Search

Atrial fibrillation/flutter (AF) is the most common dysrhythmia in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). Unexplained left ventricular hypertrophy and left ventricular outflow tract obstruction are integral components of HCM pathology which can cause increased left atrial pressure and atrial myopathy contributing to the substrate for AF. We aimed to determine the impact of AF on hospital readmissions in patients with HCM. We conducted a retrospective analysis using the 2015 to 2019 Nationwide Readmission Database to analyze the effect of AF on 30-day readmission and causes of 30-day readmission in patients with HCM. We also determined the hospital, patient, and procedure-specific independent predictors of readmission in patients with HCM and AF. Of 191,235 index HCM hospitalizations, 81,390 (42.6%) had a secondary diagnosis of AF. A total of 16.9% of patients with HCM and AF were readmitted within 30 days as compared with 14% of HCM patients without AF. The presence of AF was independently associated with a higher risk of all-cause 30-day readmission (hazard ratio [HR] 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.17 to 1.25, p <0.001). The foremost etiology of 30-day readmission in HCM patients with AF was hypertensive heart and chronic kidney disease with heart failure, whereas the foremost etiology of 30-day readmission in HCM patients without AF was sepsis. Interventions aimed toward AF management (electrical cardioversion: adjusted HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.01. p = 0.074, AF ablation: HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.13, p = 0.409, Watchman procedure: HR 1.50, 95% CI 0.16 to 14.6, p = 0.725) during index admission did not significantly impact the 30-day readmission in HCM patients with AF. Myectomy during index hospitalization (adjusted HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.86, p = 0.010) was most strongly associated with a lower risk of 30-day readmission in HCM patients with AF. In conclusion, in patients hospitalized for HCM, presence of AF was associated with excess risk of 30-day all-cause readmission. Interventions aimed toward HCM management, that is, myectomy rather than interventions aimed toward AF management predicted lower readmission rate in this patient population., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Dr. Fudim has received support from National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute grant K23HL151744, American Heart Association grant 20IPA35310955, the Mario Family Award, the Duke Chair's Award, the Translating Duke Health Award, Bayer, and BTG Specialty Pharmaceuticals; and has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Axon Therapies, CVRx, Daxor, Edwards Lifesciences, Galvani, and NXT Biomedical. Dr. Krasuski is serving as a consultant to Actelion/Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Bayer Pharmaceuticals, Gore Medical, and Medtronic. He receives research funding from the Adult Congenital Heart Association and Actelion. Dr. Khan has taken fees from Bayer. The remaining authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have compared the success of antero-lateral vs. antero-posterior electrode position for cardioversion of atrial fibrillation (AF). However, due to small sample size and conflicting results of these RCTs, the optimal electrode positioning for successful cardioversion remains uncertain., Methods: A systematic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE was conducted. Outcomes of interest included overall success of cardioversion with restoration of sinus rhythm, 1 st shock success, 2 nd shock success, mean shock energy required for successful cardioversion, mean number of shocks required for successful cardioversion, success of cardioversion at high energy (> 150 J) and success of cardioversion at low energy (< 150 J). Mantel-Haenszel risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using random-effects model., Results: A total of 14 RCTs comprising 2445 patients were included. There was no statistically significant difference between two cardioversion approaches in the overall success of cardioversion (RR 1.02; 95% CI [0.97-1.06]; p = 0.43), first shock success (RR 1.14; 95% CI [0.99-1.32]), second shock success (RR 1.08; 95% CI [0.94-1.23]), mean shock energy required (mean difference 6.49; 95% CI [-17.33-30.31], success at high energy > 150 J (RR 1.02; 95% CI [0.92-1.14] and success at low energy < 150 J (RR 1.09; 95% CI [0.97-1.22])., Conclusions: This meta-analysis of RCTs shows no significant difference in the success of cardioversion between antero-lateral vs. antero-posterior electrode position for cardioversion of AF. Large well-conducted and adequately powered randomized clinical trials are needed to definitively address this question., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Purpose: Most centers performing catheter ablation (CA) of atrial fibrillation (AF) admit the patients for an overnight hospital stay to monitor for post-procedure complications, but the clinical benefits of this overnight hospital admission policy have not been carefully investigated. We hypothesized that same-day discharge strategy is safe and feasible in patients with AF undergoing CA., Methods: A systematic review of studies comparing the safety of same-day discharge vs hospital admission for AF patients undergoing CA was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science. No randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria; therefore, observational cohort studies were included. Mantel-Haenszel risk ratios were calculated and I 2 statistics were reported for heterogeneity assessment., Results: A total of 8 observational studies with 10,102 patients were included. There were no statistically significant differences between same-day discharge vs hospital admission in all studied outcomes including post-discharge 30-day hospital visits (RR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.40-2.02; p = 0.81), post-discharge vascular/bleeding complications (RR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.46-1.88; p = 0.85), post-discharge stroke/transient ischemic attack/thromboembolism (RR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.23-2.20; p = 0.55), and post-discharge recurrent arrhythmias (RR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.60-1.09; p = 0.1)., Conclusion: In carefully selected AF patients undergoing CA, same-day discharge strategy is feasible and safe. There are no significant differences in post-discharge 30-day hospital visits, post-discharge vascular complications, and other safety outcomes. Randomized trials are needed to validate these hypothesis-generating findings., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: The efficacy and safety of novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) compared to the current guideline-recommended vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has not been well established. We pooled evidence from all available studies to assess the risks and benefits of this drug class., Methods: We queried electronic databases (MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane central) up until January 28th, 2022 for studies comparing NOACs to VKAs in AF patients undergoing TAVR. Results from studies were presented as risk ratios (RR) and pooled using a random-effects model. Subgroup analysis by study design and meta-regression analysis were performed to explore heterogeneity., Results: A total of 12 studies (3 RCTs and 9 observational) containing 12,203 patients (mean age 81.2 years; 50.5% men) were identified and included in the analysis. Pooled analysis revealed no significant difference between NOACs and VKAs in terms of stroke or systemic embolism (RR: 0.78; p = 0.18), major bleeding (RR: 0.84; p = 0.32), intracranial hemorrhage (RR 0.61; p = 0.06), all-cause mortality (RR: 0.69; p = 0.07), and myocardial infarction (RR: 1.60; p = 0.24) at a mean length of follow-up of 15.1 months. RCTs and observational studies did not significantly differ across outcomes on subgroup analysis. Meta-regression analysis found heterogeneity in all-cause mortality to be significantly explained by percentage of males (coefficient: 0.049, p = 0.007), mean age (coefficient: 0.221, p < 0.001), and CHA2DS2-VASc score (coefficient: -1.657, p < 0.001)., Conclusions: This meta-analysis suggests that outcomes with NOACs do not significantly differ compared to VKAs following TAVR in patients with AF., (© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Introduction: To evaluate the safety of uninterrupted versus interrupted direct oral anticoagulation (DOAC) for patients undergoing catheter ablation (CA) of atrial fibrillation (AF)., Methods: We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE for randomized controlled trials (RCT) and observational studies comparing uninterrupted versus interrupted DOAC for patients undergoing CA of AF. Primary outcome was major bleeding. Secondary outcomes included minor bleeding, stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) or thromboembolism (TE), silent cerebral ischemic events, and cardiac tamponade. Meta-analysis was stratified by study design. Risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using random effects model and Mantel-Haenszel method was used to pool RR., Results: A total of 13 studies (7 randomized, 6 observational) comprising 3595 patients were included. The RCT restricted analysis did not show any difference in terms of major bleeding (risk ratio [RR] = 0.79; [0.35-1.79]), minor bleeding (RR = 0.99 [0.68-1.43]), stroke or TIA or TE (RR = 0.80 [0.19-3.32]), silent cerebral ischemic events (RR = 0.64 [0.32-1.28]), and cardiac tamponade (RR = 0.61 [0.20-1.92]). Observational study restricted analysis showed a protective effect of uninterrupted DOAC on silent cerebral ischemic events (RR = 0.45 [0.31-0.67]) and no difference in other outcomes., Conclusions: There is no difference in bleeding and thromboembolic outcomes with uninterrupted versus interrupted DOAC for CA of AF and observational data suggests that uninterrupted DOACs are protective against silent cerebral ischemic lesions., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Representation trends of women, older adults, and ethnic/racial minorities in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of atrial fibrillation (AF) are uncertain., Methods: We systematically reviewed 134 AF related RCTs (phase II and III) encompassing 149,162 participants using Medline and ClinicalTrials.gov through April 2019 to determine representation trends of women, older patients (≥75 years), and ethnic/racial minorities. Weighted data on the prevalence of AF from epidemiological studies were used to compare the representation of the studied groups of interest in AF RCTs to their expected burden of the disease., Results: Only 18.7% of the RCTs reported proportion of older patients, and 12.7% RCTs reported ethnic/racial minorities. The proportions of women in RCTs versus general population were 35.2% and 35.1%, of Hispanics were 11.9% and 5.2%, of Blacks were 1.2% and 5.7%, of American Indian/Alaskans were 0.2% and 0.2%, of Asians were 14.2% and 2.4%, of native Hawaiian/Pacific Islanders were 0.05% and 0.1% and of non-Whites were 19.5% and 22.5%, respectively. The weighted mean age (SD) across the trials was 65.3 (3.2) years which was less than the corresponding weighted mean age of 71.1 (4.5) years in the comparative epidemiological data., Conclusion: The reporting of older patients and ethnic/racial minorities was poor in RCTs of AF. The representation of women and American Indian/Alaskan natives matched their expected population share of disease burden. Hispanics and Asians were over-represented and Blacks, native Hawaiian/Pacific Islanders and non-Whites were under-represented in RCTs of AF., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: The safety and effectiveness of dual therapy (direct oral anticoagulant [DOAC] plus P2Y12 inhibitor) versus triple therapy (vitamin K antagonist plus aspirin and P2Y12 inhibitor) in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is unclear., Purpose: To examine the effects of dual versus triple therapy on bleeding and ischemic outcomes in adults with AF after PCI., Data Sources: Searches of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library (inception to 31 December 2019) and ClinicalTrials.gov (7 January 2020) without language restrictions; journal Web sites; and reference lists., Study Selection: Randomized controlled trials that compared the effects of dual versus triple therapy on bleeding, mortality, and ischemic events in adults with AF after PCI., Data Extraction: Two independent investigators abstracted data, assessed the quality of evidence, and rated the certainty of evidence., Data Synthesis: Four trials encompassing 7953 patients were selected. At the median follow-up of 1 year, high-certainty evidence showed that dual therapy was associated with reduced risk for major bleeding compared with triple therapy (risk difference [RD], -0.013 [95% CI, -0.025 to -0.002]). Low-certainty evidence showed inconclusive effects of dual versus triple therapy on risks for all-cause mortality (RD, 0.004 [CI, -0.010 to 0.017]), cardiovascular mortality (RD, 0.001 [CI, -0.011 to 0.013]), myocardial infarction (RD, 0.003 [CI, -0.010 to 0.017]), stent thrombosis (RD, 0.003 [CI, -0.005 to 0.010]), and stroke (RD, -0.003 [CI, -0.010 to 0.005]). The upper bounds of the CIs for these effects were compatible with possible increased risks with dual therapy., Limitation: Heterogeneity of study designs, dosages of DOACs, and types of P2Y12 inhibitors., Conclusion: In adults with AF after PCI, dual therapy reduces risk for bleeding compared with triple therapy, whereas its effects on risks for death and ischemic end points are still unclear., Primary Funding Source: None.

Background: Despite the publication of several randomized clinical trials comparing catheter ablation (CA) with medical therapy (MT) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), the superiority of one strategy over another is still questioned by many. In this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, we compared the efficacy and safety of CA with MT for AF., Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and other online sources for randomized controlled trials of AF patients that compared CA with MT. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included cardiovascular hospitalizations and recurrence of atrial arrhythmia. Subgroup analyses stratified by the presence of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, type of AF, age, and sex were performed. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs were calculated using a random effects model, and Mantel-Haenszel method was used to pool RR., Results: Eighteen randomized controlled trials comprising 4464 patients (CA, n=2286; MT, n=2178) were included. CA resulted in a significant reduction in all-cause mortality (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.54-0.88; P=0.003) that was driven by patients with AF and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (RR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.35-0.76; P=0.0009). CA resulted in significantly fewer cardiovascular hospitalizations (hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.39-0.81; P=0.002) and fewer recurrences of atrial arrhythmias (RR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.33-0.53; P<0.00001). Subgroup analyses suggested that younger patients (age, <65 years) and men derived more benefit from CA compared with MT., Conclusions: CA is associated with all-cause mortality benefit, that is driven by patients with AF and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. CA reduces cardiovascular hospitalizations and recurrences of atrial arrhythmia for patients with AF. Younger patients and men appear to derive more benefit from CA.

The effect of preoperative atrial fibrillation (AF) on clinical outcomes after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation remains uncertain. We sought to conduct a meta-analysis to assess the safety and efficacy of LVAD implantation in AF patients. Medline and Scopus were searched for studies that assessed the effect of preoperative AF on clinical outcomes in patients who underwent LVAD implantation. Outcomes of interest included all-cause mortality, thromboembolic events, and bleeding. Estimates were combined using random effects model to calculate risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals. In this meta-analysis of 7 studies including 5,658 patients, preoperative AF was not associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality at 30 days (RR = 0.84 [0.51, 1.37]; p = 0.49; I 2  = 0%), 6 months (RR = 1.17 [0.96, 1.14]; p = 0.11; I 2  = 21%), 1 year (RR = 1.16 [0.84, 1.60]; p = 0.37; I 2  = 53%) and 2 years (RR = 1.14 [0.96, 1.36]; p = 0.12; I 2  = 23%). Preoperative AF did not increase the risk of thromboembolism (RR = 0.86 [0.38, 1.92]; p = 0.71; I 2  = 26%), pump thrombosis (RR = 1.22 [0.88, 1.68]; p = 0.23; I 2  = 49%), stroke (RR = 1.02 [0.87, 1.19]; p = 0.79; I 2  = 11%), or major bleeding (RR = 0.86 [0.38, 1.92]; p = 0.71; I 2  = 26%) after LVAD implantation. However, AF was associated with significantly increased risk of gastro-intestinal bleeding in patients receiving LVADs (RR = 1.27 [1.05, 1.55]; p = 0.014; I 2  = 0%). In conclusion, this meta-analysis reports a significantly increased risk of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding in LVADs recipients having concomitant AF. However, AF had no significant effect on all-cause mortality, stroke, or thromboembolic events in these patients. Further well-conducted studies are needed to validate these results., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: The primary objective of this systematic review was to estimate the prevalence and temporal changes in chronic comorbid conditions reported in heart failure (HF) clinical trials.Methods and Results: We searched MEDLINE for HF trials enrolling more than 400 patients published between 2001 and 2016.Trials were divided into HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), or trials enrolling regardless of ejection fraction. The prevalence of baseline chronic comorbid conditions was categorized according to the algorithm proposed by the Chronic Conditions Data Warehouse, which is used to analyse Medicare data. To test for a trend in the prevalence of comorbid conditions, linear regression models were used to evaluate temporal trends in prevalence of comorbidities. Overall, 118 clinical trials enrolling a cumulative total of 215 508 patients were included. Across all comorbidities examined, data were reported in a mean of 35% of trials, without significant improvement during the study period. Reporting of comorbidities was more common in HFrEF trials (51%) compared with HFpEF trials (27%). Among trials reporting data, hypertension (63%), ischaemic heart disease (44%), hyperlipidaemia (48%), diabetes (33%), chronic kidney disease (25%) and atrial fibrillation (25%) were the major comorbidities. The prevalence of comorbidities including hypertension, atrial fibrillation and chronic kidney disease increased over time while the prevalence of smoking decreased in HFrEF trials.Conclusion: Many HF trials do not report baseline comorbidities. A more rigorous, systematic, and standardized framework needs to be adopted for future clinical trials to ensure adequate comorbidity reporting and improve recruitment of multi-morbid HF patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Catheter ablation has shown to reduce mortality in patient with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction. Its effect on mortality in patients without HF has not been well elucidated. Methods: Thirteen randomized controlled trials encompassing 3856 patients were selected using PubMed, Embase and the CENTRAL till April 2019. Estimates were reported as random effects risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Compared with medical therapy, catheter ablation did not reduce the risk of all-cause mortality (RR, 0.86, 95% CI, 0.62-1.19, P=0.36; I²=0), stroke (RR, 0.55, 95% CI, 0.18-1.66, P=0.29; I²=0), need for cardioversion (RR, 0.84, 95% CI, 0.66-1.08, P=0.17; I²=0) or pacemaker (RR, 0.59, 95% CI, 0.34-1.01, P=0.06; I²=0). However, ablation reduced the RR of cardiac hospitalization (0.37, 95% CI, 0.18-0.77, P=0.01; I²=86), and recurrent atrial arrhythmia (0.46, 95% CI, 0.35-0.60, P<0.001; I²=87). There were non-significant differences among treatment groups with respect to major bleeding (RR, 1.89, 95% CI, 0.59-6.08, P=0.29; I²=15), and pulmonary vein stenosis (RR, 3.00, 95% CI, 0.83-10.87, P=0.09; I²=0), but had significantly higher rates of pericardial tamponade (RR, 4.46, 95 % CI, 1.70-11.72, P<0.001; I²=0). Conclusions: Catheter ablation did not improve survival compared with medical therapy in patients with AF without HF. Catheter ablation reduced cardiac hospitalization and recurrent atrial arrhythmia at the expense of pericardial tamponade. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]