Explore the vast range of titles available.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia worldwide, and it has a significant effect on morbidity and mortality. It is a significant risk factor for stroke and peripheral embolization, and it has an effect on cardiac function. Despite widespread interest and extensive research on this topic, our understanding of the etiology and pathogenesis of this disease process is still incomplete. As a result, there are no set primary preventive strategies in place apart from general cardiology risk factor prevention goals. It seems intuitive that a better understanding of the risk factors for AF would better prepare medical professionals to initially prevent or subsequently treat these patients. In this article, we discuss widely established risk factors for AF and explore newer risk factors currently being investigated that may have implications in the primary prevention of AF. For this review, we conducted a search of PubMed and used the following search terms (or a combination of terms): atrial fibrillation, metabolic syndrome, obesity, dyslipidemia, hypertension, type 2 diabetes mellitus, omega-3 fatty acids, vitamin D, exercise toxicity, alcohol abuse, and treatment. We also used additional articles that were identified from the bibliographies of the retrieved articles to examine the published evidence for the risk factors of AF.

PurposeRevascularization aims to improve myocardial perfusion. However, changes in regional artery-specific quantitative perfusion after revascularization have not been systematically investigated. It is unclear whether artery-specific thresholds for coronary flow capacity (CFC) and/or relative perfusion predict improved stress perfusion after revascularization. We sought to determine the impact of revascularization based on predefined, artery-specific, severity size thresholds for CFC and/or relative perfusion defects.MethodsFifty patients underwent PET imaging before revascularization and then prospectively within 90 days after revascularization. Changes in regional myocardial blood flow (MBF) were stratified based on baseline perfusion abnormalities, baseline reduced CFC, and whether revascularization was performed in that region.ResultsFollowing angiographic stenosis-directed revascularization, in regions with relative perfusion abnormalities and decreased CFC, stress MBF (sMBF) increased by 0.51 cm3/min/g (59%) from baseline (p < 0.001). In regions without baseline perfusion abnormalities and yet decreased CFC, sMBF increased by 0.35 cm3/min/g (40%) from baseline (p < 0.001). In regions without perfusion abnormalities and normal CFC, sMBF did not increase significantly (+0.07 cm3/min/g, p = 0.56). Patients in whom revascularization was concordant with abnormal PET findings showed increased whole-heart sMBF (+0.22 cm3/min/g, p < 0.001), but in patients in whom revascularization was targeted only to regions without perfusion abnormalities or low CFC, sMBF did not change significantly (−0.06 cm3/min/g, p = 0.38).ConclusionRevascularization targeted to regions with reduced CFC and relative perfusion abnormalities on baseline PET yielded significant improvements in sMBF. When revascularization was performed in regions without reduced CFC, sMBF did not improve.

BackgroundComposite invasive and non-invasive data consistently demonstrate that resting myocardial blood flow (rMBF) in regions of known transmural myocardial scar (TMS) converge on a value of ~ 0.30 mL/min/g or lower. This value has been confirmed using the 3 most common myocardial perfusion agents (13N, 15O-H2O and 82Rb) incorporating various kinetic models on older 2D positron emission tomography (PET) systems. Thus, rMBF in regions of TMS can serve as a reference “truth” to evaluate low-end accuracy of various PET systems and software packages (SWPs). Using 82Rb on a contemporary 3D-PET-CT system, we sought to determine whether currently available SWP can accurately and precisely measure rMBF in regions of known TMS.ResultsMedian rMBF (in mL/min/g) and COV in regions of TMS were 0.71 [IQR 0.52–1.02] and 0.16 with 4DM; 0.41 [0.34–0.54] and 0.10 with 4DM-FVD; 0.66 [0.51–0.85] and 0.11 with Cedars; 0.51 [0.43–0.61] and 0.08 with Emory-Votaw; 0.37 [0.30–0.42], 0.07 with Emory-Ottawa, and 0.26 [0.23–0.32], COV 0.07 with HeartSee.ConclusionsSWPs varied widely in low end accuracy based on measurement of rMBF in regions of known TMS. 3D PET using 82Rb and HeartSee software accurately (0.26 mL/min/g, consistent with established values) and precisely (COV = 0.07) quantified rMBF in regions of TMS. The Emory-Ottawa software yielded the next-best accuracy (0.37 mL/min/g), though rMBF was higher than established gold-standard values in ~ 5% of the resting scans. 4DM, 4DM-FDV, Cedars and Emory-Votaw SWP consistently resulted values higher than the established gold standard (0.71, 0.41, 0.66, 0.51 mL/min/g, respectively), with higher interscan variability (0.16, 0.11, 0.11, and 0.09, respectively).Trial registration: clinicaltrial.gov, NCT05286593, Registered December 28, 2021, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05286593.

We examined whether regional improvement in stress myocardial blood flow (sMBF) following angiography-guided coronary revascularization depends on the existence of a perfusion defect on positron emission tomography (PET). Percent stenosis on coronary angiography often is the main factor when deciding whether to perform revascularization, but it does not reliably relate to maximum sMBF. PET is a validated method of assessing sMBF. 19 patients (79% M, 65 ± 12 years) underwent PET stress before and after revascularization (17 PCI, 2 CABG). Pre- and post-revascularization sMBF for each left ventricular quadrant (anterior, septal, lateral, and inferior) was stratified by the presence or absence of a baseline perfusion defect on PET and whether that region was revascularized. Intervention was performed on 40 of 76 quadrants. When a baseline perfusion defect existed in a region that was revascularized (n = 26), post-revascularization flow increased by 0.6 ± 0.7 cc/min/g (1.2 ± 0.4 vs 1.7 ± 0.8, P < 0.001). When no defect existed but revascularization was performed (n = 14), sMBF did not change significantly (1.7 ± 0.3 vs 1.5 ± 0.4 cc/min/g, P = 0.16). In regions without a defect that were not revascularized (n = 29), sMBF did not significantly change (2.0 ± 0.6 vs 1.9 ± 0.7, P = 0.7). When a stress-induced perfusion defect exists on PET, revascularization improves sMBF in that region. When there is no such defect, sMBF shows no net change, whether or not intervention is performed in that area. PET stress may be useful for identifying areas of myocardium that could benefit from revascularization, and also areas in which intervention is unlikely to yield improvement in myocardial blood flow.

Patients with acute MI and an ejection fraction of 35% or less were randomly assigned to receive a wearable cardioverter–defibrillator plus medical therapy or medical therapy alone. At 90 days, there was no significant between-group difference in the rate of arrhythmic death.

As the most common sustained arrhythmia in adults, atrial fibrillation (AF) is an established and growing epidemic. To provide optimal patient care, it is important for clinicians to be aware of AF's epidemiological trends, methods of risk reduction, and the various available treatment modalities. Our understanding of AF's pathophysiology has advanced, and with this new understanding has come advancements in prevention strategies as well as pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatment options. Following PubMed and MEDLINE searches for AF risk factors, epidemiology, and therapies, we reviewed relevant articles (and bibliographies of those articles) published from 2000 to 2016. This \"state-of-the-art\" review provides a comprehensive update on the understanding of AF in the world today, contemporary therapeutic options, and directions of ongoing and future study.

Background: There are limited data on gender-based differences in atrial fibrillation (AF) treatment and prognosis. We aimed to examine gender-related differences in medical attention in an emergency department (ED) and follow-up (FU) among patients diagnosed with an AF episode and to determine whether there are gender-related differences in clinical characteristics, therapeutic strategies, and long-term adverse events in this population. Methods: We performed a retrospective observational study of patients who presented to a tertiary hospital ER for AF from 2010 to 2015, with a minimum FU of one year. Data on medical attention received, mortality, and other adverse outcomes were collected and analyzed. Results: Among the 2013 patients selected, 1232 (60%) were female. Women were less likely than men to be evaluated by a cardiologist during the ED visit (11.5% vs. 16.6%, p = 0.001) and were less likely to be admitted (5.9% vs. 9.5%, p < 0.05). Electrical cardioversion was performed more frequently in men, both during the first episode (3.4% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.001) and during FU (15.9% vs. 10.6%, p < 0.001), despite a lower AF recurrence rate in women (9.9% vs. 18.1%). During FU, women had more hospitalizations for heart failure (26.2% vs. 16.1%, p < 0.001). Conclusions: In patients with AF, although there were no gender differences in mortality, there were significant differences in clinical outcomes, medical attention received, and therapeutic strategies. Women underwent fewer attempts at cardioversion, had a lower probability of being evaluated by cardiologists, and showed a higher probability of hospitalization for heart failure. Being alert to these inequities should facilitate the adoption of measures to correct them.