PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 26, 2023Journal of Clinical Medicine13 citationsOpen Access

Prevalence and Incidence of Atrial Fibrillation in Heart Failure with Mildly Reduced or Preserved Ejection Fraction: (Additive) Value of Implantable Loop Recorders

TGThomas M. GorterDVDirk J. van VeldhuisenBMBart A. Mulder

Key Result

AF screening with an implantable loop recorder in HFmrEF/HFpEF patients detected incident AF in 44% of those without prior AF, with 58% of cases detected solely by the device.

Study Design

Type

Observational (n=113)

Multicenter

Yes

Structured PICO

Does continuous rhythm monitoring with an implantable loop recorder improve the detection of incident atrial fibrillation in patients with HFmrEF/HFpEF compared to conventional monitoring?

P
Population
113 patients with heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction (HFmrEF/HFpEF), mean age 73 ± 8 years, 75% HFpEF.
I
Intervention
Implantable loop recorder (ILR) for continuous rhythm monitoring over 2 years
C
Comparator
Conventional monitoring (yearly 12-lead ECG and two yearly 24 h Holter monitors)
O
Outcome
Prevalence and incidence of atrial fibrillation (AF) and diagnostic yield of ILR vs conventional modalities

In patients with HFmrEF/HFpEF, incident AF is extremely common and screening with an implantable loop recorder provides a much higher diagnostic yield than conventional modalities.

Main Result

Effect estimate: Incidence rate 27.1 per 100 person-years (95% CI 16.3-42.4)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction (HFmrEF/HFpEF) and has a negative impact on outcome. Reliable data on prevalence, incidence, and detection of AF from contemporary, prospective HFmrEF/HFpEF studies are scarce. METHODS: This was a prespecified sub-analysis from a prospective, multicenter study. Patients with HFmrEF/HFpEF underwent 12-lead electrocardiography (ECG), 24 h Holter monitoring, and received an implantable loop recorder (ILR) at the study start. During the 2 year follow-up, rhythm monitoring was performed via ILR, yearly ECG, and two yearly 24 h Holter monitors. RESULTS: A total of 113 patients were included (mean age 73 ± 8 years, 75% HFpEF). At baseline, 70 patients (62%) had a diagnosis of AF: 21 paroxysmal, 18 persistent, and 31 permanent AF. At study start, 45 patients were in AF. Of the 43 patients without a history of AF, 19 developed incident AF during a median follow-up of 23 15-25 months (44%; incidence rate 27.1 (95% confidence interval 16.3-42.4) per 100 person-years). Thus, after the 2-year follow-up, 89 patients (79%) had a diagnosis of AF. In 11/19 incident AF cases (i.e., 58%), AF was solely detected on the ILR. Yearly 12-lead ECG detected six incident AF cases and four of these cases were also detected on two yearly 24 h Holter monitors. Two incident AF cases were detected on an unplanned ECG/Holter. CONCLUSIONS: Atrial fibrillation is extremely common in heart failure with HFmrEF/HFpEF and may inform on symptom evaluation and treatment options. AF screening with an ILR had a much higher diagnostic yield than conventional modalities.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Gorter et al. (2023) conducted an observational in Heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction (HFmrEF/HFpEF) (n=113). Implantable loop recorder (ILR) vs. Conventional modalities (yearly ECG, 24 h Holter) was evaluated on Incident atrial fibrillation (Incidence rate 27.1 per 100 person-years, 95% CI 16.3-42.4). AF screening with an implantable loop recorder in HFmrEF/HFpEF patients detected incident AF in 44% of those without prior AF, with 58% of cases detected solely by the device.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a18e1d5a09e0bfd307c120ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12113682
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper