Background

Stroke prophylaxis in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) in the era of direct oral anticoagulants is not well characterized. Using data from American Heart Association Get With The Guidelines-AFIB, we sought to evaluate oral anticoagulation (OAC) use at discharge among AF patients with concomitant HF.

Methods and results

AF patients with a diagnosis of HF hospitalized from January 2013 to March 2017 were included. We compared patient characteristics and use of OAC at discharge among patients with reduced (redundant ejection fraction [EF], EF≤40%), borderline (40%2DS₂-VASc score was 5 (Q1, Q3; 3, 6) among all patients and higher among those with HF with preserved EF than HF with reduced EF (5 [4, 6] versus 4 [3, 5]; P<0.0001). The proportion of eligible patients discharged on OAC was 94.9%, with 43.6% discharged on warfarin and 50.7% discharged on direct oral anticoagulants. A higher proportion of patients with HF with reduced EF and HF with borderline EF were discharged on direct oral anticoagulants than with HF with preserved EF, but the difference was small (52.8%, 53.1% versus 48.5%, respectively; P=0.0002). EF group was not significantly associated with a patient's OAC use at discharge.

Conclusions

In the context of American Heart Association Get With The Guidelines-AFIB, a quality improvement program, the rate of use of OAC at discharge in eligible AF patients with HF was almost 95%. To our knowledge, these rates represent some of the highest use of appropriate anticoagulation for patients in a national registry to date.

BACKGROUND: The Get With The Guidelines - Atrial Fibrillation (GWTG-AFIB) Registry uses achievement and quality measures to improve the care of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). We sought to evaluate overall and site-level variation in attainment of these measures among sites participating in the GWTG-AFIB Registry. METHODS: From the GWTG-AFIB registry, we included patients with AF admitted between 1/3/2013 and 6/30/2019. We described patient-level attainment and variation in attainment across sites of 6 achievement measures with 1) defect-free scores (percent of patients with all eligible measures attained), and 2) composite opportunity scores (percent of all eligible patient measures attained). We also described attainment of 11 quality measures at the patient-level. RESULTS: Among 80,951 patients hospitalized for AF (age 70±13 years, 47.0% female; CHA2DS2-VASc 3.6±1.8) at 132 sites. Site-level defect-free scores ranged from 4.7% to 85.8% (25th, 50th, 75th percentile: 32.7%, 52.1%, 64.4%). Composite opportunity scores ranged from 39.4% to 97.5% (25th, 50th, 75th: 68.1%, 80.3%, 87.1%). Attainment was notably low for the following quality measures: 1) aldosterone antagonist prescription when ejection fraction ≤35% (29% of those eligible); and 2) avoidance of antiplatelet therapy with OAC in patients without coronary/peripheral artery disease (81% of those eligible). CONCLUSIONS: Despite high overall attainment of care measures across GWTG-AFIB registry sites, large site variation was present with meaningful opportunities to improve AF care beyond OAC prescription, including but not limited to prescription of aldosterone antagonists in those with AF and systolic dysfunction and avoidance of non-indicated adjunctive antiplatelet therapy.

Background Knowledge is scarce regarding how multimorbidity is associated with therapeutic decisions regarding oral anticoagulants (OACs) in patients with atrial fibrillation. Methods and Results We conducted a cross-sectional study of hospitalized patients with atrial fibrillation using the Get With The Guidelines-Atrial Fibrillation registry from 2013 to 2019. We identified patients ≥65 years and eligible for OAC therapy. Using 16 available comorbidity categories, patients were stratified by morbidity burden. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to determine the odds of receiving OAC prescription at discharge by morbidity burden. We included 34 174 patients with a median (interquartile range) age of 76 (71-83) years, 56.6% women, and 41.9% were not anticoagulated at admission. Of these patients, 38.6% had 0 to 2 comorbidities, 50.7% had 3 to 5 comorbidities, and 10.7% had ≥6 comorbidities. The overall discharge OAC prescription was high (85.6%). The prevalence of patients with multimorbidity increased from 59.7% in 2014 to 64.3% in 2019 (P trend=0.002). Using 0 to 2 comorbidities as the reference, the adjusted odds ratio (95% CI) of OAC prescription were 0.93 (0.82, 1.05) for patients with 3 to 5 comorbidities and 0.72 (0.60, 0.86) for patients with ≥6 comorbidities. In those with ≥6 comorbidities, the most common reason for nonprescription of OACs were frequent falls/frailty (31.0%). Conclusions In a contemporary quality-of-care database of hospitalized patients with atrial fibrillation eligible for OAC therapy, multimorbidity was common. A higher morbidity burden was associated with a lower odds of OAC prescription. This highlights the need for interventions to improve adherence to guideline-recommended anticoagulation in multimorbid patients with atrial fibrillation.

Background

Catheter ablation is an increasingly used treatment for symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF). However, there are limited prospective, nationwide data on patient selection and procedural characteristics. This study describes patient characteristics, techniques, treatment patterns, and safety outcomes of patients undergoing AF ablation.

Methods

A total of 3139 patients undergoing AF ablation between 2016 and 2018 in the Get With The Guidelines-Atrial Fibrillation registry from 24 US centers were included. Patient demographics, medical history, procedural details, and complications were abstracted. Differences between paroxysmal and patients with persistent AF were compared using Pearson χ² and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests.

Results

Patients undergoing AF ablation were predominantly male (63.9%) and White (93.2%) with a median age of 65. Hypertension was the most common comorbidity (67.6%), and patients with persistent AF had more comorbidities than patients with paroxysmal AF. Drug refractory, paroxysmal AF was the most common ablation indication (class I, 53.6%) followed by drug refractory, persistent AF (class I, 41.8%). Radiofrequency ablation with contact force sensing was the most common ablation modality (70.5%); 23.7% of patients underwent cryoballoon ablation. Pulmonary vein isolation was performed in 94.6% of de novo ablations; the most common adjunctive lesions included left atrial roof or posterior/inferior lines, and cavotricuspid isthmus ablation. Complications were uncommon (5.1%) and were life-threatening in 0.7% of cases.

Conclusions

More than 98% of AF ablations among participating sites are performed for class I or class IIA indications. Contact force-guided radiofrequency ablation is the dominant technique and pulmonary vein isolation the principal lesion set. In-hospital complications are uncommon and rarely life-threatening.

Background

Optical sensors on wearable devices can detect irregular pulses. The ability of a smartwatch application (app) to identify atrial fibrillation during typical use is unknown.

Methods

Participants without atrial fibrillation (as reported by the participants themselves) used a smartphone (Apple iPhone) app to consent to monitoring. If a smartwatch-based irregular pulse notification algorithm identified possible atrial fibrillation, a telemedicine visit was initiated and an electrocardiography (ECG) patch was mailed to the participant, to be worn for up to 7 days. Surveys were administered 90 days after notification of the irregular pulse and at the end of the study. The main objectives were to estimate the proportion of notified participants with atrial fibrillation shown on an ECG patch and the positive predictive value of irregular pulse intervals with a targeted confidence interval width of 0.10.

Results

We recruited 419,297 participants over 8 months. Over a median of 117 days of monitoring, 2161 participants (0.52%) received notifications of irregular pulse. Among the 450 participants who returned ECG patches containing data that could be analyzed - which had been applied, on average, 13 days after notification - atrial fibrillation was present in 34% (97.5% confidence interval [CI], 29 to 39) overall and in 35% (97.5% CI, 27 to 43) of participants 65 years of age or older. Among participants who were notified of an irregular pulse, the positive predictive value was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.76 to 0.92) for observing atrial fibrillation on the ECG simultaneously with a subsequent irregular pulse notification and 0.71 (97.5% CI, 0.69 to 0.74) for observing atrial fibrillation on the ECG simultaneously with a subsequent irregular tachogram. Of 1376 notified participants who returned a 90-day survey, 57% contacted health care providers outside the study. There were no reports of serious app-related adverse events.

Conclusions

The probability of receiving an irregular pulse notification was low. Among participants who received notification of an irregular pulse, 34% had atrial fibrillation on subsequent ECG patch readings and 84% of notifications were concordant with atrial fibrillation. This siteless (no on-site visits were required for the participants), pragmatic study design provides a foundation for large-scale pragmatic studies in which outcomes or adherence can be reliably assessed with user-owned devices. (Funded by Apple; Apple Heart Study ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03335800.).

Acquired cardiovascular conditions are a leading cause of maternal morbidity and mortality. A growing number of pregnant women have acquired and heritable cardiovascular conditions and cardiovascular risk factors. As the average age of childbearing women increases, the prevalence of acute coronary syndromes, cardiomyopathy, and other cardiovascular complications in pregnancy are also expected to increase. This document, the third of a 5-part series, aims to provide practical guidance on the management of such conditions encompassing pre-conception through acute management and considerations for delivery.

AIM: The 2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 12, 2022, to November 3, 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through November 2022, during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables, where appropriate. STRUCTURE: Atrial fibrillation is the most sustained common arrhythmia, and its incidence and prevalence are increasing in the United States and globally. Recommendations from the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and the 2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic risk assessment, anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion, atrial fibrillation catheter or surgical ablation, and risk factor modification and atrial fibrillation prevention have been developed.

AIM: The 2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 12, 2022, to November 3, 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through November 2022, during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables, where appropriate. STRUCTURE: Atrial fibrillation is the most sustained common arrhythmia, and its incidence and prevalence are increasing in the United States and globally. Recommendations from the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and the 2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic risk assessment, anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion, atrial fibrillation catheter or surgical ablation, and risk factor modification and atrial fibrillation prevention have been developed.