Athanasios Samaras 1 , Ioannis Doundoulakis 1 , Christina Antza 2 , Stefanos Zafeiropoulos 1 , Ioannis Farmakis 1 , Apostolos Tzikas 1 . Show Affiliations »
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Atrial Fibrillation (AF) has become a major global health concern and is associated with an increased risk of poor outcomes. Identifying risk factors in patients with AF can be challenging, given the high burden of comorbidities in these patients. Risk stratification schemes appear to facilitate accurate prediction of outcomes and assist therapeutic management decisions. OBJECTIVE: To summarize current evidence on risk stratification scores for patients with AF. RESULTS: Traditional risk models rely heavily on demographics and comorbidities, while newer tools have been gradually focusing on novel biomarkers and diagnostic imaging to facilitate more personalized risk assessment. Several studies have been conducted to compare existing risk schemes and identify specific patient populations in which the prognostic ability of each scheme excels. However, current guidelines do not appear to encourage the implementation of risk models in clinical practice, as they have not incorporated new ones in their recommendations for the management of patients with AF for almost a decade. CONCLUSION: Further work is warranted to analyze new reliable risk stratification schemes and optimally implement them into routine clinical life. Copyright© Bentham Science Publishers; For any queries, please email at epub@benthamscience.net.
BACKGROUND: Atrial Fibrillation (AF ) has become a major global health concern and is associated with an increased risk of poor outcomes. Identifying risk factors in patients with AF can be challenging, given the high burden of comorbidities in these patients . Risk stratification schemes appear to facilitate accurate prediction of outcomes and assist therapeutic management decisions. OBJECTIVE: To summarize current evidence on risk stratification scores for patients with AF . RESULTS: Traditional risk models rely heavily on demographics and comorbidities, while newer tools have been gradually focusing on novel biomarkers and diagnostic imaging to facilitate more personalized risk assessment. Several studies have been conducted to compare existing risk schemes and identify specific patient populations in which the prognostic ability of each scheme excels. However, current guidelines do not appear to encourage the implementation of risk models in clinical practice, as they have not incorporated new ones in their recommendations for the management of patients with AF for almost a decade. CONCLUSION: Further work is warranted to analyze new reliable risk stratification schemes and optimally implement them into routine clinical life. Copyright© Bentham Science Publishers; For any queries, please email at epub@benthamscience.net.
Entities: Disease
Species
Keywords:
Atrial fibrillation; bleeding; mortality; review; risk score; risk stratification; stroke
Year: 2021
PMID: 33302847 DOI: 10.2174/1381612826666201210113328
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Curr Pharm Des ISSN: 1381-6128 Impact factor: 3.116