Sanjay Venkatesh1, Wesley T O'Neal2, Stephen T Broughton1, Amit J Shah2,3,4, Elsayed Z Soliman5,6. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina. 2. Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia. 3. Department of Epidemiology, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia. 4. Department of Cardiology, Atlanta Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Atlanta, Georgia. 5. Department of Internal Medicine, Section on Cardiology, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina. 6. Epidemiological Cardiology Research Center (EPICARE), Department of Epidemiology and Prevention, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The absence of abnormalities on noninvasive cardiac assessment possibly confers a reduced risk of atrial fibrillation (AF) despite the presence of traditional risk factors. HYPOTHESIS: Normal findings on noninvasive cardiac assessment are associated with a lower risk of AF development. METHODS: We examined the clinical utility of normal findings on routine noninvasive cardiac assessment in 5331 participants (85% white; 57% women) from the Cardiovascular Health Study who were free of baseline AF. The combination of a normal electrocardiogram (ECG) + normal echocardiogram was assessed for the development of AF events. A normal ECG was defined as the absence of major or minor Minnesota code abnormalities. A normal echocardiogram was defined as the absence of contractile dysfunction, wall motion abnormalities, or abnormal left ventricular mass. Cox regression was used to compute the 10-year risk of developing AF. RESULTS: During the 10-year study period, a total of 951 (18%) AF events were detected. A normal ECG (multivariable hazard ratio [HR]: 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.69-0.92) and normal echocardiogram (multivariable HR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.65-0.87) were associated with a reduced risk of AF in isolation. This association improved in those with normal ECG + normal echocardiogram (multivariable HR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.55-0.79) compared with participants who had abnormal ECG + abnormal echocardiogram (referent). CONCLUSIONS: Normal findings on routine noninvasive cardiac assessment identify persons in whom the risk of AF is low. Further studies are needed to explore the utility of this profile regarding the decision to implement certain risk factor modification strategies in older adults to reduce AF burden.
BACKGROUND: The absence of abnormalities on noninvasive cardiac assessment possibly confers a reduced risk of atrial fibrillation (AF) despite the presence of traditional risk factors. HYPOTHESIS: Normal findings on noninvasive cardiac assessment are associated with a lower risk of AF development. METHODS: We examined the clinical utility of normal findings on routine noninvasive cardiac assessment in 5331 participants (85% white; 57% women) from the Cardiovascular Health Study who were free of baseline AF. The combination of a normal electrocardiogram (ECG) + normal echocardiogram was assessed for the development of AF events. A normal ECG was defined as the absence of major or minor Minnesota code abnormalities. A normal echocardiogram was defined as the absence of contractile dysfunction, wall motion abnormalities, or abnormal left ventricular mass. Cox regression was used to compute the 10-year risk of developing AF. RESULTS: During the 10-year study period, a total of 951 (18%) AF events were detected. A normal ECG (multivariable hazard ratio [HR]: 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.69-0.92) and normal echocardiogram (multivariable HR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.65-0.87) were associated with a reduced risk of AF in isolation. This association improved in those with normal ECG + normal echocardiogram (multivariable HR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.55-0.79) compared with participants who had abnormal ECG + abnormal echocardiogram (referent). CONCLUSIONS: Normal findings on routine noninvasive cardiac assessment identify persons in whom the risk of AF is low. Further studies are needed to explore the utility of this profile regarding the decision to implement certain risk factor modification strategies in older adults to reduce AF burden.
Authors: Michelle C Odden; Pamela G Coxson; Andrew Moran; James M Lightwood; Lee Goldman; Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo Journal: Am J Med Date: 2011-06-30 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: C D Furberg; T A Manolio; B M Psaty; D E Bild; N O Borhani; A Newman; B Tabatznik; P M Rautaharju Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 1992-05-15 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: J M Gardin; R McClelland; D Kitzman; J A Lima; W Bommer; H S Klopfenstein; N D Wong; V E Smith; J Gottdiener Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2001-05-01 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: B M Psaty; L H Kuller; D Bild; G L Burke; S J Kittner; M Mittelmark; T R Price; P M Rautaharju; J Robbins Journal: Ann Epidemiol Date: 1995-07 Impact factor: 3.797
Authors: J M Gardin; N D Wong; W Bommer; H S Klopfenstein; V E Smith; B Tabatznik; D Siscovick; S Lobodzinski; H Anton-Culver; T A Manolio Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 1992 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: Sumeet S Chugh; Rasmus Havmoeller; Kumar Narayanan; David Singh; Michiel Rienstra; Emelia J Benjamin; Richard F Gillum; Young-Hoon Kim; John H McAnulty; Zhi-Jie Zheng; Mohammad H Forouzanfar; Mohsen Naghavi; George A Mensah; Majid Ezzati; Christopher J L Murray Journal: Circulation Date: 2013-12-17 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Sanjay Venkatesh; Wesley T O'Neal; Stephen T Broughton; Amit J Shah; Elsayed Z Soliman Journal: Clin Cardiol Date: 2017-02-13 Impact factor: 2.882