Screening for Atrial Fibrillation in Older Adults at Primary Care Visits: VITAL-AF Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Undiagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF) may cause preventable strokes. Guidelines differ regarding AF screening recommendations. We tested whether point-of-care screening with a handheld single-lead ECG at primary care practice visits increases diagnoses of AF. METHODS: We randomized 16 primary care clinics 1:1 to AF screening using a handheld single-lead ECG (AliveCor KardiaMobile) during vital sign assessments, or usual care. Patients included were ages ≥65 years. Screening results were provided to primary care clinicians at the encounter. All confirmatory diagnostic testing and treatment decisions were made by the primary care clinician. New AF diagnoses during the 1-year follow-up were ascertained electronically and manually adjudicated. Proportions and incidence rates were calculated. Effect heterogeneity was assessed. RESULTS: Of 30 715 patients without prevalent AF (n=15 393 screening [91% screened], n=15 322 control), 1.72% of individuals in the screening group had new AF diagnosed at 1 year versus 1.59% in the control group (risk difference, 0.13% [95% CI, -0.16 to 0.42]; P=0.38). In prespecified subgroup analyses, new AF diagnoses in the screening and control groups were greater among those aged ≥85 years (5.56% versus 3.76%, respectively; risk difference, 1.80% [95% CI, 0.18 to 3.30]). The difference in newly diagnosed AF between the screening period and the previous year was marginally greater in the screening versus control group (0.32% versus -0.12%; risk difference, 0.43% [95% CI, -0.01 to 0.84]). The proportion of individuals with newly diagnosed AF who were initiated on oral anticoagulants was not different in the screening (n=194, 73.5%) and control (n=172, 70.8%) arms (risk difference, 2.7% [95% CI, -5.5 to 10.4]). CONCLUSIONS: Screening for AF using a single-lead ECG at primary care visits did not affect new AF diagnoses among all individuals aged 65 years or older compared with usual care. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT03515057.

ECG-Based Deep Learning and Clinical Risk Factors to Predict Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled analysis of 12-lead ECGs may facilitate efficient estimation of incident atrial fibrillation (AF) risk. However, it remains unclear whether AI provides meaningful and generalizable improvement in predictive accuracy beyond clinical risk factors for AF. METHODS: We trained a convolutional neural network (ECG-AI) to infer 5-year incident AF risk using 12-lead ECGs in patients receiving longitudinal primary care at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH). We then fit 3 Cox proportional hazards models, composed of ECG-AI 5-year AF probability, CHARGE-AF clinical risk score (Cohorts for Heart and Aging in Genomic Epidemiology-Atrial Fibrillation), and terms for both ECG-AI and CHARGE-AF (CH-AI), respectively. We assessed model performance by calculating discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) and calibration in an internal test set and 2 external test sets (Brigham and Women's Hospital [BWH] and UK Biobank). Models were recalibrated to estimate 2-year AF risk in the UK Biobank given limited available follow-up. We used saliency mapping to identify ECG features most influential on ECG-AI risk predictions and assessed correlation between ECG-AI and CHARGE-AF linear predictors. RESULTS: The training set comprised 45 770 individuals (age 55±17 years, 53% women, 2171 AF events) and the test sets comprised 83 162 individuals (age 59±13 years, 56% women, 2424 AF events). Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was comparable using CHARGE-AF (MGH, 0.802 [95% CI, 0.767-0.836]; BWH, 0.752 [95% CI, 0.741-0.763]; UK Biobank, 0.732 [95% CI, 0.704-0.759]) and ECG-AI (MGH, 0.823 [95% CI, 0.790-0.856]; BWH, 0.747 [95% CI, 0.736-0.759]; UK Biobank, 0.705 [95% CI, 0.673-0.737]). Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was highest using CH-AI (MGH, 0.838 [95% CI, 0.807 to 0.869]; BWH, 0.777 [95% CI, 0.766 to 0.788]; UK Biobank, 0.746 [95% CI, 0.716 to 0.776]). Calibration error was low using ECG-AI (MGH, 0.0212; BWH, 0.0129; UK Biobank, 0.0035) and CH-AI (MGH, 0.012; BWH, 0.0108; UK Biobank, 0.0001). In saliency analyses, the ECG P-wave had the greatest influence on AI model predictions. ECG-AI and CHARGE-AF linear predictors were correlated (Pearson r: MGH, 0.61; BWH, 0.66; UK Biobank, 0.41). CONCLUSIONS: AI-based analysis of 12-lead ECGs has similar predictive usefulness to a clinical risk factor model for incident AF and the approaches are complementary. ECG-AI may enable efficient quantification of future AF risk.

Clinical and Genetic Atrial Fibrillation Risk and Discrimination of Cardioembolic From Noncardioembolic Stroke.

BACKGROUND: Stroke is a leading cause of death and disability worldwide. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common cause of stroke but may not be detectable at the time of stroke. We hypothesized that an AF polygenic risk score (PRS) can discriminate between cardioembolic stroke and noncardioembolic strokes. METHODS: We evaluated AF and stroke risk in 26 145 individuals of European descent from the Stroke Genetics Network case-control study. AF genetic risk was estimated using 3 recently developed PRS methods (LDpred-funct-inf, sBayesR, and PRS-CS) and 2 previously validated PRSs. We performed logistic regression of each AF PRS on AF status and separately cardioembolic stroke, adjusting for clinical risk score (CRS), imputation group, and principal components. We calculated model discrimination of AF and cardioembolic stroke using the concordance statistic (c-statistic) and compared c-statistics using 2000-iteration bootstrapping. We also assessed reclassification of cardioembolic stroke with the addition of PRS to either CRS or a modified CHA2DS2-VASc score alone. RESULTS: Each AF PRS was significantly associated with AF and with cardioembolic stroke after adjustment for CRS. Addition of each AF PRS significantly improved discrimination as compared with CRS alone (P<0.01). When combined with the CRS, both PRS-CS and LDpred scores discriminated both AF and cardioembolic stroke (c-statistic 0.84 for AF; 0.74 for cardioembolic stroke) better than 3 other PRS scores (P<0.01). Using PRS-CS PRS and CRS in combination resulted in more appropriate reclassification of stroke events as compared with CRS alone (event reclassification [net reclassification indices]+=14% [95% CI, 10%-18%]; nonevent reclassification [net reclassification indices]-=17% [95% CI, 15%-0.19%]) or the modified CHA2DS2-VASc score (net reclassification indices+=11% [95% CI, 7%-15%]; net reclassification indices-=14% [95% CI, 12%-16%]) alone. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of polygenic risk of AF to clinical risk factors modestly improves the discrimination of cardioembolic from noncardioembolic strokes, as well as reclassification of stroke subtype. Polygenic risk of AF may be a useful biomarker for identifying strokes caused by AF.

Accuracy and variability of cardiologist interpretation of single lead electrocardiograms for atrial fibrillation: The VITAL-AF trial.

BACKGROUND: Screening for atrial fibrillation (AF) using consumer-based devices capable of producing a single lead electrocardiogram (1L ECG) is increasing. There are limited data on the accuracy of physician interpretation of these tracings. The goal of this study is to assess the sensitivity, specificity, confidence, and variability of cardiologist interpretation of point-of-care 1L ECGs. METHODS: Fifteen cardiologists reviewed point-of-care handheld 1L ECGs collected from patients aged 65 years or older enrolled in the VITAL-AF clinical trial [NCT035115057] who underwent cardiac rhythm assessments with a 1L ECG using an AliveCor KardiaMobile device. Random sampling of 1L ECGs for cardiologist review was stratified by the AliveCor algorithm interpretation. A 12L ECG performed on the same day for clinical purposes was used as the gold standard. Cardiologists each reviewed a common sample of 200 1L ECG tracings and completed a survey associated with each tracing. Cardiologists were blinded to both the AliveCor algorithm and same day 12L ECG interpretation. For each tracing, study cardiologists were asked to assess the rhythm (sinus rhythm, AF, unclassifiable), report their assessment of the quality of the tracing, and rate their confidence in rhythm interpretation. The outcomes included the sensitivity, specificity, variability, and confidence in physician interpretation. Variables associated with each measure were identified using multivariable regression. RESULTS: The average sensitivity for AF was 77.4% (range 50%-90.6%, standard deviation [SD]=11.4%) and the average specificity was 73.0% (range 41.3%-94.6%, SD = 15.4%). The mean variability was 30.8% (range 0%-76.2%, SD = 23.2%). The average reviewer confidence of 1L ECG rhythm assessment was 3.6 out of 5 (range 2.5-4.2, SD = 0.6). Patient and tracing factors associated with sensitivity, specificity, variability, and confidence were identified and included age, body mass index, and presence of artifact. CONCLUSION: Cardiologist interpretation of point-of-care handheld 1L ECGs has modest diagnostic sensitivity and specificity with substantial variability for AF classification despite high confidence. Variability in cardiologist interpretation of 1L ECGs highlights the importance of confirmatory testing for diagnosing AF.

The Use of Artificial Intelligence to Predict the Development of Atrial Fibrillation.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a major public health problem associated with preventable morbidity. Artificial intelligence (AI) is emerging as potential tool to prioritize individuals at increased risk for AF for preventive interventions. This review summarizes recent advances in the use of AI models to estimate AF risk. RECENT FINDINGS: Several AI-enabled models have been recently developed which can discriminate AF risk with reasonable accuracy. AI models utilizing the electrocardiogram waveform appear to extract predictive information which is additive beyond traditional clinical risk factors. By identifying individuals at higher risk for AF, AI-based models may improve the efficiency of preventive efforts (e.g., screening, risk factor modification) intended to reduce risk of AF and associated morbidity.

Clinical perspectives on the adoption of the artificial intelligence-enabled electrocardiogram.

The 12­lead electrocardiogram (ECG) is a common and inexpensive diagnostic modality available at scale. The ECG reflects electrical activity throughout the cardiac cycle and is increasingly recognized to contain rich signal relevant across the spectrum of human conditions. Recent work has demonstrated that artificial intelligence (AI)-based algorithms may be able to extract latent information from within the 12­lead ECG to classify the presence of disease and even predict the development of future disease. Despite recent development of many AI-based ECG algorithms, comparably few are used in routine clinical practice. Therefore, there is a critical unmet need to identify and mitigate potential barriers to the real-world clinical implementation of AI algorithms. We propose that the adoption of the AI-enabled ECG may be increased by future efforts focused on three key principles: a) maximizing credibility, b) optimizing practicality, and c) establishing clinical utility. In this mini-review, we discuss recent notable work focused on these principles and provide suggestions for future directions. AI-enabled ECG analysis possesses substantial potential to transform current methods to prevent, diagnose, and treat human disease, but a greater emphasis on their real-world application is required to bring that potential to reality.

Accelerometer-Derived "Weekend Warrior" Physical Activity and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Importance: Guidelines recommend 150 minutes or more of moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) per week for overall health benefit, but the relative effects of concentrated vs more evenly distributed activity are unclear. Objective: To examine associations between an accelerometer-derived "weekend warrior" pattern (ie, most MVPA achieved over 1-2 days) vs MVPA spread more evenly with risk of incident cardiovascular events. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective analysis of UK Biobank cohort study participants providing a full week of accelerometer-based physical activity data between June 8, 2013, and December 30, 2015. Exposures: Three MVPA patterns were compared: active weekend warrior (active WW, ≥150 minutes with ≥50% of total MVPA achieved in 1-2 days), active regular (≥150 minutes and not meeting active WW status), and inactive (<150 minutes). The same patterns were assessed using the sample median threshold of 230.4 minutes or more of MVPA per week. Main Outcomes and Measures: Associations between activity pattern and incident atrial fibrillation, myocardial infarction, heart failure, and stroke were assessed using Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for age, sex, racial and ethnic background, tobacco use, alcohol intake, Townsend Deprivation Index, employment status, self-reported health, and diet quality. Results: A total of 89 573 individuals (mean [SD] age, 62 [7.8] years; 56% women) who underwent accelerometry were included. When stratified at the threshold of 150 minutes or more of MVPA per week, a total of 37 872 were in the active WW group (42.2%), 21 473 were in the active regular group (24.0%), and 30 228 were in the inactive group (33.7%). In multivariable-adjusted models, both activity patterns were associated with similarly lower risks of incident atrial fibrillation (active WW: hazard ratio [HR], 0.78 [95% CI, 0.74-0.83]; active regular: 0.81 [95% CI, 0.74-0.88; inactive: HR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.94-1.07]), myocardial infarction (active WW: 0.73 [95% CI, 0.67-0.80]; active regular: 0.65 [95% CI, 0.57-0.74]; and inactive: 1.00 [95% CI, 0.91-1.10]), heart failure (active WW: 0.62 [95% CI, 0.56-0.68]; active regular: 0.64 [95% CI, 0.56-0.73]; and inactive: 1.00 [95% CI, 0.92-1.09]), and stroke (active WW: 0.79 [95% CI, 0.71-0.88]; active regular: 0.83 [95% CI, 0.72-0.97]; and inactive: 1.00 [95% CI, 0.90-1.11]). Findings were consistent at the median threshold of 230.4 minutes or more of MVPA per week, although associations with stroke were no longer significant (active WW: 0.89 [95% CI, 0.79-1.02]; active regular: 0.87 [95% CI, 0.74-1.02]; and inactive: 1.00 [95% CI, 0.90-1.11]). Conclusions and Relevance: Physical activity concentrated within 1 to 2 days was associated with similarly lower risk of cardiovascular outcomes to more evenly distributed activity.

Population-Based Screening for Atrial Fibrillation.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common and morbid arrhythmia. Stroke is a major hazard of AF and may be preventable with oral anticoagulation. Yet since AF is often asymptomatic, many individuals with AF may be unaware and do not receive treatment that could prevent a stroke. Screening for AF has gained substantial attention in recent years as several studies have demonstrated that screening is feasible. Advances in technology have enabled a variety of approaches to facilitate screening for AF using both medical-prescribed devices as well as consumer electronic devices capable of detecting AF. Yet controversy about the utility of AF screening remains owing to concerns about potential harms resulting from screening in the absence of randomized data demonstrating effectiveness of screening on outcomes such as stroke and bleeding. In this review, we summarize current literature, present technology, population-based screening considerations, and consensus guidelines addressing the role of AF screening in practice.

Accelerometer-derived physical activity and risk of atrial fibrillation.

AIMS: Physical activity may be an important modifiable risk factor for atrial fibrillation (AF), but associations have been variable and generally based on self-reported activity. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analysed 93 669 participants of the UK Biobank prospective cohort study without prevalent AF who wore a wrist-based accelerometer for 1 week. We categorized whether measured activity met the standard recommendations of the European Society of Cardiology, American Heart Association, and World Health Organization [moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) ≥150 min/week]. We tested associations between guideline-adherent activity and incident AF (primary) and stroke (secondary) using Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for age, sex, and each component of the Cohorts for Heart and Aging Research in Genomic Epidemiology AF (CHARGE-AF) risk score. We also assessed correlation between accelerometer-derived and self-reported activity. The mean age was 62 ± 8 years and 57% were women. Over a median of 5.2 years, 2338 incident AF events occurred. In multivariable adjusted models, guideline-adherent activity was associated with lower risks of AF [hazard ratio (HR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75-0.89; incidence 3.5/1000 person-years, 95% CI 3.3-3.8 vs. 6.5/1000 person-years, 95% CI 6.1-6.8] and stroke (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.64-0.90; incidence 1.0/1000 person-years, 95% CI 0.9-1.1 vs. 1.8/1000 person-years, 95% CI 1.6-2.0). Correlation between accelerometer-derived and self-reported MVPA was weak (Spearman r = 0.16, 95% CI 0.16-0.17). Self-reported activity was not associated with incident AF or stroke. CONCLUSIONS: Greater accelerometer-derived physical activity is associated with lower risks of AF and stroke. Future preventive efforts to reduce AF risk may be most effective when targeting adherence to objective activity thresholds.

Development of a Prediction Model for Ascending Aortic Diameter Among Asymptomatic Individuals.

Importance: Ascending thoracic aortic disease is an important cause of sudden death in the US, yet most aortic aneurysms are identified incidentally. Objective: To develop and validate a clinical score to estimate ascending aortic diameter. Design, Setting, and Participants: Using an ongoing magnetic resonance imaging substudy of the UK Biobank cohort study, which had enrolled participants from 2006 through 2010, score derivation was performed in 30 018 participants and internal validation in an additional 6681. External validation was performed in 1367 participants from the Framingham Heart Study (FHS) offspring cohort who had undergone computed tomography from 2002 through 2005, and in 50 768 individuals who had undergone transthoracic echocardiography in the Community Care Cohort Project, a retrospective hospital-based cohort of longitudinal primary care patients in the Mass General Brigham (MGB) network between 2001-2018. Exposures: Demographic and clinical variables (11 covariates that would not independently prompt thoracic imaging). Main Outcomes and Measures: Ascending aortic diameter was modeled with hierarchical group least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression. Correlation between estimated and measured diameter and performance for identifying diameter 4.0 cm or greater were assessed. Results: The 30 018-participant training cohort (52% women), were a median age of 65.1 years (IQR, 58.6-70.6 years). The mean (SD) ascending aortic diameter was 3.04 (0.31) cm for women and 3.32 (0.34) cm for men. A score to estimate ascending aortic diameter explained 28.2% of the variance in aortic diameter in the UK Biobank validation cohort (95% CI, 26.4%-30.0%), 30.8% in the FHS cohort (95% CI, 26.8%-34.9%), and 32.6% in the MGB cohort (95% CI, 31.9%-33.2%). For detecting individuals with an ascending aortic diameter of 4 cm or greater, the score had an area under the receiver operator characteristic curve of 0.770 (95% CI, 0.737-0.803) in the UK Biobank, 0.813 (95% CI, 0.772-0.854) in the FHS, and 0.766 (95% CI, 0.757-0.774) in the MGB cohorts, although the model significantly overestimated or underestimated aortic diameter in external validation. Using a fixed-score threshold of 3.537, 9.7 people in UK Biobank, 1.8 in the FHS, and 4.6 in the MGB cohorts would need imaging to confirm 1 individual with an ascending aortic diameter of 4 cm or greater. The sensitivity at that threshold was 8.9% in the UK Biobank, 11.3% in the FHS, and 18.8% in the MGB cohorts, with specificities of 98.1%, 99.2%, and 96.2%, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: A prediction model based on common clinically available data was derived and validated to predict ascending aortic diameter. Further research is needed to optimize the prediction model and to determine whether its use is associated with improved outcomes.

Automated Electronic Phenotyping of Cardioembolic Stroke.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Oral anticoagulation is generally indicated for cardioembolic strokes, but not for other stroke causes. Consequently, subtype classification of ischemic stroke is important for risk stratification and secondary prevention. Because manual classification of ischemic stroke is time-intensive, we assessed the accuracy of automated algorithms for performing cardioembolic stroke subtyping using an electronic health record (EHR) database. METHODS: We adapted TOAST (Trial of ORG 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment) features associated with cardioembolic stroke for derivation in the EHR. Using administrative codes and echocardiographic reports within Mass General Brigham Biobank (N=13 079), we iteratively developed EHR-based algorithms to define the TOAST cardioembolic stroke features, revising regular expression algorithms until achieving positive predictive value ≥80%. We compared several machine learning-based statistical algorithms for discriminating cardioembolic stroke using the feature algorithms applied to EHR data from 1598 patients with acute ischemic strokes from the Massachusetts General Hospital Ischemic Stroke Registry (2002-2010) with previously adjudicated TOAST and Causative Classification of Stroke subtypes. RESULTS: Regular expression-based feature extraction algorithms achieved a mean positive predictive value of 95% (range, 88%-100%) across 11 echocardiographic features. Among 1598 patients from the Massachusetts General Hospital Ischemic Stroke Registry, 1068 had any cardioembolic stroke feature within predefined time windows in proximity to the stroke event. Cardioembolic stroke tended to occur at an older age, with more TOAST-based comorbidities, and with atrial fibrillation (82.3%). The best model was a random forest with 92.2% accuracy and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 91.1% (95% CI, 87.5%-93.9%). Atrial fibrillation, age, dilated cardiomyopathy, congestive heart failure, patent foramen ovale, mitral annulus calcification, and recent myocardial infarction were the most discriminatory features. CONCLUSIONS: Machine learning-based identification of cardioembolic stroke using EHR data is feasible. Future work is needed to improve the accuracy of automated cardioembolic stroke identification and assess generalizability of electronic phenotyping algorithms across clinical settings.

Atrial Fibrillation Risk and Discrimination of Cardioembolic From Noncardioembolic Stroke.

Background and Purpose- Classification of stroke as cardioembolic in etiology can be challenging, particularly since the predominant cause, atrial fibrillation (AF), may not be present at the time of stroke. Efficient tools that discriminate cardioembolic from noncardioembolic strokes may improve care as anticoagulation is frequently indicated after cardioembolism. We sought to assess and quantify the discriminative power of AF risk as a classifier for cardioembolism in a real-world population of patients with acute ischemic stroke. Methods- We performed a cross-sectional analysis of a multi-institutional sample of patients with acute ischemic stroke. We systematically adjudicated stroke subtype and examined associations between AF risk using CHA2DS2-VASc, Cohorts for Heart and Aging Research in Genomic Epidemiology-AF score, and the recently developed Electronic Health Record-Based AF score, and cardioembolic stroke using logistic regression. We compared the ability of AF risk to discriminate cardioembolism by calculating C statistics and sensitivity/specificity cutoffs for cardioembolic stroke. Results- Of 1431 individuals with ischemic stroke (age, 65±15; 40% women), 323 (22.6%) had cardioembolism. AF risk was significantly associated with cardioembolism (CHA2DS2-VASc: odds ratio [OR] per SD, 1.69 [95% CI, 1.49-1.93]; Cohorts for Heart and Aging Research in Genomic Epidemiology-AF score: OR, 2.22 [95% CI, 1.90-2.60]; electronic Health Record-Based AF: OR, 2.55 [95% CI, 2.16-3.04]). Discrimination was greater for Cohorts for Heart and Aging Research in Genomic Epidemiology-AF score (C index, 0.695 [95% CI, 0.663-0.726]) and Electronic Health Record-Based AF score (0.713 [95% CI, 0.681-0.744]) versus CHA2DS2-VASc (C index, 0.651 [95% CI, 0.619-0.683]). Examination of AF scores across a range of thresholds indicated that AF risk may facilitate identification of individuals at low likelihood of cardioembolism (eg, negative likelihood ratios for Electronic Health Record-Based AF score ranged 0.31-0.10 at sensitivity thresholds 0.90-0.99). Conclusions- AF risk scores associate with cardioembolic stroke and exhibit moderate discrimination. Utilization of AF risk scores at the time of stroke may be most useful for identifying individuals at low probability of cardioembolism. Future analyses are warranted to assess whether stroke subtype classification can be enhanced to improve outcomes in undifferentiated stroke.

Predictors of oral anticoagulant non-prescription in patients with atrial fibrillation and elevated stroke risk.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and elevated stroke risk are not prescribed oral anticoagulation (OAC) despite evidence of benefit. Identification of factors associated with OAC non-prescription could lead to improvements in care. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using NCDR PINNACLE, a United States-based ambulatory cardiology registry, we examined factors associated with OAC non-prescription in patients with non-valvular AF at elevated stroke risk (CHA2DS2-VASc ≥2) between January 5, 2008 and December 31, 2014. Among 674,841 patients, 57% were treated with OAC (67% of whom were treated with warfarin). OAC prescription varied widely (28%-75%) across preselected strata of age, stroke risk (CHA2DS2-VASc), and bleeding risk (HAS-BLED), generally indicating that older patients at high stroke and low bleeding risk are commonly treated with OAC. Other factors associated with OAC non-prescription included reversible AF etiology; female sex; liver, renal, or vascular disease; and physician versus non-physician provider. Antiplatelet use was common (57%) and associated with the greatest risk of OAC non-prescription (odds ratio [OR] 4.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.39-4.49). CONCLUSIONS: In this registry of AF patients, older patients at elevated stroke and low bleeding risk were commonly treated with OAC. However, a variety of factors were associated with OAC non-prescription. Specifically, antiplatelet use was prevalent and associated with the highest likelihood of OAC non-prescription. Future studies are warranted to understand provider and patient rationale that may underlie observed associations with OAC non-prescription.

Electronic physician notifications to improve guideline-based anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Oral anticoagulants reduce the risk of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation. However, many patients with atrial fibrillation at elevated stroke risk are not treated with oral anticoagulants. OBJECTIVE: To test whether electronic notifications sent to primary care physicians increase the proportion of ambulatory patients prescribed oral anticoagulants. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial conducted from February to May 2017 within 18 practices in an academic primary care network. PARTICIPANTS: Primary care physicians (n = 175) and their patients with atrial fibrillation, at elevated stroke risk, and not prescribed oral anticoagulants. INTERVENTION: Patients of each physician were randomized to the notification or usual care arm. Physicians received baseline email notifications and up to three reminders with patient information, educational material and primary care guidelines for anticoagulation management, and surveys in the notification arm. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was the proportion of patients prescribed oral anticoagulants at 3 months in the notification (n = 972) vs. usual care (n = 1364) arms, compared using logistic regression with clustering by physician. Secondary measures included survey-based physician assessment of reasons why patients were not prescribed oral anticoagulants and how primary care physicians might be influenced by the notification. KEY RESULTS: Over 3 months, a small proportion of patients were newly prescribed oral anticoagulants with no significant difference in the notification (3.9%, 95% CI 2.8-5.3%) and usual care (3.2%, 95% CI 2.4-4.2%) arms (p = 0.37). The most common, non-exclusive reasons why patients were not on oral anticoagulants included atrial fibrillation was transient (30%) or paroxysmal (12%), patient/family declined (22%), high bleeding risk (20%), fall risk (19%), and frailty (10%). For 95% of patients, physicians stated they would not change their management after reviewing the alert. CONCLUSIONS: Electronic physician notification did not increase anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation at elevated stroke risk. Primary care physicians did not prescribe anticoagulants because they perceived the bleeding risk was too high or stroke risk was too low. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02950285.

Longer Paced QRS Duration is Associated With Increased Prevalence of Right Ventricular Pacing-Induced Cardiomyopathy.

INTRODUCTION: Pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM) is an important cause of heart failure in patients exposed to frequent right ventricular (RV) pacing. While echocardiography is diagnostic, the optimal surveillance strategy remains unknown. We sought to identify clinical and electrocardiographic factors associated with the presence of PICM to guide further testing. METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively studied 1,750 consecutive patients undergoing pacemaker implantation 2003-2012. Patients were included if baseline LVEF was normal, single chamber ventricular or dual chamber pacemaker (but not ICD or cardiac resynchronization therapy device) was implanted, frequent (≥20%) RV pacing was present and repeat echocardiogram was available following implantation. PICM was defined as ≥10% decrease in LVEF, resulting in LVEF <50%. Patients with alternative causes of cardiomyopathy were excluded. Clinical and electrocardiographic indicators of PICM were identified using multivariate logistic regression. Of 184 patients meeting study criteria, 42 (22.8%) developed PICM, with decrease in mean LVEF from 62.1% to 35.3% over mean follow-up 2.5 years. Longer follow-up paced QRS duration was associated with the presence of PICM (multivariate odds ratio 1.34 per 10 millisecond increase, 95% CI 1.06-1.63, p = 0.01). Paced QRS duration ≥150 milliseconds was 95% sensitive for PICM. Only half of patients with PICM had heart failure signs or symptoms at the time of echocardiographic diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Patients with frequent RV pacing and paced QRS duration ≥150 milliseconds should be screened by echocardiogram to assess for PICM. Patients with paced QRS duration <150 milliseconds likely do not require screening, in the absence of heart failure signs or symptoms.

Consider this a WARNing.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) prediction can be valuable at many timescales and in many populations. In this issue of Patterns, Gavidia et al. train a model called WARN for short-term prediction of AF in the timescale of minutes in patients wearing 24-h continuous Holter electrocardiograms. The ability to predict near-term (e.g., 30 min) AF has the potential to enable preventive therapies with rapid mechanisms of action (e.g., oral anticoagulation, anti-arrhythmic drugs). In this way, efficient, continuous, and algorithmic monitoring of AF risk could reduce burden on healthcare workers and represents a valuable clinical pursuit.

Revolutionising Acute Cardiac Care With Artificial Intelligence: Opportunities and Challenges.

This article reviews the application of artificial intelligence (AI) in acute cardiac care, highlighting its potential to transform patient outcomes in the face of the global burden of cardiovascular diseases. It explores how AI algorithms can rapidly and accurately process data for the prediction and diagnosis of acute cardiac conditions. The review examines AI's impact on patient health across various diagnostic tools such as echocardiography, electrocardiography, coronary angiography, cardiac computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging, discusses the regulatory landscape for AI in health care, and categorises AI algorithms by their risk levels. Furthermore, it addresses the challenges of data quality, generalisability, bias, transparency, and regulatory considerations, underscoring the necessity for inclusive data and robust validation processes. The review concludes with future perspectives on integrating AI into clinical workflows and the ongoing need for research, regulation, and innovation to harness AI's full potential in improving acute cardiac care.

Characteristics and Attitudes of Wearable Device Users and Nonusers in a Large Health Care System.

BACKGROUND: Consumer wearable devices with health and wellness features are increasingly common and may enhance disease detection and management. Yet studies informing relationships between wearable device use, attitudes toward device data, and comprehensive clinical profiles are lacking. METHODS AND RESULTS: WATCH-IT (Wearable Activity Tracking for Comprehensive Healthcare-Integrated Technology) studied adults receiving longitudinal primary or ambulatory cardiovascular care in the Mass General Brigham health care system from January 2010 to July 2021. Participants completed a 20-question electronic survey about perceptions and use of consumer wearable devices, with responses linked to electronic health records. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with device use. Among 214 992 individuals receiving longitudinal primary or cardiovascular care with an active electronic portal, 11 121 responded (5.2%). Most respondents (55.8%) currently used a wearable device, and most nonusers (95.3%) would use a wearable if provided at no cost. Although most users (70.2%) had not shared device data with their doctor previously, most believed it would be very (20.4%) or moderately (34.4%) important to share device-related health information with providers. In multivariable models, older age (odds ratio [OR], 0.80 per 10-year increase [95% CI, 0.77-0.82]), male sex (OR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.80-0.95]), and heart failure (OR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.63-0.89]) were associated with lower odds of wearable device use, whereas higher median income (OR, 1.08 per 1-quartile increase [95% CI, 1.04-1.12]) and care in a cardiovascular medicine clinic (OR, 1.17 [95% CI, 1.05-1.30]) were associated with greater odds of device use. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients in primary and cardiovascular medicine clinics, consumer wearable device use is common, and most users perceive value in wearable health data.