BACKGROUND: There are limited data available regarding the relationship between atrial fibrillation (AF) clinical type, oral anticoagulation (OAC) treatment, and clinical outcome after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The study was designed to evaluate this relationship. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Rabin Medical Center TAVR registry, including 319 consecutive patients who underwent TAVR from 2008 to 2014. Patients were divided into three groups based on their history of AF: sinus rhythm (SR), paroxysmal AF (PAF), or nonparoxysmal AF (NPAF). RESULTS: There were 211 (66%), 56 (18%), and 52 (16%) patients in the SR, PAF, and NPAF groups, respectively. The cumulative risk for stroke or death at 2 years was highest among patients with NPAF (38%), but similarly low in PAF (15%) and SR patients (16%, P < 0.001). By multivariate analysis, patients with NPAF demonstrated a significantly higher risk of stroke or death (HR = 2.76, 95% CI 1.63-4.66, P < 0.001), as compared with SR. In contrast, patients with PAF had a similar risk of stroke or death compared with SR (HR = 0.80, P = 0.508). Patients with NPAF not treated with OAC demonstrated an 8.3-fold (P < 0.001) increased risk of stroke or death, whereas patients with PAF not treated with OAC had a similar risk of stroke or death compared with the SR group (HR = 1.25, P = 0.569). CONCLUSION: History of NPAF, but not PAF, is associated with a significant increased risk of stroke or death compared with sinus rhythm in patients undergoing TAVR.
BACKGROUND: There are limited data available regarding the relationship between atrial fibrillation (AF) clinical type, oral anticoagulation (OAC) treatment, and clinical outcome after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The study was designed to evaluate this relationship. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Rabin Medical Center TAVR registry, including 319 consecutive patients who underwent TAVR from 2008 to 2014. Patients were divided into three groups based on their history of AF: sinus rhythm (SR), paroxysmal AF (PAF), or nonparoxysmal AF (NPAF). RESULTS: There were 211 (66%), 56 (18%), and 52 (16%) patients in the SR, PAF, and NPAF groups, respectively. The cumulative risk for stroke or death at 2 years was highest among patients with NPAF (38%), but similarly low in PAF (15%) and SRpatients (16%, P < 0.001). By multivariate analysis, patients with NPAF demonstrated a significantly higher risk of stroke or death (HR = 2.76, 95% CI 1.63-4.66, P < 0.001), as compared with SR. In contrast, patients with PAF had a similar risk of stroke or death compared with SR (HR = 0.80, P = 0.508). Patients with NPAF not treated with OAC demonstrated an 8.3-fold (P < 0.001) increased risk of stroke or death, whereas patients with PAF not treated with OAC had a similar risk of stroke or death compared with the SR group (HR = 1.25, P = 0.569). CONCLUSION: History of NPAF, but not PAF, is associated with a significant increased risk of stroke or death compared with sinus rhythm in patients undergoing TAVR.
Authors: Martin B Leon; Craig R Smith; Michael Mack; D Craig Miller; Jeffrey W Moses; Lars G Svensson; E Murat Tuzcu; John G Webb; Gregory P Fontana; Raj R Makkar; David L Brown; Peter C Block; Robert A Guyton; Augusto D Pichard; Joseph E Bavaria; Howard C Herrmann; Pamela S Douglas; John L Petersen; Jodi J Akin; William N Anderson; Duolao Wang; Stuart Pocock Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-09-22 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: A Pieter Kappetein; Stuart J Head; Philippe Généreux; Nicolo Piazza; Nicolas M van Mieghem; Eugene H Blackstone; Thomas G Brott; David J Cohen; Donald E Cutlip; Gerrit-Anne van Es; Rebecca T Hahn; Ajay J Kirtane; Mitchell W Krucoff; Susheel Kodali; Michael J Mack; Roxana Mehran; Josep Rodés-Cabau; Pascal Vranckx; John G Webb; Stephan Windecker; Patrick W Serruys; Martin B Leon Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2012-10 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: S Connolly; J Pogue; R Hart; M Pfeffer; S Hohnloser; S Chrolavicius; M Pfeffer; S Hohnloser; S Yusuf Journal: Lancet Date: 2006-06-10 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Israel M Barbash; Sa'ar Minha; Itsik Ben-Dor; Danny Dvir; Rebecca Torguson; Muhammad Aly; Elizabeth Bond; Lowell F Satler; Augusto D Pichard; Ron Waksman Journal: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2014-10-30 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Stefan Stortecky; Lutz Buellesfeld; Peter Wenaweser; Dik Heg; Thomas Pilgrim; Ahmed A Khattab; Steffen Gloekler; Christoph Huber; Fabian Nietlispach; Bernhard Meier; Peter Jüni; Stephan Windecker Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2013-02-05 Impact factor: 6.546
Authors: Benjamin A Steinberg; Anne S Hellkamp; Yuliya Lokhnygina; Manesh R Patel; Günter Breithardt; Graeme J Hankey; Richard C Becker; Daniel E Singer; Jonathan L Halperin; Werner Hacke; Christopher C Nessel; Scott D Berkowitz; Kenneth W Mahaffey; Keith A A Fox; Robert M Califf; Jonathan P Piccini Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2014-09-10 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Maunu Nissinen; Joonas Lehto; Fausto Biancari; Tuomo Nieminen; Markus Malmberg; Fredrik Yannopoulos; Samuli Salmi; Juhani K E Airaksinen; Tuomas Kiviniemi; Juha E K Hartikainen Journal: Clin Cardiol Date: 2020-02-05 Impact factor: 2.882
Authors: Hyung Ki Jeong; Namsik Yoon; Ju Han Kim; Nuri Lee; Dae Yong Hyun; Min Chul Kim; Ki Hong Lee; Yo Cheon Jeong; In Seok Jeong; Hyun Ju Yoon; Kye Hun Kim; Hyung Wook Park; Youngkeun Ahn; Myung Ho Jeong; Jeong Gwan Cho Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2021-11-29