Browsing by Author "Schnabel, Renate B. (8708614100)"

[No abstract available]

Many patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who are in need of stroke prevention are not treated with oral anticoagulation or discontinue treatment shortly after its initiation. Despite the availability of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), such undertreatment has improved somewhat but is still evident. This is due to continued risks of bleeding events or ischemic strokes while on DOAC, poor treatment compliance, or aversion to anticoagulant therapy. Because of significant improvements in procedural safety over the years left atrial appendage closure (LAAC), using a catheter-based, device implantation approach, is increasingly favored for the prevention of thromboembolic events in AF patients who cannot have long-term oral anticoagulation. This article is an executive summary of a practical guide recently published by an international expert consensus group, which introduces the LAAC devices and briefly explains the implantation technique. The indications and device follow-up are more comprehensively described. This practical guide, aligned with published guideline/guidance, is aimed at those non-implanting physicians who may need to refer patients for consideration of LAAC. © 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is one of the most common cardiac diseases and a complicating comorbidity for multiple associated diseases. Many clinical decisions regarding AF are currently based on the binary recognition of AF being present or absent with the categorical appraisal of AF as continued or intermittent. Assessment of AF in clinical trials is largely limited to the time to (first) detection of an AF episode. Substantial evidence shows, however, that the quantitative characteristic of intermittent AF has a relevant impact on symptoms, onset, and progression of AF and AF-related outcomes, including mortality. Atrial fibrillation burden is increasingly recognized as a suitable quantitative measure of intermittent AF that provides an estimate of risk attributable to AF, the efficacy of antiarrhythmic treatment, and the need for oral anticoagulation. However, the diversity of assessment methods and the lack of a consistent definition of AF burden prevent a wider clinical applicability and validation of actionable thresholds of AF burden. To facilitate progress in this field, the AF burden Consensus Group, an international and multidisciplinary collaboration, proposes a unified definition of AF burden. Based on current evidence and using a modified Delphi technique, consensus statements were attained on the four main areas describing AF burden: Defining the characteristics of AF burden, the recording principles, the clinical relevance in major clinical conditions, and implementation as an outcome in the clinic and in clinical trials. According to this consensus, AF burden is defined as the proportion of time spent in AF expressed as a percentage of the recording time, undertaken during a specified monitoring duration. A pivotal requirement for validity and comparability of AF burden assessment is a continuous or near-continuous duration of monitoring that needs to be reported together with the AF burden assessment. This proposed unified definition of AF burden applies independent of comorbidities and outcomes. However, the disease-specific actionable thresholds of AF burden need to be defined according to the targeted clinical outcomes in specific populations. The duration of the longest episode of uninterrupted AF expressed as a time duration should also be reported when appropriate. A unified definition of AF burden will allow for comparability of clinical study data to expand evidence and to establish actionable thresholds of AF burden in various clinical conditions. This proposed definition of AF burden will support risk evaluation and clinical treatment decisions in AF-related disease. It will further promote the development of clinical trials studying the clinical relevance of intermittent AF. A unified approach on AF burden will finally inform the technology development of heart rhythm monitoring towards validated technology to meet clinical needs. © The European Society of Cardiology 2025. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.

Objectives Atrial fibrillation (AF) screening may increase early detection and reduce complications of AF. European, Australian and World Heart Federation guidelines recommend opportunistic screening, despite a current lack of clear evidence supporting a net benefit for systematic screening. Where screening is implemented, the most appropriate approaches are unknown. We explored the views of European stakeholders about opportunities and challenges of implementing four AF screening scenarios. Design Telephone-based semi-structured interviews with results reported using Consolidated criteria for Reporting Qualitative research guidelines. Data were thematically analysed using the framework approach. Setting AF screening stakeholders in 11 European countries. Participants Healthcare professionals and regulators (n=24) potentially involved in AF screening implementation. Intervention Four AF screening scenarios: single time point opportunistic, opportunistic prolonged, systematic single time point/prolonged and patient-led screening. Primary outcome measures Stakeholder views about the challenges and feasibility of implementing the screening scenarios in the respective national/regional healthcare system. Results Three themes developed. (1) Current screening approaches: there are no national AF screening programmes, with most AF detected in symptomatic patients. Patient-led screening exists via personal devices, creating screening inequity. (2) Feasibility of screening: single time point opportunistic screening in primary care using single-lead ECG devices was considered the most feasible. Software algorithms may aid identification of suitable patients and telehealth services have potential to support diagnosis. (3) Implementation requirements: sufficient evidence of benefit is required. National screening processes are required due to different payment mechanisms and health service regulations. Concerns about data security, and inclusivity for those without primary care access or personal devices must be addressed. Conclusions There is an overall awareness of AF screening. Opportunistic screening appears the most feasible across Europe. Challenges are health inequalities, identification of best target groups for screening, streamlined processes, the need for evidence of benefit and a tailored approach adapted to national realities. © 2022 BMJ Publishing Group. All rights reserved.

A significant proportion of patients who suffer from atrial fibrillation (AF) and are in need of thromboembolic protection are not treated with oral anticoagulation or discontinue this treatment shortly after its initiation. This undertreatment has not improved sufficiently despite the availability of direct oral anticoagulants which are associated with less major bleeding than vitamin K antagonists. Multiple reasons account for this, including bleeding events or ischaemic strokes whilst on anticoagulation, a serious risk of bleeding events, poor treatment compliance despite best educational attempts, or aversion to drug therapy. An alternative interventional therapy, which is not associated with long-term bleeding and is as effective as vitamin K anticoagulation, was introduced over 20 years ago. Because of significant improvements in procedural safety over the years, left atrial appendage closure, predominantly achieved using a catheter-based, device implantation approach, is increasingly favoured for the prevention of thromboembolic events in patients who cannot achieve effective anticoagulation. This management strategy is well known to the interventional cardiologist/electrophysiologist but is not more widely appreciated within cardiology or internal medicine. This article introduces the devices and briefly explains the implantation technique. The indications and device follow-up are more comprehensively described. Almost all physicians who care for adult patients will have many with AF. This practical guide, written within guideline/guidance boundaries, is aimed at those non-implanting physicians who may need to refer patients for consideration of this new therapy, which is becoming increasingly popular. © The Author(s) 2024.

Cardiac thromboembolism attributed to atrial fibrillation (AF) is responsible for up to one-third of ischemic strokes. Stroke may be the first manifestation of previously undetected AF. Given the efficacy of oral anticoagulants in preventing AF-related ischemic strokes, strategies of searching for AF after a stroke using ECG monitoring followed by oral anticoagulation (OAC) treatment have been proposed to prevent recurrent cardioembolic strokes. This white paper by experts from the AF-SCREEN International Collaboration summarizes existing evidence and knowledge gaps on searching for AF after a stroke by using ECG monitoring. New AF can be detected by routine plus intensive ECG monitoring in approximately one-quarter of patients with ischemic stroke. It may be causal, a bystander, or neurogenically induced by the stroke. AF after a stroke is a risk factor for thromboembolism and a strong marker for atrial myopathy. After acute ischemic stroke, patients should undergo 72 hours of electrocardiographic monitoring to detect AF. The diagnosis requires an ECG of sufficient quality for confirmation by a health professional with ECG rhythm expertise. AF detection rate is a function of monitoring duration and quality of analysis, AF episode definition, interval from stroke to monitoring commencement, and patient characteristics including old age, certain ECG alterations, and stroke type. Markers of atrial myopathy (eg, imaging, atrial ectopy, natriuretic peptides) may increase AF yield from monitoring and could be used to guide patient selection for more intensive/prolonged poststroke ECG monitoring. Atrial myopathy without detected AF is not currently sufficient to initiate OAC. The concept of embolic stroke of unknown source is not proven to identify patients who have had a stroke benefitting from empiric OAC treatment. However, some embolic stroke of unknown source subgroups (eg, advanced age, atrial enlargement) might benefit more from non-vitamin K-dependent OAC therapy than aspirin. Fulfilling embolic stroke of unknown source criteria is an indication neither for empiric non-vitamin K-dependent OAC treatment nor for withholding prolonged ECG monitoring for AF. Clinically diagnosed AF after a stroke or a transient ischemic attack is associated with significantly increased risk of recurrent stroke or systemic embolism, in particular, with additional stroke risk factors, and requires OAC rather than antiplatelet therapy. The minimum subclinical AF duration required on ECG monitoring poststroke/transient ischemic attack to recommend OAC therapy is debated. © 2019 American Heart Association, Inc.

A budget impact analysis estimates the short-term difference between the cost of the current treatment strategy and a new treatment strategy, in this case to implement population screening for atrial fibrillation (AF). The aim of this study is to estimate the financial impact of implementing population-based AF-screening of 75-year-olds compared with the current setting of no screening from a healthcare payer perspective in eight European countries. The net budget impact of AF-screening was estimated in country-specific settings for Denmark, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Serbia, Spain, and Sweden. Country-specific parameters were used to allow for variations in healthcare systems and to reflect the healthcare sector in the country of interest. Similar results can be seen in all countries AF-screening incurs savings of stroke-related costs since AF treatment reduces the number of strokes. However, the increased number of detected AF and higher drug acquisition will increase the drug costs as well as the costs of physician- and control visits. The net budget impact per invited varied from €10 in Ireland to €122 in the Netherlands. The results showed the increased costs of implementing AF-screening were mainly driven by increased drug costs and screening costs. In conclusion, across Europe, though the initial cost of screening and more frequent use of oral anti-coagulants will increase the healthcare payers’ costs, introducing population screening for AF will result in savings of stroke-related costs. © The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.