Key result
The HeartLogic algorithm identified increased risk of heart failure events during atrial fibrillation, with an IN/OUT-of-alert incidence rate ratio of 2.70 (95% CI 1.01-28.33).
Why the study?
The HeartLogic Index stratifies heart failure risk, but its performance during sinus rhythm compared with long-lasting atrial fibrillation had not been evaluated.
Does the HeartLogic Index algorithm accurately stratify the risk of heart failure events in ICD patients during long-lasting atrial fibrillation compared to sinus rhythm?
Cohort (n=568)
Yes
Does the HeartLogic Index algorithm accurately stratify the risk of heart failure events in ICD patients during long-lasting atrial fibrillation compared to sinus rhythm?
Absolute Event Rate: 0.34% vs 0.06%
p-value: p=<0.001
The HeartLogic multi-sensor algorithm successfully identifies an increased risk of heart failure events even during long-lasting atrial fibrillation, although the predictive ratio is lower compared to non-AF periods.
AIMS: The HeartLogic Index combines data from multiple implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) sensors and has been shown to accurately stratify patients at risk of heart failure (HF) events. We evaluated and compared the performance of this algorithm during sinus rhythm and during long-lasting atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS AND RESULTS: HeartLogic was activated in 568 ICD patients from 26 centres. We found periods of ≥30 consecutive days with an atrial high-rate episode (AHRE) burden <1 h/day and periods with an AHRE burden ≥20 h/day. We then identified patients who met both criteria during the follow-up (AHRE group, n = 53), to allow pairwise comparison of periods. For control purposes, we identified patients with an AHRE burden <1 h throughout their follow-up and implemented 2:1 propensity score matching vs. the AHRE group (matched non-AHRE group, n = 106). In the AHRE group, the rate of alerts was 1.2 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.0-1.5]/patient-year during periods with an AHRE burden <1 h/day and 2.0 (95% CI: 1.5-2.6)/patient-year during periods with an AHRE-burden ≥20 h/day (P = 0.004). The rate of HF hospitalizations was 0.34 (95% CI: 0.15-0.69)/patient-year during IN-alert periods and 0.06 (95% CI: 0.02-0.14)/patient-year during OUT-of-alert periods (P < 0.001). The IN/OUT-of-alert state incidence rate ratio of HF hospitalizations was 8.59 (95% CI: 1.67-55.31) during periods with an AHRE burden <1 h/day and 2.70 (95% CI: 1.01-28.33) during periods with an AHRE burden ≥20 h/day. In the matched non-AHRE group, the rate of HF hospitalizations was 0.29 (95% CI: 0.12-0.60)/patient-year during IN-alert periods and 0.04 (95% CI: 0.02-0.08)/patient-year during OUT-of-alert periods (P < 0.001). The incidence rate ratio was 7.11 (95% CI: 2.19-22.44). CONCLUSION: Patients received more alerts during periods of AF. The ability of the algorithm to identify increased risk of HF events was confirmed during AF, despite a lower IN/OUT-of-alert incidence rate ratio in comparison with non-AF periods and non-AF patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://clinicaltrials.gov/Identifier: NCT02275637.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Boriani et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Heart failure and atrial fibrillation (n=568). HeartLogic Index algorithm vs. OUT-of-alert periods and periods with low atrial high-rate episode burden was evaluated on Rate of heart failure hospitalizations during IN-alert versus OUT-of-alert periods in the AHRE group (p=<0.001). The HeartLogic algorithm identified increased risk of heart failure events during atrial fibrillation, with an IN/OUT-of-alert incidence rate ratio of 2.70 (95% CI 1.01-28.33).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: