Literature DB >> 33250442

Relationship between device-detected burden and duration of atrial fibrillation and risk of ischemic stroke.

Mounir Al-Gibbawi1, Hakeem O Ayinde1, Neal K Bhatia1, Mikhael F El-Chami1, Stacy B Westerman1, Angel R Leon1, Anand D Shah1, Anshul M Patel1, David B De Lurgio1, Christine M Tompkins1, Michael S Lloyd1, Faisal M Merchant1, Soroosh Kiani2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Wider availability of continuous rhythm monitoring has made feasible the incorporation of metrics of atrial fibrillation (AF) burden and duration into the decision to initiate anticoagulation. However, the relationship between thresholds of burden and duration and underlying risk factors at which anticoagulation should be considered remains unclear.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationships of these metrics with each other and the outcome of stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA).
METHODS: We identified patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) with atrial leads who had at least 1 interrogation in 2016 demonstrating nonpermanent AF and were not receiving oral anticoagulation (OAC). We evaluated the relationship between burden (ie, percentage of time spent in AF), the longest single episode of AF, and risk factors (ie, CHA2DS2-VASc score) in predicting risk of stroke/TIA.
RESULTS: The study included 384 patients with mean follow-up of 3.2 ± 0.8 years and incidence of stroke/TIA of 14.8% during follow-up (∼4.6% per year). The burden of AF and the duration of longest episode demonstrated a significant positive correlation to each other but not CHA2DS2-VASc score. Importantly, although the CHA2DS2-VASc score was predictive of stroke/TIA, neither burden nor duration was associated with stroke/TIA.
CONCLUSION: Among patients with CIED-detected AF not receiving OAC, the amount of AF (measured by either burden or duration) does not seem to significantly impact stroke risk, whereas CHA2DS2-VASc score does. These data suggest that among patients with CIED-detected AF, once AF occurs, stroke risk seems to be predominantly driven by underlying risk factors.
Copyright © 2020 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Atrial fibrillation; Burden; CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc; Duration; Risk factors; Stroke

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33250442     DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2020.10.017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Heart Rhythm        ISSN: 1547-5271            Impact factor:   6.343


  5 in total

Review 1.  Optimizing indices of atrial fibrillation susceptibility and burden to evaluate atrial fibrillation severity, risk and outcomes.

Authors:  Giuseppe Boriani; Marco Vitolo; Igor Diemberger; Marco Proietti; Anna Chiara Valenti; Vincenzo Livio Malavasi; Gregory Y H Lip
Journal:  Cardiovasc Res       Date:  2021-06-16       Impact factor: 13.081

2.  Distinct atrial remodeling in patients with subclinical atrial fibrillation: Lessons from computed tomographic images.

Authors:  Sung-Hao Huang; Chao-Feng Liao; Zu-Yin Chen; Tze-Fan Chao; Shih-Ann Chen; Hsuan-Ming Tsao
Journal:  Pharmacol Res Perspect       Date:  2022-04

3.  How is Ambulatory Electrocardiogram Predictive of Stroke in Atrial Fibrillation Patients?

Authors:  Xiuping Zhuo; Meinv Huang
Journal:  Cardiol Res Pract       Date:  2022-10-10       Impact factor: 1.990

Review 4.  A Review of Biomarkers for Ischemic Stroke Evaluation in Patients With Non-valvular Atrial Fibrillation.

Authors:  Luxiang Shang; Ling Zhang; Yankai Guo; Huaxin Sun; Xiaoxue Zhang; Yakun Bo; Xianhui Zhou; Baopeng Tang
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2021-07-01

5.  Relationship among atrial fibrillation, the CHA2DS2-VASc score and ischaemic stroke in patients with coronary artery disease: a propensity score matching study in Hebei, China.

Authors:  Boqun Shi; Demin Liu; Qian Wang; Xue Geng; Qian Hou; Guoqiang Gu; Ruiqin Xie; Wei Cui
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2021-10-02       Impact factor: 2.298

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.