Rate Control In Patients Research Articles

Rate control with Landiolol in atrial tachyarrhythmias and comorbid left ventricular dysfunction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract Backround Atrial tachyarrhythmias (ATs) are frequently inter-related with heart failure (HF). ATs exacerbate HF, while the existence of chronic HF precipitates the occurrence of ATs. Landiolol, a highly selective and exceptionally-short acting beta-1 blocker has been used in patients with ATs and HF, where evidence on the available treatment options is limited. Purpose In this meta-analysis we intended to assess the clinical effects of rate control with landiolol in patients with ATs and comorbid left ventricular dysfunction, who are not septic or in peri-operative stage. Materials and Methods We systematically searched PubMed, Scopus and WebofScience up to 14 July 2023. Two independent reviewers screened and selected randomized control trials as well as observational studies according to predetermined eligibility criteria. Risk of bias and quality of evidence were assessed according to Cochrane guidelines. Results 2278 articles were initially screened and 11 studies were finally included in this systematic review. In 7 of the eligible studies landiolol was compared with placebo, while in the remaining 4 studies landiolol was investigated in comparison with other antiarrhythmic drugs and specifically digoxin and diltiazem. The total sample size included 1876 patients, 75% of whom were classified into III/IV NYHA class. Landiolol treatment reduced patients’ heart rate by a mean of 42 beats per minute (95% CI: 37-47 bpm) while 3 out of 4 treated patients accomplished targeted heart rate, described as an at least 20% reduction from baseline heart rate and final heart rate less than 110bpm. Compared to patients receiving other antiarrhythmic therapy, patients treated with landiolol had increased odds of achieving target heart rate (OR: 5.32, 95% CI: 2.87-10.05). Referring to landiolol safety, 15% of the treated patients encountered an adverse event, more frequently dose-dependent hypotension. Landiolol was discontinued only in a 6% of the treated patients. No difference in adverse events was identified between landiolol and other antiarrhythmic drugs. Conclusion In this meta-analysis landiolol has achieved satisfactory levels of efficacy and safety regarding rate control in patients with ATs and left ventricular dysfunction.Prisma FlowchartLandiolol efficacy in single-arm studies

Atrial fibrillation burden, symptoms and medication use after left bundle branch area pacing combined with AV-node ablation in patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation

Abstract Background AV node ablation combined with permanent pacing is an established therapy for rate control in patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) refractory or intolerant to pharmacological rate or rhythm control and not eligible for rhythm control by left atrial catheter ablation. The threshold for performing this so-called "pace-and-ablate" strategy has decreased since the introduction of conduction system pacing, and especially left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP). Purpose To investigate the AF burden, AF related symptoms and anti-arrhythmic drug (AAD) use after AV-node ablation combined with LBBAP. Methods Consecutive patients with symptomatic AF, intolerant or refractory to pharmacological rate and symptom control and deemed not eligible for left atrial catheter ablation, were included. At baseline, AF related symptoms classified according to the EHRA classification and AAD use were scored. After DDD-pacemaker implantation with an LBBAP lead and subsequent AV-node ablation device detected AF burden was assessed six weeks, six months and twelve months later. AF burden at six weeks after AV-node ablation was considered the baseline measurement for AF burden. AF related symptoms and AAD use were collected at twelve months follow-up. Results Twenty-four patients (67% female, mean age 79±4 years) scheduled for pace-and-ablate therapy were prospectively included. Eighteen patients had persistent (75%) and three long-standing persistent (12.5%) AF with enlarged left atria (left-atrial volume index (LAVI) 52 ± 18ml/m2) and EHRA class IIb or higher in twenty (69%) patients. Twenty-three patients (96%) used at least one AAD with fifteen patients (63%) using >1 AAD at baseline, fig. 1. AF burden did not change at six months (-1.3 [-17, 15] %, p=0.87) and twelve months (-2.9 [-40,35] %, p=0.86) follow-up relative to six weeks follow-up, fig 2A. AF symptoms were significantly reduced with most patients in EHRA class I (6, 25%) or class IIa (17, 71%; p<0.001) at twelve months follow-up, fig 2B. There was a significant reduction in AAD use with fourteen patients (58%) using no AAD at twelve months follow-up and no patients using >1 AAD at twelve months follow up (p<0.001), fig 2C. Conclusion AV node ablation followed by permanent LBBAP did not reduce AF burden in an AF population with advanced disease. However, a significant reduction in AF symptoms and medication use was demonstrated with this therapy. Figure 2. AF burden (panel A), symptoms (panel B) and AAD use (panel C) at baseline and twelve months after ‘pace-and-ablate’ therapy. AF = atrial fibrillation; EHRA = EHRA = European Heart Rhythm Association symptom classification for AF; AAD = anti-arrhythmic drug. *relative to AF burden at six weeks follow-up.Baseline characteristicsBaseline and follow-up measurements

Real-world validation of smartphone-based photoplethysmography for heart rate monitoring in atrial fibrillation

Abstract Introduction Photoplethysmography (PPG) based smartphone applications facilitate heart rate monitoring that may enable physicians to guide rate control in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Despite extensive validation of PPG-derived heart rate, validation studies in the presence of AF are lacking, particularly in unsupervised free-living conditions. Purpose To evaluate the accuracy of PPG-derived heart rate using a smartphone application in patients with an established diagnosis of AF, both during sinus rhythm and AF, in a real-world setting. Methods Consecutive patients undergoing AF ablation were enrolled four weeks prior to the procedure. They were instructed to assess their heart rate twice daily during eight weeks with a one-minute finger-over-the-camera smartphone-PPG recording. The reference heart rate was obtained from two 30-seconds handheld single-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) recordings performed immediately before and after the PPG recording. Measurements were valid if the heart rate did not change by more than 10% between the first and second ECG and maintained sinus rhythm or AF consistently. Results In total, fifty patients (age 63 ±11 years, 68% male) performed 3407 high-quality PPG measurements accompanied with two high-quality ECGs measurements both in sinus rhythm or AF. After excluding 223 measurements due to inconsistent heart rate between the first and second ECG, 3184 measurements remained. The mean heart rate (71.5 ± 17.3 beats per minute (bpm)) was significantly higher during AF (94.7 ± 19.4 bpm) compared to sinus rhythm (65.7 ± 10.7 bpm) (p-value < 0.001). The heart rate assessment was accurate within a 10% margin in 93.8% of PPG measurements. Inaccurate heart rate assessments were more frequent in AF (161/637; 25.3%) compared to sinus rhythm (35/2547; 1.4%) (p-value < 0.001). PPG underestimated the heart rate in sinus rhythm with 0.4 bpm (95% CI: -0.3 to -0.5 bpm) and in AF with 6.6 bpm (95% CI: -5.8 to -7.4 bpm). The deviation of PPG-derived heart rate from the ECG-derived true heart rate was significantly greater during AF (root mean square error (RMSE) = 11.8 bpm) compared to sinus rhythm (RMSE = 2.2 bpm) (p-value < 0.001). The heart rate correlation plots and corresponding Bland-Altman plots demonstrate a skewed underestimation of the heart rate in AF with PPG, particularly for high heart rates. Conclusions Heart rate can accurately be derived from PPG recordings using a smartphone application in real-world conditions. However, PPG measurements may underestimate high heart rates in the presence of AF.Heart Rate in Sinus RhythmHeart Rate in Atrial Fibrillation

Echocardiographic follow-up after AV node ablation combined with left bundle branch area pacing for patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation

Abstract Background AV node ablation combined with permanent pacing is an established therapy for rate control in patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) refractory or intolerant to pharmacological rate or rhythm control and not eligible for rhythm control by left atrial catheter ablation. The threshold for performing this so-called "pace-and-ablate" strategy has decreased since the introduction of conduction system pacing, and especially left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP). Purpose To investigate the change of the left-ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF) and left-atrial volume index (LAVI) in patients with symptomatic AF, twelve months after LBBAP and AV-node ablation. Methods Consecutive patients with symptomatic AF intolerant or refractory to pharmacological rate and symptom control and deemed not eligible for left atrial catheter ablation were included. At baseline, the EHRA score was noted and the LVEF and LAVI were measured echocardiographically. Patients were subdivided in a normal baseline LV ejection fraction (LVEF >50%) or diminished baseline LVEF (LVEF <50%) group. After LBBAP, patients underwent AV node ablation in the same procedure or four weeks later. After twelve months, the LVEF and LAVI were reassessed in the entire cohort and the two subgroups. Results Twenty-two patients (68% female, mean age 79±4 years) scheduled for pace-and-ablate therapy were prospectively included. Three (14%) had paroxysmal, sixteen patients (72%) had persistent AF and three patients (14%) long-standing persistent AF. An EHRA class IIb or higher was found in eighteen patients (82%). At baseline, the mean LVEF was 51 ± 7%, the mean LVEDD 47 ± 6 mm and LAVI 54 ± 18 ml/m2. Twelve patients (55%) had a preserved LVEF, whereas ten patients (45%) had an LVEF <50%, fig. 1. After twelve months, the overall ejection fraction increased to 54 ± 5% (p=0.016), fig. 2A. This was mostly attributed to the increase in LVEF to 51 ± 5% in the subgroup with a reduced baseline LVEF (p=0.009 compared to baseline 44 ± 5%), fig. 2A. The LVEF was unaffected in the other group (57 ± 3% vs. 57 ± 4%, p=0.63), fig. 2A. The LAVI was not significantly reduced in the overall cohort or the subgroups (54 ± 18 ml/m2 to 51 ± 19 ml/m2, p=0.16), fig 2B. Conclusion AV node ablation combined with LBBAP results in a significant improvement in LVEF at twelve months follow-up. This is mainly driven by an improvement in LVEF in those patients with a diminished LVEF at baseline. The data suggests that the therapy can reverse a tachycardiomyopathy without inducing a pacing-induced cardiomyopathy. No significant reduction in LAVI was found.Baseline characteristicsChanges in LVEF (A) and LAVI (B)

The role of rhythm control in patients with first diagnosed atrial fibrillation in a real world collective

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: Private company. Main funding source(s): Daiichi Sankyo Bayer. Background There has been conflicting evidence regarding the importance of rhythm control as opposed to rate control in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Thus, no clear recommendation on early rhythm control for risk reduction is given in the current guidelines. However, some evidence suggests that rhythm control is superior to rate control in patients with a recent diagnosis of AF. Purpose We aim to characterize patients with first diagnosed AF and evaluate the effect of a rhythm control strategy at the time of diagnosis on long term cardiovascular outcomes. Methods This is a single center, retrospective observational sub study based as a part of the HERA-FIB project. HERA-FIB included 10.222 patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) of the department of cardiology of a university hospital from June 2009 to March 2020. We consecutively included all patients with a history AF or current AF upon presentation, regardless of the reason for presentation. A structured follow-up regarding survival and major cardiovascular events was performed. Mean follow up was 23 months (IQR 12-35). Patient care was not influenced. The project was performed according to the declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the local ethics committee and registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT05995561). Results. After adjudication we included 10.222 patients in this study. Of those 2758 (27%) had no previous history of AF and were first diagnosed with AF upon presentation. There were major differences in baseline characteristics as patients with first diagnosed AF were younger (73 years vs 76 years, p<0.0001), showed a normal left ventricular function more often (47.9% vs 40.2%, p<0.0001) and had fewer histories of coronary artery disease (CAD) (30.2% vs 48.0%, p<0.0001) and fewer histories of stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) (9.0% vs 14.0%, p<0.0001). In contrast they had higher heart rates (113 bpm vs 84 bpm, p<0.0001) on admission. Among the patients with first diagnosed AF 24.6% received a cardioversion (either pharmacological of electrical). Patients with first diagnosed AF undergoing rhythm control treatment showed lower rates for all-cause mortality (10.4% vs 18.2%, p<0.0001) and myocardial infarction (2.4% vs. 5.2%, p=0.0045) as compared to patients first diagnosed with AF not recieving a cardioversion. However, no differences for strokes (2.7% vs 3.3%, p=0.6158) or severe bleeding according to ISTH major bleeding criteria (4.0% vs. 5.3%, p=0.2252) could be detected. Conclusions Patients presenting to an ED with first diagnosed AF are younger and show fewer comorbidities compared to patients with pre-existing AF. Patients with first diagnosed AF seem to profit from early rhythm control strategies showing a reduction for the rates of all-cause mortality and myocardial infarction. However, no difference for stroke or major bleeding events could be detected. Additional, prospective studies are required to verify this hypothesis.

Diltiazem reduces levels of NT-proBNP and improves symptoms compared with metoprolol in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation.

Short-term treatment with calcium channel blockers lowers levels of N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and reduces rhythm-related symptoms compared to treatment with beta-blockers. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of metoprolol and diltiazem for rate control in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation (AF) after 6 months. Men and women with permanent AF and preserved left ventricular systolic function were randomized to receive either diltiazem 360mg or metoprolol 100mg once daily. The primary endpoint was the level of NT-proBNP after a 6-month treatment period. Secondary endpoints included heart rate, rhythm-related symptoms and exercise capacity. A total of 93 patients (mean age 71±7 years, 28 women) were randomized. After 6-months' treatment, mean levels of NT-proBNP decreased in the diltiazem group and increased in the metoprolol group, with a significant between-group difference (409.8 pg/mL, 95% CI: 230.6-589.1, P<0.001). Treatment with diltiazem significantly reduced rhythm-related symptoms compared to baseline, but no change was observed in the metoprolol group. Diltiazem and metoprolol had similar effects on heart rate and exercise capacity. Diltiazem reduced NT-proBNP levels and improved rhythm-related symptoms. Metoprolol increased peptide levels but had no impact on symptoms despite similar heart rate reduction. Non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers should be considered more often for rate control in permanent AF.

Rhythm versus rate control in patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation – Observations from the GARFIELD-AF registry

BackgroundInvestigate real-world outcomes of early rhythm versus rate control in patients with recent onset atrial fibrillation. MethodsThe Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-AF (GARFIELD-AF) is an international multi-centre, non-interventional prospective registry of newly diagnosed (≤6 weeks’ duration) atrial fibrillation patients at risk for stroke. Patients were stratified according to treatment initiated at baseline (≤48 days post enrolment), and outcome risks evaluated by overlap propensity weighted Cox proportional-hazards models. ResultsOf 45,382 non-permanent atrial fibrillation patients, 23,858 (52.6 %) received rhythm control and 21,524 (47.4 %) rate control. Rhythm-controlled patients had lower median age (68.0 [Q1;Q3: 60.0;76.0] versus 73.0 [65.0;79.0]), fewer histories of stroke/transient ischemic attack/systemic embolism (9.4 % versus 13.0 %), and lower expected probabilities of death (median GARFIELD-AF death score 4.0 [2.3;7.5] versus 5.1 [2.8;9.2]). The two groups had the same median CHA2DS2-VASc scores (3.0 [2.0;4.0]) and similar proportions of anticoagulated patients (rhythm control: 66.0 %, rate control: 65.5 %). The propensity-score-weighted hazard ratios of rhythm vs rate control (reference) were 0.85 (95 % CI: 0.79–0.92, p-value < 0.0001) for all-cause mortality, 0.84 (0.72–0.97, p-value 0.020) for non-haemorrhagic stroke/systemic embolism and 0.90 (0.78–1.04, p-value 0.164) for major bleeding. ConclusionRhythm control strategy was initiated in about half of the patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular non-permanent atrial fibrillation. After balancing confounders, significantly lower risks of all-cause mortality and non-haemorrhagic stroke were observed in patients who received early rhythm control.

Clinical efficacy of catheter ablation versus medical rate control among patients with atrial fibrillation across heart failure phenotypes: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Abstract Background Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia encountered in clinical practice. It frequently co-exists with heart failure (HF) with complex dynamic interactions. Trials comparing rate and rhythm control strategies with the latter based on anti-arrhythmic drugs (AADs) failed to show benefit of one strategy over the other. Therefore, it is still unclear what constitutes an ideal AF management, especially in the context of HF. Objective To compare the clinical efficacy between catheter ablation and medical rate control among patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure Study Selection Only randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing catheter ablation and medical rate control in patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure were selected for review. Methods Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting clinical outcomes of catheter ablation versus medical rate control for AF in HF patients with &amp;gt; 6 months follow-up. Primary endpoint was change in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Secondary endpoints were 6-minute walk test (6MWT) distance, quality of life (QoL), BNP levels, and number of adverse events. Results Five RCTs with 615 patients were included in the analysis. Patients in the catheter ablation had greater improvement in LVEF (WMD 7.38, 95%CI: p &amp;lt; 0.001), longer 6-min walk distance (WMD 17.41, CI 95%: p &amp;lt; 0.0001), lower Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) scores (WMD -6.21, CI 95%: p &amp;lt; 0.00001), and lower BNP levels (WMD -113.1 ng/L, CI 95%: p &amp;lt; 0.00001), compared with medical rate control. However, catheter ablation group had higher rates of adverse events mostly from procedural complications (RR 2.2, CI 95%: p = 0.005). Conclusion Catheter ablation is superior to medical rate control in terms of LVEF improvement, increase in functional status, reduction in biomarker, and better quality of life among patients with AF and HF.

Abstract 11574: Clinical Changes and Predictors of Health Status in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

Background: Recent clinical trials have shown the health status benefit of rhythm control, including catheter ablation (CA) over rate control for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, the trials show population-averaged benefits, which complicates clinical interpretation; in reality, some patients may not benefit or even experience worsening health status after treatment. This study aimed to examine changes in patients' health status and identify predictors in a multicenter outpatient registry (KiCS-AF). Methods: KiCS-AF was a multicenter, prospective registry of patients with newly diagnosed AF collecting baseline and 1-year patient-reported health status. We examined changes in the Atrial Fibrillation Effect on QualiTy-of-life overall summary (AFEQT-OS) score over 1 year across different treatment strategies in patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF. We defined clinically important improvement and deterioration of health status as ≥5 points increase and decrease in AFEQT-OS score and no change as -5 to 5 points based on previous reports. Results: Overall, 1,960 patients were enrolled in this study, with mean AFEQT-OS scores of 76.7±17.7 and 85.4±14.8 at baseline and 1-year follow-up, respectively. The majority of patients (53.9%) experienced a clinically important improvement in health status, albeit a substantial number of patients experienced no change (28.7%) or worsening health status (17.4%). The proportion of patients with no change or worsening health status differed by treatment strategy (59.9%, 53.9%, and 32.0% in the rate control, antiarrhythmic drugs, and CA groups, respectively). After adjustment for baseline characteristics and AFEQT-OS scores, preserved baseline health status, older age (≥65 years), female sex, heart failure, and coronary artery disease were independent predictors of worsening health status in the overall cohort and the CA subgroup. Conclusion: In contemporary practice, a large proportion of patients showed improvement in health status, while a considerable number of patients experienced worsening or no change after intervention. Patient-centered care is essential to prevent the worsening of health status even after CA in high cardiovascular-risk, elderly, and female populations.

A pilot study evaluating the role of ivabradine for rate control in patients with rheumatic atrial fibrillation

ObjectivesIvabradine may have a role in rate control of atrial fibrillation (AF) due to effects on HCN channels in AV node. We studied role of Ivabradine in rate control of rheumatic AF. Methods80 patients, rheumatic AF, HR > 100 bpm (age 47 ± 11 yrs, AF duration 6.8 ± 2.9 years, rate 131 ± 16 bpm) on maximally tolerated ββ or CCB's, randomized to Ivabradine or escalated ββ/CCB. Ivabradine started @ 2.5 mg BD; increased to 5 mg BD if inadequate response at 1 week (failure to decrease HR < 10% vs baseline). After Holter at 1 month, dose escalated to 7.5 mg BD if needed. ResultsIvabradine resulted in significantly lower HR (81 ± 10 vs 99 ± 9) at 3 months and 6 months (79 ± 8 vs 94 ± 8, p < 0.001). Absolute reduction in HR: 56 ± 15 vs 31 ± 14 bpm and % change in HR: 41 ± 7 vs 24 ± 9%, both p < 0.00001).At 6 months, Ivabradine group had.1Significantly lower NT Pro BNP (1168 vs 1314 pg/ml), higher 6 min walk distance (410 ± 47 vs 349 ± 54 m, all p < 0.001)2Better symptom class (EHRA score 1: asymptomatic 84% vs 40%), improvement >1 EHRA class; baseline 60% vs 17%3Better LA Strain (22.8 ± 2.8% vs 20.6 ± 2.5%)Ivabradine was well tolerated and there was no drug withdrawal. ConclusionOur data suggest that Ivabradine can be an option for rate control in rheumatic AF.

Diltiazem efficacy and CYP2D6 gene polymorphism in patients with atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular response

BackgroundDiltiazem stands out as one of the front-line drugs administered in the emergency department to achieve acute rate control in patients suffering from atrial fibrillation with rapid Ventricular Response. One of the cytochrome enzymes involved in the metabolism of diltiazem is cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6). Interindividual differences can act on drug metabolism and thus drug efficacy due to the genetic polymorphism induced by the CYP2D6 enzyme. This study explores the association between the efficacy of diltiazem and the genetic polymorphism of CYP2D6 in patients with atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular response.Results87 out of 93 individuals with ventricular rate > 120 beats/min constituted the patient cohort. The patients were administered 0.25 mg/kg diltiazem intravenously. As a second dose, 0.35 mg/kg diltiazem was administered to patients who reportedly did not receive adequate drug efficacy. Heart rate control was considered to be achieved in patients whose heart rate fell below 110 beats/min and did not rise above 110 beats/min for 2 h. CYP2D6 *2, *3, *4 and *10 represent allele variants and *1 represents wild type (wt) allele. Achieving rate control after one or two doses of diltiazem in normal allele (wt/wt) carriers proved significantly higher than wt/*2, wt/*4 and wt/*10 heterozygous variant carriers. No significant difference was noted in wt/*3 heterozygous variant carriers.ConclusionThe presence of *2, *4 and *10 alleles was observed to significantly compromise the drug efficacy. *3 allele was found to bear no relation to the effect of diltiazem on achieving rate control.

CE-452776-3 IS RATE CONTROL EVER ADEQUATE? CATHER ABLATION IN RATE CONTROLLED ATRIAL FIBRILLATION WITH REDUCED EJECTION FRACTION

The optimal rate control target for atrial fibrillation (AF) in the setting of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is not defined. Prior clinical trials have demonstrated benefits of AF ablation for patients with HFrEF, including recovery in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). However, it is unknown if degree of rate control prior to ablation affects outcomes. To evaluate whether degree of pre-ablation rate control impacts LVEF recovery following AF ablation in patients with HFrEF. A single center, retrospective cohort study of 75 consecutive patients with LVEF ≤35% who underwent first-time ablation for persistent AF at NYU Langone Health between January 2014 and January 2021. Patients were classified as having a LVEF recovery if their post-ablation LVEF was >35%. Proportion of patients with LVEF recovery were compared between multiple rate control cutoffs: 110 bpm, 90 bpm, and 70 bpm. A binomial logistic regression analysis was then performed examining the relationship of pre-ablation HR on LVEF recovery. The mean pre-ablation HR was 90±25 bpm, baseline LVEF was 27±6%, and 64% (48/75) of patients had at least 3 months of maximal GDMT prior to ablation (Table 1A). Significant improvement in LVEF was observed in all patient subgroups irrespective of rate control status (Figure 1A) and regardless of prior GDMT (Figure 1B). Overall, LVEF recovery to >35% occurred in 59% (44/75) of patients. Compared to patients with pre-ablation HR faster than evaluated rate control cutoffs (Table 1B), there were no differences in frequency of LVEF recovery when using ≤110 bpm (controlled: 58% vs. not controlled: 63%, p=0.73) or ≤90 bpm (controlled: 52% vs. not controlled: 66%, p=0.21). In contrast, patients achieving rate control ≤70 bpm were significantly less likely to have LVEF recovery (41%) compared to those with HR above the cutoff (66%; p=0.04). Binomial logistic regression analysis did not reveal HR as a significant predictor of LVEF recovery (OR=1.01; CI 95%=0.99-1.03; p=0.16). Catheter ablation of persistent in AF in patients with HFrEF frequently resulted in improvement in LVEF, irrespective of achieved rate control. LVEF recovery >35% following catheter ablation was reduced only with rate control of HR 70bpm. Catheter ablation should be considered in HFrEF patients regardless of degree of rate control achieved. Heart rate 70bpm should be evaluated as a goal for adequate rate control in patients with HFrEF in whom rhythm control is not pursued.

Lenient rate control versus strict rate control for atrial fibrillation: a statistical analysis plan for the Danish Atrial Fibrillation (DanAF) randomized clinical trial

BackgroundA key decision in the treatment of atrial fibrillation is choosing between a rhythm control strategy or a rate control strategy as the main strategy. When choosing rate control, the optimal heart rate target is uncertain. The Danish Atrial Fibrillation trial is a randomized, multicenter, two-group, superiority trial comparing strict rate control versus lenient rate control in patients with either persistent or permanent atrial fibrillation at inclusion. To prevent bias arising from selective reporting and data-driven analyses, we developed a predefined description of the statistical analysis.MethodsThe primary outcome of this trial is the physical component score of the SF-36 questionnaire. A total of 350 participants will be enrolled based on a minimal important difference of 3 points on the physical component score of the SF-36 questionnaire, a standard deviation of 10 points, a statistical power of 80% (beta of 20%), and an acceptable risk of type I error of 5%. All secondary, exploratory, and echocardiographic outcomes will be hypothesis-generating. The analyses of all outcomes will be based on the intention-to-treat principle. We will analyze continuous outcomes using linear regression adjusting for “site,” type of atrial fibrillation at inclusion (persistent/ permanent), left ventricular ejection fraction (≥ 40% or < 40%), and the baseline value of the outcome (all as fixed effects). We define our threshold for statistical significance as a p-value of 0.05 and assessments of clinical significance will be based on the anticipated intervention effects defined in the sample size and power estimations. Thresholds for both statistical and clinical significance will be assessed according to the 5-step procedure proposed by Jakobsen and colleagues.DiscussionThis statistical analysis plan will be published prior to enrolment completion and before any data are available and is sought to increase the validity of the DANish Atrial Fibrillation trial.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT04542785. Registered on Sept 09, 2020.

Optimal Heart Rate Control Improves Long-Term Prognosis of Decompensated Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction

Background and Objectives: An elevated heart rate is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease; however, the relationship between heart rate control and the long-term outcomes of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) remains unclear. This study explored the long-term prognostic importance of heart rate control in patients hospitalized with HFrEF. Materials and Methods: We retrieved the records of patients admitted for decompensated heart failure with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of ≤40%, from 1 January 2005 to 31 December 2019. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) during follow-up. We analyzed the outcomes using Cox proportional hazard ratios calculated using the patients' heart rates, as measured at baseline and approximately 3 months later. The mean follow-up duration was 49.0 ± 38.1 months. Results: We identified 5236 eligible patients, and divided them into five groups on the basis of changes in their heart rates. The mean LVEFs of the groups ranged from 29.1% to 30.6%. After adjustment for all covariates, the results demonstrated that lesser heart rate reductions at the 3-month screening period were associated with long-term cardiovascular death, HHF, and all-cause mortality (p for linear trend = 0.033, 0.042, and 0.003, respectively). The restricted cubic spline model revealed a linear relationship between reduction in heart rate and risk of outcomes (p for nonlinearity > 0.2). Conclusions: Greater reductions in heart rate were associated with a lower risk of long-term cardiovascular death, HHF, and all-cause mortality among patients discharged after hospitalization for decompensated HFrEF.

Measurements of pulse rate using facial video cameras from smart devices in patients diagnosed with atrial fibrillation

Clinical applications of passive long-term heart rate (HR) monitoring in patients with cardiac arrhythmias include adequate drug titration of atrioventricular (AV) nodal drugs and assessment of medical compliance with treatment. A majority of patients treated with beta-blockers, especially patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), require some degree of drug titration during the first 6 months of treatment to ensure that adequate HR control and medicine compliance has been achieved. Failing to achieve adequate rate control in patients with AF can lead to worsening symptoms, heart failure exacerbations, and potentially tachycardia-induced cardiomyopathy. Enabling video-based monitoring during telehealth patient visits could facilitate providers to measure heart rate (HR) without the need for a dedicated home device (smartwatch, SPO2 device, or others). Videoplethysmography (VPG) is a monitoring technology that measures pulse rate by utilizing front-facing cameras embedded in smart devices. VPG provides a remote and contactless cardiac monitoring solution. We conducted a clinical experiment to evaluate the accuracy of VPG in measuring HR while running on two portable devices: Samsung S10 smartphones and S3 tablets. We used a single‑lead ECG to measure the heart rate at the time of the VPG recordings in AF patients. We employed the Bland-Altman method to measure the level of agreement between videoplethysmography and ECG-based measurements of HR. The findings reveal that the mean difference in videoplethysmography and ECG-based heart rate was inferior to 1 bpm across the 2 devices with confidence intervals ranging from 3 to 12 BPM. Our facial video-based HR monitoring solution could assist providers in measuring heart rates in their patients with AF during remote telehealth visits.

Abstract 12571: Optimal Rate Control Strategy in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials and Multivariable Adjusted Studies

Introduction: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with an increased risk of impaired quality of life, stroke, and mortality. Despite multiple studies, the optimal target for rate control in AF is not definitively known. Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the effects of strict rate control (&lt;80 bpm at rest) with a lenient rate control strategy (&lt;110 bpm at rest) in patients with AF. The outcomes analyzed were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular (CV) death and CV hospitalization. A subgroup analysis was also performed in patients with heart failure (HF). PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane Central were searched for randomized controlled trials or observational studies with multivariable analyses adjusting for confounders. Results: Seven studies were included. All studies were either randomized or reported multivariate adjusted hazard ratios. There were 14,154 (59.6%) patients in the strict rate control strategy and 9,606 (40.4%) in the lenient group. AF was reported as paroxysmal in 1,697 (7.3%) patients. All-cause mortality was not statistically different between a strict vs. lenient heart rate control strategy, although there was a tendency towards improvement in the strict control group (HR 1.10; 95% CI 1.00-1.22; p=0.05; Figure 1A). In patients with AF and HF, there was also no significant difference between groups (HR 1.13; 95% CI 0.99-1.30; p=0.08; Figure 1B). Furthermore, CV death (HR 0.91; 95% CI 0.75-1.11) and CV hospitalization (HR 1.01; 95% CI 0.96-1.06) were also not significantly different between the two strategies. Conclusions: There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality between strict and leninent rate control in patients with AF among randomized trials or multivariable adjusted studies. In a subgroup of patients with HF, there was also no significant difference between the two rate control strategies.

Rhythm versus rate control in patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation: observations from the GARFIELD-AF registry

Abstract Background Atrial fibrillation is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. Real-world reports on the effect of early rhythm control on patient outcomes in patient with recent onset atrial fibrillation are limited. Purpose To assess the effect of early rhythm versus rate control on clinical outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Method The Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-AF (GARFIELD-AF) is a non-interventional registry of adult (≥18 years) patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation (≤ six weeks' duration) and at least one investigator determined risk factor for stroke. Patients were enrolled in 1317 participating sites in 35 countries between March 2010 and August 2016. Patients with permanent atrial fibrillation were excluded. Stratification to rhythm or rate control was based on treatment strategy initiated at baseline (≤48 days post enrolment). Rhythm control was defined as investigator reported initiation of rhythm control (antiarrhythmic drug(s), cardioversion, or ablation – alone or in combination with rate modifiers). Rate control was defined as investigator reported initiation of rate control and absence of rhythm control therapy. Overlap propensity weighting and Cox proportional-hazards models were used to evaluate effect on outcomes. Results Of 45,382 included patients, 23,858 (52.6%) received rhythm control and 21,524 (47.4%) rate control. Rates of rhythm control were similar throughout the study time period (52.7% in 2010/2011, 54.2% in 2015/2016). Patients in the rhythm control group were younger (median age (Q1; Q3) 68.0 (60.0; 76.0) versus 73.0 (65.0; 79.0)), had lower rates of prior stroke/transitory ischemic attack/systemic embolism (9.4% vs 13.0%), and a lower median GARFIELD death score (4.0 (2.3; 7.5) versus 5.1 (2.8; 9.2)). Median CHA2DS2-VASc Scores were 3.0 (2.0; 4.0) in both groups. Rate of anticoagulation treatment was similar in the rhythm and rate control group (66.0% versus 65.5%). After propensity score overlap weighting, patients of the two groups were well balanced on all observed characteristics. Event rates per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval [CI]) over two years follow-up in the rhythm and rate control group were 2.94 (2.78–3.10) versus 4.43 (4.22–4.64) for mortality, 0.84 (0.75–0.92) versus 1.16 (1.05–1.27) for non-haemorrhagic stroke/systemic embolism and 0.84 (0.76–0.93) versus 1.16 (1.06–1.27) for major bleeding. Adjusted hazard ratios (95% CI) for the same time period were 0.85 (0.79–0.92), 0.84 (0.72–0.97) and 0.9 (0.78–1.04). Conclusion In this large, internation registry, a rhythm control strategy was initiated at baseline in about half of the patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation. After adjustment for confounding factors, a significantly lower risk of all-cause mortality and non-haemorrhagic stroke/systemic embolism were observed for patients that received an early rhythm control strategy. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: Private grant(s) and/or Sponsorship. Main funding source(s): This work was supported by the Thrombosis Research Institute (London, UK).

Sex Difference in Effectiveness of Early Rhythm- over Rate-Control in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

Background: This study aimed to investigate the associations between sex and the relative effect of rhythm control over rate control in patients with atrial fibrillation. Methods: We used the National Health Insurance Service database to select patients treated for atrial fibrillation within one year after diagnosis. The primary composite outcome comprised cardiovascular death, ischemic stroke, heart failure hospitalization, or acute myocardial infarction. Results: During the mean follow-up (4.9 ± 3.2 years), the benefit of rhythm control over rate control on the primary composite outcome became statistically insignificant after 3 months from atrial fibrillation diagnosis in women while remained steadily until 12 months in men. The risk of primary composite outcome for rhythm control was lower than that for rate control in both sexes if it was initiated within 6 months (men: HR = 0.86, 95%CI = 0.79–0.94; women: HR = 0.85, 95%CI = 0.78–0.93; P for interaction = 0.844). However, there was significant interaction between sex and the relative effect of rhythm control if it was initiated after 6 months (men: HR = 0.72, 95%CI = 0.52–0.99; women: HR = 1.32, 95%CI = 0.92–1.88; P for interaction = 0.018). Conclusion: Rhythm control resulted in lower risk of primary composite outcome than rate control in both sexes; however, the treatment initiation at an earlier stage might be considered in women.

Benefits and safety of landiolol for rapid rate control in patients with atrial tachyarrhythmias and acute decompensated heart failure.

Atrial tachyarrhythmias often occur in patients with worsening heart failure (HF), and the development of atrial tachyarrhythmias in acute decompensated HF (ADHF) causes an uncontrolled heart rate (HR) and leads to further exacerbation of HF and persistence of a decompensated HF state. Landiolol, a short-acting intravenous beta-1 blocker, shows very high cardiac beta-1 selectivity and has a very short elimination half-life of approximately 4 min. As shown in several reports, the benefit of intravenous landiolol is that it lowers the ventricular rate early after the start of use without markedly deteriorating haemodynamics. After the cardiac status is stabilized by rapid control of HR, subsequent basic HF pharmacotherapy and rhythm control therapies will be effective for improving outcomes. Because of the pharmacokinetic properties of landiolol, if the patient suffers an adverse reaction such as hypotension or bradycardia, such effects can be quickly reversed by tapering the dose or discontinuing use altogether. Based on several clinical studies, this review discusses the efficacy, safety and role of intravenous landiolol in acute HR control in patients with atrial tachyarrhythmias and ADHF.

THE IMPACT OF HYPERTENSION AND ANTIHIPERTENSIVE TREATMENTS ON PATIENTS WITH SARS-COV-2: A RETROSPECTIVE-COHORT STUDY

Objective: Hypertension is one of the most important factors for cardiovascular disease. It has been repeatedly proposed as a prognostic factor of severe COVID-19 and has been included in clinical risk scores to predict the occurrence of critical illness in ospitalised with COVID-19. Also, it has been postulated the relation between antihypertensive drugs and the severity of COVID-19. The aims of our study were to analyze whether hypertension and antihypertensive treatment represent an independent risk factor for death or intensive care unit admission in patients with SARS-COV2. Design and method: Observational, retrospective, single-center cohort study of all patients admitted to Hospital Virgen Macarena diagnosed with COVID-19 between the months of March and December 2020. A bivariate analysis was performed using Pearson's chi-square Results: 608 patients required admission for COVID-19. A total of 83.7% were hypertensive, specifically 75.9% were under antihypertensive treatment (35.7% with only 1 drug, 29.9% were taking two drugs, 9% with three drugs, and 1.3% with 4 drugs). 26.2% were treated with an ACEI, 24.8% with ARA-II, 16.8% with calcium-antagonists, 30.9% with diuretics, 21.2% with beta-blockers, 0, 5% with alpha-blockers). Hypertension did not show a statistically significant relationship with mortality (p = 0.34), increase in mortality and ICU admissions. Neither treatment with ACEI (p = 0.4), ARB-II (p = 0.45), calcium antagonists (p = 0.53), diuretics (p = 0.68), alpha blockers (p = 0.07) demonstrated relation with those items. Surprisingly, beta-blockers increased the mortality in patients with SARS-COV2 (p = 0.048). Probably this results can be explained as these drugs were indicated for rate control in patients with atrial fibrillation (p = 0.006). The number of antihypertensive drugs used also did not show a statistically significant relationship with an increase in mortality (p = 0.978). Conclusions: Hypertension is a highly prevalent pathology in patients ospitalised with COVID-19 infection. However, high blood pressure was not associated with a higher risk for mortality in patients with SARS-COV-2, neither the type or the number of antihypertensive drug used. Only beta-blockers alter outcomes in hypertensive patients with COVID-19, as they were associated with more deaths.