Explore the vast range of titles available.

Smartwatch and fitness band wearable consumer electronics can passively measure pulse rate from the wrist using photoplethysmography (PPG). Identification of pulse irregularity or variability from these data has the potential to identify atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter (AF, collectively). The rapidly expanding consumer base of these devices allows for detection of undiagnosed AF at scale. The Apple Heart Study is a prospective, single arm pragmatic study that has enrolled 419,093 participants (NCT03335800). The primary objective is to measure the proportion of participants with an irregular pulse detected by the Apple Watch (Apple Inc, Cupertino, CA) with AF on subsequent ambulatory ECG patch monitoring. The secondary objectives are to: 1) characterize the concordance of pulse irregularity notification episodes from the Apple Watch with simultaneously recorded ambulatory ECGs; 2) estimate the rate of initial contact with a health care provider within 3 months after notification of pulse irregularity. The study is conducted virtually, with screening, consent and data collection performed electronically from within an accompanying smartphone app. Study visits are performed by telehealth study physicians via video chat through the app, and ambulatory ECG patches are mailed to the participants. The results of this trial will provide initial evidence for the ability of a smartwatch algorithm to identify pulse irregularity and variability which may reflect previously unknown AF. The Apple Heart Study will help provide a foundation for how wearable technology can inform the clinical approach to AF identification and screening.

•Prescribing practices of antiarrhythmic drugs vary in cardiologists.•Antiarrhythmic drug prescribing practices deviate from guideline recommendations.•Deviation from recommendations largely surrounded sotalol and class 1C agent use.

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is common in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Little is known about the impact of OSA on AF treatment and long-term outcomes. We studied whether patients with OSA have a greater likelihood of progressing to more persistent forms of AF or require more hospitalizations and/or worse outcomes compared with patients without OSA. A total of 10,132 patients were enrolled between June 2010 and August 2011 in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF) and followed for up to 2 years. The prevalence of OSA and continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) treatment was captured at baseline. The association between OSA and major cardiovascular outcomes was analyzed using multivariable hierarchical logistic regression modeling and Cox frailty regression model. Of the 10,132 patients with AF, 1,841 had OSA. Patients with OSA were more symptomatic (22% vs 16% severe/disabling symptoms; P < .0001) and more often on rhythm control therapy (35% vs 31%; P = .0037). In adjusted analyses, patients with OSA had higher risk of hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR], 1.12; 95% CI, 1.03-1.22; P = .0078), but no difference in the risks of death (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.77-1.15; P = .54); the composite of CV death, myocardial infarction, and stroke/transient ischemic attack (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.85-1.34; P = .57); major bleeding (HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.96-1.46; P = .11); or AF progression (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.89-1.28; P = .51). Patients with OSA on CPAP treatment were less likely to progress to more permanent forms of AF compared with patients without CPAP (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.46-0.94; P = .021). Compared with those without, AF patients with OSA have worse symptoms and higher risks of hospitalization, but similar mortality, major adverse cardiovascular outcome, and AF progression rates. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT01165710 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Time in therapeutic range (TTR) of international normalized ratio (INR) of 2.0 to 3.0 is important for the safety and effectiveness of warfarin anticoagulation. There are few data on TTR among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in community-based clinical practice. Using the US Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF), we examined TTR (using a modified Rosendaal method) among 5,210 patients with AF on warfarin and treated at 155 sites. Patients were grouped into quartiles based on TTR data. Multivariable logistic regression modeling with generalized estimating equations was used to determine patient and provider factors associated with the lowest (worst) TTR. Overall, 59% of the measured INR values were between 2.0 and 3.0, with an overall mean and median TTR of 65% ± 20% and 68% (interquartile range [IQR] 53%-79%). The median times below and above the therapeutic range were 17% (IQR 8%-29%) and 10% (IQR 3%-19%), respectively. Patients with renal dysfunction, advanced heart failure, frailty, prior valve surgery, and higher risk for bleeding (ATRIA score) or stroke (CHA2DS2-VASc score) had significantly lower TTR (P < .0001 for all). Patients treated at anticoagulation clinics had only slightly higher median TTR (69%) than those not (66%) (P < .0001). Among patients with AF in US clinical practices, TTR on warfarin is suboptimal, and those at highest predicted risks for stroke and bleeding were least likely to be in therapeutic range.

Physicians use multiple drugs in combination to treat hypertension, heart failure, diabetes mellitus, angina, hyperlipidemia, and many other cardiovascular conditions and risk factors. However, administering antiarrhythmic drugs (AAD) in combination is rarely discussed. Yet, the possibility of increasing efficacy and/or tolerance and/or safety of AADs (by adding mechanisms, offsetting adverse mechanisms, and/or using lower doses) exists. Unfortunately, this topic has not been reviewed in any contemporary cardiac literature of which we are aware, although information regarding AAD combinations has been published. In conclusion, and accordingly, this review discusses the possibility of using AAD combinations for both ventricular arrhythmias and atrial fibrillation, in which the rationale for such combinations, considerations for such combinations, and supporting literature are covered.

In two multicenter, randomized trials, the antiarrhythmic agent dronedarone was compared with placebo for the maintenance of sinus rhythm in patients with atrial fibrillation. With pooled data from the two trials, the median time to the recurrence of atrial fibrillation was 116 days in the dronedarone group and 53 days in the placebo group. With pooled data from two trials, the median time to the recurrence of atrial fibrillation was 116 days in the dronedarone group and 53 days in the placebo group. Atrial fibrillation is the most common arrhythmia requiring hospitalization. 1 , 2 Although arrhythmia-related symptoms and thromboembolic strokes are significantly reduced by anticoagulation therapy and rate control, sinus rhythm is often associated with improvement in exercise capacity and quality of life. 3 Therefore, restoration and maintenance of sinus rhythm remain major therapeutic goals for patients with atrial fibrillation. 3 – 6 Amiodarone is an especially potent atrial antifibrillatory agent, 7 but it induces potentially serious side effects in some patients. 7 – 10 Thus, compounds that are devoid of such effects but that retain the antiarrhythmic potential of amiodarone are therapeutically desirable. 7 , 11 Dronedarone is a benzofuran derivative . . .

Warfarin reduces thromboembolic risks in atrial fibrillation (AF), but therapeutic durability remains a concern. We used clinical data from ORBIT-AF, a nationwide outpatient AF registry conducted at 176 sites with follow-up data at 6 and 12 months, to examine longitudinal patterns of warfarin discontinuation. We estimated associations between patient and provider characteristics and report of any warfarin discontinuation using discrete time proportional odds models. Of 10,132 AF patients enrolled in ORBIT-AF from June 2010 to August 2011, 6,110 (60.3%) were prescribed warfarin, had follow-up data, and were not switched to an alternative oral anticoagulant enrolled from June 2010 to August 2011. Over 1 year, 617 patients (10.1% of baseline warfarin users) discontinued warfarin therapy. Among incident warfarin users (starting therapy within 1 year of baseline survey), warfarin discontinuation rates rose to 17.1%. The most commonly reported reasons for warfarin discontinuation were physician preference (47.7%), patient refusal/preference (21.1%), bleeding event (20.2%), frequent falls/frailty (10.8%), high bleeding risk (9.8%), and patient inability to adhere to/monitor therapy (4.7%). In multivariable analysis, the factors most strongly associated with warfarin discontinuation were bleeding hospitalization during follow-up (odds ratio 10.91, 95% CI 7.91-15.03), prior catheter ablation (1.83, 1.37-2.45), noncardiovascular/nonbleeding hospitalization (1.77, 1.40-2.24), cardiovascular hospitalization (1.64, 1.33-2.03), and permanent AF (0.25, 0.17-0.36). Discontinuation of warfarin is common among patients with AF, particularly among incident users. Warfarin is most commonly discontinued because of physician preference, patient refusal, and bleeding events.

Prokinetic agents, specifically 5-hydroxytryptamine type 4 (5-HT 4 ) receptor agonists, have been shown to provide relief in chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC). The first-generation 5-HT 4 agonists were initially withdrawn from use owing to associations with serious cardiovascular (CV) events. This review summarizes CV safety data for prucalopride, a high-affinity 5-HT 4 agonist approved in the United States in 2018 for adults with CIC. No significant effects of prucalopride on CV safety were observed in animal models or early-phase clinical studies, including a thorough QT study at therapeutic (2 mg) or supratherapeutic (10 mg) doses. Among 1,750 patients with CIC who received prucalopride (2–4 mg) in 5 phase 3 studies, no trends in CV adverse events, electrocardiogram parameters, or blood pressure were documented; ≤1.0%–2.0% of patients had prolonged QT interval corrected for heart rate (HR) using Fridericia formula after placebo or prucalopride treatment, and low HR occurred in ≤6.1% and ≤3.3% of these patients, respectively. In two 24-month observational studies among 2,468 patients, changes in electrocardiogram parameters over time were minor, except at occasional time points when significant changes from baseline were reported for HR or QT interval. In a real-world European CV safety study among 35,087 patients (prucalopride, 5,715; polyethylene glycol 3350 [PEG3350], 29,372), results were consistent for no evidence of increased risk of major adverse CV events among patients treated with prucalopride vs PEG3350 (incidence rate ratio = 0.64; 95% confidence interval 0.36–1.14). Studies to date have not raised concerns regarding the impact of prucalopride treatment on CV parameters.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac dysrhythmia and contributes significantly to health care expenditures. We sought to assess the frequency and predictors of hospitalization in patients with AF. The ORBIT-AF registry is a prospective, observational study of outpatients with AF enrolled from June 29, 2010, to August 9, 2011. The current analysis included 9,484 participants with 1-year follow-up. Multivariable, logistic regression was used to identify baseline characteristics that were associated with first cause-specific hospitalization. Overall, 31% of patients with AF studied (n = 2,963) had 1 or more hospitalizations per year and 10% (n = 983) had 2 or more. The most common hospitalization cause was cardiovascular (20 per 100 patient-years vs 3.3 bleeding vs 17 noncardiovascular, nonbleeding). Compared with those not hospitalized, hospitalized patients were more likely to have concomitant heart failure (42% vs 28%, P < .0001), higher mean CHADS2 (1 point for congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75, or diabetes; 2 points for prior stroke or transient ischemic attack) scores (2.5 vs 2.2, P < .0001), and more symptoms (baseline European Heart Rhythm Association class severe symptoms 18% vs 13%, P < .0001). In multivariable analysis, heart failure (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.57 for New York Heart Association III/IV vs none, P < .0001), heart rate at baseline (adjusted HR 1.11 per 10-beats/min increase >66, P < .0001), and AF symptom class (adjusted HR 1.37 for European Heart Rhythm Association severe vs none, P < .0001) were the major predictors of incident hospitalization. Hospitalization is common in outpatients with AF and is independently predicted by heart failure and AF symptoms. Improved symptom control, rate control, and comorbid condition management should be evaluated as strategies to reduce health care use in these patients.

Oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy reduces the risk of thromboembolic events associated with atrial fibrillation (AF), yet a substantial proportion of patients with AF are not prescribed OAC. The aim of this study is to describe the frequencies of and factors associated with OAC contraindications in contemporary clinical practice. We analyzed data from the ORBIT-AF study, a national, prospective, outpatient registry of incident and prevalent AF. Oral anticoagulation contraindications were uniformly collected at enrollment by site personnel using a predefined list. Baseline patient and provider characteristics were compared between participants with and without documented OAC contraindications. From June 2010 to August 2011, 10,130 patients 18 years or older with electrocardiographically documented AF were enrolled at 176 practices. Of these, 1,330 (13.1%) had contraindications documented at the baseline visit: prior bleed (27.7%), patient refusal/preference (27.5%), high bleeding risk (18.0%), frequent falls/frailty (17.6%), need for dual antiplatelet therapy (10.4%), unable to adhere/monitor warfarin (6.0%), comorbid illness (5.3%), prior intracranial hemorrhage (5.0%), allergy (2.4%), occupational risk (0.8%), pregnancy (0.2%), and other (12.6%). Among patients with reported contraindications, 30.3% were taking warfarin or dabigatran, as compared with 83.0% of those without reported contraindications. Besides “patient refusal/preference,” being labeled as having frequent falls or being frail was associated with the lowest OAC use among patients with high stroke risk. Contraindications to OAC therapy among patients with AF are common but subjective. Many patients with reported contraindications were receiving OAC, suggesting that the perceived benefit outweighed the potential harm posed by the relative contraindication.