Risk of thromboembolism in patients developing critical illness-associated atrial fibrillation

Clayton, Benjamin; Ball, Susan; Read, James; Waddy, Sam

doi:10.7861/clinmedicine.18-4-282

Cited by 12 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the timing and dosing of anticoagulant therapy is a challenge during critical illness due to dynamic changes in coagulation status and the potential concurrent need for invasive procedures and surgery 4 . Observational studies conducted in critically ill patients with sepsis or admitted to mixed ICUs have not demonstrated any clear benefit of therapeutic versus prophylactic anticoagulant dosing 32–35 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Management of acute atrial fibrillation in the intensive care unit: An international survey

Wetterslev

Møller

Granholm

et al. 2021

Acta Anaesthesiol Scand

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in intensive care unit (ICU) patients and is associated with poor outcomes. Different management strategies exist, but the evidence is limited and derived from non‐ICU patients. This international survey of ICU doctors evaluated the preferred management of acute AF in ICU patients. Method We conducted an international online survey of ICU doctors with 27 questions about the preferred management of acute AF in the ICU, including antiarrhythmic therapy in hemodynamically stable and unstable patients and use of anticoagulant therapy. Results A total of 910 respondents from 70 ICUs in 14 countries participated in the survey with 24%–100% of doctors from sites responding. Most ICUs (80%) did not have a local guideline for the management of acute AF. The preferred first‐line strategy for the management of hemodynamically stable patients with acute AF was observation (95% of respondents), rhythm control (3%), or rate control (2%). For hemodynamically unstable patients, the preferred strategy was observation (48%), rhythm control (48%), or rate control (4%). Overall, preferred antiarrhythmic interventions included amiodarone, direct current cardioversion, beta‐blockers other than sotalol, and magnesium in that order. A total of 67% preferred using anticoagulant therapy in ICU patients with AF, among whom 61% preferred therapeutic dose anticoagulants and 39% prophylactic dose anticoagulants. Conclusion This international survey indicated considerable practice variation among ICU doctors in the clinical management of acute AF, including the overall management strategies and the use of antiarrhythmic interventions and anticoagulants.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Management of acute atrial fibrillation in the intensive care unit: An international survey

Wetterslev

Møller

Granholm

et al. 2021

Acta Anaesthesiol Scand

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The authors report a retrospective observational analysis in a cohort of patients who develop novel atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter within a generalised intensive care unit setting. 1 However beyond the salient discussion and conclusion the data highlights further points of note.…”

Section: Atrial Fibrillationmentioning

confidence: 88%

Atrial fibrillation

Guha

2019

Clinical Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…7 The haemodynamic impact of NOAF in critically ill patients is poorly understood, but limited data suggest that NOAF may precede haemodynamic instability 8 and may be associated with increased rates of thromboembolism. 9 NOAF during critical illness is associated with an increased risk of death in an ICU and in hospital. 10,11 There is also a significant organisational impact of NOAF because it is associated with an increased length of ICU and hospital stay, and higher health-care costs.…”

Section: Description Of the Health Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments and outcomes for new-onset atrial fibrillation in ICU patients: the CAFE scoping review and database analyses

Bedford

Drikite

Corbett

et al. 2021

Health Technol Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background New-onset atrial fibrillation occurs in around 10% of adults treated in an intensive care unit. New-onset atrial fibrillation may lead to cardiovascular instability and thromboembolism, and has been independently associated with increased length of hospital stay and mortality. The long-term consequences are unclear. Current practice guidance is based on patients outside the intensive care unit; however, new-onset atrial fibrillation that develops while in an intensive care unit differs in its causes and the risks and clinical effectiveness of treatments. The lack of evidence on new-onset atrial fibrillation treatment or long-term outcomes in intensive care units means that practice varies. Identifying optimal treatment strategies and defining long-term outcomes are critical to improving care. Objectives In patients treated in an intensive care unit, the objectives were to (1) evaluate existing evidence for the clinical effectiveness and safety of pharmacological and non-pharmacological new-onset atrial fibrillation treatments, (2) compare the use and clinical effectiveness of pharmacological and non-pharmacological new-onset atrial fibrillation treatments, and (3) determine outcomes associated with new-onset atrial fibrillation. Methods We undertook a scoping review that included studies of interventions for treatment or prevention of new-onset atrial fibrillation involving adults in general intensive care units. To investigate the long-term outcomes associated with new-onset atrial fibrillation, we carried out a retrospective cohort study using English national intensive care audit data linked to national hospital episode and outcome data. To analyse the clinical effectiveness of different new-onset atrial fibrillation treatments, we undertook a retrospective cohort study of two large intensive care unit databases in the USA and the UK. Results Existing evidence was generally of low quality, with limited data suggesting that beta-blockers might be more effective than amiodarone for converting new-onset atrial fibrillation to sinus rhythm and for reducing mortality. Using linked audit data, we showed that patients developing new-onset atrial fibrillation have more comorbidities than those who do not. After controlling for these differences, patients with new-onset atrial fibrillation had substantially higher mortality in hospital and during the first 90 days after discharge (adjusted odds ratio 2.32, 95% confidence interval 2.16 to 2.48; adjusted hazard ratio 1.46, 95% confidence interval 1.26 to 1.70, respectively), and higher rates of subsequent hospitalisation with atrial fibrillation, stroke and heart failure (adjusted cause-specific hazard ratio 5.86, 95% confidence interval 5.33 to 6.44; adjusted cause-specific hazard ratio 1.47, 95% confidence interval 1.12 to 1.93; and adjusted cause-specific hazard ratio 1.28, 95% confidence interval 1.14 to 1.44, respectively), than patients who did not have new-onset atrial fibrillation. From intensive care unit data, we found that new-onset atrial fibrillation occurred in 952 out of 8367 (11.4%) UK and 1065 out of 18,559 (5.7%) US intensive care unit patients in our study. The median time to onset of new-onset atrial fibrillation in patients who received treatment was 40 hours, with a median duration of 14.4 hours. The clinical characteristics of patients developing new-onset atrial fibrillation were similar in both databases. New-onset atrial fibrillation was associated with significant average reductions in systolic blood pressure of 5 mmHg, despite significant increases in vasoactive medication (vasoactive-inotropic score increase of 2.3; p < 0.001). After adjustment, intravenous beta-blockers were not more effective than amiodarone in achieving rate control (adjusted hazard ratio 1.14, 95% confidence interval 0.91 to 1.44) or rhythm control (adjusted hazard ratio 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.67 to 1.11). Digoxin therapy was associated with a lower probability of achieving rate control (adjusted hazard ratio 0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.32 to 0.86) and calcium channel blocker therapy was associated with a lower probability of achieving rhythm control (adjusted hazard ratio 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.39 to 0.79) than amiodarone. Findings were consistent across both the combined and the individual database analyses. Conclusions Existing evidence for new-onset atrial fibrillation management in intensive care unit patients is limited. New-onset atrial fibrillation in these patients is common and is associated with significant short- and long-term complications. Beta-blockers and amiodarone appear to be similarly effective in achieving cardiovascular control, but digoxin and calcium channel blockers appear to be inferior. Future work Our findings suggest that a randomised controlled trial of amiodarone and beta-blockers for management of new-onset atrial fibrillation in critically ill patients should be undertaken. Studies should also be undertaken to provide evidence for or against anticoagulation for patients who develop new-onset atrial fibrillation in intensive care units. Finally, given that readmission with heart failure and thromboembolism increases following an episode of new-onset atrial fibrillation while in an intensive care unit, a prospective cohort study to demonstrate the incidence of atrial fibrillation and/or left ventricular dysfunction at hospital discharge and at 3 months following the development of new-onset atrial fibrillation should be undertaken. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN13252515. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 71. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

show abstract

Risk of thromboembolism in patients developing critical illness-associated atrial fibrillation

Cited by 12 publications

References 33 publications

Management of acute atrial fibrillation in the intensive care unit: An international survey

Management of acute atrial fibrillation in the intensive care unit: An international survey

Atrial fibrillation

Pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments and outcomes for new-onset atrial fibrillation in ICU patients: the CAFE scoping review and database analyses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About