Occurrence and characteristics of stroke events in the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Sinus Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) study.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a risk factor for stroke, especially when accompanied by other high-risk cardiovascular predictors. The Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) Study was a multicenter comparison of high-risk patients with AF who were randomized to either a sinus rhythm control or a rate control strategy. METHODS: Physicians were encouraged to continue anticoagulation therapy for their patients. Patients in the sinus rhythm control group could stop warfarin sodium therapy after 4 (preferably a minimum of 12) weeks if they maintained sinus rhythm while receiving an antiarrhythmic drug. RESULTS: The AFFIRM Study enrolled 4060 patients. Mortality was the same in both groups. Two hundred eleven patients (8.2%) had a stroke event. Ischemic stroke occurred in 157 patients (6.3%), primary intraparenchymal hemorrhage in 34 (1.2%), and subdural or subarachnoid hemorrhage in 24 (0.8%). The most frequently determined ischemic stroke mechanism was cardioembolic (35/71 [49%]). Treatment assignment had no significant effect on the occurrence of ischemic stroke. Patients in AF at the time of the stroke event had a 60% greater chance of having an ischemic stroke, and those taking warfarin at the time of follow-up had a 69% decrease in the risk of having an ischemic stroke. CONCLUSIONS: In the AFFIRM Study, stroke rates were not significantly different in the rate control and sinus rhythm control arms. However, several clinical and therapeutic variables were associated with stroke risk. In patients with a history of AF at high risk for stroke or death, the presence of AF increases the risk of having a stroke, and warfarin therapy reduces the risk of having a stroke. The beneficial effect of warfarin therapy is seen not only in patients in AF but also in patients with a history of AF but who presumably remain in sinus rhythm.

Analysis of cause-specific mortality in the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) study.

BACKGROUND: Expectations that reestablishing and maintaining sinus rhythm in patients with atrial fibrillation might improve survival were disproved in the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) study. This report describes the cause-specific modes of death in the AFFIRM treatment groups. METHODS AND RESULTS: All deaths in patients enrolled in AFFIRM underwent blinded review by the AFFIRM Events Committee, and a mode of death was assigned. In AFFIRM, 2033 patients were randomized to a rhythm-control strategy and 2027 patients to a rate-control strategy. During a mean follow-up of 3.5 years, there were 356 deaths in the rhythm-control patients and 310 deaths in the rate-control patients (P=0.07). In the rhythm-control group, 129 patients (9%) died of a cardiac cause, and in the rate-control group, 130 patients (10%) died (P=0.95). Both groups had similar rates of arrhythmic and nonarrhythmic cardiac deaths. The numbers of vascular deaths were similar in the 2 groups: 35 (3%) in the rhythm-control group and 37 (3%) in the rate-control group (P=0.82). There were no differences in the rates of ischemic stroke and central nervous system hemorrhage. In the rhythm-control group, there were 169 noncardiovascular deaths (47.5% of the total number of deaths), whereas in the rate-control arm, there were 113 noncardiovascular deaths (36.5% of the total number of deaths) (P=0.0008). Differences in noncardiovascular death rates were due to pulmonary and cancer-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Management of atrial fibrillation with a rhythm-control strategy conferred no advantage over a rate-control strategy in cardiac or vascular mortality and may be associated with an increased noncardiovascular death rate.

Lessons from the Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation trials.

Atrial fibrillation predisposes to left atrial thrombus formation and carries a sixfold increased risk for stroke. Antithrombotic therapies are the mainstay for stroke prevention. The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke-sponsored Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation (SPAF) studies assessed the value of warfarin, aspirin, and their combination for preventing stroke in six multicenter trials involving 3950 participants. This review presents the major results and implications, which offer unique perspectives on antithrombotic therapies for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. Warfarin and aspirin reduce stroke. Anticoagulation substantially benefits high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation, while many younger patients with atrial fibrillation have a low stroke rate when given aspirin. Pathogenetic and transesophageal echocardiographic correlations shed light on mechanisms by which antithrombotic agents prevent stroke. Warfarin inhibits formation of atrial appendage thrombi and markedly reduces cardioembolic strokes, while aspirin primarily prevents smaller, noncardioembolic strokes. The SPAF III stroke risk stratification scheme has been validated for identifying patients with high versus moderate versus low risk for stroke. Women with atrial fibrillation benefit from anticoagulation significantly more than men do. Many elderly patients with recurrent paroxysmal atrial fibrillation have high rates of stroke. Antithrombotic prophylaxis should be individualized on the basis of the estimated risk for stroke during aspirin therapy and the risk for bleeding during anticoagulation. Overall, nearly one third of patients with atrial fibrillation are low risk and should be treated with aspirin, and about one third are high risk and should receive warfarin if it can be given safely. For patients at moderate risk for stroke, patient preferences and access to reliable anticoagulation monitoring are particularly relevant.