Dronedarone in the treatment of atrial fibrillation with concomitant heart failure and preserved or mildly reduced ejection fraction: closer to Ithaca after a long Odyssey?

Drug management of atrial fibrillation in light of guidelines and current evidence: an Italian Survey on behalf of Italian Association of Arrhythmology and Cardiac Pacing

AIM

Atrial fibrillation is a multifaceted disease requiring personalized treatment, in accordance with current ESC guidelines. Despite a wide range of literature, we still have various aspects dividing the opinion of the experts in rate control, rhythm control and thromboembolic prophylaxis. The aim of this survey was to provide a country-wide picture of current practice regarding atrial fibrillation pharmacological management according to a patient's characteristics.

METHODS

Data were collected using an in-person survey that was administered to members of the Italian Association of Arrhythmology and Cardiac Pacing.

RESULTS

We collected data from 106 physicians, working in 72 Italian hospitals from 15 of 21 regions. Our work evidenced a high inhomogeneity in atrial fibrillation management regarding rhythm control, rate control and thromboembolic prophylaxis in both acute and chronic patients. This element was more pronounced in settings in which literature shows a lack of evidence and, consequently, the indications provided by the guidelines are weak or absent.

CONCLUSION

This National survey evidenced a high inhomogeneity in current approaches adopted for atrial fibrillation management by a sample of Italian cardiologist experts in arrhythmia management. Further studies are needed to explore if these divergences are associated with different long-term outcomes.

Impact of dronedarone on patients with atrial fibrillation and diabetes: A sub-analysis of the ATHENA and EURIDIS/ADONIS studies

AIM

This post hoc analysis evaluated efficacy and safety of dronedarone in atrial fibrillation (AF) and atrial flutter (AFL) patients with/without diabetes.

METHODS

Patients were categorized according to baseline diabetes status. Time-to-event analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier method. Hazard-ratios were assessed using Cox models.

RESULTS

945/4628 (dronedarone = 482; placebo = 463) patients in ATHENA and 215/1237 (dronedarone = 148; placebo = 67) patients in EURIDIS/ADONIS studies had diabetes. In ATHENA, there were higher rates of CV hospitalization/death in patients with diabetes (39.5%) than without diabetes (34.7%). Incidence of first CV hospitalization/death was lower in patients with diabetes treated with dronedarone (35.1%) than placebo (44.1%), and time to this event was longer in those treated with dronedarone than placebo (log-rank p = 0.005). Median AF/AFL recurrence time was longer in patients treated with dronedarone than placebo in patients with diabetes (ATHENA: 722 vs 527 days, log-rank p = 0.004; EURIDIS/ADONIS: 100 vs 23 days, log-rank p = 0.15) or without diabetes (ATHENA: 741 vs 492 days, log-rank p < 0.0001; EURIDIS/ADONIS: 120 vs 59 days, log-rank p = 0.0002). Occurrence of any treatment-related adverse events with dronedarone was similar for patients with/without diabetes and was comparable to placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Dronedarone reduced incidence of CV hospitalization/death, AF/AFL recurrence and increased time to these events in AF/AFL patients with/without diabetes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Not applicable, as it was a post hoc analysis. This article is based on previously conducted studies (ATHENA: NCT00174785, EURIDIS: NCT00259428, and ADONIS: NCT00259376).