AIM-AF: A Physician Survey in the United States and Europe

AN INTERNATIONAL PHYSICIAN SURVEY OF CURRENT ABLATION PRACTICES IN ATRIAL FIBRILLATION: AN AIM-AF SUBSTUDY

BACKGROUND

Practice guidelines recommend Ablation (ABL) in atrial fibrillation (AF) for rhythm control; guidance for antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) post-ablation is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To understand AAD and ABL practices in USA and Europe.

METHODS

An online survey of experienced cardiologists (CDs, n=360) and interventional electrophysiologists (EPs, n=269) was conducted. AAD and ABL related survey questions and responses were analyzed.

RESULTS

ABL was preferred more often as first-line AF therapy (Rx) by US CDs/EPs (p<.001). ABL was selected to avoid AAD Rx by 46% (50% CDs, 40% EPs), prevent AF progression by 41% (36% CDs, 47% EPs) and for superior efficacy by 28% (27% CDs, 30% EPs), ABL was employed by 9% in asymptomatic AF (9% CDs, 10% EPs), by 14% in subclinical AF (13% CDs, 14% EPs), by 17% for first AF event (15% CDs, 18% EPs). Primary ABL was preferred in heart failure by 38%. Co-morbidities, age and left atrial size were limitations for ABL by 48%, 40% and 38%, respectively. AADs were used after ABL for AF/ atrial tachycardia (AT) prophylaxis by 34% for 3-6 months and 29% for 1-2 months. AADs were given for a single AF recurrence by 34%, bridging to re-ablation by 32%, and long-term Rx by 34%. AF/AT post-ABL was most often managed with amiodarone (42-48%).

CONCLUSION

ABL was frequently preferred over AADs in symptomatic AF but was notably also used for asymptomatic and subclinical AF. Post-ABL AAD Rx for AF prophylaxis or recurrence was frequent with empiric amiodarone being the most often selected AAD.

The effect of antiarrhythmic medications on the risk of cardiovascular outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation and coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND

While current guidelines recommend amiodarone and dronedarone for rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and coronary artery disease (CAD), there was no comparative study of antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) on the cardiovascular outcomes in general practice.

METHODS

This study included patients with AF and CAD who received their first prescription of amiodarone, class Ic AADs (flecainide, propafenone), dronedarone or sotalol between January 2016 and December 2020. The primary outcome was a composite of hospitalization for heart failure (HHF), stroke, acute myocardial infarction (AMI), and cardiovascular death. We used Cox proportional regression models, including with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), to estimate the relationship between AADs and cardiovascular outcomes.

RESULTS

Among the AF cohort consisting of 8752 patients, 1996 individuals had CAD, including 477 who took dronedarone and 1519 who took other AADs. After a median follow-up of 38 months, 46.3% of patients who took dronedarone and 54.4% of patients who took other AADs experienced cardiovascular events. Compared to dronedarone, the use of other AADs was associated with increased cardiovascular events after adjusting for covariates (hazard ratio [HR] 1.531, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.112-2.141, p = 0.023) and IPTW (HR 1.491, 95% CI 1.174-1.992, p = 0.012). The secondary analysis showed that amiodarone and class Ic drugs were associated with an increased risk of HHF. The low number of subjects in the sotalol group limits data interpretation.

CONCLUSION

For patients with AF and CAD, dronedarone was associated with better cardiovascular outcomes than other AADs. Amiodarone and class Ic AADs were associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular events, particularly HHF.

Patients' perspective of quality-of-care and its correlation to quality-of-life following spontaneous coronary artery dissection

AIMS

Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) is an under-recognized cause of myocardial infarction. We aimed to investigate SCAD survivors' perceptions of their quality-of-care and its relationship to quality-of-life.

METHODS AND RESULTS

An anonymous survey was distributed online to SCAD survivors involved in Australian SCAD support groups, with 172 (95.3% female, mean age 52.6 ± 9.2 years) participants in the study. The survey involved assessment of quality-of-life using a standardized questionnaire (EQ-5DTM-3L). Respondents rated the quality-of-care received during their hospital admission for SCAD with a median of 8/10 [interquartile range (IQR) 7-10]. Respondents ≤ 50 years vs. >50 years were more likely to perceive that their symptoms were not treated seriously as a myocardial infarction (χ2 = 4.127, df = 1, P < 0.05). Participants rated clinician's knowledge of SCAD with a median of 4/10 (IQR 2-8) and 7/10 (IQR 3-9) for Emergency and Cardiology clinicians, respectively (P < 0.05). The internet was the most selected source (45.4%) of useful SCAD information. The mean EQ-5DTM summary index was 0.79 (population norm 0.87). A total of 47.2% of respondents reported a mental health condition diagnosis, with 36% of these diagnosed after their admission with SCAD. Quality-of-life was significantly associated with perceived quality-of-care: EQ-5DTM index/(1-EQ-5DTM index) increased by 13% for each unit increase in quality-of-care after adjusting for age and comorbidities (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

While SCAD survivors rated their overall hospital care highly, healthcare providers' knowledge of SCAD was perceived to be poor, and the most common source of SCAD information was the internet. Mental health conditions were common, and a significant association was observed between perceived quality-of-care and SCAD survivors' quality-of-life.

Physicians' perspectives on percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion for patients with atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

There has been an increasing uptake of transcatheter left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) for stroke reduction in atrial fibrillation.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the perceptions and approaches among a nationally representative sample of physicians.

METHODS

Using the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile, we selected a random sample of 500 physicians from each of the specialties: general cardiologists, interventional cardiologists, electrophysiologists, and vascular neurologists. The participants received the survey by mail up to three times from November 9, 2021 to January 14, 2022. In addition to the questions about experiences, perceptions, and approaches, physicians were randomly assigned to 1 of the 4 versions of a patient vignette: white man, white woman, black man, and black woman, to investigate potential bias in decision-making.

RESULTS

The top three reasons for considering LAAO were: a history of intracranial bleeding (94.3%), a history of major extracranial bleeding (91.8%), and gastrointestinal lesions (59.0%), whereas the top three reasons for withholding LAAO were: other indications for long-term oral anticoagulation (87.7%), a low bleeding risk (77.0%), and a low stroke risk (65.6%). For the reasons limiting recommendations for LAAO, 59.8% mentioned procedural risks, 42.6% mentioned "limiting efficacy data comparing LAAO to NOAC" and 32.8% mentioned "limited safety data comparing LAAO to NOAC." There was no difference in physicians' decision-making by patients' race, gender, or the concordance between patients' and physicians' race or gender.

CONCLUSIONS

In the first U.S. national physician survey of LAAO, individual physicians' perspectives varied greatly, which provided information that will help customize future educational activities for different audiences.

CONDENSED ABSTRACT

Although diverse practice patterns of LAAO have been documented, little is known about the reasoning or perceptions that drive these variations. Unlike prior surveys that were directed to Centers that performed LAAO, the current survey obtained insights from individual physicians, not only those who perform the procedures (interventional cardiologists and electrophysiologists) but also those who are closely involved in the decision-making and referral process (general cardiologists and vascular neurologists). The findings identify key evidence gaps and help prioritize future studies to establish a consistent and evidence-based best practice for AF stroke prevention.

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.

Real-world utilization of the pill-in-the-pocket method for terminating episodes of atrial fibrillation: data from the multinational Antiarrhythmic Interventions for Managing Atrial Fibrillation (AIM-AF) survey

AIMS

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained arrhythmia encountered in clinical practice. Episodes may stop spontaneously (paroxysmal AF); may terminate only via intervention (persistent AF); or may persist indefinitely (permanent AF) (see European and American guidelines, referenced below, for more precise definitions). Recently, there has been renewed interest in an approach to terminate AF acutely referred to as 'pill-in-the-pocket' (PITP). The PITP is recognized in both the US and European guidelines as an effective option using an oral antiarrhythmic drug for acute conversion of acute/recent-onset AF. However, how PITP is currently used has not been systematically evaluated.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The recently published Antiarrhythmic Interventions for Managing Atrial Fibrillation (AIM-AF) survey included questions regarding current PITP usage, stratified by US vs. European countries surveyed, by representative countries within Europe, and by cardiologists vs. electrophysiologists. This manuscript presents the data from this planned sub-study. Our survey revealed that clinicians in both the USA and Europe consider PITP in about a quarter of their patients, mostly for recent-onset AF with minimal or no structural heart disease (guideline appropriate). However, significant deviations exist. See the Graphical abstract for a summary of the data.

CONCLUSION

Our findings highlight the frequent use of PITP and the need for further physician education about appropriate and optimal use of this strategy.

[Atrial fibrillation on the intensive care unit : The special prognostic importance of the first manifestation]

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia in the intensive care unit (ICU) and is associated with increased mortality. The AF is classified into five different forms, initially diagnosed AF, paroxysmal AF, persistent AF, long-standing persistent AF and permanent AF. Studies could confirm that the first manifestation of AF (new onset AF) is of particular importance in intensive care patients. The mortality and costs are much higher than for patients with chronic AF. This important clinical difference of the AF pattern should be taken into consideration in the treatment of intensive care patients. The treatment of comorbidities is essential in the treatment concept on the ICU. In patients with an increased risk of thromboembolic complications, therapeutic anticoagulation is indicated, although the greatly increased risk of bleeding during intensive care treatment should be considered in individual cases. In cases of hemodynamic instability electrical cardioversion should immediately be carried out. Otherwise, pharmacological cardioversion can also be carried out. Apart from a few exceptions, amiodarone is the antiarrhythmic drug of choice for rhythm control due to the contraindications for other drugs.

Atrial Fibrillation: Is Rhythm Control Required, and If So, How, and What Is the Internist's Role?

Atrial fibrillation-no primary care physician can escape it! Atrial fibrillation is the most common tachyarrhythmia encountered in clinical practice-whether family practice, internal medicine, cardiology, pulmonology medicine, etc. Moreover, with growth of the older segment of our population and better survival of patients with cardiovascular disorders, the incidence and prevalence of atrial fibrillation are both increasing progressively. Currently, a review of major guidelines shows that the treatment approach to atrial fibrillation involves 4 "pillars"-treatment of contributory comorbidities ("upstream therapy"), control of the ventricular response to the rapid atrial rates during atrial fibrillation, prevention of thromboembolism with oral anticoagulation or left atrial appendage occlusion (except in the minority of patients at too low a thromboembolic risk), and rhythm control in those patients who require it. The latter is the most complex of the 4, and many, if not most, primary care physicians currently prefer to leave this "pillar" to the care of a cardiologist or electrophysiologist. Nonetheless, it is important for the primary care physician to be familiar with the rhythm treatment components and choices (both overall and, specifically, the ones in which they must participate) as they will impact many interactions with their patients in multiple ways. This review details for the primary care physician the components of care regarding rhythm control of atrial fibrillation and the areas in which the primary care physician/internist must be knowledgeable and proactively involved.