RESUMO
Importance: Catheter ablation is associated with reduced heart failure (HF) hospitalization and death in select patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, the benefit in patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is uncertain. Objective: To investigate whether catheter ablation for AF is associated with reduced HF-related outcomes according to HF phenotype. Data Source: A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central was conducted among studies published from inception to September 2023. Study Selection: Parallel-group randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing catheter ablation with conventional rate or rhythm control therapies in patients with HF, New York Heart Association functional class II or greater, and a history of paroxysmal or persistent AF were included. Pairs of independent reviewers screened 7531 titles and abstracts, of which 12 RCTs and 4 substudies met selection criteria. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data were abstracted in duplicate according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. Pooled effect estimates were calculated using random-effects Mantel-Haenszel models. Interaction P values were used to test for subgroup differences. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was HF events, defined as HF hospitalization, clinically significant worsening of HF, or unscheduled visits to a clinician for treatment intensification. Secondary outcomes included cardiovascular and all-cause mortality. Results: A total of 12 RCTs with 2465 participants (mean [SD] age, 65.3 [9.7] years; 658 females [26.7%]) were included; there were 1552 participants with HFrEF and 913 participants with HFpEF. Compared with conventional rate or rhythm control, catheter ablation was associated with reduced risk of HF events in HFrEF (risk ratio [RR], 0.59; 95% CI, 0.48-0.72), while there was no benefit in patients with HFpEF (RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.65-1.32) (P for interaction = .03). Catheter ablation was associated with reduced risk of cardiovascular death compared with conventional therapies in HFrEF (RR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.34-0.70) but a differential association was not detected in HFpEF (RR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.46-1.79) (P for interaction = .12). Similarly, no difference in the association of catheter ablation with all-cause mortality was found between HFrEF (RR vs conventional therapies, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.47-0.86) and HFpEF (RR vs conventional therapies, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.39-2.30) groups (P for interaction = .39). Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that catheter ablation for AF was associated with reduced risk of HF events in patients with HFrEF but had limited or no benefit in HFpEF. Results from ongoing trials may further elucidate the role of catheter ablation for AF in HFpEF.
Assuntos
Fibrilação Atrial , Ablação por Cateter , Insuficiência Cardíaca , Volume Sistólico , Humanos , Fibrilação Atrial/cirurgia , Fibrilação Atrial/fisiopatologia , Ablação por Cateter/métodos , Insuficiência Cardíaca/fisiopatologia , Insuficiência Cardíaca/cirurgia , Volume Sistólico/fisiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Despite guidelines supporting antithrombotic therapy use in atrial fibrillation (AF), under-prescribing persists. We assessed whether computerized clinical decision support (CDS) would enable guideline-based antithrombotic therapy for AF patients in primary care. METHODS: This cluster randomized trial of CDS versus usual care (UC) recruited participants from primary care practices across Nova Scotia, following them for 12 months. The CDS tool calculated bleeding and stroke risk scores and provided recommendations for using oral anticoagulants (OAC) per Canadian guidelines. RESULTS: From June 14, 2014 to December 15, 2016, 203 primary care providers (99 UC, 104 CDS) with access to high-speed Internet were recruited, enrolling 1,145 eligible patients (543 UC, 590 CDS) assigned to the same treatment arm as their provider. Patient mean age was 72.3 years; most were male (350, 64.5% UC, 351, 59.5% CDS) and from a rural area (298, 54.9% UC, 315, 53.4% CDS). At baseline, a higher than anticipated proportion of patients were receiving guideline-based OAC therapy (373, 68.7% UC, 442, 74.9% CDS; relative risk [RR] 0.97 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87-1.07; Pâ¯=â¯.511)). At 12 months, prescription data were available for 538 usual care and 570 CDS patients, and significantly more CDS patients were managed according to guidelines (415, 77.1% UC, 479, 84.0% CDS; RR 1.08 (95% CI, 1.01-1.15; Pâ¯=â¯.024)). CONCLUSION: Notwithstanding high baseline rates, primary care provider access to the CDS over 12 months further optimized the prescribing of OAC therapy per national guidelines to AF patients potentially eligible to receive it. This suggests that CDS can be effective in improving clinical process of care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials NCT01927367. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01927367?term=NCT01927367&draw=2&rank=1.
Assuntos
Anticoagulantes , Fibrilação Atrial , Sistemas de Apoio a Decisões Clínicas , Atenção Primária à Saúde , Acidente Vascular Cerebral , Humanos , Fibrilação Atrial/complicações , Fibrilação Atrial/tratamento farmacológico , Fibrilação Atrial/terapia , Masculino , Feminino , Idoso , Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Anticoagulantes/administração & dosagem , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/prevenção & controle , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/etiologia , Nova Escócia , Fidelidade a DiretrizesRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Recurrent ventricular tachycardia (VT) in patients with prior myocardial infarction is associated with adverse quality of life and clinical outcomes, despite the presence of implanted defibrillators (ICDs). Suppression of recurrent VT can be accomplished with antiarrhythmic drug therapy or catheter ablation. The Ventricular Tachycardia Antiarrhythmics or Ablation In Structural Heart Disease 2 (VANISH2) trial is designed to determine whether ablation is superior to antiarrhythmic drug therapy as first line therapy for patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and VT. METHODS: The VANISH2 trial enrolls patients with prior myocardial infarction and VT (with one of: ≥1 ICD shock; ≥3 episodes treated with antitachycardia pacing (ATP) and symptoms; ≥5 episodes treated with ATP regardless of symptoms; ≥3 episodes within 24 hours; or sustained VT treated with electrical cardioversion or pharmacologic conversion). Enrolled patients are classified as either sotalol-eligible, or amiodarone-eligible, and then are randomized to either catheter ablation or to that antiarrhythmic drug therapy, with randomization stratified by drug-eligibility group. Drug therapy, catheter ablation procedures and ICD programming are standardized. All patients will be followed until two years after randomization. The primary endpoint is a composite of mortality at any time, appropriate ICD shock after 14 days, VT storm after 14 days, and treated sustained VT below detection of the ICD after 14 days. The outcomes will be analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle using survival analysis techniques RESULTS: The results of the VANISH2 trial are intended to provide data to support clinical decisions on how to suppress VT for patients with prior myocardial infarction. CLINICALTRIALS: gov registration NCT02830360.
Assuntos
Antiarrítmicos , Cardiomiopatias , Ablação por Cateter , Isquemia Miocárdica , Taquicardia Ventricular , Humanos , Taquicardia Ventricular/terapia , Antiarrítmicos/uso terapêutico , Ablação por Cateter/métodos , Cardiomiopatias/complicações , Cardiomiopatias/terapia , Isquemia Miocárdica/complicações , Masculino , Feminino , Desfibriladores Implantáveis , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Amiodarona/uso terapêutico , Resultado do Tratamento , Sotalol/uso terapêutico , Terapia CombinadaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The Resynchronization-Defibrillation for Ambulatory Heart Failure Trial (RAFT) showed a greater benefit with respect to mortality at 5 years among patients who received cardiac-resynchronization therapy (CRT) than among those who received implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). However, the effect of CRT on long-term survival is not known. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II or III heart failure, a left ventricular ejection fraction of 30% or less, and an intrinsic QRS duration of 120 msec or more (or a paced QRS duration of 200 msec or more) to receive either an ICD alone or a CRT defibrillator (CRT-D). We assessed long-term outcomes among patients at the eight highest-enrolling participating sites. The primary outcome was death from any cause; the secondary outcome was a composite of death from any cause, heart transplantation, or implantation of a ventricular assist device. RESULTS: The trial enrolled 1798 patients, of whom 1050 were included in the long-term survival trial; the median duration of follow-up for the 1050 patients was 7.7 years (interquartile range, 3.9 to 12.8), and the median duration of follow-up for those who survived was 13.9 years (interquartile range, 12.8 to 15.7). Death occurred in 405 of 530 patients (76.4%) assigned to the ICD group and in 370 of 520 patients (71.2%) assigned to the CRT-D group. The time until death appeared to be longer for those assigned to receive a CRT-D than for those assigned to receive an ICD (acceleration factor, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.69 to 0.92; P = 0.002). A secondary-outcome event occurred in 412 patients (77.7%) in the ICD group and in 392 (75.4%) in the CRT-D group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with a reduced ejection fraction, a widened QRS complex, and NYHA class II or III heart failure, the survival benefit associated with receipt of a CRT-D as compared with ICD appeared to be sustained during a median of nearly 14 years of follow-up. (RAFT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00251251.).
Assuntos
Terapia de Ressincronização Cardíaca , Desfibriladores Implantáveis , Insuficiência Cardíaca , Humanos , Insuficiência Cardíaca/mortalidade , Insuficiência Cardíaca/fisiopatologia , Insuficiência Cardíaca/terapia , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Volume Sistólico , Resultado do Tratamento , Função Ventricular Esquerda , Eletrocardiografia , Seguimentos , Fatores de TempoRESUMO
ABSTRACT: Aims Data on patient characteristics, prevalence, and outcomes of atrial fibrillation (AF) patients without traditional risk factors, often labelled 'lone AF', are sparse. METHODS AND RESULTS: The RE-LY AF registry included 15 400 individuals who presented to emergency departments with AF in 47 countries. This analysis focused on patients without traditional risk factors, including age ≥60 years, hypertension, coronary artery disease, heart failure, left ventricular hypertrophy, congenital heart disease, pulmonary disease, valve heart disease, hyperthyroidism, and prior cardiac surgery. Patients without traditional risk factors were compared with age- and region-matched controls with traditional risk factors (1:3 fashion). In 796 (5%) patients, no traditional risk factors were present. However, 98% (779/796) had less-established or borderline risk factors, including borderline hypertension (130-140/80-90 mmHg; 47%), chronic kidney disease (eGFR < 60 mL/min; 57%), obesity (body mass index > 30; 19%), diabetes (5%), excessive alcohol intake (>14 units/week; 4%), and smoking (25%). Compared with patients with traditional risk factors (n = 2388), patients without traditional risk factors were more often men (74% vs. 59%, P < 0.001) had paroxysmal AF (55% vs. 37%, P < 0.001) and less AF persistence after 1 year (21% vs. 49%, P < 0.001). Furthermore, 1-year stroke occurrence rate (0.6% vs. 2.0%, P = 0.013) and heart failure hospitalizations (0.9% vs. 12.5%, P < 0.001) were lower. However, risk of AF-related re-hospitalization was similar (18% vs. 21%, P = 0.09). CONCLUSION: Almost all patients without traditionally defined AF risk factors have less-established or borderline risk factors. These patients have a favourable 1-year prognosis, but risk of AF-related re-hospitalization remains high. Greater emphasis should be placed on recognition and management of less-established or borderline risk factors.
Assuntos
Fibrilação Atrial , Transtorno da Personalidade Borderline , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
BACKGROUND Pacemakers can automatically identify and catalogatrial high-rate episodes (AHREs). While most AHREs represent true atrial tachyarrhythmia/atrial fibrillation (AT/AF), a review of stored electrograms suggests that a substantial proportion do not. As AHREs may lead to the initiation of oral anticoagulation, it iscrucial to understand the relationship between AHREs and true AT/AF.OBJECTIVE To compare the positive predictive value of AHREs forelectrogram-confirmed AT/AF for various atrial rates and episodedurations.METHODS By using data from 2580 patients who participated in the ASymptomatic atrial fibrillation and Stroke Evaluation in pacemakerpatients and the AF Reduction atrial pacing Trial, all AHREs 6 minutes and 190 beats/min with available electrograms were reviewed to determine whether they represented true AT/AF. The positive predictive value of these AHREs was assessed for episodedurations of 6 minutes, 30 minutes, 6 hours, and 24 hours at atrial rates of 190 and 250 beats/min.RESULTS Of 5769 AHREs 6 minutes and 190 beats/min, 82.7% were true AT/AF and 17.3% were false positives (predominantly due to repetitive nonre-entrant ventriculoatrial synchrony).False positives dropped to 6.8%, 3.3%, and 1.8% when the threshold duration was increased to 30 minutes, 6 hours, and 24 hours, respectively. Increasing the threshold heart rate to 250beats/min added little to the positive predictive value when longerthreshold durations were used.CONCLUSIONS By using a cutoff of 6 minutes and 190 beats/min, the rate of false-positive AHREs is 17.3%, making physicianreview of electrograms essential. For AHREs lasting 6 hours, therate of false positives is 3.3%, making physician review less crucial.