Atrial high-rate episodes: prevalence, stroke risk, implications for management, and clinical gaps in evidence

Self-terminating atrial arrhythmias are commonly detected on continuous rhythm monitoring, e.g. by pacemakers or defibrillators. It is unclear whether the presence of these arrhythmias has therapeutic consequences. We sought to summarize evidence on the prevalence of atrial high-rate episodes (AHREs) and their impact on risk of stroke. We performed a comprehensive, tabulated review of published literature on the prevalence of AHRE. In patients with AHRE, but without atrial fibrillation (AF), we reviewed the stroke risk and the potential risk/benefit of oral anticoagulation. Atrial high-rate episodes are found in 10-30% of AF-free patients. Presence of AHRE slightly increases stroke risk (0.8% to 1%/year) compared with patients without AHRE. Atrial high-rate episode of longer duration (e.g. those >24 h) could be associated with a higher stroke risk. Oral anticoagulation has the potential to reduce stroke risk in patients with AHRE but is associated with a rate of major bleeding of 2%/year. Oral anticoagulation is not effective in patients with heart failure or survivors of a stroke without AF. It remains unclear whether anticoagulation is effective and safe in patients with AHRE. Atrial high-rate episodes are common and confer a slight increase in stroke risk. There is true equipoise on the best way to reduce stroke risk in patients with AHRE. Two ongoing trials (NOAH-AFNET 6 and ARTESiA) will provide much-needed information on the effectiveness and safety of oral anticoagulation using non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in patients with AHRE.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Safety and efficacy of dronedarone from clinical trials to real-world evidence: implications for its use in atrial fibrillation.

Efficacy and safety of dronedarone was shown in the ATHENA trial for paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. Further trials revealed safety concerns in patients with heart failure and permanent AF. This review summarizes insights from recent real-world studies and meta-analyses, including reports on efficacy, with focus on liver safety, mortality risk in patients with paroxysmal/persistent AF, and interactions of dronedarone with direct oral anticoagulants. Reports of rapidly progressing liver failure in dronedarone-prescribed patients in 2011 led to regulatory cautions about potential liver toxicity. Recent real-world evidence suggests dronedarone liver safety profile is similar to other antiarrhythmics and liver toxicity could be equally common with many Class III antiarrhythmics. Dronedarone safety concerns (increased mortality in patients with permanent AF) were raised based on randomized controlled trials (RCT) (ANDROMEDA and PALLAS), but comedication with digoxin may have increased the mortality rates in PALLAS, considering the dronedarone-digoxin pharmacokinetic (PK) interaction. Real-world data on apixaban-dronedarone interactions and edoxaban RCT observations suggest no significant safety risks for these drug combinations. Median trough plasma concentrations of dabigatran 110 mg during concomitant use with dronedarone are at acceptable levels, while PK data on the rivaroxaban-dronedarone interaction are unavailable. In RCTs and real-world studies, dronedarone significantly reduces AF burden and cardiovascular hospitalizations, and demonstrates a low risk for proarrhythmia in patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF. The concerns on liver safety must be balanced against the significant reduction in hospitalizations in patients with non-permanent AF and low risk for proarrhythmias following dronedarone treatment

Real-world utilization of the pill-in-the-pocket method for terminating episodes of atrial fibrillation: data from the multinational Antiarrhythmic Interventions for Managing Atrial Fibrillation (AIM-AF) survey.

AIMS: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained arrhythmia encountered in clinical practice. Episodes may stop spontaneously (paroxysmal AF); may terminate only via intervention (persistent AF); or may persist indefinitely (permanent AF) (see European and American guidelines, referenced below, for more precise definitions). Recently, there has been renewed interest in an approach to terminate AF acutely referred to as 'pill-in-the-pocket' (PITP). The PITP is recognized in both the US and European guidelines as an effective option using an oral antiarrhythmic drug for acute conversion of acute/recent-onset AF. However, how PITP is currently used has not been systematically evaluated. METHODS AND RESULTS: The recently published Antiarrhythmic Interventions for Managing Atrial Fibrillation (AIM-AF) survey included questions regarding current PITP usage, stratified by US vs. European countries surveyed, by representative countries within Europe, and by cardiologists vs. electrophysiologists. This manuscript presents the data from this planned sub-study. Our survey revealed that clinicians in both the USA and Europe consider PITP in about a quarter of their patients, mostly for recent-onset AF with minimal or no structural heart disease (guideline appropriate). However, significant deviations exist. See the Graphical abstract for a summary of the data. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight the frequent use of PITP and the need for further physician education about appropriate and optimal use of this strategy

AIM-AF: A Physician Survey in the United States and Europe.

Background Guideline recommendations are the accepted reference for selection of therapies for rhythm control of atrial fibrillation (AF). This study was designed to understand physicians' treatment practices and adherence to guidelines. Methods and Results The AIM-AF (Antiarrhythmic Medication for Atrial Fibrillation) study was an online survey of clinical cardiologists and electrophysiologists that was conducted in the United States and Europe (N=629). Respondents actively treated ≥30 patients with AF who received drug therapy, and had received or were referred for ablation every 3 months. The survey comprised 96 questions on physician demographics, AF types, and treatment practices. Overall, 54% of respondents considered guidelines to be the most important nonpatient factor influencing treatment choice. Across most queried comorbidities, amiodarone was selected by 60% to 80% of respondents. Other nonadherent usage included sotalol by 21% in patients with renal impairment; dofetilide initiation (16%, United States only) outside of hospital; class Ic agents by 6% in coronary artery disease; and dronedarone by 8% in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Additionally, rhythm control strategies were frequently chosen in asymptomatic AF (antiarrhythmic drugs [AADs], 35%; ablation, 8%) and subclinical AF (AADs, 38%; ablation, 13%). Despite guideline algorithms emphasizing safety first, efficacy (48%) was selected as the most important consideration for AAD choice, followed by safety (34%). Conclusions Despite surveyed clinicians recognizing the importance of guidelines, nonadherence was frequently observed. While deviation may be reasonable in selected patients, in general, nonadherence has the potential to compromise patient safety. These findings highlight an underappreciation of the safe use of AADs, emphasizing the need for interventions to support optimal AAD selection

European Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Survey II: rationale and design

The Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT) Survey II is a 6 months snapshot survey initiated by two ESC Associations, the European Heart Rhythm Association and the Heart Failure Association, which is designed to describe clinical practice regarding implantation of CRT devices in a broad sample of hospitals in 47 ESC member countries. The large volume of clinical and demographic data collected should reflect current patient selection, implantation, and follow-up practice and provide information relevant for assessing healthcare resource utilization in connection with CRT. The findings of this survey should permit representative benchmarking both nationally and internationally across Europ

European Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Survey II: rationale and design

The Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT) Survey II is a 6 months snapshot survey initiated by two ESC Associations, the European Heart Rhythm Association and the Heart Failure Association, which is designed to describe clinical practice regarding implantation of CRT devices in a broad sample of hospitals in 47 ESC member countries. The large volume of clinical and demographic data collected should reflect current patient selection, implantation, and follow-up practice and provide information relevant for assessing healthcare resource utilization in connection with CRT. The findings of this survey should permit representative benchmarking both nationally and internationally across Europ

Real-World Utilization of the Pill-In-The-Pocket Method for Terminating Episodes of Atrial Fibrillation: Data From the Multinational Antiarrhythmic Interventions for Managing Atrial Fibrillation (AIM-AF) Survey

AIMS: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained arrhythmia encountered in clinical practice. Episodes may stop spontaneously (paroxysmal AF); may terminate only via intervention (persistent AF); or may persist indefinitely (permanent AF) (see European and American guidelines, referenced below, for more precise definitions). Recently, there has been renewed interest in an approach to terminate AF acutely referred to as \u27pill-in-the-pocket\u27 (PITP). The PITP is recognized in both the US and European guidelines as an effective option using an oral antiarrhythmic drug for acute conversion of acute/recent-onset AF. However, how PITP is currently used has not been systematically evaluated. METHODS AND RESULTS: The recently published Antiarrhythmic Interventions for Managing Atrial Fibrillation (AIM-AF) survey included questions regarding current PITP usage, stratified by US vs. European countries surveyed, by representative countries within Europe, and by cardiologists vs. electrophysiologists. This manuscript presents the data from this planned sub-study. Our survey revealed that clinicians in both the USA and Europe consider PITP in about a quarter of their patients, mostly for recent-onset AF with minimal or no structural heart disease (guideline appropriate). However, significant deviations exist. See the Graphical abstract for a summary of the data. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight the frequent use of PITP and the need for further physician education about appropriate and optimal use of this strategy