The appropriate use of risk scores in the prediction of atrial fibrillation

O’Neal, Wesley T.; Alonso, Álvaro

doi:10.21037/jtd.2016.10.96

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The HATCH score range from 0 to 7 and high risk score was defined as ≥5. (10) HAVOC score includes hypertension, age, valvular heart disease, peripheral vascular disease, obesity, congestive heart failure, and coronary artery disease [range 0-214; low risk (scores 0-4), medium risk (5-9), and high risk (10)(11)(12)(13)(14)]. The HAVOC score presented an accuracy of 78% and OR = 2-29 (95%CI = 1.37-3.82) for scores above 5 (11).…”

Section: Assessmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Does Parkinson's Disease Increase the Risk of Atrial Fibrillation? Insights From Electrocardiogram and Risk Scores From a Case-Control Study

Alves

Abrantes²,

Portugal

et al. 2021

Front. Neurol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Previous studies suggested that Parkinson's Disease (PD) patients could have an increased risk of atrial fibrillation. However, data supporting this association is not robust. We aimed to compare the potential risk of atrial fibrillation associated with PD in an age and gender matched case-control study, comparing the p-wave indexes from electrocardiograms and clinical risk scores among groups.Methods: A cross-sectional case-control study was performed. All subjects included in the analysis were clinically evaluated and subjected to a 12-lead electrocardiogram. Two blinded independent raters measured the p-wave duration. Subjects were classified as having normal P-wave duration (<120 ms), partial IAB (P-wave duration ≥ 120 ms, positive in inferior leads), and advanced IAB (p-wave duration ≥ 120 ms with biphasic morphology in inferior leads). Atrial fibrillation risk scores (CHARGE-AF, HATCH, and HAVOC) were calculated.Results: From 194 potential participants, three were excluded from the control group due to a previous diagnosis of atrial fibrillation. Comparing the PD patients (n = 97) with controls (n = 95), there were no statistically significant differences regarding the mean p-wave duration (121 ms vs. 122 ms, p = 0.64) and proportion of advanced interatrial block (OR = 1.4, 95%CI = 0.37–5.80, p = 0.58). All patients had a low or medium risk of developing atrial fibrillation based on the clinical scores. There were no differences between the PD patients and controls regarding the mean values of CHARGE-AF, HATCH, and HAVOC.Conclusions: Our results do not support the hypothesis that PD patients have an increased risk of atrial fibrillation based on the p-wave predictors and atrial fibrillation clinical scores.

show abstract

Section: Assessmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Due to the clinical complications and economic burden ( 8 ) associated with atrial fibrillation, several electrocardiogram criteria such as interatrial block ( 7 ) and clinical scoring systems [such as CHARGE-AF ( 9 ), HATCH ( 10 ), and HAVOC ( 11 )] were developed to aid atrial fibrillation prediction ( 12 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Parkinson's Disease Increase the Risk of Atrial Fibrillation? Insights From Electrocardiogram and Risk Scores From a Case-Control Study

Alves

Abrantes²,

Portugal

et al. 2021

Front. Neurol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A number of prognostic models, or risk scores, which attempt to combine several predictors to generate an individualised estimate of risk in different populations have been developed for AF prediction. These include the Cohorts for Ageing and Research in Genomic Epidemiology (CHARGE)-AF score [16], the HAVOC score [17], the ATLAS score [18], the HATCH score [19], and the APPLE score [20].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prognostic models for predicting incident or recurrent atrial fibrillation: protocol for a systematic review

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the arrhythmia most commonly diagnosed in clinical practice. It is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Prevalence of AF and complications of AF, estimated by hospitalisations, have increased dramatically in the last decade. Being able to predict AF would allow tailoring of management strategies and a focus on primary or secondary prevention. Models predicting recurrent AF would have particular clinical use for the selection of rhythm control therapy. There are existing prognostic models which combine several predictors or risk factors to generate an individualised estimate of risk of AF. The aim of this systematic review is to summarise and compare model performance measures and predictive accuracy across different models and populations at risk of developing incident or recurrent AF. Methods Methods tailored to systematic reviews of prognostic models will be used for study identification, risk of bias assessment and synthesis. Studies will be eligible for inclusion where they report an internally or externally validated model. The quality of studies reporting a prognostic model will be assessed using the Prediction Study Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). Studies will be narratively described and included variables and predictive accuracy compared across different models and populations. Meta-analysis of model performance measures for models validated in similar populations will be considered where possible. Discussion To the best of our knowledge, this will be the first systematic review to collate evidence from all studies reporting on validated prognostic models, or on the impact of such models, in any population at risk of incident or recurrent AF. The review may identify models which are suitable for impact assessment in clinical practice. Should gaps in the evidence be identified, research recommendations relating to model development, validation or impact assessment will be made. Findings will be considered in the context of any models already used in clinical practice, and the extent to which these have been validated. Systematic review registration PROSPERO ( CRD42018111649 ).

show abstract

“…Anticoagulants for Atrial Fibrillation Антикоагулянты при фибрилляции предсердий В современной клинической практике одним из наиболее значимых нарушений сердечного ритма является фибрилляция предсердий (ФП) [1][2][3]. Имеющиеся сведения о распространенности данного нарушения весьма противоречивы.…”

unclassified

Assessment of Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation for 2015-2017 According to the Registry of the Clinic of the Scientific Research Institute of Medical Problems of the North of Krasnoyarsk City

Tuchkov

Gogolashvili

Yaskevich

2019

Racionalʹnaâ farmakoterapiâ v kardiologii

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim. To evaluate the volume of antithrombotic therapy (ATT) at the prehospital stage in connection with the risk of thromboembolic complications, and also to study the dynamics of the frequency of administration of oral anticoagulants (ОAC) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in 2015-2017.Material and methods. The registry included 562 patients with AF at the age of 18 years and older, hospitalized in the cardiology department during 2015-2017. The registry did not include patients with AF and mechanical heart valves, mitral stenosis. The diagnosis of AF was established in accordance with the current recommendations. All patients had an assessment of the risk of thromboembolic complications on the CHA2DS2-VASc scale, the risk of bleeding on the HAS-BLED scale. The incidence of ATT at the prehospital stage was assessed depending on the risk of thromboembolic complications based on patient questioning and analysis of medical records. In addition, an assessment of the dynamics of the frequency of the OAC prescription during 2015-2017 was conducted.Results. The overwhelming majority of patients with AF (96.1%) belonged to the group of high-risk of cardioembolic strokes according to the CHA2DS2-VASc scale and had indications for OAC therapy. The frequency of OAC prescription in patients with AF who were admitted to the cardiology department was 32% at the prehospital stage, of which 19.8% of patients took warfarin and 12.2% – direct OAC. The target level of the international normalized ratio (from 2.0 to 3.0) at the time of hospitalization was observed only in 33.6% of patients taking warfarin. Over the observation period, there was a tendency to increase the frequency of OAC prescription from 30% in 2015 to 38.4% in 2017.Conclusion. Only 32% of patients with AF and high risk of thromboembolic complications received adequate antithrombotic therapy at the prehospital stage. According to the registry the frequency of OAC prescription in patients with AF during 2015-2017 increased by 8.4%. At the same time, there was a significant increase in the frequency of direct OAC prescription.

show abstract

The appropriate use of risk scores in the prediction of atrial fibrillation

Cited by 8 publications

References 23 publications

Does Parkinson's Disease Increase the Risk of Atrial Fibrillation? Insights From Electrocardiogram and Risk Scores From a Case-Control Study

Does Parkinson's Disease Increase the Risk of Atrial Fibrillation? Insights From Electrocardiogram and Risk Scores From a Case-Control Study

Prognostic models for predicting incident or recurrent atrial fibrillation: protocol for a systematic review

Assessment of Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation for 2015-2017 According to the Registry of the Clinic of the Scientific Research Institute of Medical Problems of the North of Krasnoyarsk City

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About