Browsing by Author "Lip, Gregory Y. H (57216675273)"

[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.

The management of an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in a patient with existing atrial fibrillation (AF) often presents a management dilemma both in the acute phase and post-ACS, since the majority of AF patients will already be receiving oral anticoagulation (OAC) for stroke prevention and will require further antithrombotic treatment to reduce the risk of in-stent thrombosis or recurrent cardiac events. Current practice recommendations are based largely on consensus option as there is limited evidence from randomized controlled trials. Prior to the launch of the new European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) consensus document, a survey was undertaken to examine current clinical management of these patients across centres in Europe. Forty-seven centres submitted valid responses, with the majority (70.2%) being university hospitals. This EHRA survey demonstrated overall the management of ACS in AF patients is consistent with the available guidance. Most centres would use triple therapy for a short duration (4 weeks) and predominantly utilize a strategy of OAC (vitamin K antagonist, VKA or non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant, NOAC) plus aspirin and clopidogrel, followed by dual therapy [(N)OAC plus clopidogrel] until 12 months post-percutaneous coronary intervention, followed by (N)OAC monotherapy indefinitely. Where NOAC was used in combination with antiplatelet(s), the lower dose of the respective NOAC was preferred, in accordance with current recommendations. © 2019 Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.

Aims: In recent years, stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) has radically changed, with increasing use of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs). Contemporary European data on AF thromboprophylaxis are needed. Methods and results: We report 1-year follow-up data from the EURObservational Research Programme in Atrial Fibrillation (EORP-AF) General Long-Term Registry. Outcomes were assessed according to antithrombotic therapy. At 1-year follow-up, 9663 (88.0%) patients had available data for analysis: 586 (6.1%) were not treated with any antithrombotic; 681 (7.0%) with antiplatelets only; 4066 (42.1%) with vitamin K antagonist (VKA) only; 3167 (32.8%) with NOACs only; and 1163 (12.0%) with antiplatelet and oral anticoagulant. At 1-year follow-up, there was a low rate of stroke (0.7%) and any thromboembolic event (TE) (1.2%), while haemorrhagic events occurred in 222 patients (2.3%). Cardiovascular (CV) death and all-cause death occurred in 3.9% and 5.2% of patients, respectively. Cumulative survival for all the three main outcomes considered was highest amongst patients treated only with NOACs (P < 0.0001). Multivariable-adjusted Cox regression analysis found that VKA or NOACs use was independently associated with a lower risk for any TE/acute coronary syndrome/CV death, while all treatments were independently associated with a lower risk for CV death and all-cause death. Conclusion: The 1-year follow-up of EORP-AF General Long-Term Registry reported a low occurrence of thromboembolic and haemorrhagic events, although mortality was high. Both VKA and NOACs were associated with a lower risk of all main adverse outcomes. All treatments were associated with a lower risk for CV death and all-cause death. © 2019 Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.

Stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is one pillar of the management of this common arrhythmia. Substantial advances in the epidemiology and associated pathophysiology underlying AF-related stroke and thrombo-embolism are evident. Furthermore, the introduction of the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (also called direct oral anticoagulants) has clearly changed our approach to stroke prevention in AF, such that the default should be to offer oral anticoagulation for stroke prevention, unless the patient is at low risk. A strategy of early rhythm control is also beneficial in reducing strokes in selected patients with recent onset AF, when compared to rate control. Cardiovascular risk factor management, with optimization of comorbidities and attention to lifestyle factors, and the patient's psychological morbidity are also essential. Finally, in selected patients with absolute contraindications to long-term oral anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion or exclusion may be considered. The aim of this state-of-the-art review article is to provide an overview of the current status of AF-related stroke and prevention strategies. A holistic or integrated care approach to AF management is recommended to minimize the risk of stroke in patients with AF, based on the evidence-based Atrial fibrillation Better Care (ABC) pathway, as follows: A: Avoid stroke with Anticoagulation; B: Better patient-centred, symptom-directed decisions on rate or rhythm control; C: Cardiovascular risk factor and comorbidity optimization, including lifestyle changes. © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.

[No abstract available]

Aims: The 4S-AF classification scheme comprises of four domains: stroke risk (St), symptoms (Sy), severity of atrial fibrillation (AF) burden (Sb), and substrate (Su). We sought to examine the implementation of the 4S-AF scheme in the EORP-AF General Long-Term Registry and compare outcomes in AF patients according to the 4S-AF-led decision-making process. Methods and results: Atrial fibrillation patients from 250 centres across 27 European countries were included. A 4S-AF score was calculated as the sum of each domain with a maximum score of 9. Of 6321 patients, 8.4% had low (St), 47.5% EHRA I (Sy), 40.5% newly diagnosed or paroxysmal AF (Sb), and 5.1% no cardiovascular risk factors or left atrial enlargement (Su). Median follow-up was 24 months. Using multivariable Cox regression analysis, independent predictors of all-cause mortality were (St) [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 8.21, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.60-25.9], (Sb) (aHR 1.21, 95% CI: 1.08-1.35), and (Su) (aHR 1.27, 95% CI: 1.14-1.41). For CV mortality and any thromboembolic event, only (Su) (aHR 1.73, 95% CI: 1.45-2.06) and (Sy) (aHR 1.29, 95% CI: 1.00-1.66) were statistically significant, respectively. None of the domains were independently linked to ischaemic stroke or major bleeding. Higher 4S-AF score was related to a significant increase in all-cause mortality, CV mortality, any thromboembolic event, and ischaemic stroke but not major bleeding. Treatment of all 4S-AF domains was associated with an independent decrease in all-cause mortality (aHR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.55-0.92). For each 4S-AF domain left untreated, the risk of all-cause mortality increased substantially (aHR 1.35, 95% CI: 1.16-1.56). Conclusion: Implementation of the novel 4S-AF scheme is feasible, and treatment decisions based on this scheme improve mortality rates in AF. © 2021 Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.

Aims: The risk of developing atrial fibrillation (AF) and its complications continues to increase, despite good progress in preventing AF-related strokes. Methods and results: This article summarizes the outcomes of the 7th Consensus Conference of the Atrial Fibrillation NETwork (AFNET) and the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) held in Lisbon in March 2019. Sixty-five international AF specialists met to present new data and find consensus on pressing issues in AF prevention, management and future research to improve care for patients with AF and prevent AF-related complications. This article is the main outcome of an interactive, iterative discussion between breakout specialist groups and the meeting plenary. AF patients have dynamic risk profiles requiring repeated assessment and risk-based therapy stratification to optimize quality of care. Interrogation of deeply phenotyped datasets with outcomes will lead to a better understanding of the cardiac and systemic effects of AF, interacting with comorbidities and predisposing factors, enabling stratified therapy. New proposals include an algorithm for the acute management of patients with AF and heart failure, a call for a refined, data-driven assessment of stroke risk, suggestions for anticoagulation use in special populations, and a call for rhythm control therapy selection based on risk of AF recurrence. Conclusion: The remaining morbidity and mortality in patients with AF needs better characterization. Likely drivers of the remaining AF-related problems are AF burden, potentially treatable by rhythm control therapy, and concomitant conditions, potentially treatable by treating these conditions. Identifying the drivers of AF-related complications holds promise for stratified therapy. © 2020 Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the commonest cardiac rhythm disorder. Evaluation of patients with AF requires an electrocardiogram, but imaging techniques should be considered for defining management and driving treatment. The present document is an expert consensus from the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI) and the European Heart Rhythm Association. The clinical value of echocardiography, cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR), computed tomography (CT), and nuclear imaging in AF patients are challenged. Left atrial (LA) volume and strain in echocardiography as well as assessment of LA fibrosis in CMR are discussed. The value of CT, especially in planning interventions, is highlighted. Fourteen consensus statements have been reached. These may serve as a guide for both imagers and electrophysiologists for best selecting the imaging technique and for best interpreting its results in AF patients. © 2016 Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.

[No abstract available]

Aims: There has been an increasing focus on integrated, multidisciplinary, and holistic care in the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). The 'Atrial Fibrillation Better Care' (ABC) pathway has been proposed to streamline integrated care in AF. We evaluated the impact on outcomes of an ABC adherent management in a contemporary real-life European-wide AF cohort. Methods and results: Patients enrolled in the ESC-EHRA EURObservational Research Programme in AF General Long-Term Registry with baseline data to evaluate ABC criteria and available follow-up data were considered for this analysis. Among the original 11 096 AF patients enrolled, 6646 (59.9%) were included in this analysis, of which 1996 (30.0%) managed as ABC adherent. Patients adherent to ABC care had lower CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores (mean ± SD, 2.68 ± 1.57 vs. 3.07 ± 1.90 and 1.26 ± 0.93 vs. 1.58 ± 1.12, respectively; P < 0.001). At 1-year follow-up, patients managed adherent to ABC pathway compared to non-adherent ones had a lower rate of any thromboembolic event (TE)/acute coronary syndrome (ACS)/cardiovascular (CV) death (3.8% vs. 7.6%), CV death (1.9% vs. 4.8%), and all-cause death (3.0% vs. 6.4%) (all P < 0.0001). On Cox multivariable regression analysis, ABC adherent care showed an association with a lower risk of any TE/ACS/CV death [hazard ratio (HR): 0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.44-0.79], CV death (HR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.35-0.78), and all-cause death (HR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.43-0.78). Conclusion: In a large contemporary cohort of European AF patients, a clinical management adherent to ABC pathway for integrated care is associated with a significant lower risk for cardiovascular events, CV death, and all-cause death. © 2020 Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.

This European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) Scientific Initiatives Committee, EHRA Young Electrophysiologists, Association of Cardiovascular Nursing and Allied Professionals, and European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Council on Stroke joint survey aimed to assess the interpretation of the CHA2DS2-VASc score components and preferred resources for calculating the score. Of 439 respondents, most were general cardiologists (46.7%) or electrophysiologists (EPs) (42.1%). The overall adherence to the ESC-defined scoring criteria was good. Most variation was observed in the interpretation of the significance of left ventricular ejection fraction and brain natriuretic peptide in the scoring for the 'C' component, as well as the 'one-off high reading of blood pressure' to score on the 'H' component. Greater confidence was expressed in scoring the 'H' component (72.3%) compared with the 'C' (46.2%) and 'V' (45.9%) components. Respondents mainly relied on their recall for the scoring of CHA2DS2-VASc score (64.2%). The three most favoured referencing resources varied among different professionals, with pharmacists and physicians relying mainly on memory or web/mobile app, whereas nurses favoured using a web/mobile app followed by memory or guidelines/protocol. In conclusion, this survey revealed overall good adherence to the correct definition of each component in scoring of the 'C', 'H', and 'V' elements of the CHA2DS2-VASc score, although the variation in their interpretations warrants further clarifications. The preferred referencing resources to calculate the score varied among different healthcare professionals. Guideline education to healthcare professionals and updated and unified online/mobile scoring tools are suggested to improve the accuracy in scoring the CHA2DS2-VASc score. © 2020 Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.