Left Ventricular Diastolic Indices and Their Impact on Outcomes in Patients with Recently Diagnosed Atrial Fibrillation

Background: Early identification of atrial fibrillation (AF) patients at risk for heart failure (HF) remains critical for improving their outcomes. We aimed to investigate whether indices of left ventricular diastolic dysfunction (LVDD) can stratify AF patients without clinical history of HF. Methods: We extracted 1775 patients’ data from a prospective cohort that consecutively recruited recently recognized AF patients with ejection fraction ≥50%. We categorized patients as LVDD grade 0 (none) to 3 (severe) based on mitral deceleration time and E/e’ per the American Society of Echocardiography recommendation. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause death, stroke, and HF hospitalization during the 2-year follow-up. We also investigated the Atrial Fibrillation Effects on QualiTy-of-Life (AFEQT) scores. Results: Overall, 857 (48.3%) had mild or higher LVDD. Incidence of primary outcomes increased in parallel with LVDD grading (1.8%, 2.8%, 6.5%, and 8.1% for grades 0–3, respectively, p < 0.001), and the presence of grade 3 LVDD was an independent predictor of the primary outcome (adjusted HR 2.28 (vs. grade 0), 95%CI 1.13–4.60). Furthermore, patients with LVDD had lower AFEQT scores at the enrollment and 1-year follow-up. Conclusions: LVDD indices were associated with adverse clinical outcomes and patients’ perceived health status in a recently diagnosed AF cohort without HF

Prognostic Implications and Efficacy of Catheter Ablation by Atrial Fibrillation Type

Background Catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) is preferred for paroxysmal AF (PAF) but selectively performed in patients with persistent AF (PersAF). This study aimed to investigate the prognostic differences and consequences of CA based on the AF type. Methods and Results Data from a multicenter AF cohort study were analyzed, categorizing patients as PAF or PersAF according to AF duration (≤7 or >7 days, respectively). A composite of all‐cause death, heart failure hospitalization, stroke, and bleeding events during 2‐year follow‐up and changes in the Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality‐of‐life score were compared. Additionally, propensity score matching was performed to compare clinical outcomes of patients with and without CA in both AF types. Among 2788 patients, 51.6% and 48.4% had PAF and PersAF, respectively. Patients with PersAF had a higher incidence of the composite outcome (12.8% versus 7.2%; P<0.001) and smaller improvements in Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality‐of‐life scores than those with PAF. After adjusting for baseline characteristics, PersAF was an independent predictor of adverse outcomes (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.30–1.78], P=0.031) and was associated with poor improvements in Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality‐of‐life scores. Propensity score matching analysis showed that the CA group had significantly fewer adverse events than the medication group among patients with PAF (odds ratio, 0.31 [95% CI, 0.18–0.68]; P=0.002). Patients with PersAF showed a similar but nonsignificant trend. Conclusions PersAF is a risk factor for worse clinical outcomes, including patients' health status. CA is associated with fewer adverse events, although careful consideration is required based on the AF type