Towards personalized antithrombotic management with drugs and devices across the cardiovascular spectrum.

Intravascular thrombus formation and embolization are among the most frequent events leading to a number of cardiovascular conditions with high morbidity and mortality. The underlying causes are stasis of the circulating blood, genetic and acquired coagulation disorders, and reduced antithrombotic or prothrombotic properties of the vascular wall (Virchow's triad). In the venous system, intravascular thrombi can cause venous thrombosis and pulmonary and even peripheral embolism including ischaemic stroke [through a patent foramen ovale (PFO)]. Thrombi in the left atrium and its appendage or ventricle form in the context of atrial fibrillation and infarction, respectively. Furthermore, thrombi can form on native or prosthetic aortic valves, within the aorta (in particular at sites of ulcers, aortic dissection, and abdominal aneurysms), and in cerebral and peripheral arteries causing stroke and critical limb ischaemia, respectively. Finally, thrombotic occlusion may occur in arteries supplying vital organs such the heart, brain, kidney, and extremities. Thrombus formation and embolization can be managed with anticoagulants and devices depending on where they form and embolize and on patient characteristics. Vitamin K antagonists are preferred in patients with mechanical valves, while novel oral anticoagulants are first choice in most other cardiovascular conditions, in particular venous thromboembolism and atrial fibrillation. As anticoagulants are associated with a risk of bleeding, devices such as occluders of a PFO or the left atrial appendage are preferred in patients with an increased bleeding risk. Platelet inhibitors such as aspirin and/or P2Y12 antagonists are preferred in the secondary prevention of coronary artery disease, stroke, and peripheral artery disease either alone or in combination depending on the clinical condition. A differential and personalized use of anticoagulants, platelet inhibitors, and devices is recommended and reviewed in this article.

Attaining sinus rhythm mediates improved outcome with early rhythm control therapy of atrial fibrillation: the EAST-AFNET 4 trial.

AIMS: A strategy of systematic, early rhythm control (ERC) improves cardiovascular outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). It is not known how this outcome-reducing effect is mediated. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using the Early treatment of Atrial Fibrillation for Stroke prevention Trial (EAST-AFNET 4) data set, potential mediators of the effect of ERC were identified in the total study population at 12-month follow up and further interrogated by use of a four-way decomposition of the treatment effect in an exponential model predicting future primary outcome events. Fourteen potential mediators of ERC were identified at the 12-month visit. Of these, sinus rhythm at 12 months explained 81% of the treatment effect of ERC compared with usual care during the remainder of follow up (4.1 years). In patients not in sinus rhythm at 12 months, ERC did not reduce future cardiovascular outcomes (hazard ratio 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.65-1.67). Inclusion of AF recurrence in the model only explained 31% of the treatment effect, and inclusion of systolic blood pressure at 12 months only 10%. There was no difference in outcomes in patients who underwent AF ablation compared with those who did not undergo AF ablation. CONCLUSION: The effectiveness of early rhythm control is mediated by the presence of sinus rhythm at 12 months in the EAST-AFNET 4 trial. Clinicians implementing ERC should aim for rapid and sustained restoration of sinus rhythm in patients with recently diagnosed AF and cardiovascular comorbidities.

The electrocardiogram endeavour: from the Holter single-lead recordings to multilead wearable devices supported by computational machine learning algorithms.

This review aims to provide a comprehensive recapitulation of the evolution in the field of cardiac rhythm monitoring, shedding light in recent progress made in multilead ECG systems and wearable devices, with emphasis on the promising role of the artificial intelligence and computational techniques in the detection of cardiac abnormalities.

Machine learning does not improve upon traditional regression in predicting outcomes in atrial fibrillation: an analysis of the ORBIT-AF and GARFIELD-AF registries.

AIMS: Prediction models for outcomes in atrial fibrillation (AF) are used to guide treatment. While regression models have been the analytic standard for prediction modelling, machine learning (ML) has been promoted as a potentially superior methodology. We compared the performance of ML and regression models in predicting outcomes in AF patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF) and Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD (GARFIELD-AF) are population-based registries that include 74 792 AF patients. Models were generated from potential predictors using stepwise logistic regression (STEP), random forests (RF), gradient boosting (GB), and two neural networks (NNs). Discriminatory power was highest for death [STEP area under the curve (AUC) = 0.80 in ORBIT-AF, 0.75 in GARFIELD-AF] and lowest for stroke in all models (STEP AUC = 0.67 in ORBIT-AF, 0.66 in GARFIELD-AF). The discriminatory power of the ML models was similar or lower than the STEP models for most outcomes. The GB model had a higher AUC than STEP for death in GARFIELD-AF (0.76 vs. 0.75), but only nominally, and both performed similarly in ORBIT-AF. The multilayer NN had the lowest discriminatory power for all outcomes. The calibration of the STEP modelswere more aligned with the observed events for all outcomes. In the cross-registry models, the discriminatory power of the ML models was similar or lower than the STEP for most cases. CONCLUSION: When developed from two large, community-based AF registries, ML techniques did not improve prediction modelling of death, major bleeding, or stroke.

Uninterrupted edoxaban vs. vitamin K antagonists for ablation of atrial fibrillation: the ELIMINATE-AF trial.

AIMS: Edoxaban is a direct factor Xa inhibitor approved for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF). Uninterrupted edoxaban therapy in patients undergoing AF ablation has not been tested. METHODS AND RESULTS: The ELIMINATE-AF trial, a multinational, multicentre, randomized, open-label, parallel-group study, was conducted to assess the safety and efficacy of once-daily edoxaban 60 mg (30 mg in patients indicated for dose reduction) vs. vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in AF patients undergoing catheter ablation. Patients were randomized 2:1 to edoxaban vs. VKA. The primary endpoint (per-protocol population) was time to first occurrence of all-cause death, stroke, or International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis-defined major bleeding during the period from the end of the ablation procedure to end of treatment (90 days). Overall, 632 patients were enrolled, 614 randomized, and 553 received study drug and underwent ablation; 177 subjects underwent brain magnetic resonance imaging to assess silent cerebral infarcts. The primary endpoint (only major bleeds occurred) was observed in 0.3% (1 patient) on edoxaban and 2.0% (2 patients) on VKA [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval): 0.16 (0.02-1.73)]. In the ablation population (modified intent-to-treat population including patients with ablation), the primary endpoint was observed in 2.7% of edoxaban (N = 10) and 1.7% of VKA patients (N = 3) between start of ablation and end of treatment. There were one ischaemic and one haemorrhagic stroke, both in patients on edoxaban. Cerebral microemboli were detected in 13.8% (16) patients who received edoxaban and 9.6% (5) patients in the VKA group (nominal P = 0.62). CONCLUSION: Uninterrupted edoxaban therapy represents an alternative to uninterrupted VKA treatment in patients undergoing AF ablation.

Screening for Atrial Fibrillation: A Report of the AF-SCREEN International Collaboration.

Approximately 10% of ischemic strokes are associated with atrial fibrillation (AF) first diagnosed at the time of stroke. Detecting asymptomatic AF would provide an opportunity to prevent these strokes by instituting appropriate anticoagulation. The AF-SCREEN international collaboration was formed in September 2015 to promote discussion and research about AF screening as a strategy to reduce stroke and death and to provide advocacy for implementation of country-specific AF screening programs. During 2016, 60 expert members of AF-SCREEN, including physicians, nurses, allied health professionals, health economists, and patient advocates, were invited to prepare sections of a draft document. In August 2016, 51 members met in Rome to discuss the draft document and consider the key points arising from it using a Delphi process. These key points emphasize that screen-detected AF found at a single timepoint or by intermittent ECG recordings over 2 weeks is not a benign condition and, with additional stroke factors, carries sufficient risk of stroke to justify consideration of anticoagulation. With regard to the methods of mass screening, handheld ECG devices have the advantage of providing a verifiable ECG trace that guidelines require for AF diagnosis and would therefore be preferred as screening tools. Certain patient groups, such as those with recent embolic stroke of uncertain source (ESUS), require more intensive monitoring for AF. Settings for screening include various venues in both the community and the clinic, but they must be linked to a pathway for appropriate diagnosis and management for screening to be effective. It is recognized that health resources vary widely between countries and health systems, so the setting for AF screening should be both country- and health system-specific. Based on current knowledge, this white paper provides a strong case for AF screening now while recognizing that large randomized outcomes studies would be helpful to strengthen the evidence base.

Rationale and design of a global registry to evaluate real-world clinical outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation and high risk of stroke treated with left atrial appendage occlusion using the AMPLATZER amulet device-Perspective of available/ongoing registries of catheter-based LAA occlusion.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the rationale and design of a global prospective registry on catheter-based left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion using the second generation AMPLATZER Amulet LAA occlusion device and to provide a comprehensive perspective on available/ongoing registries for catheter-based LAA occlusion. BACKGROUND: Given the increasing clinical application of catheter-based LAA occlusion, there is an important need for prospective real-world clinical data regarding this cardiac intervention. METHODS: The Global Amplatzer Amulet LAA registry aims to provide prospective real-world data from an all-comer population of atrial fibrillation (AF) patients undergoing catheter-based LAA occlusion for stroke prevention. This observational, prospective, multicenter registry will provide peri-procedural and long-term clinical outcome data for catheter-based LAA occlusion using a second generation LAA occlusion device. The global registry will enroll 1,000 patients at up to 75 institutions. Patients will be followed for 2 years after implantation. Primary endpoints will report procedural and long-term data on ischemic stroke, systemic embolism, cardiovascular death and major bleeding. The study will involve independent event adjudication and echocardiographic core laboratory evaluation. Long-term follow-up data are expected in 2018. RESULTS: The Global Amplatzer Amulet LAA registry will collect safety and efficacy information on catheter-based LAA occlusion. Characteristics of available and ongoing catheter-based LAA occlusion registries are described. CONCLUSIONS: There is an important need for prospective real-world clinical data of catheter-based LAA occlusion given the increasing application of this intervention. The present global real-world registry will expand our knowledge on peri-procedural and long-term outcome of catheter-based LAA occlusion using a second generation occlusion device.

Innovation in cardiovascular disease in Europe with focus on arrhythmias: current status, opportunities, roadblocks, and the role of multiple stakeholders.

The European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) held an Innovation Forum in February 2016, to consider issues around innovation. The objective of the forum was to extend the innovation debate outside of the narrow world of arrhythmia specialists and cardiology in general, and seek input from all stakeholders including regulators, strategists, technologists, industry, academia, health providers, medical societies, payers, and patients. Innovation is indispensable for a continuing improvement in health care, preferably at higher efficacy and lower costs. It requires people who have been trained in a good scientific environment, high-quality research for achieving ground breaking inventions and the certainty of return on innovation investments. In the context of cardiovascular disease, innovation can imply better risk assessment and stratification, device technology, drug development, and process design. Several areas of promising developments were identified as well as several roadblocks to innovation. To drive innovation forward all stakeholders need to play a significant role. In a globalized and extremely competitive world, the leading role of Europe in medical innovation can only be achieved through a combined and well-coordinated effort from all involved parties.

A Decade of Information on the Use of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices and Interventional Electrophysiological Procedures in the European Society of Cardiology Countries: 2017 Report from the European Heart Rhythm Association.

AIMS: The aim of this analysis was to provide comprehensive information on invasive cardiac arrhythmia therapies in the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) area over the past 10 years. METHODS AND RESULTS: The European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) has collected data on invasive arrhythmia therapies since 2008. This year 53 of the 56 ESC member countries provided data for the EHRA White Book. Here we present updated data on procedure rates together with information on demographics, economy, vital statistics, local healthcare systems and training activities. Considerable heterogeneity in the access to invasive arrhythmia therapies still exists across the five geographical ESC regions. In 2016, the device implantation rates per million population were 3-6 times higher in the Western region than in the non-European and Eastern ESC member countries. Catheter ablation activity was highest in the Western countries followed by the Northern and Southern areas. In the non-European countries, atrial fibrillation ablation rate was more than tenfold lower than in the European countries. On the other hand, the growth rate over the past ten years was highest in the non-European and Eastern countries. In some Eastern European countries with relative low gross domestic product the procedure rates exceeded the average values. CONCLUSION: It was encouraging to note that during the past decade the growth in invasive arrhythmia therapies was greatest in the areas historically with relatively low activity. Nevertheless, there is substantial disparity and continued efforts are needed to improve harmonization of cardiac arrhythmia therapies in the ESC area.

Device-detected atrial fibrillation and risk for stroke: an analysis of >10,000 patients from the SOS AF project (Stroke preventiOn Strategies based on Atrial Fibrillation information from implanted devices).

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the association between maximum daily atrial fibrillation (AF) burden and risk of ischaemic stroke. BACKGROUND: Cardiac implanted electronic devices (CIEDs) enhance detection of AF, providing a comprehensive measure of AF burden. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: A pooled analysis of individual patient data from five prospective studies was performed. Patients without permanent AF, previously implanted with CIEDs, were included if they had at least 3 months of follow-up. A total of 10 016 patients (median age 70 years) met these criteria. The risk of ischaemic stroke associated with pre-specified cut-off points of AF burden (5 min, 1, 6, 12, and 23 h, respectively) was assessed. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 24 months, 43% of 10 016 patients experienced at least 1 day with at least 5 min of AF burden and for them the median time to the maximum AF burden was 6 months (inter-quartile range: 1.3-14). A Cox regression analysis adjusted for the CHADS2 score and anticoagulants at baseline demonstrated that AF burden was an independent predictor of ischaemic stroke. Among the thresholds of AF burden that we evaluated, 1 h was associated with the highest hazard ratio (HR) for ischaemic stroke, i.e. 2.11 (95% CI: 1.22-3.64, P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Device-detected AF burden is associated with an increased risk of ischaemic stroke in a relatively unselected population of CIEDs patients. This finding may add to the basis for timely and clinically appropriate decision-making on anticoagulation treatment.

Cardiac and vascular effects of fingolimod: mechanistic basis and clinical implications.

Fingolimod, a sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor (S1PR) modulator, was the first oral disease-modifying therapy approved for relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis; it reduces autoreactive lymphocytes' egress from lymphoid tissues by down-regulating S1PRs. Sphingosine-1-phosphate signaling is implicated in a range of physiologic functions, and S1PRs are expressed differentially in various tissues, including the cardiovascular system. Modulation of S1PRs on cardiac cells provides an explanation for the transient effects of fingolimod on heart rate and atrioventricular conduction at initiation of fingolimod therapy, and for the mild but more persistent effects on blood pressure observed in some patients on long-term treatment. This review describes the nontherapeutic actions of fingolimod in the context of sphingosine-1-phosphate signaling in the cardiovascular system, as well as providing a summary of the associated clinical implications useful to physicians considering initiation of fingolimod therapy in patients. A transient reduction in heart rate (mean decrease of 8 beats per minute) and, less commonly, a temporary delay in atrioventricular conduction observed in some patients when initiating fingolimod therapy are both due to activation of S1PR subtype 1 on cardiac myocytes. These effects are a reflection of fingolimod first acting as a full S1PR agonist and thereafter functioning as an S1PR antagonist after down-regulation of S1PR subtype 1 at the cell surface. For most individuals, first-dose effects of fingolimod are asymptomatic, but all patients need to be monitored for at least 6 hours after the first dose, in accordance with the label recommendations.

Impact of patient selection in clinical trials: application of ROCKET AF and ARISTOTLE criteria in GARFIELD-AF.

BACKGROUND: The extent to which differences in results from Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (ARISTOTLE) and Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial (ROCKET) atrial fibrillation (AF)-the landmark trials for the approval of apixaban and rivaroxaban, respectively, for non-valvular AF-were influenced by differences in their protocols is debated. The potential influence of selection criteria on trial results was assessed by emulating these trials in data from the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the Field (GARFIELD)-AF registry. METHODS: Vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and non-vitamin K oral antagonist (NOAC) users from GARFIELD-AF were selected according to eligibility for the original ARISTOTLE or ROCKET AF trials. A propensity score overlap weighted Cox model was used to emulate trial randomisation between treatment groups. Adjusted HRs for stroke or systemic embolism (SE) within 2 years of enrolment were calculated for each NOAC versus VKA. RESULTS: Among patients on apixaban, rivaroxaban and VKA, 2570, 3560 and 8005 were eligible for ARISTOTLE, respectively, and 1612, 2005 and 4368, respectively, for ROCKET AF. When selecting for ARISTOTLE criteria, apixaban users had significantly lower stroke/SE risk versus VKA (HR 0.57; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.94) while no reduction was observed with rivaroxaban (HR 0.98; 95% CI 0.68 to 1.40). When selecting for ROCKET AF criteria, safety and efficacy versus VKA were similar across the NOACs. CONCLUSION: Apixaban and rivaroxaban showed similar results versus VKA in high-risk patients selected according to ROCKET AF criteria, whereas differences emerged when selecting for the more inclusive ARISTOTLE criteria. Our results highlight the importance of trial selection criteria in interpreting trial results and underline the problems faced in comparing treatments across rather than within clinical trials.

GARFIELD-AF: risk profiles, treatment patterns and 2-year outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation in Germany, Austria and Switzerland (DACH) compared to 32 countries in other regions worldwide.

BACKGROUND: The Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF) is a worldwide non-interventional study of stroke prevention in patients with non-valvular AF. METHODS AND RESULTS: 52,080 patients with newly diagnosed AF were prospectively enrolled from 2010 to 2016. 4121 (7.9%) of these patients were recruited in DACH [Germany (n = 3567), Austria (n = 465) and Switzerland (n = 89) combined], and 47,959 patients were from 32 countries in other regions worldwide (ORW). Hypertension was most prevalent in DACH and ORW (85.3% and 75.6%, respectively). Diabetes, hypercholesterolaemia, carotid occlusive disease and vascular disease were more prevalent in DACH patients vs ORW (27.6%, 49.4%, 5.8% and 29.0% vs 21.7%, 40.9%, 2.8% and 24.5%). The use of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) increased more in DACH over time. Management of vitamin K antagonists was suboptimal in DACH and ORW (time in therapeutic range of INR ≥ 65% in 44.6% and 44.4% of patients or ≥ 70% in 36.9% and 36.0% of patients, respectively). Adjusted rates of cardiovascular mortality and MI/ACS were higher in DACH while non-haemorrhagic stroke/systemic embolism was lower after 2-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Similarities and dissimilarities in AF management and clinical outcomes are seen in DACH and ORW. The increased use of NOAC was associated with a mismatch of risk-adapted anticoagulation (over-and-undertreatment) in DACH. Suboptimal control of INR requires educational activities in both regional groups. Higher rates of cardiovascular death in DACH may reflect the higher risk profile of these patients and lower rates of non-haemorrhagic stroke could be associated with increased NOAC use.

Country and health expenditure are major predictors of withholding anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation patients at high risk of stroke.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) at high thromboembolic risk recommend oral anticoagulants (OACs) for preventing stroke and systemic embolism (SE). The reasons for guideline non-adherence are still unclear. AIM: The aim is to identify clinical, demographic and non-patient characteristics associated with withholding OAC in patients with AF at high stroke risk. METHODS: Patients in the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-AF, newly diagnosed with AF between March 2010 and August 2016, and with CHA2DS2-VASc Score≥2 (excluding sex), were grouped by OAC treatment at enrolment. Factors associated with OAC non-use were analysed by multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 40 416 eligible patients, 12 126 (30.0%) did not receive OACs at baseline. Globally, OAC prescription increased over time, from 60.4% in 2010-2011 to 74.7% in 2015-2016. Country of enrolment was the major predictor for OAC withholding (χ2-df=2576). Clinical predictors of OAC non-use included type of AF (χ2-df=404), history of bleeding (χ2-df=263) and vascular disease (χ2-df=99). OACs were used most frequently around the age of 75 years and decreasingly with younger as well as older age beyond 75 years (χ2-df=148). Non-cardiologists (χ2-df=201) and emergency room physicians (χ2-df=14) were less likely to prescribe OACs. OAC prescription correlated positively with country health expenditure. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately one out of three AF patients did not receive OAC, while eligible according to the guidelines. Country of enrolment was the major determinant of anticoagulation strategy, while higher country health expenditure was associated with lower likelihood of withholding anticoagulation.

Determinants and clinical outcomes of patients who refused anticoagulation: findings from the global GARFIELD-AF registry.

OBJECTIVE: There is a substantial incidence of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) not receiving anticoagulation. The reasons for not receiving anticoagulation are generally attributed to clinician's choice, however, a proportion of AF patients refuse anticoagulation. The aim of our study was to investigate factors associated with patient refusal of anticoagulation and the clinical outcomes in these patients. METHODS: Our study population comprised patients in the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD (GARFIELD-AF) registry with CHA2DS2-VASc≥2. A logistic regression was developed with predictors of patient anticoagulation refusal identified by least absolute shrinkage and selection operator methodology. Patient demographics, medical and cardiovascular history, lifestyle factors, vital signs (body mass index, pulse, systolic and diastolic blood pressure), type of AF and care setting at diagnosis were considered as potential predictors. We also investigated 2-year outcomes of non-haemorrhagic stroke/systemic embolism (SE), major bleeding and all-cause mortality in patients who refused versus patients who received and patients who did not receive anticoagulation for other reasons. RESULTS: Out of 43 154 AF patients, who were at high risk of stroke, 13 283 (30.8%) did not receive anticoagulation at baseline. The reason for not receiving anticoagulation was unavailable for 38.7% (5146/13 283); of the patients with a known reason for not receiving anticoagulation, 12.5% (1014/8137) refused anticoagulation. Diagnosis in primary care/general practitioner, Asian ethnicity and presence of vascular disease were strongly associated with a higher risk of patient refusal of anticoagulation. Patient refusal of anticoagulation was associated with a higher risk of non-haemorrhagic stroke/SE (adjusted HR (aHR) 1.16 (95% CI 0.77 to 1.76)) but lower all-cause mortality (aHR 0.59 (95% CI 0.43 to 0.80)) compared with patients who received anticoagulation. The GARFIELD-AF mortality score corroborated this result. CONCLUSION: The data suggest patient refusal of anticoagulation is a missed opportunity to prevent AF-related stroke. Further research is required to understand the patient profile and mortality outcome of patients who refuse anticoagulation.