International trends in clinical characteristics and oral anticoagulation treatment for patients with atrial fibrillation: Results from the GARFIELD-AF, ORBIT-AF I, and ORBIT-AF II registries.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia in the world. We aimed to provide comprehensive data on international patterns of AF stroke prevention treatment. METHODS: Demographics, comorbidities, and stroke risk of the patients in the GARFIELD-AF (n=51,270), ORBIT-AF I (n=10,132), and ORBIT-AF II (n=11,602) registries were compared (overall N=73,004 from 35 countries). Stroke prevention therapies were assessed among patients with new-onset AF (≤6 weeks). RESULTS: Patients from GARFIELD-AF were less likely to be white (63% vs 89% for ORBIT-AF I and 86% for ORBIT-AF II) or have coronary artery disease (19% vs 36% and 27%), but had similar stroke risk (85% CHA2DS2-VASc ≥2 vs 91% and 85%) and lower bleeding risk (11% with HAS-BLED ≥3 vs 24% and 15%). Oral anticoagulant use was 46% and 57% for patients with a CHA2DS2-VASc=0 and 69% and 87% for CHA2DS2-VASc ≥2 in GARFIELD-AF and ORBIT-AF II, respectively, but with substantial geographic heterogeneity in use of oral anticoagulant (range: 31%-93% [GARFIELD-AF] and 66%-100% [ORBIT-AF II]). Among patients with new-onset AF, non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant use increased over time to 43% in 2016 for GARFIELD-AF and 71% for ORBIT-AF II, whereas use of antiplatelet monotherapy decreased from 36% to 17% (GARFIELD-AF) and 18% to 8% (ORBIT-AF I and II). CONCLUSIONS: Among new-onset AF patients, non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant use has increased and antiplatelet monotherapy has decreased. However, anticoagulation is used frequently in low-risk patients and inconsistently in those at high risk of stroke. Significant geographic variability in anticoagulation persists and represents an opportunity for improvement

Digoxin Use and Subsequent Outcomes Among Patients in a Contemporary Atrial Fibrillation Cohort

BackgroundAlthough digoxin has long been used to treat atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF), its safety remains controversial.ObjectivesThis study sought to describe digoxin use over time in patients with AF who were stratified by the presence or absence of HF, to characterize the predictors of digoxin use and initiation, and to correlate digoxin use with outcomes.MethodsLongitudinal patterns of digoxin use and its association with a variety of outcomes were assessed in a prospective outpatient registry conducted at 174 U.S. sites with enrollment from June 2010 to August 2011.ResultsAmong 9,619 patients with AF and serial follow-up every 6 months for up to 3 years, 2,267 (23.6%) received digoxin at study enrollment, 681 (7.1%) were initiated on digoxin during follow-up, and 6,671 (69.4%) were never prescribed digoxin. After adjusting for other medications, heart rate was 72.9 beats/min among digoxin users and 71.5 beats/min among nonusers (p < 0.0001). Prevalent digoxin use at registry enrollment was not associated with subsequent onset of symptoms, hospitalization, or mortality (in patients with HF, adjusted hazard ratio [HR] for death: 1.04; without HF, HR: 1.22). Incident digoxin use during follow-up was not associated with subsequent death in patients with HF (propensity adjusted HR: 1.05), but was associated with subsequent death in those without HF (propensity adjusted HR: 1.99).ConclusionsAfter adjustment for detailed clinical factors, digoxin use in registry patients with AF had a neutral association with outcomes under most circumstances. Because of the multiple conflicting observational reports about digoxin's safety and possible concerns in specific clinical situations, a large pragmatic trial of digoxin therapy in AF is needed

Predictors of intracranial hemorrhage in patients with atrial fibrillation treated with oral anticoagulants: Insights from the GARFIELD-AF and ORBIT-AF registries.

BACKGROUND: An unmet need exists to reliably predict the risk of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) treated with oral anticoagulants (OACs). HYPOTHESIS: An externally validated model improves ICH risk stratification. METHODS: Independent factors associated with ICH were identified by Cox proportional hazard modeling, using pooled data from the GARFIELD-AF (Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation) and ORBIT-AF (Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation) registries. A predictive model was developed and validated by bootstrap sampling and by independent data from the Danish National Patient Register. RESULTS: In the combined training data set, 284 of 53 878 anticoagulated patients had ICH over a 2-year period (0.31 per 100 person-years; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.28-0.35). Independent predictors of ICH included: older age, prior stroke or transient ischemic attack, concomitant antiplatelet (AP) use, and moderate-to-severe chronic kidney disease (CKD). Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) were associated with a significantly higher risk of ICH compared with non-VKA oral anticoagulants (NOACs) (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.61; 95% CI: 1.25-2.08; p = .0002). The ability of the model to discriminate individuals in the training set with and without ICH was fair (optimism-corrected C-statistic: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.65-0.71) and outperformed three previously published methods. Calibration between predicted and observed ICH probabilities was good in both training and validation data sets. CONCLUSIONS: Age, prior ischemic events, concomitant AP therapy, and CKD were important risk factors for ICH in anticoagulated AF patients. Moreover, ICH was more frequent in patients receiving VKA compared to NOAC. The new validated model is a step toward mitigating this potentially lethal complication

Heart rate is associated with progression of atrial fibrillation, independent of rhythm.

ObjectiveAtrial fibrillation (AF) often progresses from paroxysmal or persistent to more sustained forms, but the rate and predictors of AF progression in clinical practice are not well described.MethodsUsing the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of AF, we analysed the incidence and predictors of progression and tested the discrimination and calibration of the HATCH (hypertension, age, TIA/stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart failure) and CHA₂DS₂VASc scores for identifying AF progression.ResultsAmong 6235 patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF at baseline, 1479 progressed, during follow-up (median 18 (IQR 12-24) months). These patients were older and had more comorbidities than patients who did not progress (CHADS₂ 2.3±1.3 vs 2.1±1.3, p<0.0001). At baseline, patients with AF progression were more often on a rate control as opposed to a rhythm control strategy (66 vs 56%, p<0.0001) and had higher heart rate (72(64-80) vs 68(60-76) bpm, p<0.0001). The strongest predictors of AF progression were AF on the baseline ECG (OR 2.30, 95% CI 1.95 to 2.73, p<0.0001) and increasing age (OR 1.16, 95% CI1.09 to 1.24, p<0.0001, per 10 increase), while patients with lower heart rate (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.89, p<0.0001, per 10 decrease ≤80) were less likely to progress. There was no significant interaction between rhythm on baseline ECG and heart rate (p=0.71). The HATCH and CHA₂DS₂VASc scores had modest discriminatory power for AF progression (C-indices 0.55 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.58) and 0.55 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.57)).ConclusionsWithin 1.5 years, almost a quarter of the patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF progress to a more sustained form. Progression is strongly associated with heart rate, and age

Heart rate is associated with progression of atrial fibrillation, independent of rhythm

Objective Atrial fibrillation (AF) often progresses from paroxysmal or persistent to more sustained forms, but the rate and predictors of AF progression in clinical practice are not well described. Methods Using the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of AF, we analysed the incidence and predictors of progression and tested the discrimination and calibration of the HATCH (hypertension, age, TIA/stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart failure) and CHA(2)DS(2)VASc scores for identifying AF progression. Results Among 6235 patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF at baseline, 1479 progressed, during follow-up (median 18 (IQR 12-24) months). These patients were older and had more comorbidities than patients who did not progress (CHADS(2) 2.3 +/- 1.3 vs 2.1 +/- 1.3, p<0.0001). At baseline, patients with AF progression were more often on a rate control as opposed to a rhythm control strategy (66 vs 56%, p<0.0001) and had higher heart rate (72(64-80) vs 68 (60-76) bpm, p<0.0001). The strongest predictors of AF progression were AF on the baseline ECG (OR 2.30, 95% CI 1.95 to 2.73, p<0.0001) and increasing age (OR 1.16, 95% CI1.09 to 1.24, p<0.0001, per 10 increase), while patients with lower heart rate (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.89, p<0.0001, per 10 decrease <= 80) were less likely to progress. There was no significant interaction between rhythm on baseline ECG and heart rate (p=0.71). The HATCH and CHA(2)DS(2)VASc scores had modest discriminatory power for AF progression (C-indices 0.55 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.58) and 0.55 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.57)). Conclusions Within 1.5 years, almost a quarter of the patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF progress to a more sustained form. Progression is strongly associated with heart rate, and age

Digoxin Use and Subsequent Outcomes Among Patients in a Contemporary Atrial&nbsp;Fibrillation Cohort

BackgroundAlthough digoxin has long been used to treat atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF), its safety remains controversial.ObjectivesThis study sought to describe digoxin use over time in patients with AF who were stratified by the presence or absence of HF, to characterize the predictors of digoxin use and initiation, and to correlate digoxin use with outcomes.MethodsLongitudinal patterns of digoxin use and its association with a variety of outcomes were assessed in a prospective outpatient registry conducted at 174 U.S. sites with enrollment from June 2010 to August 2011.ResultsAmong 9,619 patients with AF and serial follow-up every 6 months for up to 3 years, 2,267 (23.6%) received digoxin at study enrollment, 681 (7.1%) were initiated on digoxin during follow-up, and 6,671 (69.4%) were never prescribed digoxin. After adjusting for other medications, heart rate was 72.9 beats/min among digoxin users and 71.5 beats/min among nonusers (p &lt; 0.0001). Prevalent digoxin use at registry enrollment was not associated with subsequent onset of symptoms, hospitalization, or mortality (in patients with HF, adjusted hazard ratio [HR] for death: 1.04; without HF, HR: 1.22). Incident digoxin use during follow-up was not associated with subsequent death in patients with HF (propensity adjusted HR: 1.05), but was associated with subsequent death in those without HF (propensity adjusted HR: 1.99).ConclusionsAfter adjustment for detailed clinical factors, digoxin use in registry patients with AF had a neutral association with outcomes under most circumstances. Because of the multiple conflicting observational reports about digoxin's safety and possible concerns in specific clinical situations, a large pragmatic trial of digoxin therapy in AF is needed

Outcomes registry for better informed treatment of atrial fibrillation II: Rationale and design of the ORBIT-AF II registry

BackgroundRecent clinical trials have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of several non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) for the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). However, there are limited data on their use and outcomes in routine clinical practice, particularly among patients newly diagnosed as having AF and patients with AF recently transitioned to a NOAC.Methods/designORBIT-AF II is a multicenter, national registry of patients with AF that is enrolling up to 15,000 newly diagnosed patients with AF and/or those with AF recently transitioned to a NOAC from 300 US outpatient practices. These patients will be followed for up to 2 years, including clinical status, outcomes (major adverse cardiovascular events, bleeding), and management of anticoagulation surrounding bleeding events. In addition, detailed data regarding the use of these agents in and around cardiac procedures, their complications, and management of such complications will be collected.ConclusionsThe ORBIT-AF II registry will provide valuable insights into the safety and effectiveness of NOACs used in AF in community practice settings

Patient factors associated with quality of life in atrial fibrillation

BackgroundAs treatment options for atrial fibrillation (AF) increase, more attention is focused on patients' experiences and quality of life (QoL). However, little is known about the factors associated with these outcomes.MethodsThe Atrial Fibrillation Effect on QualiTy-of-life (AFEQT) is a disease-specific QoL tool for AF, with domain and summary scores ranging from 0 (the worst QoL) to 100. Using multivariable linear regression, we evaluated factors associated with baseline AFEQT Summary and Subscale Scores in ORBIT AF, a large, community-based AF registry. Independent associations were reported as coefficient estimates in scores and 95% confidence intervals (CI).ResultsOverall, AFEQT was assessed in 2007 AF outpatients from 99 sites. Median age (IQR) was 76 years (67-82) and 43% were female. The median AFEQT summary score was 82 (67-94). Female sex, younger age, new onset AF, higher heart rate, obstructive sleep apnea, symptomatic heart failure (HF), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and coronary artery disease were all independently associated with reduced QoL. Female sex [Estimate -7.03, 95% CI (-9.31, -4.75)] and new onset versus permanent AF [Estimate -7.44, 95% CI (-11.03, -3.84)] were independently associated with increased symptoms. NYHA Class III or IV HF [Estimate -14.44, 95% CI (-19.46, -8.76)] and female sex [Estimate -7.91, 95% CI (-9.95, -5.88)] were most independently associated with impaired daily activities.ConclusionsQoL in patients with AF varies widely and is associated with several patient factors. Understanding patient factors independently associated with worse QoL can be a foundation for tailoring treatment

Increased Heart Rate Is Associated With Higher Mortality in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation (AF): Results From the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of AF (ORBIT-AF).

BackgroundMost patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) require rate control; however, the optimal target heart rate remains under debate. We aimed to assess rate control and subsequent outcomes among patients with permanent AF.Methods and resultsWe studied 2812 US outpatients with permanent AF in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation. Resting heart rate was measured longitudinally and used as a time-dependent covariate in multivariable Cox models of all-cause and cause-specific mortality during a median follow-up of 24 months. At baseline, 7.4% (n=207) had resting heart rate &lt;60 beats per minute (bpm), 62% (n=1755) 60 to 79 bpm, 29% (n=817) 80 to 109 bpm, and 1.2% (n=33) ≥110 bpm. Groups did not differ by age, previous cerebrovascular disease, heart failure status, CHA2DS2-VASc scores, renal function, or left ventricular function. There were significant differences in race (P=0.001), sinus node dysfunction (P=0.004), and treatment with calcium-channel blockers (P=0.006) and anticoagulation (P=0.009). In analyses of continuous heart rates, lower heart rate ≤65 bpm was associated with higher all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.15 per 5-bpm decrease; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.32; P=0.04). Similarly, increasing heart rate &gt;65 bpm was associated with higher all-cause mortality (adjusted HR, 1.10 per 5-bpm increase; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.15; P&lt;0.0001). This relationship was consistent across endpoints and in a broader sensitivity analysis of permanent and nonpermanent AF patients.ConclusionsAmong patients with permanent AF, there is a J-shaped relationship between heart rate and mortality. These data support current guideline recommendations, and clinical trials are warranted to determine optimal rate control.Clinical trial registrationURL: http://clinicaltrials.gov/. Unique identifier: NCT01165710

Oral anticoagulation management in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing cardiac implantable electronic device implantation.

BackgroundOral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy is associated with increased periprocedural risks after cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation. Patterns of anticoagulation management involving non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have not been characterized.HypothesisAnticoagulation strategies and outcomes differ by anticoagulant type in patients undergoing CIED implantation.MethodsUsing the nationwide Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation, we assessed how atrial fibrillation (AF) patients undergoing CIED implantation were cared for and their subsequent outcomes. Outcomes were compared by oral anticoagulant therapy (none, warfarin, or NOAC) as well as by anticoagulation interruption status.ResultsAmong 9129 AF patients, 416 (5%) underwent CIED implantation during a median follow-up of 30 months (interquartile range, 24-36). Of these, 60 (14%) had implantation on a NOAC. Relative to warfarin therapy, those on a NOAC were younger (70.5 years [range, 65-77.5 years] vs 77 years [range, 70-82 years]), had less valvular heart disease (15.0% vs 31.3%), higher creatinine clearance (67.3 [range, 59.7-99.0] vs 65.8 [range, 50.0-91.6]), were more likely to have persistent AF (26.7% vs 22.9%), and use concomitant aspirin (51.7% vs 35.2%). OAC therapy was commonly interrupted for CIED in 64% (n = 183 of 284) of warfarin patients and 65% (n = 39 of 60) of NOAC patients. Many interrupted patients received intravenous bridging anticoagulation: 33/183 (18%) interrupted warfarin and 4/39 (10%) interrupted NOAC patients. Thirty-day periprocedure bleeding and stroke adverse events were infrequent.ConclusionsManagement of anticoagulation among AF patients undergoing CIED implantation is highly variable, with OAC being interrupted in more than half of both warfarin- and NOAC-treated patients. Bleeding and stroke events were infrequent in both warfarin and NOAC-treated patients