23 research outputs found

    Why Are Outcomes Different for Registry Patients Enrolled Prospectively and Retrospectively? Insights from the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF).

    Get PDF
    Background: Retrospective and prospective observational studies are designed to reflect real-world evidence on clinical practice, but can yield conflicting results. The GARFIELD-AF Registry includes both methods of enrolment and allows analysis of differences in patient characteristics and outcomes that may result. Methods and Results: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and ≥1 risk factor for stroke at diagnosis of AF were recruited either retrospectively (n = 5069) or prospectively (n = 5501) from 19 countries and then followed prospectively. The retrospectively enrolled cohort comprised patients with established AF (for a least 6, and up to 24 months before enrolment), who were identified retrospectively (and baseline and partial follow-up data were collected from the emedical records) and then followed prospectively between 0-18 months (such that the total time of follow-up was 24 months; data collection Dec-2009 and Oct-2010). In the prospectively enrolled cohort, patients with newly diagnosed AF (≤6 weeks after diagnosis) were recruited between Mar-2010 and Oct-2011 and were followed for 24 months after enrolment. Differences between the cohorts were observed in clinical characteristics, including type of AF, stroke prevention strategies, and event rates. More patients in the retrospectively identified cohort received vitamin K antagonists (62.1% vs. 53.2%) and fewer received non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (1.8% vs . 4.2%). All-cause mortality rates per 100 person-years during the prospective follow-up (starting the first study visit up to 1 year) were significantly lower in the retrospective than prospectively identified cohort (3.04 [95% CI 2.51 to 3.67] vs . 4.05 [95% CI 3.53 to 4.63]; p = 0.016). Conclusions: Interpretations of data from registries that aim to evaluate the characteristics and outcomes of patients with AF must take account of differences in registry design and the impact of recall bias and survivorship bias that is incurred with retrospective enrolment. Clinical Trial Registration: - URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier for GARFIELD-AF (NCT01090362)

    Risk profiles and one-year outcomes of patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation in India: Insights from the GARFIELD-AF Registry.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: The Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF) is an ongoing prospective noninterventional registry, which is providing important information on the baseline characteristics, treatment patterns, and 1-year outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). This report describes data from Indian patients recruited in this registry. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 52,014 patients with newly diagnosed AF were enrolled globally; of these, 1388 patients were recruited from 26 sites within India (2012-2016). In India, the mean age was 65.8 years at diagnosis of NVAF. Hypertension was the most prevalent risk factor for AF, present in 68.5% of patients from India and in 76.3% of patients globally (P < 0.001). Diabetes and coronary artery disease (CAD) were prevalent in 36.2% and 28.1% of patients as compared with global prevalence of 22.2% and 21.6%, respectively (P < 0.001 for both). Antiplatelet therapy was the most common antithrombotic treatment in India. With increasing stroke risk, however, patients were more likely to receive oral anticoagulant therapy [mainly vitamin K antagonist (VKA)], but average international normalized ratio (INR) was lower among Indian patients [median INR value 1.6 (interquartile range {IQR}: 1.3-2.3) versus 2.3 (IQR 1.8-2.8) (P < 0.001)]. Compared with other countries, patients from India had markedly higher rates of all-cause mortality [7.68 per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval 6.32-9.35) vs 4.34 (4.16-4.53), P < 0.0001], while rates of stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding were lower after 1 year of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Compared to previously published registries from India, the GARFIELD-AF registry describes clinical profiles and outcomes in Indian patients with AF of a different etiology. The registry data show that compared to the rest of the world, Indian AF patients are younger in age and have more diabetes and CAD. Patients with a higher stroke risk are more likely to receive anticoagulation therapy with VKA but are underdosed compared with the global average in the GARFIELD-AF. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01090362

    0131: Strategy of anticoagulation in pacemaker and ICD replacement procedure in real life. The French Electra survey

    Get PDF
    Aimto evaluate routine French implanters strategy in device replacement in patients under anticoagulation for atrial Fibrillation (AF pts).MethodA questionnaire was e-mailed to 140 French implanters.Results102 aswers were obtained. In AF patients, admission is on day of procedure D0 (10%) or D-1(80%) whether pts are on vitamine K antagonist(VKA) or New Oral AntiCoagulant (NOAC). In AF pts under VKA, only 4%bridge to Low Weight Heparine (LWH) or Unfractionated Heparine (UH) while treatment is interrupted without substitution (wos) by 61% and continued without interruption by 32%. In AF pts under NOAC, only 5%bridge to UH or LWH while treatment is interrupted on D-3 (13%), D-2(25%), D-1(44%). When interrupted, NOAC are resumed at D0 (23%), D+1(54%), D+2(10%), D+3(3%).ConclusionsMost of implanters hospitalize AF pts at D-1 of replacement procedure. Short discontinuation (VKA, NOAC) or uninterruption (VKA) is prefered to bridging strategy

    A randomized study of defibrillator lead implantations in the right ventricular mid-septum versus the apex: the SEPTAL study.

    No full text
    International audienceINTRODUCTION: The study was designed to evaluate the feasibility and performance of right ventricular (RV) mid-septal versus apical implantable defibrillator (ICD) lead placement. METHODS AND RESULTS: SEPTAL is a randomized, noninferiority trial, which randomly assigned patients to implantation of ICD leads in the RV mid-septum versus apex, with a primary objective of comparing the implant success rate of implant at each site, based on strict electrical predefined criteria. We also compared the (1) pacing lead characteristics, (2) rates of appropriate and inappropriate ICD therapies, and (3) all-cause mortality between the 2 sites at 1 year. The trial enrolled 215 patients (mean age = 59.7 ± 12.4 years, mean LVEF = 34.0 ± 14.2%, 84.2% men), of whom 148 (68.8%) presented with ischemic heart disease. The ICD indication was primary prevention in 117 patients (54.4%). The lead was successfully implanted in 96/107 patients (89.7%) assigned to the RV mid-septum, and in 99/108 (91.7%) assigned to the apex (ns). The 1-year rate of lead-related adverse events was similar in both groups. A total of 8 first inappropriate ICD therapies (7.9%) were delivered in the RV mid-septal group, versus 8 (7.8%) in the apical group (ns), while first appropriate therapies were delivered to 22 (21.4%) and 24 patients (23.8%), respectively (ns). All-cause mortality was 7.9% in the RV mid-septal versus 2.9% in the RV apical group (ns). CONCLUSION: This study confirmed the technical feasibility and noninferior performance of ICD leads implanted in the RV mid-septum versus the apex

    Outcomes after cryoballoon or radiofrequency ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation: a multicentric propensity-score matched study

    Get PDF
    International audiencePURPOSE:Recent data show no benefit of additional ablation beyond pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) in persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). Evidence suggests that radiofrequency energy (RF) and cryoballoon (CRYO) have comparable efficacy for PVI. We aimed to assess the outcomes after a single catheter ablation procedure, comparing PVI using CRYO vs. RF ablation for PVI plus additional ablation in a cohort of patients with persistent AF.METHODS:In this prospective multicenter propensity score-matched comparison, 59 consecutive patients undergoing CRYO ablation of persistent AF were matched to 59 patients treated with RF from November 2010 to June 2012.RESULTS:During a mean follow-up of 15.6 ± 11.5 months, 43.2 % of patients presented atrial arrhythmia relapse after a blanking period of 3 months, which was comparable between the two groups (40.7 % in CRYO vs. 45.8 % in RF, Log rank P = 0.14; HR = 0.67, 95 %CI 0.38-1.16, P = 0.15), despite the fact that 52.5 % of RF patients add additional complex fractionated atrial electrogram ablation, as well as left atrial linear ablation in over two-thirds (roof line in 67.8 % and mitral isthmus in 32.2 %). On multivariate Cox regression, only AF duration in years (HR = 1.10, 95 %CI 1.01-1.10, P = 0.04) was a predictor of relapse. Patients undergoing RF ablation presented a numerically, but non-significantly, lower complication rate (6.8 vs 10.2 %, P = 0.51).CONCLUSION:In our multicenter experience, freedom from atrial arrhythmias was comparable among matched patients treated with CRYO and RF, despite non-significant trends in favor of RF in terms of complications, at the cost of longer procedure times

    Outcomes in Newly Diagnosed Atrial Fibrillation and History of Acute Coronary Syndromes: Insights from GARFIELD-AF

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: Many patients with atrial fibrillation have concomitant coronary artery disease with or without acute coronary syndromes and are in need of additional antithrombotic therapy. There are few data on the long-term clinical outcome of atrial fibrillation patients with a history of acute coronary syndrome. This is a 2-year study of atrial fibrillation patients with or without a history of acute coronary syndromes

    Analysis of Outcomes in Ischemic vs Nonischemic Cardiomyopathy in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation A Report From the GARFIELD-AF Registry

    No full text
    IMPORTANCE Congestive heart failure (CHF) is commonly associated with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF), and their combination may affect treatment strategies and outcomes

    Evolving antithrombotic treatment patterns for patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation

    No full text
    Objective We studied evolving antithrombotic therapy patterns in patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) and >= 1 additional stroke risk factor between 2010 and 2015
    corecore