the management of AF is rate control, which can modulate ventricle rate, alleviate adverse associated symptoms and improve the quality of life. As primary management of AF through rate control or rhythm is a topic under debate, the purpose of this review is to explore the rationale for the rate control approach in managing AF by considering the guidelines, recommendations and determinants for the choice of rate control drugs, including beta blockers, digoxin and non- dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers for patients with AF and other comorbidities and atrioventricular nodal ablation and pacing. Despite the limitations of rate control treatment, which may not be effective in preventing disease progression or in reducing symptoms in highly symptomatic patients, it is widely used for almost all patients with atrial fibrillation. Although rate control is one of the first line management of all patient with atrial fibrillation, several issues remain debateable.

Effect of Digoxin Therapy on Mortality in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: An Updated Meta-Analysis

Background: Whether digoxin is associated with increased mortality in atrial fibrillation (AF) remains controversial. We aimed to assess the risk of mortality and clinical effects of digoxin use in patients with AF.

Methods: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library were systematically searched to identify eligible studies comparing all-cause mortality of patients with AF taking digoxin with those not taking digoxin, and the length of follow-up was at least 6 months. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted and pooled.

Results: A total of 29 studies with 621,478 patients were included. Digoxin use was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality in all patients with AF (HR 1.17, 95% CI 1.13–1.22, P < 0.001), especially in patients without HF (HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.11–1.47, P < 0.001). There was no significant association between digoxin and mortality in patients with AF and HF (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.99–1.14, P = 0.110). In all patients with AF, regardless of concomitant HF, digoxin use was associated with an increased risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) (HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.23–1.60, P < 0.001) and cardiovascular (CV) mortality (HR 1.27, 95% CI 1.08–1.50, P < 0.001), and digoxin use had no significant association with all-cause hospitalization (HR 1.13, 95% CI 0.92–1.39, P = 0.230).

Conclusion: We conclude that digoxin use is associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality, CV mortality, and SCD, and it does not reduce readmission for AF, regardless of concomitant HF. Digoxin may have a neutral effect on all-cause mortality in patients with AF with concomitant HF.

Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.ukPROSPERO.

Association Between Digoxin Use and Cancer Incidence: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study With Competing Risk Analysis

Background: Previous studies neglected death as a critical competing risk while estimating the cancer risk for digoxin users. Therefore, the current study aims to assess the effectiveness of digoxin on cancer prevention by competing risk analysis. Methods: We performed a population-based retrospective cohort study using the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research database between 1998 and 2010. After one-to-one propensity score-matching from 36,160 patients with defined criteria, we enrolled 758 patients both in digoxin and β-blocker group for further analysis. Results: The results showed that the digoxin group had higher all-cause mortality than the β-blocker group in the 4- year (10.4 vs. 4.9%) and 8 years (13.6 vs. 7.0%) follow-up. The subdistribution HR of cancer incidence in the digoxin group compared to the β-blocker group was 1.99 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.22-3.01) and 1.46 (95% CI: 1.01-2.15) in the 4 years and 8 years follow-up, respectively. Conclusions: The result of our study showed the usage of digoxin has no benefit in cancer prevention compared with β-blocker. The possibility of β-blocker as a new drug candidate for cancer prevention needs further clinical evaluation. The current study also emphasized the necessity of competing risk analysis applying to similar clinical researches.

Influence of digoxin on mortality in patients with atrial fibrillation: Overview of systematic reviews

Once a routine part of atrial fibrillation (AF) management, digoxin use has declined. Likely hastening this decline are findings from several studies and systematic reviews identifying a potential association between digoxin use and all-cause mortality in AF populations. However, inconsistency exists within some of these studies potentially leading to confusion among clinicians. To critically evaluate the current literature to contextualize the associations between digoxin and mortality risk in patients with AF by performing an overview of systematic reviews. We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Database of Systematic Reviews, and SCOPUS from their earliest date through October 12, 2020, to identify systematic reviews (SRs) that included studies enrolling patients with AF or atrial flutter and evaluated the association between digoxin use and all-cause mortality. We used the AMSTAR 2 tool to assess the risk of bias for each included SR. Results from reviews are qualitatively synthesized. Our search identified 10 SRs that met our inclusion criteria. Of the 41 unique AF studies included in these SRs, 41% were cohort studies, 29% were post hoc analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 15% were RCTs, and 15% were registry studies. Based on our AMSTAR 2 assessment, the overall confidence in the results of the 10 reviews was rated as "moderate" in three SRs, "low" in three SRs, and "critically low" in the rest. Except for one review, each included SR shows that digoxin use in AF is associated with a 15 to 38% higher risk of all-cause mortality. This association may be greater when AF-only populations are considered compared with a mix of AF and heart failure populations. Serum digoxin concentration (SDC) data were infrequently considered, but available data suggested a greater association between increasing SDC and all-cause mortality. This overview of reviews found general consistency regarding the association between digoxin use and higher all-cause mortality in AF populations. However, heterogeneity exists among and between SRs and an unmet need exists for additional study in a RCT setting with close monitoring and reporting of SDC to better inform clinical practice.

Association of digoxin with mortality in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease: A population-based cohort study

Digoxin is commonly prescribed for heart failure and atrial fibrillation, but there is limited data on its safety in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). We conducted a population-based cohort study using the pre-end stage renal disease (ESRD) care program registry and the National Health Insurance Research Database in Taiwan. Of advanced CKD patient cohort (N = 31,933), we identified the digoxin user group (N = 400) matched with age and sex non-user group (N = 2,220). Multivariable Cox proportional hazards and sub-distribution hazards models were used to evaluate the association between digoxin use and the risk of death, cardiovascular events (acute coronary syndrome, ischemic stroke, or hemorrhagic stroke) and renal outcomes (ESRD, rapid decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate-eGFR, or acute kidney injury). Results showed that all-cause mortality was higher in the digoxin user group than in the non-user group, after adjusting for covariates (adjusted hazard ratio, aHR 1.63; 95% CI 1.23-2.17). The risk for acute coronary syndrome (sub-distribution hazard ratio, sHR 1.18; 95% CI 0.75-1.86), ischemic stroke (sHR 1.42; 95% CI 0.85-2.37), and rapid eGFR decline (sHR 1.00 95% CI 0.78-1.27) was not significantly different between two groups. In conclusion, our study demonstrated that digoxin use was associated with increased mortality, but not cardiovascular events or renal function decline in advanced CKD patients. This finding warns the safety of prescribing digoxin in this population. Future prospective studies are needed to overcome the limitations of cohort study design.

Significance of serum fibroblast growth factor-23 and miR-208b in pathogenesis of atrial fibrillation and their relationship with prognosis

BACKGROUND

The incidence and prevalence of atrial fibrillation are increasing each year, and this condition is one of the most common clinical arrhythmias.

AIM

To investigate the levels and significance of serum fibroblast growth factor 23 (FGF-23) and miR-208b in patients with atrial fibrillation and their relationship with prognosis.

METHODS

From May 2018 to October 2019, 240 patients with atrial fibrillation were selected as an observation group, including 134 with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and 106 with persistent atrial fibrillation; 150 patients with healthy sinus rhythm were selected as a control group. The serum levels of FGF-23 and miR-208b in the two groups were measured. In the observation group, cardiac parameters were determined by echocardiography.

RESULTS

The serum levels of FGF-23 and miR-208b in the observation group were 210.20 ± 89.60 ng/mL and 5.30 ± 1.22 ng/mL, which were significantly higher than the corresponding values in the control group (P < 0.05). In the observation group, the serum levels of FGF-23 and miR-208b in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation were 234.22 ± 70.05 ng/mL and 5.83 ± 1.00 ng/mL, which were significantly higher than the corresponding values in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (P < 0.05). The left atrial dimension (LAD) of patients with persistent atrial fibrillation was 38.81 ± 5.11 mm, which was significantly higher than that of patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (P > 0.05). The serum levels of FGF-23 and miR-208b were positively correlated with the LAD (r = 0.411 and 0.382, P < 0.05). In the observation group, the serum levels of FGF-23 and miR-208b in patients with a major cardiovascular event (MACE) were 243.30 ± 72.29 ng/mL and 6.12 ± 1.12 ng/mL, which were significantly higher than the corresponding values in patients without a MACE (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The serum levels of FGF-23 and miR-208b are increased in patients with atrial fibrillation and are related to the type of disease, cardiac parameters, and prognosis.

[Second look: practical diagnostic and therapeutic checks in neurorehabilitation]

Post-acute inpatient neurorehabilitation facilities are increasingly treating patients who are not only severely ill and multimorbid but who are also referred from non-neurological departments. These patients are still often medically unstable so that the previous diagnostics and treatment must be reevaluated and when necessary adapted or supplemented. Certain interdisciplinary diagnostic and therapeutic problems, such as antithrombotic therapy, regularly reoccur. This article presents these problems in a checklist fashion, which should provide indications in individual cases when previously carried out measures need to be questioned and adapted.

Digoxin in Atrial Fibrillation: An Old Topic Revisited

Digoxin has been used for more than 50 years in patients with Atrial Fibrillation (AF), with the goal of Controlling Heart Rate (HR) and restoring sinus rhythm. In the last two decades, several studies have correlated therapeutic use of digoxin with increased mortality. However, such studies have potential biases that cannot be disregarded, mainly because they are cross-sectional experiments or post-hoc analyses of Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs). Despite uncertainties regarding the safety of digoxin in this setting, it remains one of the most prescribed drugs for AF worldwide. On the other hand, the absence of any RCTs designed to evaluate mortality makes a definitive conclusion more difficult to reach; therefore, this medication must be used with care. In this review, we explored the therapeutic use of digoxin in the context of AF, discussed mortality data by means of critical analysis in the light of the best available evidence, and position ourselves in relation to more rigorous control of serum levels of this drug in daily practice.

Effects of adding adjunctive hyperbaric oxygen therapy to standard wound care for diabetic foot ulcers: a protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

INTRODUCTION

Diabetic foot ulcer represents a major health problem globally. Preliminary studies have indicated that systemic treatment of diabetic foot ulcer patients with hyperbaric oxygen therapy have beneficial effects on wound healing, risk of amputation, glycaemic control, atherosclerosis, inflammatory markers and other clinical and laboratory parameters. This protocol for a systematic review aims at identifying the beneficial and harmful effects of adding hyperbaric oxygen therapy to standard wound care for diabetic foot ulcers.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This protocol 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 hyperbaric oxygen therapy in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcer versus any control group with any intervention defined as standard wound care or similar, together with sham interventions. Our primary outcome will be: all-cause mortality, serious adverse events and quality of life. Our secondary outcomes will be: healing of index wound, major amputation and wound infection. 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 (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) assessment to assess the quality of the evidence.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

We use publicly accessible documents as evidence, there is no participant involvement at an individual level and an institutional ethics approval is not required. The results of the review will be sought published in a peer-reviewed journals, also in the event of insignificant results or null results, and thereby it will be disseminated to clinicians and public available.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019139256.

Study of the strength of the evidence and the redundancy of the research on pharmacological treatment for Alzheimer's disease: a cumulative meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

PURPOSE

To study the strength of the evidence on efficacy, safety and acceptability of cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEI) and memantine for Alzheimer's disease (AD); and to determine the number of redundant post-authorisation trials.

METHODS

A cumulative meta-analysis with a trial sequential analysis (TSA) was performed. Primary outcomes were cognitive function assessed with ADAS-cog or SIB scales, discontinuation due to adverse events (AE) and discontinuation for any reason. The redundancy of post-authorisation clinical trials was studied by determining the novel aspects of each study on patient, intervention, comparator and trial outcome characteristics. Two criteria of futile trial (lenient and strict) were used.

RESULTS

A total of 63 randomised clinical trials (RCTs) (16,576 patients) were included. It was conclusive that neither ChEI nor memantine achieved clinically significant improvement in cognitive function. In relation to safety, there was sufficient evidence to conclude that donepezil caused a clinically relevant increase on dropouts due to AE whereas the evidence was inconclusive for the remaining interventions. Regarding acceptability, it was conclusive that no ChEI improved treatment discontinuation while it was uncertain for memantine. The proportion of redundant trials was 5.6% with the lenient criteria and 42.6% with the strict one.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence is conclusive that ChEI and memantine do not achieve clinically significant symptomatic improvement in AD while the acceptability of ChEI is unsatisfactory. Although evidence on the safety of pharmacological interventions for AD and acceptability of memantine is inconclusive, no further RCTs are needed as their efficacy is not clinically relevant. Redundant trials were identified but their number depends on the criteria of futility used.

Clarity and controversy around rate control in AF, the orphan child in AF therapeutics

The vast majority of clinical arrhythmia-management research over the past couple of decades has focused on catheter-based therapeutic advances. There has been much less emphasis on rate-control strategies; however, the majority of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) will require some form of rate-control management, making AF rate-control the single most widely used therapeutic component in AF-patients. While the general principles governing AF rate-control have remained largely unchanged, they are often underappreciated. In addition, a number of important controversies make optimal rate-control therapy sometimes difficult to choose. In this review, we aim to address a number of important areas of controversy in the application of AF rate-control, as well as to discuss aspects that are well understood but often underappreciated. Specific areas of focus include the following: (i) heart rate-targets in patients with preserved left-ventricular ejection fraction and concomitant AF; (ii) the clinical implications of differences in pharmacological mechanisms of action between beta-adrenoceptor and Ca²⁺-channel blockers; (iii) controversies regarding the safety and use of digoxin in AF; (iv) the implications cardiac resynchronization therapy for rate-control in AF; and (v) controversies surrounding the benefits of rate-control with beta-blockers in patients with reduced left-ventricular ejection fraction and AF.

Is There Still a Role for Digoxin in the Management of Atrial Fibrillation?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

A number of recent observational analyses have assessed clinical outcomes associated with digoxin use in patients with atrial fibrillation. In this review, we review these data and provide suggestions on the contemporary use of digoxin in patients with atrial fibrillation as supported by the recent evidence.

RECENT FINDINGS

Observational data from clinical trials and registries have provided variable results on the safety and efficacy of chronic digoxin use in patients with atrial fibrillation. In general, results have been consistent with an associated increase in adverse clinical outcomes with digoxin use in atrial fibrillation patients without heart failure. In atrial fibrillation patients with heart failure, while the weight of evidence suggested an associated risk with digoxin therapy, the results are inconsistent. In patients with atrial fibrillation without heart failure, digoxin should generally be avoided. In atrial fibrillation patients with heart failure, digoxin should generally be reserved for patients that do not achieve adequate rate control or are not tolerant of other rate control therapies.

Taking the Pulse of Atrial Fibrillation: A Practical Approach to Rate Control

Despite major advances in atrial fibrillation (AF) catheter ablation, rate control remains the most widely used management strategy for AF in the general population. In addition to its use as a primary approach to control symptoms and prevent complications of AF, rate control is often a necessary complement to rhythm-control strategies, especially with antiarrhythmic drugs. The value of rate-control therapy is supported by several large randomized clinical trials showing no difference in major cardiovascular outcomes between rate-control and rhythm-control strategies with currently available therapeutic approaches (antiarrhythmic drugs and/or catheter ablation). Despite its extensive use, the rational basis for rate-control therapy is underemphasized in clinical teaching and practice. In this article, we aim to provide evidence-based thoughts on important practical aspects of rate-control therapy in AF by reviewing 5 clinically relevant issues. We (1) highlight the pharmacological differences between the mechanisms of action of β-blockers and Ca²⁺-channel blockers for AF rate control and the practical implications for therapeutic decision making; (2) review the controversies surrounding the use of digoxin for AF rate control in the light of recently published work; (3) discuss the evidence for rate-control heart rate targets in patients with AF and preserved left-ventricular function; (4) examine how heart rate targets may differ in patients with heart failure and reduced vs preserved left-ventricular ejection fraction and the importance of heart-rate lowering for the effectiveness of cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with heart failure and AF; (5) discuss the relationship between AF, exercise capacity, and rate-controlling drug class.