Accompanying the aging of populations worldwide, and increased survival with chronic diseases, the incidence and prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF) are rising, justifying the term global epidemic. This multifactorial arrhythmia is intertwined with common concomitant cardiovascular diseases, which share classical cardiovascular risk factors. Targeted prevention programs are largely missing. Prevention needs to start at an early age with primordial interventions at the population level. The public health dimension of AF motivates research in modifiable AF risk factors and improved precision in AF prediction and management. In this review, we summarize current knowledge in an attempt to untangle these multifaceted associations from an epidemiological perspective. We discuss disease trends, preventive opportunities offered by underlying risk factors and concomitant disorders, current developments in diagnosis and risk prediction, and prognostic implications of AF and its complications. Finally, we review current technological (eg, eHealth) and methodological (artificial intelligence) advances and their relevance for future prevention and disease management.
Recurrent atrial fibrillation (AF) occurs in up to 50 % of patients within 1 year after catheter ablation, and a clinical risk score to predict recurrence remains a critical unmet need. The aim of this study was to (1) develop a simple score for the prediction of rhythm outcome following catheter ablation; (2) compare it with the CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores, and (3) validate it in an external cohort.
Rhythm outcome between 3 and 12 months after AF catheter ablation were documented. The APPLE score [one point for age>65 years, persistent AF, impaired eGFR (<60 ml/min/1.73 m2), LA diameter ≥43 mm, EF < 50 %] was associated with AF recurrence and was validated in an external cohort in 261 patients with comparable ablation and follow-up.
In 1145 patients (60 ± 10 years, 65 % male, 62 % paroxysmal AF) the APPLE score showed better prediction of AF recurrences (AUC 0.634, 95 % CI 0.600–0.668, p < 0.001) than CHADS2 (AUC 0.538) and CHA2DS2-VASc (AUC 0.542). Compared to patients with an APPLE score of 0, the odds ratio for AF recurrences was 1.73, 2.79 and 4.70 for APPLE scores 1, 2, or ≥3, respectively (all p < 0.05). In the external validation cohort, the APPLE score showed similar results (AUC 0.624, 95 % CI 0.562–0.687, p < 0.001).
The novel APPLE score is superior to the CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores for prediction of rhythm outcome after catheter ablation. It holds promise as a useful tool to identify patients with low, intermediate, and high risk for AF recurrence.
BackgroundGalectin-3 (Gal-3) is an emerging biomarker in heart failure that is involved in fibrosis and inflammation. However, its potential value as a prognostic marker in atrial fibrillation (AF) is unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of AF catheter ablation on Gal-3 and evaluate its prognostic impact for predicting rhythm outcome after catheter ablation.MethodsGal-3 was measured at baseline and after 6 months using specific ELISA. AF recurrences were defined as any atrial arrhythmia lasting longer than 30 sec within 6 months after ablation.ResultsIn 105 AF patients (65% males, age 62±9 years, 52% paroxysmal AF) undergoing catheter ablation, Gal-3 was measured at baseline and after 6 months and compared with an AF-free control cohort (n=14, 50 % males, age 58±11 years). Gal-3 was higher in AF patients compared with AF-free controls (7.8±2.9 vs. 5.8±1.8, ng/mL, p=0.013). However, on multivariable analysis, BMI (p=0.007) but not AF (p=0.068) was associated with Gal-3. In the AF cohort, on univariable analysis higher Gal-3 levels were associated with female gender (p=0.028), higher BMI (p=0.005) and both CHADS2 (p=0.008) and CHA2DS2-VASC (p=0.016) scores, however, on multivariable analysis only BMI remained significantly associated with baseline Gal-3 (p=0.016). Gal-3 was similar 6 months after AF catheter ablation and was not associated with sinus rhythm maintenance.ConclusionsAlthough galectin-3 levels are higher in AF patients, this is driven by cardiometabolic co-morbidities and not heart rhythm. Gal-3 is not useful for predicting rhythm outcome of catheter ablation.
Background-Recurrences of atrial fibrillation (AF) occur in up to 30% within 1 year after catheter ablation. This study evaluated the value of CHADS 2 , R 2 CHADS 2 , and CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc scores for the prediction of rhythm outcomes after AF catheter ablation.
BackgroundArrhythmia recurrences after catheter ablation occur in up to 50% within one year but their prediction remains challenging. Recently, we developed a novel score for the prediction of rhythm outcomes after single AF ablation demonstrating superiority to other scores. The current study was performed to 1) prove the predictive value of the APPLE score in patients undergoing repeat AF ablation and 2) compare it with the CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores.MethodsRhythm outcome between 3–12 months after AF ablation were documented. The APPLE score (one point for Age >65 years, Persistent AF, imPaired eGFR (<60 ml/min/1.73m2), LA diameter ≥43 mm, EF <50%) was calculated in every patient before procedure.Results379 consecutive patients from The Leipzig Heart Center AF Ablation Registry (60±10 years, 65% male, 70% paroxysmal AF) undergoing repeat AF catheter ablation were included. Arrhythmia recurrences were observed in 133 patients (35%). While the CHADS2 (AUC 0.577, p = 0.037) and CHA2DS2-VASc scores (AUC 0.590, p = 0.015) demonstrated low predictive value, the APPLE score showed better prediction of arrhythmia recurrences (AUC 0.617, p = 0.002) than other scores (both p<0.001). Compared to patients with an APPLE score of 0, the risk (OR) for arrhythmia recurrences was 2.9, 3.0 and 6.0 (all p<0.01) for APPLE scores 1, 2, or ≥3, respectively.ConclusionsThe novel APPLE score is superior to the CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores for prediction of rhythm outcomes after repeat AF catheter ablation. It may be helpful to identify patients with low, intermediate or high risk for recurrences after repeat procedure.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.