Con: atrial arrhythmia prophylaxis is not required for cardiac surgery

Prophylaxis against atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery: effective, but not routinely used--a survey of cardiothoracic units in the United kingdom

OBJECTIVE

To establish whether international recommendations on chemoprophylaxis against postoperative atrial fibrillation in cardiac surgery patients are implemented locally in cardiothoracic units in the United Kingdom; to determine which drugs are being used, how long they are given, and whether outcomes are monitored.

DESIGN

Survey of local cardiothoracic center guidelines.

SETTING

Postal and telephone survey.

PARTICIPANTS

Senior anesthesiologists and critical care staff in all 37 public cardiothoracic units in the United Kingdom.

INTERVENTION

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Results were obtained from all contacted cardiothoracic units. Five units (14%) have local guidelines for chemoprophylaxis against atrial fibrillation in place. All use β-antagonists as their primary prophylactic drugs; only one unit uses amiodarone as a secondary prophylactic drug. Duration of prophylactic treatment varies, from 5 days to 6 weeks postoperatively. Thirty-two units (86%) have no local guidelines for chemoprophylaxis in place.

CONCLUSION

Chemoprophylaxis against postoperative atrial fibrillation in cardiac surgery patients remains underused, despite its effectiveness and recommendations for its routine use by several international organizations. Departmental guidelines help to ensure routine use, but this survey shows that so far only a minority of cardiothoracic units in the United Kingdom have implemented such guidelines. Awareness of the advantages of routine prophylaxis against atrial fibrillation should be improved and departmental prescribing policies encouraged.

Clinical review: treatment of new-onset atrial fibrillation in medical intensive care patients--a clinical framework

Atrial fibrillation occurs frequently in medical intensive care unit patients. Most intensivists tend to treat this rhythm disorder because they believe it is detrimental. Whether atrial fibrillation contributes to morbidity and/or mortality and whether atrial fibrillation is an epiphenomenon of severe disease, however, are not clear. As a consequence, it is unknown whether treatment of the arrhythmia affects the outcome. Furthermore, if treatment is deemed necessary, it is not known what the best treatment is. We developed a treatment protocol by searching for the best evidence. Because studies in medical intensive care unit patients are scarce, the evidence comes mainly from extrapolation of data derived from other patient groups. We propose a treatment strategy with magnesium infusion followed by amiodarone in case of failure. Although this strategy seems to be effective in both rhythm control and rate control, the mortality remained high. A randomised controlled trial in medical intensive care unit patients with placebo treatment in the control arm is therefore still defendable.