Prognostic Significance of New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation Burden in Acute Myocardial Infarction Patients: A Comparison Based on Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction

Figures

• 

  Figure 1. Flow diagram illustrating the inclusion of patients. AF, atrial fibrillation; NOAF, new-onset atrial fibrillation; AMI, acute myocardial infarction; AMIrEF, AMI with reduced ejection fraction; AMIpEF, AMI with preserved ejection fraction; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; CEM, continuous electronic monitoring; CABG, coronary artery bypass grafting.

• 

  Figure 2. Event-free survival incidences of the studied outcomes in AMIrEF and AMIpEF patients according to AF burden. Kaplan–Meier curves illustrating the event-free survival incidence of MACE (A,E), cardiovascular death (B,F), HF hospitalization (C,G), and ischemic stroke (D,H) in AMIrEF and AMIpEF patients according to AF burden. NOAF, new-onset atrial fibrillation; AF, atrial fibrillation; AMI, acute myocardial infarction; AMIrEF, AMI with reduced ejection fraction; AMIpEF, AMI with preserved ejection fraction; MACE, major adverse cardiovascular event; HF, heart failure.

• 

  Figure 3. Association between post-MI NOAF burden and clinical outcomes in AMIrEF and AMIpEF groups. RCS analysis of the association between post-MI NOAF burden and risks of MACE, cardiovascular death, HF hospitalization, and ischemic stroke in the AMIrEF (A–D) and AMIpEF (E–H) groups. The colored solid line represents the HR, the colored area represents the 95% CI, and the horizontal dashed line indicates an HR of 1.00. For MACE, cardiovascular death, and HF hospitalization, the HRs were adjusted for GRACE risk score, age, sex, MI types, primary PCI, and peak troponin-T. For ischemic stroke, an adjustment was performed using the CHA2DS2-VASc score. NOAF, new-onset atrial fibrillation; AMI, acute myocardial infarction; AMIrEF, AMI with reduced ejection fraction; AMIpEF, AMI with preserved ejection fraction; MACE, major adverse cardiovascular event; HF, heart failure; RCS, restricted cubic spline; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval.

• 

  Figure 4. Sensitivity analyses of multiple AF burden thresholds in AMIrEF and AMIpEF patients for the MACE endpoint. Sensitivity analyses evaluating the association between post-MI NOAF burden and MACE using different AF burden cutoffs in AMIrEF (A) and AMIpEF (B) patients. NOAF, new-onset atrial fibrillation; AF, atrial fibrillation; MI, myocardial infarction; AMI, acute myocardial infarction; AMIrEF, AMI with reduced ejection fraction; AMIpEF, AMI with preserved ejection fraction; MACE, major adverse cardiovascular event; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval. 1 Adjusted for GRACE risk score, age, sex, MI type, primary PCI, and peak troponin-T.