Publication:
Clinical utility and prognostic implications of the novel 4S-AF scheme to characterize and evaluate patients with atrial fibrillation: a report from ESC-EHRA EORP-AF Long-Term General Registry

dc.contributor.authorDing, Wern Yew (56141931000)
dc.contributor.authorProietti, Marco (57202956034)
dc.contributor.authorBoriani, Giuseppe (57675336900)
dc.contributor.authorFauchier, Laurent (7005282545)
dc.contributor.authorBlomström-Lundqvist, Carina (55941853900)
dc.contributor.authorMarin, Francisco (57212539524)
dc.contributor.authorPotpara, Tatjana S (57216792589)
dc.contributor.authorLip, Gregory Y. H (57216675273)
dc.date.accessioned2025-06-12T12:49:51Z
dc.date.available2025-06-12T12:49:51Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.description.abstractAims: 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.
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euab280
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85130863248&doi=10.1093%2feuropace%2feuab280&partnerID=40&md5=2e2a508422a6cb6f41f32ac81756950c
dc.identifier.urihttps://remedy.med.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/3499
dc.subject4S-AF
dc.subjectAtrial fibrillation
dc.subjectBleeding
dc.subjectCharacterization
dc.subjectClassification
dc.subjectEORP-AF registry
dc.subjectMortality
dc.subjectPrognostic implications
dc.subjectStroke
dc.subjectThromboembolism
dc.subjectValidation
dc.titleClinical utility and prognostic implications of the novel 4S-AF scheme to characterize and evaluate patients with atrial fibrillation: a report from ESC-EHRA EORP-AF Long-Term General Registry
dspace.entity.typePublication

Files