Why the study?
Atrial fibrillation is common in heart failure, but gaps remain regarding its impact on outcomes in patients with left ventricular assist devices.
Does the presence of atrial fibrillation increase mortality, thromboembolism, or bleeding in adult patients with left ventricular assist devices compared to sinus rhythm?
Does the presence of atrial fibrillation increase mortality, thromboembolism, or bleeding in adult patients with left ventricular assist devices compared to sinus rhythm?
In patients with left ventricular assist devices, the presence of atrial fibrillation is associated with a 25% increased risk of all-cause mortality compared to sinus rhythm, but a lower risk of thromboembolism.
Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common finding in patients with heart failure and is well-known for its deleterious effects on cardiac function and hemodynamics; however, there are gaps in knowledge regarding the impact of AF on patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs). Methods: In this study, we searched PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases through September 2021 to find articles that assessed the outcomes of AF in patients with LVADs. Results: A total of 12 studies that underwent systematic review evaluated the outcomes of 7853 adult patients. The meta-analysis analyzed findings from a total of 1003 patients. Pooled findings indicated a 25% higher risk of mortality in patients with AF as compared to those in sinus rhythm (P = .02). No statistically significant differences in mortality were noted between patients with paroxysmal AF or persistent AF (P = .13). No statistically significant differences were noted between the groups in terms of bleeding (P = .70). There was an increased risk of thromboembolism in patients with sinus rhythm compared to those with AF (P < .001). Conclusion: The presence of AF was not found to be associated with an increased risk of bleeding or thromboembolism but may be associated with increased mortality.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Buttar et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: