Browsing by Author "Chao, Tze-Fan (35335897300)"

[No abstract available]

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a major public health problem1 with global prevalence rates (per 1000000 population) in 2010 being 596.2 (95% uncertainty interval (UI), 558.4-636.7) in men and 373.1 (95% UI, 347.9-402.2) in women; the incidence rates increased to 77.5 (95% UI, 65.2-95.4) in men and 59.5 (95% UI, 49.9-74.9) in women.2 Worldwide, AF in association with valvular heart disease (VHD) is also common, and management strategies for this group of patients have been less addressed by randomized trials. The latter have largely focused on 'non-valvular AF' patients leading to major uncertainties over how to define (and treat) such patients. There is also an important heterogeneity in the definition of valvular and non-valvular AF.3 Some physicians assume that any valve disease should be considered as 'valvular' AF. Others consider that only mechanical valve prosthesis and rheumatic mitral stenosis should be defined as 'valvular' AF. The term valvular AF has been arbitrarily applied and the 2016 ESC guidelines have avoided the term 'valvular AF' and refer simply to 'AF related to hemodynamically significant mitral stenosis or prosthetic mechanical heart valves'.4 AF clearly leads to an incremental risk for thromboembolism in patients with mitral valve stenosis, but there are limited data for other valvular diseases. Another proposal is to use the acronym MARM-AF as a simple acronym to designate 'Mechanical and Rheumatic Mitral AF' as an alternative to term 'valvular AF' to designate the clinical scenarios for which at the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are not indicated.5 For this document we recognize the uncertainty in terminology, and our scope largely relates to AF related to 'hemodynamically significant' rheumatic VHD (ie. severe enough to impact on patient's survival or necessitates an intervention or surgery) or prosthetic mechanical heart valves. Nonetheless, thrombo-embolic (TE) risk varies according to valve lesion and may be associated with CHA2DS2VASc score risk factor components, rather than the valve disease per se being causal.6,7 TE risk may also be influenced not only by type but also the severity of the lesion. For example, the degree of mitral regurgitation may matter when it comes to risk of TE as some studies suggest that mild (Grade 1) mitral regurgitation is associated with a 2.7-fold increased risk of stroke/TE, while severe forms may possibly have a 'protective' effect (HR = 0.45 for stroke and 0.27 for LA stasis.8 An appropriate definition of 'valvular AF' would need to identify a subgroup of patients with similar pathophysiology of thrombo-embolism, TE risk, and treatment strategies6,9; however, this would be challenging given the major heterogeneity of the condition. This consensus document proposes that the term 'valvular AF' is outdated and given that any definition ultimately relates to the evaluated practical use of oral anticoagulation (OAC) type, we propose a functional EHRA (EvaluatedHeartvalves, Rheumatic orArtificial) categorization in relation to the type of OAC use in patients with AF, as follows:Evaluated Heartvalves, Rheumatic or Artificial (EHRA) Type 1,which refers to AF patients with 'VHD needing therapy with a Vitamin K antagonist (VKA)' © The Author 2016.

Whilst there is a clear clinical benefit of oral anticoagulation (OAC) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) in reducing the risks of thromboembolism, major bleeding events (especially intracranial bleeds) may still occur and be devastating. The decision to initiate and continue anticoagulation is often based on a careful assessment of both the thromboembolism and bleeding risk. The more common and validated bleeding risk factors have been used to formulate bleeding risk stratification scores, but thromboembolism and bleeding risk factors often overlap. Also, many factors that increase bleeding risk are transient and modifiable, such as variable international normalized ratio values, surgical procedures, vascular procedures, or drug–drug and food–drug interactions. Bleeding risk is also not a static ‘one off’ assessment based on baseline factors but is dynamic, being influenced by ageing, incident comorbidities, and drug therapies. In this Consensus Document, we comprehensively review the published evidence and propose a consensus on bleeding risk assessments in patients with AF and VTE, with the view to summarizing ‘best practice’ when approaching antithrombotic therapy in these patients. We address the epidemiology and size of the problem of bleeding risk in AF and VTE, review established bleeding risk factors, and summarize definitions of bleeding. Patient values and preferences, balancing the risk of bleeding against thromboembolism are reviewed, and the prognostic implications of bleeding are discussed. We propose consensus statements that may help to define evidence gaps and assist in everyday clinical practice. © 2022 Authors. All rights reserved.

While there is a clear clinical benefit of oral anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) in reducing the risks of thromboembolism, major bleeding events (especially intracranial bleeds) may still occur and be devastating. The decision for initiating and continuing anticoagulation is often based on a careful assessment of both thromboembolism and bleeding risk. The more common and validated bleeding risk factors have been used to formulate bleeding risk stratification scores, but thromboembolism and bleeding risk factors often overlap. Also, many factors that increase bleeding risk are transient and modifiable, such as variable international normalized ratio values, surgical procedures, vascular procedures, or drug-drug and food-drug interactions. Bleeding risk is also not a static one-off assessment based on baseline factors but is dynamic, being influenced by aging, incident comorbidities, and drug therapies. In this executive summary of a European and Asia-Pacific Expert Consensus Paper, we comprehensively review the published evidence and propose a consensus on bleeding risk assessments in patients with AF and VTE, with a view to summarizing best practice when approaching antithrombotic therapy in these patients. We address the epidemiology and size of the problem of bleeding risk in AF and VTE, and review established bleeding risk factors and summarize definitions of bleeding. Patient values and preferences, balancing the risk of bleeding against thromboembolism, are reviewed, and the prognostic implications of bleeding are discussed. We propose consensus statements that may help to define evidence gaps and assist in everyday clinical practice. © 2022 Georg Thieme Verlag. All rights reserved.

Stroke prevention is central to the management of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) which has moved towards a more holistic or integrative care approach. The published evidence suggests that management of AF patients following such a holistic approach based on the Atrial fibrillation Better Care (ABC) pathway is associated with a lower risk of stroke and adverse events. Risk assessment, re-assessment and use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are important for stroke prevention in AF. The stroke and bleeding risks of AF patients are not static and should be re-assessed regularly. Bleeding risk assessment is to address and mitigate modifiable bleeding risk factors, and to identify high bleeding risk patients for early review and follow-up. Well-controlled comorbidities and healthy lifestyles also play an important role to achieve a better clinical outcome. Digital health solutions are increasingly relevant in the diagnosis and management of patients with AF, with the potential to improve stroke prevention. In this review, we provide an update on stroke prevention in AF, including importance of holistic management, risk assessment/re-assessment, and stroke prevention for special AF populations. Evidence-based and structured management of AF patients would reduce the risk of stroke and other adverse events. © 2023 The Author(s)

[No abstract available]

[No abstract available]

[No abstract available]

[No abstract available]

The field of observational studies or “real world studies” is in rapid development with many new techniques introduced and increased understanding of traditional methods. For this reason the current paper provides an overview of current methods with focus on new techniques. Some highlights can be emphasized: We provide an overview of sources of data for observational studies. There is an overview of sources of bias and confounding. Next There is an overview of causal inference techniques that are increasingly used. The most commonly used techniques for statistical modelling are reviewed with focus on the important distinction of risk versus prediction. The final section provides examples of common problems with reporting observational data. © The Author(s) 2019.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the commonest sustained cardiac rhythm disorder associated with an increased risk of stroke and systemic embolic events. The prevention of stroke using oral anticoagulants has been a pivotal component of AF management. The purpose of this review is to summarize recent advances in the treatment and prevention of stroke in AF over the last 5 years. We performed a comprehensive structured literature search using MEDLINE for publications from 11th March 2015 through to 31st December 2020. We focused mainly on primarily published research articles and systematic reviews including updates in different international guidelines. We found that improved awareness and detection of AF and use of clinical risk stratification are central to the identification of patients at risk of stroke who would benefit from oral anticoagulation. The recommendation of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants over warfarin in both efficacy and safety perspective is represented in all international guidelines. Beyond stroke prevention, there is a move to more holistic or integrated care management of AF, which has been shown to improve outcomes. We conclude that stroke prevention remains a dominant part of the management of patients with AF. Not all stroke risk factors carry equal weight, and many require additional scrutiny (e.g. severity of CAD, type of diabetes, duration of hypertension). The utilization of clinical risk scores to help decision-making should take into account that these scores are mere simplification tools to aid decision-making and the additional clinical benefit with more complex risk scores and addition of biomarkers is limited. Also, stroke and bleeding risks are dynamic and require regular review. Instead of arbitrarily categorizing patients into (artificial) low, moderate, and high stroke risk strata, anticoagulation should be offered to all patients with AF unless they are low risk with no risk factors for stroke. Stroke prevention is also part of the proactive, integrated care approach to holistic management of patients with AF, which can be simplified in the ABC (Atrial fibrillation Better Care) pathway: ‘A’ Avoid stroke/Anticoagulation; ‘B’ Better symptom management emphasising patient-centred symptom directed decisions on rate or rhythm control strategies; and ‘C’ refers to Cardiovascular risk and comorbidity optimization, including lifestyle changes and attention to patient values and preferences, as well as the psychological morbidity associated with AF. © 2021