Major Outcomes in Atrial Fibrillation Patients with One Risk Factor: Impact of Time in Therapeutic Range

BACKGROUND: The benefits and harms of oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy in patients with only one stroke risk factor (i.e. CHA2DS2-VASc= 1 in males, or 2 in females) has been subject of debate. METHODS: We analysed all patients with only one stroke risk factor from the merged datasets of SPORTIF III and V trials. Anticoagulation control was defined according to time in therapeutic range (TTR). RESULTS: Of the original trial cohort, 1,097 patients had only one stroke risk factor. Stroke/systemic thromboembolic event had an incidence of 0.9 per 100 patient-years, with an incidence of 1.6 per 100 patient-years for all-cause death and 2.3%/patient-years for the composite outcome of stroke/systemic thromboembolic event/all-cause death. There were no significant differences in the risk for stroke/systemic thromboembolic event between sexes, nor between the different stroke risk factors amongst these atrial fibrillation patients with only one stroke risk factor. Cox regression analysis in patients treated with warfarin only found TTR to be inversely associated with stroke/systemic thromboembolic event (p=0.034) and all-cause death (p=0.015). Chronic heart failure was significantly associated with the outcome of all-cause death (p=0.0019) and the composite outcome of stroke/systemic thromboembolic event/all-cause death (p=0.021). There was a significant inverse linear association between TTR and the cumulative risk for both stroke/systemic thromboembolic event and all-cause death (both p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In atrial fibrillation patients with only one additional stroke risk factor (i.e. CHA2DS2-VASc= 1 in males or 2 in females), rates of major adverse events (stroke/systemic thromboembolic event, mortality) were high, despite anticoagulation. TTR in warfarin-treated patients was inversely associated with the occurrence of both stroke/systemic thromboembolic event and all-cause death

Reviews Can We Predict Stroke in Atrial Fibrillation?

Stroke prevention with appropriate thromboprophylaxis still remains central to the management of atrial fibrillation (AF). Nonetheless, stroke risk in AF is not homogeneous, but despite stroke risk in AF being a continuum, prior stroke risk stratification schema have been used to &apos;artificially&apos; categorise patients into low, moderate and high risk stroke strata, so that the patients at highest risk can be identified for warfarin therapy. Data from recent large cohort studies show that by being more inclusive, rather than exclusive, of common stroke risk factors in the assessment of the risk for stroke and thromboembolism in AF patients, we can be so much better in assessing stroke risk, and in optimising thromboprophylaxis with the resultant reduction in stroke and mortality. Thus, there has been a recent paradigm shift towards getting better at identifying the &apos;truly low risk&apos; patients with AF who do not even need antithrombotic therapy, whilst those with one or more stroke risk factors can be treated with oral anticoagulation, whether as well-controlled warfarin or one or the new oral anticoagulant drugs. The new European guidelines on AF have evolved to deemphasise the artificial low/moderate/high risk strata (as they were not very predictive of thromboembolism, anyway) and stressed a risk factor based approach (within the CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score) given that stroke risk is a continuum. Those categorised as &apos;low risk&apos; using the CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score are &apos;truly low risk&apos; for thromboembolism, and the CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score performs as good as-and possibly better--than the CHADS 2 score in predicting those at &apos;high risk&apos;. Indeed, those patients with a CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score = 0 are &apos;truly low risk&apos; so that no antithrombotic therapy is preferred, whilst in those with a CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score of 1 or more, oral anticoagulation is recommended or preferred. Given that guidelines should be applicable for &gt;80% of the time, for &gt;80% of the patients, this stroke risk assessment approach covers the majority of the patients we commonly seen in everyday clinical practice, and considers the common stroke risk factors seen in these patients. The European guidelines also do stress that antithrombotic therapy is necessary in all patients with AF unless they are age &lt;65 years and truly low risk. Indeed, some patients with &apos;female gender&apos; only as a single risk factor (but still CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score of 1, due to gender) do not need anticoagulation, especially if they fulfil the criterion of &apos;&apos;age &lt;65 and lone AF, and very low risk&apos;&apos;. In the European and Canadian guidelines, bleeding risk assessment is also emphasised, and the simple validated HAS-BLED score is recommended. A HAS-BLED score of ≥3 represents a sufficiently high risk such that caution and/or regular review of a patient is needed. It also makes the clinician think of correctable common bleeding risk factors, and the availability of such a score allows an informed assessment of bleeding risk in AF patients, when antithrombotic therapy is being initiated

Consumer-Led Screening for Atrial Fibrillation:A Report From the mAFA-II Trial Long-Term Extension Cohort

BACKGROUND: There are limited data on mobile health detection of prevalent atrial fibrillation (AF) and its related risk factors over time. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to report the trends on prevalent AF detection over time and risk factors, with a consumer-led photoplethysmography screening approach. METHODS: 3,499,461 subjects aged over 18 years, who use smart devices (Huawei Technologies Co.) were enrolled between October 26, 2018, and December 1, 2021. RESULTS: Among 2,852,217 subjects for AF screening, 12,244 subjects (0.43%; 83.2% male, mean age 57 ± 15 years) detected AF episodes. When compared with 2018, the risk (adjusted HRs, 95% CI) for monitored prevalent AF increased significantly for subjects when monitoring started in 2020 (adjusted HR: 1.34; 95% CI: 1.27-1.40; P 93% confirmation of detected AF episodes even for the low-risk general population, highlighting the increased risk for detecting prevalent AF and the need for modification of OSA that increase AF susceptibility. (Mobile Health [mHealth] Technology for Improved Screening, Patient Involvement and Optimizing Integrated Care in Atrial Fibrillation [mAFA (mAF-App) II study]; ChiCTR-OOC-17014138