Atrial Fibrillation Heart Failure Research Articles

Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction patients: A meta-analysis

BackgroundThe optimal treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) remains unsettled. ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of catheter ablation (CA) and medical therapy compared to medical therapy alone in patients with AF and HFrEF. MethodsWe performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CA with guideline-directed medical therapy for AF in patients with HFrEF (left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] ≤ 40%). We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane for eligible trials. A random effects model was used to calculate the risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). ResultsSix RCTs comprising 1055 patients were included, of whom 530 (50.2%) were randomized to CA. Compared with medical therapy, CA was associated with a significant reduction in heart failure (HF) hospitalization (RR 0.57; 95% CI 0.45–0.72; P < .01), cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.46; 95% CI 0.31–0.70; P < .01), all-cause mortality (RR 0.53; 95% CI 0.36–0.78; P < .01), and AF burden (MD –29.8%; 95% CI –43.73% to –15.90%; P < .01). Also, there was a significant improvement in LVEF (MD 3.8%; 95% CI 1.6%–6.0%; P < .01) and quality of life (Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire; MD –4.92 points; 95% CI –8.61 to –1.22 points; P < .01) in the ablation group. ConclusionIn this meta-analysis of RCTs of patients with AF and HFrEF, CA was associated with a reduction in HF hospitalization, cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality as well as a significant improvement in LVEF and quality of life.

Efficacy of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in heart failure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

The study aims to evaluate whether rhythm control by catheter ablation is superior to medical therapy for the patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF). The literatures were searched by using PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases up to 12 October 2023. The randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing rhythm control using catheter ablation vs. medical therapy in AF patients with HF were pooled. The primary outcomes included all-cause mortality, HF re-hospitalization, and stroke, and the secondary outcomes included left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), atrial tachyarrythmia recurrence, quality of life (Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire score, MLHFQ score), 6min walking distance (6MWD), the level of N-terminal B-type natriuretic peptide precursor (NT-proBNP), and adverse events. Nine RCTs involving in 2293 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared with medical therapy, catheter ablation reduced all-cause mortality [10.07% (121/1201) vs. 15.26% (175/1147), risk ratio (RR):0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.48-0.74, P<0.00001, I2=0%] and the rate of HF re-hospitalization (RR: 0.65, P=0.02, 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.94, I2=74%), but had no obvious difference in incidence of stroke (RR: 0.67, P=0.27, 95% CI: 0.32 to 1.38, I2=0%). Catheter ablation enhanced LVEF [mean difference (MD), 6.26%, P<0.00001, I2=89%], reduced AT recurrence (RR: 0.37, P<0.00001, 95% CI: 0.26 to 0.52, I2=89%), improved the quality of life (MLHFQ score) (MD: -6.83, P=0.003, I2=67%), elevated 6MWD (MD: 15.92, P=0.006, I2=76%), and diminished the level NT-proBNP (MD: -44.19, P<0.00001, I2=75%), but had no significant difference in adverse events [25.81% (310/1201) vs. 30.25% (347/1147), RR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.65-1.01, P=0.06, I2=55%]. Catheter ablation as rhythm control strategy substantially enhances the survival rate, reduces HF re-hospitalization, increases the rate of sinus rhythm maintenance, improves the left ventricular function and the quality of life for AF patients with HF, and has similar safety, compared with medical therapy. The rhythm control by catheter ablation may be a better strategy for the AF patients with HF.

Increased Cyclic Guanosine Monophosphate and Interleukin-1Beta Is Activated by Mitochondrial Dysfunction and Associated With Heart Failure in Atrial Fibrillation Patients.

This study aimed to identify the association of cyclic guanosine monophosphate (GMP)-adenosine monophosphate (AMP) synthase-stimulator interferon genes (cGAS-STING) pathway with heart failure (HF) in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. We prospectively enrolled 106 AF patients without evidence of HF. The serum levels of 2'3'-cyclic GMP-AMP (2'3'-cGAMP) and interleukin (IL)-1β were measured by enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA). To determine the underlying mechanism, we supplemented the complex I inhibitor rotenone and the specific cGAS inhibitor RU.521 in neonatal rat ventricular cardiomyocytes. During 18-month follow-up, serum concentrations of 2'3'-cGAMP (baseline 51.82 ± 11.34 pg/mL vs. follow-up 124.50 ± 75.83 pg/mL, Ppaired t < 0.01) and IL-1β (baseline 436.07 ± 165.82 vs. follow-up 632.48 ± 119.25 ng/mL, Ppaired t < 0.01) were substantially upregulated in AF patients with HF as compared with those without HF. Furthermore, serum 2'3'-cGAMP and IL-1β levels at 18-month follow-up were independently associated with the occurrence of HF in AF patients. Inhibition of cGAS by RU.521 effectively reversed the upregulation of 2'3'-cGAMP and STING phosphorylation induced by mitochondrial dysfunction, accompanied with inhibition of nod-like receptor protein 3 (NLRP3) inflammasome, IL-1β and IL-18 secretion. Induction of mitochondrial dysfunction causes an upregulation of 2'3'-cGAMP and activation of NLRP3 inflammasome through cGAS-STING pathway in cardiomyocytes.

Characteristics and Outcomes of Atrial Fibrillation in Chronic Heart Failure Patients: A Comprehensive Analysis of the Colombian Heart Failure Registry.

Heart failure (HF) and atrial fibrillation (AF) represent conditions that commonly coexist. The impact of AF in HF has yet to be well studied in Latin America. This study aimed to characterize the sociodemographic and clinical features, along with patients' outcomes with AF and HF from the Colombian Heart Failure Registry (RECOLFACA). Patients with ambulatory HF and AF were included in RECOLFACA, mainly with persistent or permanent AF. A 6-month follow-up was performed. Primary outcome was all-cause mortality. To assess the impact of AF on mortality, we used a logistic regression model. A P value of < 0.05 was considered significant. All statistical tests were two-tailed. Of 2,528 patients with HF in the registry, 2,514 records included information regarding AF diagnosis. Five hundred sixty (22.3%) were in AF (mean age 73 ± 11, 56% men), while 1,954 had no AF (mean age 66 ± 14 years, 58% men). Patients with AF were significantly older and had a different profile of comorbidities and implanted devices compared to non-AF patients. Moreover, AF diagnosis was associated with lower quality of life score (EuroQol-5D), mainly in mobility, personal care, and daily activity. AF was prevalent in patients with preserved ejection fraction (EF), while no significant differences in N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels were observed. Although higher mortality was observed in the AF group compared to individuals without AF (8.9% vs. 6.1%, respectively; P = 0.016), this association lost statistical significance after adjusting by age in a multivariate regression model (odds ratio (OR): 1.35; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.95 - 1.92). AF is more prevalent in HF patients with higher EF, lower quality of life and different clinical profiles. Similar HF severity and non-independent association with mortality were observed in our cohort. These results emphasize the need for an improved understanding of the AF and HF coexistence phenomenon.

Adverse Events Requiring Hospitalization Following Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation in Heart Failure with versus without Systolic Dysfunction.

The safety and efficacy of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation in individuals with heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (EF), particularly concerning the occurrence of post-procedural adverse events necessitating hospitalization, including anticoagulant-associated major bleeding, still lack conclusive determination. Data from patients with HF and AF who underwent catheter ablation for AF between 2019 and 2022 at our institution were retrospectively reviewed. All participants were divided into an EF < 50% group or an EF ≥ 50% group according to their baseline left ventricular EF. The composite incidence of the clinical events following catheter ablation was compared between the two groups: (1) all-cause death, (2) HF hospitalization, (3) stroke or systemic embolism, and (4) major bleeding. A total of 122 patients (75 years old, 68 male) were included. Of them, 62 (50.8%) patients had an EF ≥ 50%. EF ≥ 50% was an independent predictor of the composite endpoint (adjusted odds ratio 6.07, 95% confidence interval 1.37-26.99, p = 0.018). The incidences of each adverse event were not significantly different between the two groups, except for a higher incidence of major bleeding in the EF ≥ 50% group (12.7% vs. 0%, p = 0.026). Among patients with HF coupled with AF, the incidence of adverse events following AF ablation proved notably elevated in patients with EF ≥ 50% in contrast to their counterparts with EF < 50%. This disparity primarily stems from a heightened occurrence of major bleeding within the EF ≥ 50% cohort. The strategy to reduce adverse events, especially in patients with EF ≥ 50%, remains the next concern.

Trajectory change of left ventricular ejection fraction after rhythm control for atrial fibrillation in heart failure.

Rhythm control therapy has shown great benefits for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF). However, few studies have evaluated the effects of rhythm control on left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) trajectory across the whole HF spectrum. Our study explored the prevalence and predictors of LVEF trajectory changes and their prognostic implications following rhythm control. Depending on the treatment strategy, the cohort was classified into rhythm and rate control groups. Alterations in HF types and LVEF trajectory were recorded. The observational endpoints were all-cause mortality and HF-related admission. Predictors of LVEF trajectory improvement in the rhythm control group were evaluated. After matching, the two groups had similar age [mean age (years): rhythm/rate control: 63.96/65.13] and gender [male: rhythm/rate control: n=228 (55.6%)/233 (56.8%)]. Based on baseline LVEF measurement, the post-matched cohort had 490 HF with preserved ejection fraction (rhythm/rate control: n=260/230; median LVEF: 58.00%/57.00%), 99 HF with mildly reduced ejection fraction (rhythm/rate control: n=50/49; median LVEF: 45.00%/46.00%), and 231 HF with reduced ejection fraction (rhythm/rate control: n=100/131; median LVEF: 32.50%/33.00%). Trajectory analysis found that the rhythm control group had a greater percentage of LVEF trajectory improvement than the rate control group [80 (53.3%) vs. 71 (39.4%), P=0.012]. Cox regression analysis also showed that the rhythm control group was more likely to have improved LVEF trajectory compared with the rate control group {hazard ratio [HR] 1.671 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.196-2.335], P=0.003}. In the survival analysis, the rhythm control group experienced significant lower risks of all-cause mortality [HR 0.600 (95% CI 0.366-0.983), P=0.043] and HF-related admission [HR 0.611 (95% CI 0.496-0.753), P<0.001]. In the rhythm control subgroup, E/e' [odds ratio (OR) 0.878 (95% CI 0.792-0.974), P = 0.014], left ventricular end-diastolic diameter [OR 0.874 (95% CI 0.777-0.983), P = 0.024], and CHA2DS2-VASc score (congestive HF, hypertension, age ≥75 years, diabetes mellitus, stroke or transient ischaemic attack, vascular disease, age 65-74 years, and sex category) [OR 0.647 (95% CI 0.438-0.955), P = 0.028] were identified as three independent predictors of LVEF trajectory improvement. Rhythm control is associated with improved LVEF trajectory and clinical outcomes and may thus be considered the optimal therapeutic strategy for patients with both HF and AF.

Factors associated with disease progression in patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure anticoagulated with rivaroxaban.

Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) have a high risk of thromboembolism and other outcomes and anticoagulation is recommended. This study was aimed to explore the risk factors associated with HF worsening in patients with AF and HF taking rivaroxaban in Spain. Multicenter, prospective, observational study that included adults with AF and chronic HF, receiving rivaroxaban ≥4 months before entering. HF worsening was defined as first hospitalization or emergency visit because of HF exacerbation. A total of 672 patients from 71 Spanish centers were recruited, of whom 658 (97.9%) were included in the safety analysis and 552 (82.1%) in the per protocol analysis. At baseline, mean age was 73.7 ± 10.9 years, 64.9% were male, CHA2 DS2 -VASc was 4.1 ± 1.5, HAS-BLED was 1.6 ± 0.9% and 51.3% had HF with preserved ejection fraction. After 24 months of follow-up, 24.9% of patients developed HF worsening, 11.6% died, 2.9% had a thromboembolic event, 3.1% a major bleeding, 0.5% an intracranial bleeding and no patient had a fatal hemorrhage. Older age, the history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, the previous use of vitamin K antagonists, and restrictive or infiltrative cardiomyopathies, were independently associated with HF worsening. Only 6.9% of patients permanently discontinued rivaroxaban treatment. Approximately one out of four patients with HF and AF treated with rivaroxaban developed a HF worsening episode after 2 years of follow-up. The identification of those factors that increase the risk of HF worsening could be helpful in the comprehensive management of this population.

Lower risk of atrial fibrillation development associated with SGLT-2 inhibitors in type 2 diabetic patients compared to DPP-4 inhibitors: a nationwide cohort study

Abstract Background Accumulating evidence shows that sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors reduce cardiovascular outcomes. However, this favorable effect is unclear for newly atrial fibrillation (AF) development compared to other anti-diabetic drugs. Purpose We investigated the association of SGLT-2 inhibitor for newly AF development compared to dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes. Methods Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, among 2,160,911 type 2 diabetes patients (age ≥20 years) between 1 May 2016 and 31 December 2018, we studied 42,806 patients with SGLT-2 inhibitors and 448,715 patients with DPP-4 inhibitors who had not prior AF diagnosis. Propensity score-matching (1:1 ratio) was used to correct for differences between the groups. Results During a median follow-up of 1.3 years, after propensity score matching, compared with patients with DPP-4 inhibitors (n=42,786), patients with SGLT-2 inhibitors (n=42,786) have shown lower incidence and risk of AF (2.7 and 3.3 per 1000 person-years; hazard ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.55-0.97; p=0.028) aand an absolute rate difference of −0.7 [95% confidence interval (CI) −1.3 to −0.1, p=0.034] per 1000 person-years by on-treatment analysis. In intention-to-treat analysis, these results were consistent (2.6 and 3.2 per 1000 person-years; hazard ratio 0.83, 95% confidence interval 0.66-1.03; p=0.092) with an absolute rate difference of −0.5 [95% confidence interval (CI) −1.2 to −0.1, p=0.093] per 1000 person-years . In subgroup analysis, SGLT-2 inhibitors were associated with lower risks of AF in heart failure compared to their counterparts in intention-to-treat analysis (p for interaction=0.036). Conclusion Based on this nationwide cohort of type 2 diabetes patients treated with SGLT-2 inhibitors or DPP-4 inhibitors, SGLT-2 inhibitors were associated with protection against newly AF development after adjusting for clinical confounders.Incidence rates and adjusted HR

The prognostic association of atrial fibrillation on heart failure hospitalizations after acute myocardial infarction

Abstract Aims The association of atrial fibrillation (AF) with heart failure (HF) specific hospitalizations after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is unclear. We aim to study the association of AF and 6-month HF hospitalization after an AMI in a large American cohort. Methods and Results Adult survivors of a AMI hospitalization without cardiogenic shock were identified from the 2019 US Nationwide Readmissions Database. The unadjusted association of AF (pre-existing and denovo) with baseline characteristics and primary outcome of rate of 6-month HF admission, and secondary outcomes of fatal HF admission, composite of HF peri-AMI or a 6-month HF admission, and a composite of 6-month HF or death during a non−HF-related admission was evaluated using chi square tests or t-tests, and independent associations of AF on outcomes were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression. Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify the association of AF on cumulative incidence risk on HF readmission. Of 262,390 AMI survivors, AF was present in 18.0%. By 6-months, HF hospitalization occurred in 5.4% of all patients. AF was associated with a higher adjusted risk for 6-month HF admission (OR 1.42, 95% CI: 1.34-1.50). In the adjusted time-to-event analysis, AF was associated with a higher risk for 6-month HF readmission (HR 1.39, 95% CI 1.31-1.46, P&amp;lt;0.001). AF was associated with a higher risk for fatal HF and the composite outcomes. Conclusions AF was present in 1 in 6 AMI survivors without cardiogenic shock and AF was associated with a higher risk of HF hospitalization in the subsequent 6-month period.Cumulative Incidence CurvesOutcomes Table

A deep-learning-based retinal cardiovascular disease biomarker and risk of stroke, myocardial infarction, atrial fibrillation, and heart failure in the UK Biobank

Abstract Background Retinal photographs allow a non-invasive way to see the human vasculature and provide insights into cardiovascular disease (CVD). In our previous study, we developed the Reti-CVD, a deep-learning algorithm to predict the future CVD events from retinal photographs. Purpose In this study, we extend the application of Reti-CVD by investigating the association between the Reti-CVD score and the occurrence of individual cardiovascular events, including stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), atrial fibrillation (AF), and heart failure (HF). Methods The Reti-CVD scores were calculated and stratified into three risk groups based on optimized cut-off values from the UK Biobank. The cumulative incidence of cardiovascular events (stroke, MI, AF, and all-cause HF each) rate was evaluated across the three groups (low, moderate, and high risk) defined by the Reti-CVD score. Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs), trends in HRs, and respective p-values were examined by fitting a linear model for the three categories after adjustment of age, gender, diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and smoking. C-statistics was used to assess the prognostic value of the Reti-CVD score. Results A total of 44,677 participants were included at baseline and tracked for up to 7 years. There were 277 (0.62%) strokes, 506 (1.13%) MIs, 1053 (2.32%) AFs, and 431 (0.94%) HFs. An increase in Reti-CVD score was significantly associated with increased risk of stroke (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] trends, 1.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-1.80, p=0.008), MI (aHR trends, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.01-1.08, p&amp;lt;0.001), and AF (aHR trends, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.17-1.52, p&amp;lt;0.001). However, the association of Reti-CVD score-based three-risk groups and the occurrence of HF showed a trend for increased risk without statistical significance (aHR trends, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.96-1.43, p=0.123). C statistics based on Reti-CVD alone were 0.65 (0.63-0.68) for stroke, 0.64 (0.62-0.66) for MI, 0.66 (0.65-0.67) for AF, and 0.65 (0.60-0.70) for HF. Conclusion A deep-learning-based retinal CVD biomarker, the Reti-CVD has the potential to identify individuals with a risk of stroke, MI, and AF, who are likely to benefit from earlier preventative CVD interventions. For the relationship between the Reti-CVD and HF, it seems necessary to analyze by HF subtypes.

Prevalence of Subclinical Atrial Fibrillation in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction

BackgroundAtrial fibrillation (AF) is common in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and is associated with poorer clinical outcomes. The prevalence of subclinical AF in patients with HFpEF remains unknown. ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to determine whether subclinical AF was more prevalent in individuals with HFpEF than in individuals without histories of heart failure (HF). MethodsPatients with HFpEF with no prior diagnoses of AF were screened for subclinical AF, and the prevalence of subclinical AF was compared with that among control subjects without HF drawn from MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) who underwent the same electrocardiographic monitoring. Multivariable logistic regression was used to adjust for demographic and clinical comorbidities. ResultsNinety patients with HFpEF and 1,230 MESA participants were included. Patients with HFpEF were younger (median age 69 years [Q1-Q3: 63-76 years] vs 72 years [Q1-Q3: 66-80 years]; P = 0.02), more obese (median body mass index 36 kg/m2 [Q1-Q3: 30-45 kg/m2] vs 27 kg/m2 [Q1-Q3: 24-30 kg/m2]; P < 0.001), and more likely to have diabetes (34% vs 21%; P = 0.01). The prevalence of subclinical AF was 8.9% in patients with HFpEF and 4.1% in non-HF participants. After multivariable adjustment for age, sex, race, body mass index, diabetes, smoking, and total analyzable time on electrocardiographic monitor, there was a significantly higher odds of subclinical AF in patients with HFpEF compared with MESA (OR: 3.01; 95% CI: 1.13-7.99; P = 0.03). ConclusionsPatients with HFpEF had a higher prevalence of subclinical AF than participants without HF from a community-based study. Screening for atrial arrhythmias may be appropriate among patients with HFpEF for timely initiation of thromboembolic prophylaxis and may identify individuals at greater risk for clinical decompensation.

Obesity as a risk factor in atrial fibrillation and heart failure

Abstract Objectives The aim of this article is to provide an insight into the role of obesity as a risk factor, and as a potential etiologic agent of atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF). Methods A narrative (non-systematic) review article summarizing currently available data regarding the interaction between obesity, AF and HF. Results Obesity is considered a risk factor of AF and chronic HF. Multiple recent studies indicate that obesity is also a potential causal factor in the development of AF and HF, the elucidation of pathological mechanisms of which could help devise new diagnostic and therapeutic modalities for these conditions. The discussion about obesity in relation to HF cannot omit the so-called obesity paradox, which represents a dilemma for clinicians, and it is still a source of irregularities regarding the strategy of weight reduction in obese patients with HF. Recently, the obesity paradox has also been assumed to play a role in the relationship between obesity and thromboembolic complications of AF. Conclusions Obesity is an independent and modifiable risk factor for AF and HF. In addition, there is an increasing volume of experimental and clinical data that suggests an important role of the epicardial adipose tissue in the pathophysiology of AF. However, several issues, such as the issue of optimal pharmacotherapy and weight reduction strategy in obese patients with HF remains still unanswered, and open for future investigation.

The Relationship Between Atrial Fibrillation and Parathyroid Hormone in Heart Failure Outpatients.

Background Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common arrhythmia in heart failure (HF). Plasma concentrations of para-thyroid hormone (PTH) have been shown to increase in HF. The relationship between PTH concentrations and the presence of AF in HF is, however, unknown. This study analyzed the relationship between plasma PHT concentrations and AF in patients with systolic HF.Material and methods 131 consecutive, stable HF patients, who were admitted to the HF outpatient clinic, were included in this prospective, observational study. Patients were classified as those with AF (n = 36) and those in sinus rhythm (SR, n = 95).Results PTH concentrations were markedly higher in patients with AF compared to the patients in SR [85 (15-320) vs. 112 (30-326) U / ml, p=0.007]. PTH, creatinine clearance, hemoglobin, creatinine, age, and left ventricular ejection fraction were found to be related to AF by univariate analysis; though, multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that only PTH concentration was independently related to AF.Conclusion PTH concentrations can be used to indicate AF in patients with systolic HF.

Asymptomatic vs. symptomatic atrial fibrillation: Clinical outcomes in heart failure patients

BackgroundThe outcome implications of asymptomatic vs. symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) in specific groups of patients according to clinical heart failure (HF) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) need to be clarified. MethodsIn a prospective observational study, patients were categorized according to overt HF with LVEF≤40 %, or with LVEF>40 %, or without overt HF with LVEF40 %≤ or > 40 %, as well as according to the presence of asymptomatic or symptomatic AF. ResultsA total of 8096 patients, divided into 8 groups according to HF and LVEF, were included with similar proportions of asymptomatic AF (ranging from 43 to 48 %).After a median follow-up of 730 [699 -748] days, the composite outcome (all-cause death and MACE) was significantly worse for patients with asymptomatic AF associated with HF and reduced LVEF vs. symptomatic AF patients of the same group (p = 0.004). On adjusted Cox regression analysis, asymptomatic AF patients with HF and reduced LVEF were independently associated with a higher risk for the composite outcome (aHR 1.32, 95 % CI 1.04-1.69) and all-cause death (aHR 1.33, 95 % CI 1.02-1.73) compared to symptomatic AF patients with HF and reduced LVEF. Kaplan-Meier curves showed that HF-LVEF≤40 % asymptomatic patients had the highest cumulative incidence of all-cause death and MACE (p < 0.001 for both). ConclusionsIn a large European cohort of AF patients, the risk of the composite outcome at 2 years was not different between asymptomatic and symptomatic AF in the whole cohort but adverse implications for poor outcomes were found for asymptomatic AF in HF with LVEF≤40 %.

The impact of age on ablation outcomes in AF-mediated cardiomyopathy.

The absence of ventricular scar in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and systolic heart failure (HF) predicts left ventricular (LV) recovery following AF ablation. It is unknown whether age impacts the degree of LV recovery, reverse remodeling, or AF recurrence following catheter ablation (CA) among this population. To evaluate the impact of age on LV recovery and AF recurrence in a population with AF and systolic HF without fibrosis (termed AF-mediated cardiomyopathy) following CA. Consecutive patients undergoing CA between 2013 and 2021 with LV ejection fraction (LVEF) < 45% and absence of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) detected LV myocardial fibrosis were stratified by age (<65 vs. ≥65 years). Following CA, participants underwent remote rhythm monitoring for 12 months with repeat CMR for HF surveillance. The study population consisted of 70 patients (10% female, mean LVEF 33 ± 9%), stratified into younger (age < 65 years, 63%) and older (age ≥ 65 years, 37%) cohorts. Baseline comorbidities, LVEF(34 ± 9 vs. 33 ± 8 ≥65 years, p = .686), atrial and ventricular dimensions (left atrial volume index:55 ± 21 vs. 56 ± 14 mL/m2 age ≥ 65, p = .834; indexed left ventricular end-diastolic volume: 108 ± 40 vs. 104 ± 28 mL/m2 age ≥ 65, p = .681), pharmacotherapy and ablation strategy (pulmonary vein isolation in all; posterior wall isolation in 27% vs. 19% age ≥ 65, p = .448; cavotricuspid isthmus in 9% vs. 11.5% age ≥ 65) were comparable (all p > .05) albeit a higher CHADS2 VASc score in the older cohort (2.7 ± 0.9 vs. 1.6 ± 0.6 age < 65, p < .001). Freedom from AF was comparable (hazard ratio: 0.65, 95% confidence interval: 0.38-1.48, LogRank p = .283) as was AF burden [0% (interquartile range, IQR: 0.0-2.1) vs. age ≥ 65: [0% (IQR 0.0-1.7), p = .516], irrespective of age. There was a significant improvement in LV systolic function in both groups (ΔLVEF + 21 ± 14% vs. +21 ± 12% age ≥ 65, p = .913), with LV recovery in the vast majority (73% vs. 69%, respectively, p = .759) at 13 (IQR: 12-16) months. This was accompanied by comparable improvements in functional status (New York Heart Association class p = .851; 6-min walk distance 50 ± 61 vs. 93 ± 134 min age ≥ 65, p = .066), biomarkers (ΔN-terminal-pro brain natriuretic peptide -139 ± 246 vs. -168 ± 181 age ≥ 65,p = .629) and HF symptoms (Short Form-36 survey Δphysical component summary p = .483/Δmental component summary, p = .841). In patients undergoing CA for AF with systolic HF in the absence of ventricular scar, comparable improvements in ventricular function, symptoms, and freedom from AF are achieved irrespective of age.

Effects of Rhythm Control for Atrial Fibrillation on Cardiac Remodeling and Valvular Regurgitation in Patients with Heart Failure.

Previous studies investigating cardiac remodeling and functional regurgitation of rhythm control for atrial fibrillation (AF) in heart failure (HF) are limited. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the impact of rhythm control for AF on cardiac remodeling and functional regurgitation in the spectrum of HF. Its effect on prognosis was explored. According to the treatment strategies of AF, the cohort was classified into the rhythm control and rate control groups. To further detect the implications of rhythm control on cardiac remodeling, functional regurgitation, and outcomes in HF subtypes, patients were further divided into HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), HF with mildly reduced ejection fraction, and HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) subgroups. A total of 828 patients were enrolled, with 307 patients in the rhythm control group and 521 patients in the rate control group. Over a median follow-up time of 3.8 years, patients with rhythm control treatments experienced improvements in biatrial structure parameters, left ventricular ejection fraction, and functional regurgitation (mitral and tricuspid regurgitation) compared with rate control treatment (p < 0.05). Cox regression analysis demonstrated that rhythm control reduced the risks of all-cause mortality (HR 0.436 [95% CI, 0.218-0.871], p = 0.019) in HFpEF and HF-related admissions in HFrEF (HR 0.500 [95% CI, 0.330-0.757], p = 0.001) and HFpEF (HR 0.541 [95% CI, 0.407-0.720], p < 0.001); these associations were similar after adjusting for multiple confounders. Rhythm control therapy can be considered an appropriate treatment strategy for the management of AF in HF to improve cardiac remodeling, functional regurgitation, and prognosis.

Rationale and design of the NEO-NORMAL-AF study examination of the usefulness of implantable loop recorder for arrhythmia detection including atrial fibrillation in heart failure with non-reduced ejection fraction cases: a pilot study

IntroductionThe incidence of arrhythmia in heart failure with non-reduced ejection fraction (HFnon-rEF) in patients who have a history of hospitalisation is unclear. The aim of this study is to investigate...

Association of Body Mass Index and Abdominal Obesity with Incidence of Atrial Fibrillation in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction.

The association between obesity and atrial fibrillation (AF) incidence in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) patients is currently unclear. Our analyses and results are based on the whole Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure with an Aldosterone Antagonist (TOPCAT) trial (placebo and spironolactone). A total of 2138 subjects without baseline AF were included in the trial. Kaplan-Meier (K-M) curves and Cox regression with hazard ratios (HRs) and confidence intervals (CIs) were used to assess the incidence of AF with obesity. Of 2138 HFpEF patients without baseline AF, 1165 were obese (body mass index [BMI]≥30 kg/m2). The K-M curve showed obese patients developed AF more than overweight (25≤ BMI ≤29.9 kg/m2) patients (p=0.013), confirmed by multivariable analysis, while there's no statistical difference between overweight and normal weight (18.5≤ BMI ≤24.9 kg/m2) patients. The occurrence of AF increased by 3% for every kg/m2 increase in BMI (adjusted HR, aHR: 1.03; 95% CI: 1.00-1.06), with a positive linear association (p for nonlinear: 0.145). Obesity was associated with AF incidence (aHR: 1.62; 95% CI: 1.05-2.50) compared with non-obesity (including overweight and normal-weight patients). Abdominal obesity was associated with increased AF incidence (aHR: 1.70; 95% CI: 1.04-2.77), and AF incidence rose by 18% per centimeter in circumference (aHR: 1.18; 95% CI: 1.04-1.34). Obesity and abdominal obesity increase the incidence of AF in HFpEF patients. Further studies need to determine whether there is a difference in AF in response to spironolactone across obese HFpEF pheno groups.

Prevalence and Prognostic Implication of Atrial Fibrillation in Heart Failure Subtypes: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) portends a poor outcome. The HF universal definition has incorporated Heart Failure with mildly reduced Ejection Fraction (HFmrEF). We sought to evaluate the relationship between AF and different HF subtypes, with emphasis on HFmrEF. PubMed and Embase databases were searched up to July 2022. Studies that classified HF with EF≥50% as Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction (HFpEF); EF 40%-49% as HFmrEF; and EF <40% as Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction (HFrEF) were included. Fifty (50) eligible studies, with 126,720 acute HF and 109,683 chronic HF patients, were included. Ten percent (10%) and 12% of patients constituted HFmrEF subtype in patients with acute and chronic HF, respectively. The AF prevalence was 38% (95%CI [33, 44], I2=96.9%) in HFmrEF, as compared to 43% (95%CI [39, 47], I2=97.9%) in HFpEF, and 32% (95%CI [29, 35], I2=98.6%) in HFrEF in acute HF patients. Meta-regression showed HFmrEF shared age as a determinant for AF prevalence with HFrEF and HFpEF. Similar AF prevalence also was observed in chronic HF. Compared to sinus rhythm, AF was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality in all HF subtypes: HFmrEF (n=6; HR 1.28, 95%CI [1.08, 1.51], I2=71%), HFpEF (n=10; HR 1.14, 95%CI [1.06, 1.23], I2=55%) and HFrEF (n=9; HR 1.11, 95%CI [1.02, 1.21], I2=78%). The prevalence of AF was intermediate for HFmrEF in between HFpEF and HFrEF, with determinants shared with either HF subtype. The co-existence of AF and HF predicts an increased all-cause mortality across all categories of HF. (PROSPERO registry: CRD42021189411).

Prevalence and Incidence of Atrial Fibrillation in Heart Failure with Mildly Reduced or Preserved Ejection Fraction: (Additive) Value of Implantable Loop Recorders.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction (HFmrEF/HFpEF) and has a negative impact on outcome. Reliable data on prevalence, incidence, and detection of AF from contemporary, prospective HFmrEF/HFpEF studies are scarce. This was a prespecified sub-analysis from a prospective, multicenter study. Patients with HFmrEF/HFpEF underwent 12-lead electrocardiography (ECG), 24 h Holter monitoring, and received an implantable loop recorder (ILR) at the study start. During the 2 year follow-up, rhythm monitoring was performed via ILR, yearly ECG, and two yearly 24 h Holter monitors. A total of 113 patients were included (mean age 73 ± 8 years, 75% HFpEF). At baseline, 70 patients (62%) had a diagnosis of AF: 21 paroxysmal, 18 persistent, and 31 permanent AF. At study start, 45 patients were in AF. Of the 43 patients without a history of AF, 19 developed incident AF during a median follow-up of 23 [15-25] months (44%; incidence rate 27.1 (95% confidence interval 16.3-42.4) per 100 person-years). Thus, after the 2-year follow-up, 89 patients (79%) had a diagnosis of AF. In 11/19 incident AF cases (i.e., 58%), AF was solely detected on the ILR. Yearly 12-lead ECG detected six incident AF cases and four of these cases were also detected on two yearly 24 h Holter monitors. Two incident AF cases were detected on an unplanned ECG/Holter. Atrial fibrillation is extremely common in heart failure with HFmrEF/HFpEF and may inform on symptom evaluation and treatment options. AF screening with an ILR had a much higher diagnostic yield than conventional modalities.