Key result
HATCH score predicts ~169% greater NOAF risk after TAVI, performing as well as CHA2DS2-VASc.
Why the study?
New-onset atrial fibrillation is a frequent complication after TAVI associated with adverse outcomes, but simple pre-procedural tools to identify at-risk patients are limited.
Does the HATCH score predict new-onset atrial fibrillation in patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI?
Cohort (n=268)
No
Does the HATCH score predict new-onset atrial fibrillation in patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI?
Odds Ratio: 2.69 (95% CI 1.75–4.13)
p-value: p=<0.001
The HATCH score is a simple, bedside tool that independently predicts new-onset atrial fibrillation after transfemoral TAVI, performing comparably to the CHA2DS2-VASc score.
May support HATCH for post-TAVI NOAF risk stratification; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation.
Background New‐onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) is a frequent complication after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and is associated with adverse outcomes, yet simple pre‐procedural tools to identify at‐risk patients are limited. The HATCH score predicts incident atrial fibrillation in other settings but has not been evaluated in TAVI. We assessed whether the HATCH score predicts NOAF after transfemoral TAVI and compared it with the CHA 2 DS 2 ‐VASc score. Methods In this retrospective single‐center study, 268 patients in sinus rhythm who underwent transfemoral TAVI for severe aortic stenosis between October 2022 and January 2026 were included. NOAF was defined as atrial fibrillation or flutter lasting ≥ 30 s during the index hospitalization. Independent predictors were identified by multivariable logistic regression; discrimination was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), compared using the DeLong test, and internally validated by bootstrapping. Results NOAF occurred in 44 patients (16.4%). The HATCH score was higher in the NOAF group (2.75 ± 0.81 vs. 2.03 ± 0.85; p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, the HATCH score (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 2.69, 95% CI 1.75–4.13; p < 0.001) and aortic root angulation (adjusted OR 1.05 per degree, 95% CI 1.02–1.09; p = 0.002) were independent predictors of NOAF. The HATCH score yielded an AUC of 0.730 (95% CI 0.672–0.782), numerically higher than that of the CHA 2 DS 2 ‐VASc score (0.668, 95% CI 0.608–0.724), although the difference was not significant ( p = 0.216); a HATCH score ≥ 3 provided 63.6% sensitivity and 77.7% specificity. The optimism‐corrected C‐statistic was 0.761 with a calibration slope of 0.918. NOAF was associated with a higher rate of in‐hospital stroke (15.9% vs. 3.6%; p = 0.005). Conclusions The HATCH score independently predicted NOAF after transfemoral TAVI and performed at least as well as the CHA 2 DS 2 ‐VASc score; aortic root angulation was an additional independent correlate. As a simple, bedside tool, the HATCH score may aid pre‐procedural risk stratification, pending external validation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tunca et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Severe aortic stenosis (n=268). HATCH score vs. CHA2DS2-VASc score was evaluated on New-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) lasting ≥ 30 s during the index hospitalization (OR 2.69, 95% CI 1.75-4.13, p=<0.001). The HATCH score independently predicted new-onset atrial fibrillation after transfemoral TAVI (adjusted OR 2.69; 95% CI 1.75-4.13; p<0.001), performing at least as well as the CHA2DS2-VASc score.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: