Blood pressure in atrial fibrillation and in sinus rhythm during ambulatory blood pressure monitoring: data from the TEMPLAR project

Atrial Fibrillation Screening During Routine Automated Office, Home, and Ambulatory Blood Pressure Measurement: A Diagnostic Test Accuracy Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is often asymptomatic and undiagnosed. As AF and hypertension often coexist, opportunistic AF detection during routine automated blood pressure (BP) measurement appears to be an attractive screening method.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted to identify studies assessing the diagnostic test accuracy of office, home, or 24-hour ambulatory BP measuring devices with AF detection algorithms versus reference electrocardiography. Analyses were performed per participant (AF status based on several BP readings; most office/home devices) or per reading (AF status based on individual readings; all ambulatory devices). A meta-analysis stratified by device type (office/home/ambulatory) was conducted to calculate pooled measures of diagnostic accuracy. Sensitivity/meta-regression analyses were also performed.

RESULTS

Among 3096 records initially retrieved, 23 diagnostic test accuracy studies were included. Data derived from 11 093 individuals (weighted age 69 years, males 56%, hypertensives 79%, diabetics 24%, and AF prevalence 17%) indicated a pooled sensitivity 0.97 (95% CI, 0.92-0.99), specificity 0.93 (95% CI, 0.90-0.95), and accuracy 0.93 (95% CI, 0.89-0.95), with generally consistent results using office, home, or ambulatory BP devices (slightly lower specificity with the latter). The positive and negative predictive values were 0.70 (95% CI, 0.60-0.80) and 0.99 (95% CI, 0.98-1.00), respectively. Sensitivity analyses indicated lower specificity in studies implementing reading versus participant analyses. Most studies presented a low risk of bias and minor applicability concerns.

CONCLUSIONS

There is considerable and consistent evidence suggesting high diagnostic accuracy of AF detection algorithms implemented in automated BP monitors during routine BP measurements in and out of the office. AF diagnosis requires verification (electrocardiography) before treatment is administered.

Impact of nocturnal blood pressure dipping on recurrence of atrial fibrillation after pulmonary vein isolation

Lack of the typical nocturnal blood pressure (BP) fall, i.e non-dipper, has been known as a cardiovascular risk. However, the influence of non-dipper on atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence after pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) has been unclear. We investigated the clinical impact of non-dipping as evaluated by 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring on the long-term outcome of AF recurrence post-PVI in 76 AF patients with a history of increased BP. The PVI procedure was successful in all 76 patients (mean age, 66±9years; antihypertensive medication, 89%; non-paroxysmal AF, 24%). Twenty patients had AF recurrence during a median follow-up of 1138 days. There was no difference in BP levels between the AF recurrence and non-recurrence groups (average 24 h systolic BP:126 ± 17 vs.125 ± 14 mmHg; P = 0.84). On the other hand, the patients with non-dipper had a higher AF recurrence than those with dipper (38.9% vs.15.0%; P = 0.018). In Cox hazard analysis adjusted by age, non-paroxysmal AF and average 24-hr systolic BP level, the non-dipper was an independent predictor of AF recurrence (HR 2.78 [95%CI:1.05-7.34], P = 0.039). Non-dipper patients had a larger left atrial (LA) volume index than the dipper patients (45.9 ± 17.3 vs.38.3 ± 10.2 ml/m2, P = 0.037). Among the 58 patients who underwent high-density voltage mapping in LA, 11 patients had a low-voltage area (LVA) defined as an area with a bipolar voltage < 0.5 mV. However, there was no association of LVA with non-dipper or dipper (22.2% vs.16.1%, P = 0.555). Non-dipper is an independent predictor of AF recurrence post-PVI. Management of abnormal diurnal BP variation post-PVI may be important.