Rhythm versus rate control in patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation – Observations from the GARFIELD-AF registry

© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).[Background] Investigate real-world outcomes of early rhythm versus rate control in patients with recent onset atrial fibrillation.[Methods] The Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-AF (GARFIELD-AF) is an international multi-centre, non-interventional prospective registry of newly diagnosed (≤6 weeks’ duration) atrial fibrillation patients at risk for stroke. Patients were stratified according to treatment initiated at baseline (≤48 days post enrolment), and outcome risks evaluated by overlap propensity weighted Cox proportional-hazards models.[Results] Of 45,382 non-permanent atrial fibrillation patients, 23,858 (52.6 %) received rhythm control and 21,524 (47.4 %) rate control. Rhythm-controlled patients had lower median age (68.0 [Q1;Q3: 60.0;76.0] versus 73.0 [65.0;79.0]), fewer histories of stroke/transient ischemic attack/systemic embolism (9.4 % versus 13.0 %), and lower expected probabilities of death (median GARFIELD-AF death score 4.0 [2.3;7.5] versus 5.1 [2.8;9.2]). The two groups had the same median CHA2DS2-VASc scores (3.0 [2.0;4.0]) and similar proportions of anticoagulated patients (rhythm control: 66.0 %, rate control: 65.5 %). The propensity-score-weighted hazard ratios of rhythm vs rate control (reference) were 0.85 (95 % CI: 0.79–0.92, p-value < 0.0001) for all-cause mortality, 0.84 (0.72–0.97, p-value 0.020) for non-haemorrhagic stroke/systemic embolism and 0.90 (0.78–1.04, p-value 0.164) for major bleeding.[Conclusion] Rhythm control strategy was initiated in about half of the patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular non-permanent atrial fibrillation. After balancing confounders, significantly lower risks of all-cause mortality and non-haemorrhagic stroke were observed in patients who received early rhythm control.This work was supported by the Thrombosis Research Institute (London, UK).Peer reviewe

Risk profile, antithrombotic treatment and clinical outcomes of patients in Nordic countries with atrial fibrillation - results from the GARFIELD-AF registry

Aims: The objective was to evaluate the clinical characteristics, management and two-year outcomes of patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation at risk for stroke in Nordic countries.Methods: We examined the baseline characteristics, antithrombotic treatment, and two-year clinical outcomes of patients from four Nordic countries.Results: A total of 52,080 patients were enrolled in the GARFIELD-AF. Out of 29,908 European patients, 2,396 were recruited from Nordic countries. The use of oral anticoagulants, alone or in combination with antiplatelet (AP), was higher in Nordic patients in all CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc categories: 0-1 (72.8% vs 60.3%), 2-3 (78.7% vs 72.9%) and >= 4 (79.2% vs 74.1%). In Nordic patients, NOAC +/- AP was more frequently prescribed (32.0% vs 27.7%) and AP monotherapy was less often prescribed (10.4% vs 18.2%) when compared with Non-Nordic European patients. The rates (per 100 patient years) of all-cause mortality and non-haemorrhagic stroke/systemic embolism (SE) were similar in Nordic and Non-Nordic European patients [3.63 (3.11-4.23) vs 4.08 (3.91-4.26), p value = .147] and [0.98 (0.73-1.32) vs 1.02 (0.93-1.11), p value = .819], while major bleeding was significantly higher [1.66 (1.32-2.09) vs 1.01 (0.93-1.10), p value Conclusion: Nordic patients had significantly higher major bleeding than Non-Nordic-European patients. In contrast, rates of all-cause mortality and non-haemorrhagic stroke/SE were comparable.</p

Diagnostics of Hereditary Connective Tissue Disorders by Genetic Next-Generation Sequencing

Aims: This quality analysis study was designed to review the indications, reports, and clinical consequences of 438 diagnostic next-generation sequencing (NGS) gene panel analyses for hereditary connective tissue disorders (HCTD). Methods: Molecular analyses were retrieved from laboratory databases and patient records, and compared to the clinical information in the requisition and classified according to the Human Phenotype Ontology. Results: In 123 of 438 NGS analyses, 156 sequence variants were reported in 33 of 54 genes analyzed. NGS analyses and, in some cases, postanalytic assessment resulted in identification of pathogenic variants in 40 (9%) of patients, and variants of uncertain significance were identified in 83 (19%) of cases analyzed. While cardiovascular abnormalities were the most common phenotype noted in the requisitions, no specific organ system could be identified in which the reported symptoms provided an actionable indication for the analysis. Certain health issues recorded in the patients' records were found to be frequently left out of requisitions. Conclusions: The interpretation of genetic sequence variants continues to be a significant challenge in HCTD. Although not associated with the highest diagnostic yield, cardiovascular disease and family history may be suitable indications for NGS due to the clinical consequences of the identification of a known or likely causative sequence variant for a vascular HCTD in patients and relatives

Cardioversion safety - Are we doing enough?

There is a considerable periprocedural risk of thromboembolic events in atrial fibrillation patients undergoing cardioversion, and treatment with anticoagulants is therefore a hallmark of cardioversion safety. Based on retrospective subgroup analyses and prospective studies, non-vitamin K anticoagulants are at least as efficient as vitamin K-antagonists in preventing thromboembolic complications after cardioversion. The risk of thromboembolic complications after cardioversion very much depends on the comorbidities in a given patient, and especially heart failure, diabetes, and age &amp;#x3e;75 years carry a markedly increased risk. Cardioversion has been considered safe within a 48-h time window after onset of atrial fibrillation without prior treatment with anticoagulants, but recent studies have set this practice into question based on e.g. erratic debut assessment of atrial fibrillation. Therefore, a simple and more practical approach is here suggested, where early cardioversion is performed only in hemodynamically unstable patients