Jesper H Svendsen1, Søren Z Diederichsen2, Søren Højberg3, Derk W Krieger4, Claus Graff5, Christian Kronborg6, Morten S Olesen7, Jonas B Nielsen2, Anders G Holst2, Axel Brandes8, Ketil J Haugan9, Lars Køber10. 1. Department of Cardiology, Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark; Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. Electronic address: jesper.hastrup.svendsen@regionh.dk. 2. Department of Cardiology, Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark. 3. Department of Cardiology, Copenhagen University Hospital - Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg, Copenhagen, Denmark. 4. Department of Neurology, Mediclinic City Hospital, Dubai, United Arabic Emirates; Department of Neuroscience, Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Science, Dubai, United Arabic Emirates. 5. Department of Health Science and Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark. 6. Department of Business and Economics, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark. 7. Department of Cardiology, Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark; Department of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 8. Department of Clinical Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark; Department of Cardiology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark. 9. Department of Cardiology, Copenhagen University Hospital - Zealand University Hospital Roskilde, Roskilde, Denmark. 10. Department of Cardiology, Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark; Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether screening for atrial fibrillation and subsequent treatment with anticoagulants if atrial fibrillation is detected can prevent stroke. Continuous electrocardiographic monitoring using an implantable loop recorder (ILR) can facilitate detection of asymptomatic atrial fibrillation episodes. We aimed to investigate whether atrial fibrillation screening and use of anticoagulants can prevent stroke in individuals at high risk. METHODS: We did a randomised controlled trial in four centres in Denmark. We included individuals without atrial fibrillation, aged 70-90 years, with at least one additional stroke risk factor (ie, hypertension, diabetes, previous stroke, or heart failure). Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:3 ratio to ILR monitoring or usual care (control) via an online system in permuted blocks with block sizes of four or eight participants stratified according to centre. In the ILR group, anticoagulation was recommended if atrial fibrillation episodes lasted 6 min or longer. The primary outcome was time to first stroke or systemic arterial embolism. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02036450. FINDINGS: From Jan 31, 2014, to May 17, 2016, 6205 individuals were screened for inclusion, of whom 6004 were included and randomly assigned: 1501 (25·0%) to ILR monitoring and 4503 (75·0%) to usual care. Mean age was 74·7 years (SD 4·1), 2837 (47·3%) were women, and 5444 (90·7%) had hypertension. No participants were lost to follow-up. During a median follow-up of 64·5 months (IQR 59·3-69·8), atrial fibrillation was diagnosed in 1027 participants: 477 (31·8%) of 1501 in the ILR group versus 550 (12·2%) of 4503 in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 3·17 [95% CI 2·81-3·59]; p<0·0001). Oral anticoagulation was initiated in 1036 participants: 445 (29·7%) in the ILR group versus 591 (13·1%) in the control group (HR 2·72 [95% CI 2·41-3·08]; p<0·0001), and the primary outcome occurred in 318 participants (315 stroke, three systemic arterial embolism): 67 (4·5%) in the ILR group versus 251 (5·6%) in the control group (HR 0·80 [95% CI 0·61-1·05]; p=0·11). Major bleeding occurred in 221 participants: 65 (4·3%) in the ILR group versus 156 (3·5%) in the control group (HR 1·26 [95% CI 0·95-1·69]; p=0·11). INTERPRETATION: In individuals with stroke risk factors, ILR screening resulted in a three-times increase in atrial fibrillation detection and anticoagulation initiation but no significant reduction in the risk of stroke or systemic arterial embolism. These findings might imply that not all atrial fibrillation is worth screening for, and not all screen-detected atrial fibrillation merits anticoagulation. FUNDING: Innovation Fund Denmark, The Research Foundation for the Capital Region of Denmark, The Danish Heart Foundation, Aalborg University Talent Management Program, Arvid Nilssons Fond, Skibsreder Per Henriksen, R og Hustrus Fond, The AFFECT-EU Consortium (EU Horizon 2020), Læge Sophus Carl Emil Friis og hustru Olga Doris Friis' Legat, and Medtronic.
BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether screening for atrial fibrillation and subsequent treatment with anticoagulants if atrial fibrillation is detected can prevent stroke. Continuous electrocardiographic monitoring using an implantable loop recorder (ILR) can facilitate detection of asymptomatic atrial fibrillation episodes. We aimed to investigate whether atrial fibrillation screening and use of anticoagulants can prevent stroke in individuals at high risk. METHODS: We did a randomised controlled trial in four centres in Denmark. We included individuals without atrial fibrillation, aged 70-90 years, with at least one additional stroke risk factor (ie, hypertension, diabetes, previous stroke, or heart failure). Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:3 ratio to ILR monitoring or usual care (control) via an online system in permuted blocks with block sizes of four or eight participants stratified according to centre. In the ILR group, anticoagulation was recommended if atrial fibrillation episodes lasted 6 min or longer. The primary outcome was time to first stroke or systemic arterial embolism. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02036450. FINDINGS: From Jan 31, 2014, to May 17, 2016, 6205 individuals were screened for inclusion, of whom 6004 were included and randomly assigned: 1501 (25·0%) to ILR monitoring and 4503 (75·0%) to usual care. Mean age was 74·7 years (SD 4·1), 2837 (47·3%) were women, and 5444 (90·7%) had hypertension. No participants were lost to follow-up. During a median follow-up of 64·5 months (IQR 59·3-69·8), atrial fibrillation was diagnosed in 1027 participants: 477 (31·8%) of 1501 in the ILR group versus 550 (12·2%) of 4503 in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 3·17 [95% CI 2·81-3·59]; p<0·0001). Oral anticoagulation was initiated in 1036 participants: 445 (29·7%) in the ILR group versus 591 (13·1%) in the control group (HR 2·72 [95% CI 2·41-3·08]; p<0·0001), and the primary outcome occurred in 318 participants (315 stroke, three systemic arterial embolism): 67 (4·5%) in the ILR group versus 251 (5·6%) in the control group (HR 0·80 [95% CI 0·61-1·05]; p=0·11). Major bleeding occurred in 221 participants: 65 (4·3%) in the ILR group versus 156 (3·5%) in the control group (HR 1·26 [95% CI 0·95-1·69]; p=0·11). INTERPRETATION: In individuals with stroke risk factors, ILR screening resulted in a three-times increase in atrial fibrillation detection and anticoagulation initiation but no significant reduction in the risk of stroke or systemic arterial embolism. These findings might imply that not all atrial fibrillation is worth screening for, and not all screen-detected atrial fibrillation merits anticoagulation. FUNDING: Innovation Fund Denmark, The Research Foundation for the Capital Region of Denmark, The Danish Heart Foundation, Aalborg University Talent Management Program, Arvid Nilssons Fond, Skibsreder Per Henriksen, R og Hustrus Fond, The AFFECT-EU Consortium (EU Horizon 2020), Læge Sophus Carl Emil Friis og hustru Olga Doris Friis' Legat, and Medtronic.
Authors: F Halimi; P Sabouret; J P Huberman; L Ouazana; D Guedj; K Djouadi; T S Dhanjal; A Goette; C Lafont; Nicolas Lellouche Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2022-09-28 Impact factor: 6.138
Authors: Marta Rubiera; Ana Aires; Kateryna Antonenko; Sabrina Lémeret; Christian H Nolte; Jukka Putaala; Renate B Schnabel; Anil M Tuladhar; David J Werring; Dena Zeraatkar; Maurizio Paciaroni Journal: Eur Stroke J Date: 2022-06-03
Authors: Flemming Javier Olsen; Søren Zöga Diederichsen; Peter Godsk Jørgensen; Magnus T Jensen; Anders Dahl; Nino Emmanuel Landler; Claus Graff; Axel Brandes; Derk Krieger; Ketil Haugan; Lars Køber; Søren Højberg; Jesper Hastrup Svendsen; Tor Biering-Sørensen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-06-03 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Daniel Engler; Coral L Hanson; Lien Desteghe; Giuseppe Boriani; Søren Zöga Diederichsen; Ben Freedman; Elena Palà; Tatjana S Potpara; Henning Witt; Hein Heidbuchel; Lis Neubeck; Renate B Schnabel Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-06-21 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Kanjana S Perera; Danielle de Sa Boasquevisque; Purnima Rao-Melacini; Amanda Taylor; Anna Cheng; Graeme J Hankey; Sarah Lee; Joan Marti Fabregas; Sebastian F Ameriso; Thalia S Field; Antonio Arauz; Shelagh B Coutts; Marcel Arnold; Robert Mikulik; Danilo Toni; Jennifer Mandzia; Roland C Veltkamp; Elena Meseguer; Karl Georg Haeusler; Robert G Hart Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2022-05-01 Impact factor: 29.907