Browsing by Author "Halvorsen, Sigrun (9039942100)"

In 2014, a joint consensus document dealing with the management of antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and/or undergoing percutaneous coronary or valve interventions was published, which represented an effort of the European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Thrombosis, European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI), and European Association of Acute Cardiac Care (ACCA) endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) and Asia-Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS). Since publication of this document, additional data from observational cohorts, randomized controlled trials, and percutaneous interventions as well as new guidelines have been published. Moreover, new drugs and devices/interventions are also available, with an increasing evidence base. The approach to managing AF has also evolved towards a more integrated or holistic approach. In recognizing these advances since the last consensus document, EHRA, WG Thrombosis, EAPCI, and ACCA, with additional contributions from HRS, APHRS, Latin America Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS), and Cardiac Arrhythmia Society of Southern Africa (CASSA), proposed a focused update, to include the new data, with the remit of comprehensively reviewing the available evidence and publishing a focused update consensus document on the management of antithrombotic therapy in AF patients presenting with ACS and/or undergoing percutaneous coronary or valve interventions, and providing up-to-date consensus recommendations for use in clinical practice. European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2018. For permissions.

[No abstract available]

[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.

Background: The safety and efficacy of antithrombotic regimens may differ between patients with atrial fibrillation who have acute coronary syndromes (ACS), treated medically or with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and those undergoing elective PCI. Methods: Using a 2×2 factorial design, we compared apixaban with vitamin K antagonists and aspirin with placebo in patients with atrial fibrillation who had ACS or were undergoing PCI and were receiving a P2Y12 inhibitor. We explored bleeding, death and hospitalization, as well as death and ischemic events, by antithrombotic strategy in 3 prespecified subgroups: Patients with ACS treated medically, patients with ACS treated with PCI, and those undergoing elective PCI. Results: Of 4614 patients enrolled, 1097 (23.9%) had ACS treated medically, 1714 (37.3%) had ACS treated with PCI, and 1784 (38.8%) had elective PCI. Apixaban compared with vitamin K antagonist reduced International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding in patients with ACS treated medically (hazard ratio [HR], 0.44 [95% CI, 0.28-0.68]), patients with ACS treated with PCI (HR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.52-0.89]), and patients undergoing elective PCI (HR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.64-1.04]; Pinteraction=0.052) and reduced death or hospitalization in the ACS treated medically (HR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.54-0.92]), ACS treated with PCI (HR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.74-1.06]), and elective PCI (HR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.72-1.04]; Pinteraction=0.345) groups. Compared with vitamin K antagonists, apixaban resulted in a similar effect on death and ischemic events in the ACS treated medically, ACS treated with PCI, and elective PCI groups (Pinteraction=0.356). Aspirin had a higher rate of bleeding than did placebo in patients with ACS treated medically (HR, 1.49 [95% CI, 0.98-2.26]), those with ACS treated with PCI (HR, 2.02 [95% CI, 1.53-2.67]), and those undergoing elective PCI (HR, 1.91 [95% CI, 1.48-2.47]; Pinteraction=0.479). For the same comparison, there was no difference in outcomes among the 3 groups for the composite of death or hospitalization (Pinteraction=0.787) and death and ischemic events (Pinteraction=0.710). Conclusions: An antithrombotic regimen consisting of apixaban and a P2Y12 inhibitor without aspirin provides superior safety and similar efficacy in patients with atrial fibrillation who have ACS, whether managed medically or with PCI, and those undergoing elective PCI compared with regimens that include vitamin K antagonists, aspirin, or both. © 2019 American Heart Association, Inc.

Atrial fibrillation and acute heart failure frequently co-exist and can exacerbate each other. Their combination leads to increased morbidity and mortality. However, the prevalence and significance, as well as the treatment, of atrial fibrillation in acute heart failure are not well studied. Management of atrial fibrillation in acute heart failure requires a multidisciplinary team approach. Treatment of underlying disease(s), identification and treatment of potentially correctable causes and precipitating factors and anticoagulation are crucial. In this article, current evidence on atrial fibrillation in the setting of acute heart failure is summarised. The recommendations on management of atrial fibrillation in the prehospital stage, the treatment of reversible causes, when and how to use rate or rhythm control, maintenance of sinus rhythm, catheter ablation and pacing, anticoagulation, as well as measures on prevention of atrial fibrillation are provided. © The European Society of Cardiology 2020.

Aims: Since its emergence in early 2020, the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has reached pandemic levels, and there have been repeated outbreaks across the globe. The aim of this two part series is to provide practical knowledge and guidance to aid clinicians in the diagnosis and management of cardiovascular (CV) disease in association with COVID-19. Methods and results: A narrative literature review of the available evidence has been performed, and the resulting information has been organized into two parts. The first, which was reported previously, focused on the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and diagnosis of CV conditions that may be manifest in patients with COVID-19. This second part addresses the topics of: care pathways and triage systems and management and treatment pathways, both of the most commonly encountered CV conditions and of COVID-19; and information that may be considered useful to help patients with CV disease (CVD) to avoid exposure to COVID-19. Conclusion: This comprehensive review is not a formal guideline but rather a document that provides a summary of current knowledge and guidance to practicing clinicians managing patients with CVD and COVID-19. The recommendations are mainly the result of observations and personal experience from healthcare providers. Therefore, the information provided here may be subject to change with increasing knowledge, evidence from prospective studies, and changes in the pandemic. Likewise, the guidance provided in the document should not interfere with recommendations provided by local and national healthcare authorities. © The European Society of Cardiology 2021. All rights reserved.

Aims: Since its emergence in early 2020, the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has reached pandemic levels, and there have been repeated outbreaks across the globe. The aim of this two part series is to provide practical knowledge and guidance to aid clinicians in the diagnosis and management of cardiovascular (CV) disease in association with COVID-19. Methods and results: A narrative literature review of the available evidence has been performed, and the resulting information has been organized into two parts. The first, which was reported previously, focused on the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and diagnosis of CV conditions that may be manifest in patients with COVID-19. This second part addresses the topics of: care pathways and triage systems and management and treatment pathways, both of the most commonly encountered CV conditions and of COVID-19; and information that may be considered useful to help patients with CV disease (CVD) to avoid exposure to COVID-19. Conclusion: This comprehensive review is not a formal guideline but rather a document that provides a summary of current knowledge and guidance to practicing clinicians managing patients with CVD and COVID-19. The recommendations are mainly the result of observations and personal experience from healthcare providers. Therefore, the information provided here may be subject to change with increasing knowledge, evidence from prospective studies, and changes in the pandemic. Likewise, the guidance provided in the document should not interfere with recommendations provided by local and national healthcare authorities. © 2021 The European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.

Aims: Since its emergence in early 2020, the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has reached pandemic levels, and there have been repeated outbreaks across the globe. The aim of this two-part series is to provide practical knowledge and guidance to aid clinicians in the diagnosis and management of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in association with COVID-19. Methods and results: A narrative literature review of the available evidence has been performed, and the resulting information has been organized into two parts. The first, reported here, focuses on the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and diagnosis of cardiovascular (CV) conditions that may be manifest in patients with COVID-19. The second part, which will follow in a later edition of the journal, addresses the topics of care pathways, treatment, and follow-up of CV conditions in patients with COVID-19. Conclusion: This comprehensive review is not a formal guideline but rather a document that provides a summary of current knowledge and guidance to practicing clinicians managing patients with CVD and COVID-19. The recommendations are mainly the result of observations and personal experience from healthcare providers. Therefore, the information provided here may be subject to change with increasing knowledge, evidence from prospective studies, and changes in the pandemic. Likewise, the guidance provided in the document should not interfere with recommendations provided by local and national healthcare authorities. © 2021 The European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.

Aims:Since its emergence in early 2020, the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has reached pandemic levels, and there have been repeated outbreaks across the globe. The aim of this two-part series is to provide practical knowledge and guidance to aid clinicians in the diagnosis and management of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in association with COVID-19. Methods and results: A narrative literature review of the available evidence has been performed, and the resulting information has been organized into two parts. The first, reported here, focuses on the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and diagnosis of cardiovascular (CV) conditions that may be manifest in patients with COVID-19. The second part, which will follow in a later edition of the journal, addresses the topics of care pathways, treatment, and follow-up of CV conditions in patients with COVID-19. Conclusion: This comprehensive review is not a formal guideline but rather a document that provides a summary of current knowledge and guidance to practicing clinicians managing patients with CVD and COVID-19. The recommendations are mainly the result of observations and personal experience from healthcare providers. Therefore, the information provided here may be subject to change with increasing knowledge, evidence from prospective studies, and changes in the pandemic. Likewise, the guidance provided in the document should not interfere with recommendations provided by local and national healthcare authorities. © The European Society of Cardiology 2021. All rights reserved.

Aims: To establish a set of quality indicators (QIs) for the cardiovascular (CV) assessment and management of patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery (NCS). Methods and results: The Quality Indicator Committee of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (ESAIC) in collaboration with Task Force members of the 2022 ESC Guidelines on CV assessment and management of patients undergoing NCS followed the ESC methodology for QI development. This included (1) identification, by constructing a conceptual framework of care, of domains of the CV assessment, and management of patients with risk factors or established cardiovascular disease (CVD) who are considered for or undergoing NCS, (2) development of candidate QIs following a systematic literature review, (3) selection of the final set of QIs using a modified Delphi method, and (4) evaluation of the feasibility of the developed QIs. In total, eight main and nine secondary QIs were selected across six domains: (1) structural framework (written policy), (2) patient education and quality of life (CV risk discussion), (3) peri-operative risk assessment (indication for diagnostic tests), (4) peri-operative risk mitigation (use of hospital therapies), (5) follow-up (post-discharge assessment), and (6) outcomes (major CV events). Conclusion: We present the 2022 ESC/ESAIC QIs for the CV assessment and management of patients with risk factors or established CVD who are considered for or are undergoing NCS y. These indicators are supported by evidence from the literature, underpinned by expert consensus, and align with the 2022 ESC Guidelines on CV assessment and management of patients undergoing NCS. © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.

Objectives Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (P-PCI) is the preferred reperfusion option in ST-elevation myocardial infarction, but its benefits become attenuated as time to its potential delivery becomes prolonged. Based on the STrategic Reperfusion Early After Myocardial Infarction trial, we assessed the impact of increasing time delay on outcomes in patients randomised to a pharmacoinvasive strategy (PI) or P-PCI. Methods Thirty-day clinical outcomes were examined according to PCI-related delay (P-RD). Data from hospitals that enrolled >10 randomised patients were used and P-RD categorised as ≤55 min, >55-97 min and >97 min. Results Composite of death/congestive heart failure/ cardiogenic shock/myocardial infarction in PI and P-PCI arms occurred in 10.6% versus 10.3% (≤55 min, p=0.910); 13.9% versus 17.9% (>55-97 min, p=0.148) and 13.5% versus 16.2% (>97 min, p=0.470), respectively. While there was no worsening of outcomes for PI across the P-RD spectrum, this occurred in the P-PCI arm ( p(trend)=0.038). For P-RD ≤55 min, fewer events tended to occur with P-PCI than PI. Conversely, as P-RD increased to >55 min, PI-assigned patients had better outcomes than P-PCI, suggesting an event-free advantage with PI as P-RD increased (p (interaction)=0.094). Analysing P-RD continuously showed that for every 10-min increment there was an increasing trend towards bene fit among PI-assigned patients ( p(interaction)=0.073). Conclusions As P-RD increased, PI outcomes became superior to P-PCI when P-RD is prolonged and exceeds guideline-mandated times. In such circumstances, a PI strategy may provide an alternative reperfusion option. Adverse time delays for delivery of P-PCI should be considered when evaluating reperfusion strategies.

Objective Uncertainty exists concerning the relative merits of pharmacological versus mechanical coronary reperfusion in patients presenting early with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) with extensive myocardium at risk. Accordingly, we investigated whether the extent of baseline ST-segment shift was related to the response of either reperfusion modality in patients with STEMI presenting within 3 h of symptoms. Methods We analysed baseline ECGs from 1859 patients enrolled in the STrategic Reperfusion Early After Myocardial Infarction (STREAM) trial. The sum of ST-segment elevation (ΣSTE) and ST-segment deviation (ΣSTD) was categorised into quartiles and associations with the primary endpoint (30-day death/shock/congestive heart failure/re-myocardial infarction) for each reperfusion strategy (early fibrinolysis vs primary percutaneous coronary intervention) were explored. Results Overall, there was a progressive rise in the 30-day primary endpoint according to quartiles of baseline ΣSTE (10.3% (0-5 mm), 12.4% (5.5-8.5 mm), 12.1% (9-13.5 mm), 17.6% (>14.0 mm), p=0.008) and ΣSTD (9.0% (0-9 mm), 13.5% (9.5-14 mm), 14.7% (14.5-20 mm), 15.3% (>20 mm), p=0.019). Both ΣSTE and ΣSTD were associated with the primary endpoint (ΣSTE: p=0.071; ΣSTD: p=0.024). However, there was no interaction between quartiles of baseline ΣSTE or ΣSTD and efficacy of either reperfusion strategy on the 30-day clinical outcomes (ΣSTE: p (interaction)=0.696; ΣSTD: p (interaction)=0.542). Conclusions These data demonstrate an association between ΣSTE or ΣSTD on the baseline ECG and clinical events at 30 days following reperfusion therapy in STEMI. More importantly, the response to different reperfusion strategies was not influenced by the extent of jeopardised myocardium. Trial registration number NCT00623623; Post-results.