Prognostic impact of restored sinus rhythm in patients with sepsis and new-onset atrial fibrillation

A nationwide study on new onset atrial fibrillation risk factors and its association with hospital mortality in sepsis patients

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia and its incidence increases with sepsis. However, data on new-onset AF during sepsis hospitalization remain limited in China. We aimed to evaluate the incidence, risk factors, and associated mortality of new-onset AF in sepsis patients in China. We conducted a retrospective study using the National Data Center for Medical Service system, from 1923 tertiary and 2363 secondary hospitals from 31 provinces in China from 2017 to 2019.In total we included 1,425,055 sepsis patients ≥ 18 years without prior AF. The incidence of new-onset AF was 1.49%. Older age, male sex, hypertension, heart failure, coronary disease, valvular disease, and mechanical ventilation were independent risk factor. New-onset AF was associated with a slight increased risk of mortality (adjusted RR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.06). Population attributable fraction suggested AF accounted for 0.2% of sepsis deaths. In this large nationwide cohort, new-onset AF occurred in 1.49% of sepsis admissions and was associated with a small mortality increase. Further research should examine whether optimized AF management can improve sepsis outcomes in China.

Echocardiography predictors of sustained sinus rhythm after cardioversion of supraventricular arrhythmia in patients with septic shock

PURPOSE

The echocardiography parameters may predict the maintenance of sinus rhythm after cardioversion of a supraventricular arrhythmia (SVA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients in septic shock with onset of an SVA, normal to moderately reduced LV systolic function (EF_LV˃̳35%) and on a continuous noradrenaline of <1.0 μg/kg.min were included. Echocardiography was performed at the arrhythmia onset, 1 h and 4 h post cardioversion on an infusion of propafenone or amiodarone.

RESULTS

Cardioversion was achieved in 96% of the 209 patients within a median time of 6(1.8-15.6)h, 134(64.1%) patients experienced at least one SVA recurrence after cardioversion. At 4 h the left atrial emptying fraction (LA_EF, cut-off 38.4%, AUC 0.69,p˂0.001), and transmitral A wave velocity-time-integral (Avti, cut-off 6.8 cm, AUC 0.65,p = 0.001) showed as limited predictors of a single arrhythmia recurrence. The LA_EF 44(36,49)%, (p = 0.005) and the Avti 8.65(7.13,9.50)cm, (p < 0.001) were associated with sustained sinus rhythm and decreased proportionally to increasing numbers of arrhythmia recurrences (p < 0.001 and p = 0.007, respectively). The enlarged left atrial end-systolic diameter at the arrhythmia onset (p = 0.04) and elevated systolic pulmonary artery pressure at 4 h (p = 0.007) were weak predictors of multiple(˃3) recurrences.

CONCLUSION

The LA_EF and Avti are related to arrhythmia recurrences post-cardioversion suggesting potential guidance to the choice between rhythm and rate control strategies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03029169, registered on 24th of January 2017.

New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in the Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients Hospitalized in the Intensive Care Unit

New-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) is the most frequently encountered cardiac arrhythmia observed in patients with COVID-19 infection, particularly in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients. The purpose of the present review is to delve into the occurrence of NOAF in COVID-19 and thoroughly review recent, pertinent data. However, the causality behind this connection has yet to be thoroughly explored. The proposed mechanisms that could contribute to the development of AF in these patients include myocardial damage resulting from direct virus-induced cardiac injury, potentially leading to perimyocarditis; a cytokine crisis and heightened inflammatory response; hypoxemia due to acute respiratory distress; disturbances in acid-base and electrolyte levels; as well as the frequent use of adrenergic drugs in critically ill patients. Additionally, secondary bacterial sepsis and septic shock have been suggested as primary causes of NOAF in ICU patients. This notion gains strength from the observation of a similar prevalence of NOAF in septic non-COVID ICU patients with ARDS. It is plausible that both myocardial involvement from SARS-CoV-2 and secondary sepsis play pivotal roles in the onset of arrhythmia in ICU patients. Nonetheless, there exists a significant variation in the prevalence of NOAF among studies focused on severe COVID-19 cases with ARDS. This discrepancy could be attributed to the inclusion of mixed populations with varying degrees of illness severity, encompassing not only patients in general wards but also those admitted to the ICU, whether intubated or not. Furthermore, the occurrence of NOAF is linked to increased morbidity and mortality. However, it remains to be determined whether NOAF independently influences outcomes in critically ill COVID-19 ICU patients or if it merely reflects the disease's severity. Lastly, the management of NOAF in these patients has not been extensively studied. Nevertheless, the current guidelines for NOAF in non-COVID ICU patients appear to be effective, while accounting for the specific drugs used in COVID-19 treatment that may prolong the QT interval (although drugs like lopinavir/ritonavir, hydrochlorothiazide, and azithromycin have been discontinued) or induce bradycardia (e.g., remdesivir).

Atrial fibrillation is not an independent determinant of 28-day mortality among critically III sepsis patients

This study was conducted to investigate the relationship between atrial fibrillation and the clinical prognosis of patients with sepsis in intensive care unit. A total of 21,538 sepsis patients were enrolled in the study based on the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV database, of whom 6,759 had AF. Propensity score matching was used to compare the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with and without AF. Besides, the inverse probability of treatment weighting, univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyzes were performed. Of the 21,538 patients, 31.4% had AF. The prevalence of AF increased in a step-by-step manner with growing age. Patients with AF were older than those without AF. After PSM, 11,180 patients remained, comprising 5,790 matched pairs in both groups. In IPTW, AF was not associated with 28-day mortality [hazard ratio (HR), 1.07; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.99-1.15]. In Kaplan-Meier analysis, it was not observed difference of 28-day mortality between patients with and without AF. AF could be associated with increased ICU LOS, hospital LOS and need for mechanical ventilation; however, it does not remain an independent short-term predictor of 28-day mortality among patients with sepsis after PSM with IPTW and multivariate analysis.

Atrial Fibrillation and Sepsis in Elderly Patients and Their Associaton with In-Hospital Mortality

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) affects about 2% to 4% of the world population, and in patients hospitalized in intensive care units, this incidence can reach up to 23% in those with septic shock. The impact of AF in patients with sepsis is reflected in worse clinical outcomes, and the identification of the triggering factors can be a target for future prevention and treatment strategies.

OBJECTIVES

To verify the relationship between the development of AF and mortality in patients over 80 years of age included in the sepsis protocol and to identify the risk factors that contribute to the development of AF in this population.

METHODS

Retrospective observational study, with a review of electronic medical records and inclusion of 895 patients aged 80 years or older, included in the sepsis protocol of a high-complexity private hospital in São Paulo, SP, from January 2018 to December 2020. All tests were performed with a significance level of 5%.

RESULTS

The incidence of AF in the sample was 13%. After multivariate analysis, using multiple logistic regression, it was possible to demonstrate an association of mortality, in the studied population, with the SOFA score (odds ratio [OR] 1.21 [1.09 - 1.35]), higher values of C-reactive protein (OR 1.04 [1.01 - 1.06]), need for vasoactive drugs (OR 2.4 [1.38 - 4.18]), use of mechanical ventilation (OR 3.49 [1.82 - 6.71]), and mainly AF (OR 3.7 [2.16 - 6.31]).

CONCLUSION

In very elderly patients (80 years of age and older) with sepsis, the development of AF was shown to be an independent risk factor for in-hospital mortality.

Sepsis as an independent risk factor in atrial fibrillation and cardioembolic stroke

BACKGROUND

Electrolyte balance is an important factor to sustain the homeostasis of human body environment and in sepsis pathogenesis. Many current cohort-based studies have already revealed that electrolyte disorder may intensify sepsis and induce stroke. However, the corresponding randomized controlled trials did not show that electrolyte disorder in sepsis has a harmful effect on stroke.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to examine the association of genetically sepsis-derived electrolyte disorder with stroke risk using meta-analysis and Mendelian randomization.

RESULTS

In four studies (182,980 patients), electrolyte disorders were compared with stroke incidence in patients with sepsis. The pooled odds ratio (OR) of stroke is 1.79 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.23-3.06; p < 0.05], which shows a significant association between electrolyte disorder and stroke in sepsis patients. Furthermore, in order to evaluate the causal association between stroke risk and sepsis-derived electrolyte disorder, a two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) study was conducted. The genetic variants extracted from a genome-wide association study (GWAS) of exposure data that are strongly associated with frequently used sepsis were used as instrumental variables (IVs). Based on the IVs' corresponding effect estimates, we estimated overall stroke risk, cardioembolic stroke risk, and stroke induced by large/small vessels from a GWAS meta-analysis with 10,307 cases and 19,326 controls. As a final step to verify the preliminary MR results, we performed sensitivity analysis using multiple types of Mendelian randomization analysis.

CONCLUSION

Our study revealed the association between electrolyte disorder and stroke in sepsis patients, and the correlation between genetic susceptibility to sepsis and increased risk of cardioembolic stroke, hinting that cardiogenic diseases and accompanying electrolyte disorder interference in due course could help sepsis patients get more benefits in stroke prevention.

Increased long-term mortality following new-onset atrial fibrillation in the intensive care unit: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the long-term outcomes of patients who develop new-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) during an intensive care unit (ICU) admission.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from 2000 to 2022. We included studies of adults based in general ICUs that evaluated long-term outcomes (at least 30 days after hospital discharge) of NOAF. We excluded studies involving patients with a history of atrial fibrillation (AF). We performed risk of bias assessment of the included studies based on a modified Newcastle Ottawa score (NOS). We extracted summary data for long-term outcomes. Where the outcome was reported in three or more studies we pooled effect sizes.

RESULTS

We screened 2206 studies and included 15 studies reporting data from 561,797 patients. Pooled analysis of 4 studies using a random effects model revealed an association between NOAF acquired in an ICU and 90-day mortality (including ICU and hospital mortality) (RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.12-2.08). We also found an association between NOAF and 1-year mortality from 7 studies (RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.65-1.96), which remained when analysing 1-year mortality in hospital survivors (RR 1.72 (95% CI 1.49-1.98).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients who develop NOAF in an ICU, both 90-day and 1-year mortality are increased in comparison to those who do not develop NOAF. Current evidence suggests an increased risk of thromboembolic events after hospital discharge in patients who develop NOAF in an ICU.

Risk factors for new-onset atrial fibrillation during critical illness: A Delphi study

Background

New-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) is common during critical illness and is associated with poor outcomes. Many risk factors for NOAF during critical illness have been identified, overlapping with risk factors for atrial fibrillation in patients in community settings. To develop interventions to prevent NOAF during critical illness, modifiable risk factors must be identified. These have not been studied in detail and it is not clear which variables warrant further study.

Methods

We undertook an international three-round Delphi process using an expert panel to identify important predictors of NOAF risk during critical illness.

Results

Of 22 experts invited, 12 agreed to participate. Participants were located in Europe, North America and South America and shared 110 publications on the subject of atrial fibrillation. All 12 completed the three Delphi rounds. Potentially modifiable risk factors identified include 15 intervention-related variables.

Conclusions

We present the results of the first Delphi process to identify important predictors of NOAF risk during critical illness. These results support further research into modifiable risk factors including optimal plasma electrolyte concentrations, rates of change of these electrolytes, fluid balance, choice of vasoactive medications and the use of preventative medications in high-risk patients. We also hope our findings will aid the development of predictive models for NOAF.

New-onset atrial fibrillation in intensive care: epidemiology and outcomes

Aims

New-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) is common in patients treated on an intensive care unit (ICU), but the long-term impacts on patient outcomes are unclear. We compared national hospital and long-term outcomes of patients who developed NOAF in ICU with those who did not, before and after adjusting for comorbidities and ICU admission factors.

Methods and results

Using the RISK-II database (Case Mix Programme national clinical audit of adult intensive care linked with Hospital Episode Statistics and mortality data), we conducted a retrospective cohort study of 4615 patients with NOAF and 27 690 matched controls admitted to 248 adult ICUs in England, from April 2009 to March 2016. We examined in-hospital mortality; hospital readmission with atrial fibrillation (AF), heart failure, and stroke up to 6 years post discharge; and mortality up to 8 years post discharge. Compared with controls, patients who developed NOAF in the ICU were at a higher risk of in-hospital mortality [unadjusted odds ratio (OR) 3.22, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.02–3.44], only partially explained by patient demographics, comorbidities, and ICU admission factors (adjusted OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.38–1.63). They were also at a higher risk of subsequent hospitalization with AF [adjusted cause-specific hazard ratio (aCHR) 5.86, 95% CI 5.33–6.44], stroke (aCHR 1.47, 95% CI 1.12–1.93), and heart failure (aCHR 1.28, 95% CI 1.14–1.44) independent of pre-existing comorbidities.

Conclusion

Patients who develop NOAF during an ICU admission are at a higher risk of in-hospital death and readmissions to hospital with AF, heart failure, and stroke than those who do not.

Prevalence of New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation and Associated Outcomes in Patients with Sepsis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: New-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) is a common complication in patients with sepsis, although its prevalence and impact on outcomes are still unclear. We aim to provide a systematic review and meta-analysis on the prevalence of NOAF in patients with sepsis, and its impact on in-hospital mortality and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality. Methods: PubMed and EMBASE were systematically searched on 26 December 2021. Studies reporting on the prevalence of NOAF and/or its impact on in-hospital mortality or ICU mortality in patients with sepsis or septic shock were included. The pooled prevalence and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated, as well as the risk ratios (RR), 95%CI and 95% prediction intervals (PI) for outcomes. Subgroup analyses and meta-regressions were performed to account for heterogeneity. Results: Among 4988 records retrieved from the literature search, 22 articles were included. Across 207,847 patients with sepsis, NOAF was found in 13.5% (95%CI: 8.9–20.1%), with high heterogeneity between studies; significant subgroup differences were observed, according to the geographical location, study design and sample size of the included studies. A multivariable meta-regression model showed that sample size and geographical location account for most of the heterogeneity. NOAF patients showed an increased risk of both in-hospital mortality (RR: 1.69, 95%CI: 1.47–1.96, 95%PI: 1.15–2.50) and ICU mortality (RR: 2.12, 95%CI: 1.86–2.43, 95%PI: 1.71–2.63), with moderate to no heterogeneity between the included studies. Conclusions: NOAF is a common complication during sepsis, being present in one out of seven individuals. Patients with NOAF are at a higher risk of adverse events during sepsis, and may need specific therapeutical interventions.

Meta-Analysis of New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation Versus No History of Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Noncardiac Critical Care Illness

The incidence of new-onset secondary atrial fibrillation (NOSAF) is as high as 44% in noncardiac critical illness. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to evaluate the impact of NOSAF, compared with history of prior atrial fibrillation (AF) and no history of AF in noncardiac critically ill patients. Patients undergoing cardiothoracic surgery were excluded. NOSAF incidence, intensive care unit (ICU)/hospital length of stay (LOS), and mortality outcomes were analyzed. Of 2,360 studies reviewed, 19 studies met inclusion criteria (n = 306,805 patients). NOSAF compared with no history of AF was associated with increased in-hospital mortality (risk ratio [RR] 2.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.76 to 2.41, p <0.001), longer ICU LOS (standardized difference in means [SMD] 0.66, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.91, p <0.001), longer hospital LOS (SMD 0.31, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.56, p = 0.001) and increased risk of long-term (>1 year) mortality (RR 1.76, 95% CI 1.29 to 2.40, p <0.001). NOSAF compared with previous AF was also associated with higher in-hospital mortality (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.49, p <0.001), longer ICU LOS (SMD 0.37, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.70, p = 0.03) but no difference in-hospital LOS (SMD -0.18, 95% CI -0.66 to 0.31, p = 0.47). In conclusion, NOSAF, in the setting of noncardiac critical illness is associated with increased in-hospital mortality compared with no history of AF and previous AF. NOSAF (vs no history of AF) is also associated with increased long-term mortality.

Management of new onset atrial fibrillation in critically unwell adult patients: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

BACKGROUND

New onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) is the most common arrhythmia affecting critically unwell patients. NOAF can lead to worsening haemodynamic compromise, heart failure, thromboembolic events, and increased mortality. The aim of this systematic review and narrative synthesis is to evaluate the non-pharmacological and pharmacological management strategies for NOAF in critically unwell patients.

METHODS

Of 1782 studies, 30 were eligible for inclusion, including 4 RCTs and 26 observational studies. Efficacy of direct current cardioversion, amiodarone, β-antagonists, calcium channel blockers, digoxin, magnesium, and less commonly used agents such as ibutilide are reported.

RESULTS

Cardioversion rates of 48% were reported for direct current cardioversion; however, re-initiation of NOAF was as high as 23.4%. Amiodarone was the most commonly reported intervention with cardioversion rates ranging from 18% to 95.8% followed by β-antagonists with cardioversion rates from 40% to 92.3%. Amiodarone was more effective than diltiazem (odds ratio [OR]=1.91, P=0.32) at cardioversion. Short-acting β-antagonists esmolol and landiolol were more effective compared with diltiazem at cardioversion (OR=3.55, P=0.04) and HR control (OR=3.2, P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

There was significant variation between studies with regard to the definition of successful cardioversion and heart rate control, making comparisons between studies and interventions difficult. Future RCTs comparing individual anti-arrhythmic agents, in particular magnesium, amiodarone, and β-antagonists, and the role of anticoagulation in critically unwell patients are required. There is also an urgent need for a core outcome dataset for studies of new onset atrial fibrillation to allow comparisons between different anti-arrhythmic strategies.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019121739.

Pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments and outcomes for new-onset atrial fibrillation in ICU patients: the CAFE scoping review and database analyses

BACKGROUND

New-onset atrial fibrillation occurs in around 10% of adults treated in an intensive care unit. New-onset atrial fibrillation may lead to cardiovascular instability and thromboembolism, and has been independently associated with increased length of hospital stay and mortality. The long-term consequences are unclear. Current practice guidance is based on patients outside the intensive care unit; however, new-onset atrial fibrillation that develops while in an intensive care unit differs in its causes and the risks and clinical effectiveness of treatments. The lack of evidence on new-onset atrial fibrillation treatment or long-term outcomes in intensive care units means that practice varies. Identifying optimal treatment strategies and defining long-term outcomes are critical to improving care.

OBJECTIVES

In patients treated in an intensive care unit, the objectives were to (1) evaluate existing evidence for the clinical effectiveness and safety of pharmacological and non-pharmacological new-onset atrial fibrillation treatments, (2) compare the use and clinical effectiveness of pharmacological and non-pharmacological new-onset atrial fibrillation treatments, and (3) determine outcomes associated with new-onset atrial fibrillation.

METHODS

We undertook a scoping review that included studies of interventions for treatment or prevention of new-onset atrial fibrillation involving adults in general intensive care units. To investigate the long-term outcomes associated with new-onset atrial fibrillation, we carried out a retrospective cohort study using English national intensive care audit data linked to national hospital episode and outcome data. To analyse the clinical effectiveness of different new-onset atrial fibrillation treatments, we undertook a retrospective cohort study of two large intensive care unit databases in the USA and the UK.

RESULTS

Existing evidence was generally of low quality, with limited data suggesting that beta-blockers might be more effective than amiodarone for converting new-onset atrial fibrillation to sinus rhythm and for reducing mortality. Using linked audit data, we showed that patients developing new-onset atrial fibrillation have more comorbidities than those who do not. After controlling for these differences, patients with new-onset atrial fibrillation had substantially higher mortality in hospital and during the first 90 days after discharge (adjusted odds ratio 2.32, 95% confidence interval 2.16 to 2.48; adjusted hazard ratio 1.46, 95% confidence interval 1.26 to 1.70, respectively), and higher rates of subsequent hospitalisation with atrial fibrillation, stroke and heart failure (adjusted cause-specific hazard ratio 5.86, 95% confidence interval 5.33 to 6.44; adjusted cause-specific hazard ratio 1.47, 95% confidence interval 1.12 to 1.93; and adjusted cause-specific hazard ratio 1.28, 95% confidence interval 1.14 to 1.44, respectively), than patients who did not have new-onset atrial fibrillation. From intensive care unit data, we found that new-onset atrial fibrillation occurred in 952 out of 8367 (11.4%) UK and 1065 out of 18,559 (5.7%) US intensive care unit patients in our study. The median time to onset of new-onset atrial fibrillation in patients who received treatment was 40 hours, with a median duration of 14.4 hours. The clinical characteristics of patients developing new-onset atrial fibrillation were similar in both databases. New-onset atrial fibrillation was associated with significant average reductions in systolic blood pressure of 5 mmHg, despite significant increases in vasoactive medication (vasoactive-inotropic score increase of 2.3; p < 0.001). After adjustment, intravenous beta-blockers were not more effective than amiodarone in achieving rate control (adjusted hazard ratio 1.14, 95% confidence interval 0.91 to 1.44) or rhythm control (adjusted hazard ratio 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.67 to 1.11). Digoxin therapy was associated with a lower probability of achieving rate control (adjusted hazard ratio 0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.32 to 0.86) and calcium channel blocker therapy was associated with a lower probability of achieving rhythm control (adjusted hazard ratio 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.39 to 0.79) than amiodarone. Findings were consistent across both the combined and the individual database analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Existing evidence for new-onset atrial fibrillation management in intensive care unit patients is limited. New-onset atrial fibrillation in these patients is common and is associated with significant short- and long-term complications. Beta-blockers and amiodarone appear to be similarly effective in achieving cardiovascular control, but digoxin and calcium channel blockers appear to be inferior.

FUTURE WORK

Our findings suggest that a randomised controlled trial of amiodarone and beta-blockers for management of new-onset atrial fibrillation in critically ill patients should be undertaken. Studies should also be undertaken to provide evidence for or against anticoagulation for patients who develop new-onset atrial fibrillation in intensive care units. Finally, given that readmission with heart failure and thromboembolism increases following an episode of new-onset atrial fibrillation while in an intensive care unit, a prospective cohort study to demonstrate the incidence of atrial fibrillation and/or left ventricular dysfunction at hospital discharge and at 3 months following the development of new-onset atrial fibrillation should be undertaken.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN13252515.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 71. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Association of onset time of new-onset atrial fibrillation with in-hospital mortality among critically ill patients: A secondary analysis of a prospective multicenter observational study

Background

New-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) in critically ill patients is associated with adverse outcomes. In non-critical settings, the circadian variation in paroxysmal AF is of significant interest; however, circadian variation in critically ill patients with new-onset AF has not been thoroughly studied. This study aimed to examine the association between AF onset time and in-hospital mortality.

Methods

This was a secondary analysis of a prospective multicenter observational study enrolling adult critically ill patients. According to AF onset time, patients were divided into nighttime (0:00–7:59), daytime (8:00–15:59), and evening (16:00–23:59). We conducted a multiple logistic regression analysis to assess the potential association between AF onset time and in-hospital mortality. We also assessed the distribution of AF onset, crude in-hospital mortality, and adjusted in-hospital mortality according to bihourly intervals.

Results

Of 423 patients, in-hospital mortality was 26%. During nighttime, 135 patients (32%) developed new-onset AF. AF emerged during daytime for 141 (33%) and during evening for 147 (35%). Daytime AF was significantly associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality (adjusted OR: 1.92; 95% CI: 1.07–3.44; p = 0.030). Bihourly interval analysis showed that adjusted in-hospital mortality was unevenly distributed and bimodal with troughs between 6:00 and 7:59 and between 18:00 and 19:59. A similar trend was seen in the distribution of the number of new-onset AF.

Conclusions

We found that the bihourly adjusted in-hospital mortality was distributed in a bimodal fashion. Further research is needed to determine the causes of the diurnal variation and its impact on patient outcomes.

New-onset atrial fibrillation in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Background

Mortality in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is high, therefore, it is essential to evaluate the independent effect of new-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) on mortality in patients with COVID-19. We aimed to determine the incidence, risk factors, and outcomes of NOAF in a cohort of critically ill patients with COVID-19.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study on patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with a diagnosis of COVID-19. NOAF was defined as atrial fibrillation that was detected after diagnosis of COVID-19 without a prior history. The primary outcome of the study was the effect of NOAF on mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients.

Results

NOAF incidence was 14.9% (n = 37), and 78% of patients (n = 29) were men in NOAF positive group. Median age of the NOAF group was 79.0 (interquartile range, 71.5-84.0). Hospital mortality was higher in the NOAF group (87% vs 67%, respectively, P = .019). However, in multivariate analysis, NOAF was not an independent risk factor for hospital mortality (OR 1.42, 95% CI 0.40-5.09, P = .582).

Conclusions

The incidence of NOAF was 14.9% in critically ill COVID-19 patients. Hospital mortality was higher in the NOAF group. However, NOAF was not an independent risk factor for hospital mortality in patients with COVID-19.

Treatment strategies for new onset atrial fibrillation in patients treated on an intensive care unit: a systematic scoping review

BACKGROUND

New-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) in patients treated on an intensive care unit (ICU) is common and associated with significant morbidity and mortality. We undertook a systematic scoping review to summarise comparative evidence to inform NOAF management for patients admitted to ICU.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, OpenGrey, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, ISRCTN, ClinicalTrials.gov, EU Clinical Trials register, additional WHO ICTRP trial databases, and NIHR Clinical Trials Gateway in March 2019. We included studies evaluating treatment or prevention strategies for NOAF or acute anticoagulation in general medical, surgical or mixed adult ICUs. We extracted study details, population characteristics, intervention and comparator(s), methods addressing confounding, results, and recommendations for future research onto study-specific forms.

RESULTS

Of 3,651 citations, 42 articles were eligible: 25 primary studies, 12 review articles and 5 surveys/opinion papers. Definitions of NOAF varied between NOAF lasting 30 s to NOAF lasting > 24 h. Only one comparative study investigated effects of anticoagulation. Evidence from small RCTs suggests calcium channel blockers (CCBs) result in slower rhythm control than beta blockers (1 study), and more cardiovascular instability than amiodarone (1 study). Evidence from 4 non-randomised studies suggests beta blocker and amiodarone therapy may be equivalent in respect to rhythm control. Beta blockers may be associated with improved survival compared to amiodarone, CCBs, and digoxin, though supporting evidence is subject to confounding. Currently, the limited evidence does not support therapeutic anticoagulation during ICU admission.

CONCLUSIONS

From the limited evidence available beta blockers or amiodarone may be superior to CCBs as first line therapy in undifferentiated patients in ICU. The little evidence available does not support therapeutic anticoagulation for NOAF whilst patients are critically ill. Consensus definitions for NOAF, rate and rhythm control are needed.

Rhythm-control therapy for new-onset atrial fibrillation in critically ill patients: A post hoc analysis from the prospective multicenter observational AFTER-ICU study

BACKGROUND

Sustained new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) in the intensive care unit has been reported to be associated with poor outcomes. However, in critical illness, whether rhythm-control therapy can achieve sinus rhythm (SR) restoration is unknown. This study aimed to assess the impact of rhythm-control therapy on SR restoration for new-onset AF in critically ill patients.

METHODS

This post-hoc analysis of a prospective multicenter observational study involving 32 Japan intensive care units compared patients with and without rhythm-control therapy for new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) and conducted a multivariable analysis using Cox proportional hazards regression analysis including rhythm-control therapy as a time-varying covariate for SR restoration.

RESULTS

Of 423 new-onset AF patients, 178 patients (42%) underwent rhythm-control therapy. Among those patients, 131 (31%) underwent rhythm-control therapy within 6 h after AF onset. Magnesium sulphate was the most frequently used rhythm-control drug. The Cox proportional hazards model for SR restoration showed that rhythm-control therapy had a significant positive association with SR restoration (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.46; 95% confidence interval: 1.16-1.85). However, the rhythm-control group had numerically higher hospital mortality than the non-rhythm-control group (31% vs. 23%, p = 0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

Rhythm-control therapy for new-onset AF in critically ill patients was associated with SR restoration. However, patients with rhythm-control therapy had poorer prognosis, possibly due to selection bias. These findings may provide important insight for the design and feasibility of interventional studies assessing rhythm-control therapy in new-onset AF.

Outcomes of new-onset atrial fibrillation in patients with sepsis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 225,841 patients

BACKGROUND

The outcomes of new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) during sepsis are inconsistent and inconclusive. This meta-analysis aims to provide a comprehensive description of the impact of new-onset AF on the prognosis of sepsis.

METHODS

Three electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library) were searched for relevant studies. Meta-analysis was performed using odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) as effect measures.

RESULTS

A total of 225,841 patients from 13 individual studies were incorporated to the meta-analysis. The summary results revealed that new-onset AF during sepsis was associated with increased odds of in-hospital mortality (pooled OR: 2.09; 95% CI: 1.53-2.86; p < 001), post-discharge mortality (pooled OR: 2.44; 95% CI: 1.81-3.29; p < .001), and stroke (pooled OR:1.88; 95% CI: 1.13-3.14; p < .05). Results also indicated that the incidence of new-onset AF varied from 1.9% for mild sepsis to 46.0% for septic shock. Furthermore, compared to those without AF, people with new-onset AF had longer ICU and hospital stays, as well as a higher recurrence of AF.

CONCLUSIONS

New-onset AF is frequently associated with adverse outcomes in patients with sepsis. This is a clinical issue that warrants more attention and should be managed appropriately to prevent poor prognosis.

New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in Sepsis: A Narrative Review

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a frequently identified arrhythmia during the course of sepsis. The aim of this narrative review is to assess the characteristics of patients with new-onset AF related to sepsis and the risk of stroke and death, to understand if there is a need for anticoagulation. We searched for studies on AF and sepsis on PubMed, the Cochrane database, and Web of Science, and 17 studies were included. The mean incidence of new-onset AF in patients with sepsis was 20.6% (14.7% in retrospective studies and 31.6% in prospective). Risk factors for new-onset AF included advanced age, white race, male sex, obesity, history of cardiopulmonary disease, heart or respiratory failure, and higher disease severity score. In-hospital mortality was higher in patients with than in those without new-onset AF in 10 studies. In four studies the overall intensive care unit and hospital mortality rates were comparable between patients with and without new-onset AF, while three other studies did not provide mortality data. One study reported on the in-hospital incidence of stroke, which was 2.6 versus 0.69% in patients with or without new-onset AF, respectively. Seven of the studies provided follow-up data after discharge. In three studies, new-onset AF was associated with excess mortality at 28 days, 1 year, and 5 years after discharge of 34, 21, and 3% patients, respectively. In two studies, the mortality rate was comparable in patients with and without new-onset AF. Postdischarge stroke was reported in five studies, whereof two studies had no events after 30 and 90 days, one study showed a nonsignificant increase in stroke, and two studies demonstrated a significant increase in risk of stroke after new-onset AF. The absolute risk increase was 0.6 to 1.6%. Large prospective studies are needed to better understand the need for anticoagulation after new-onset AF in sepsis.

Clinical course after identification of new-onset atrial fibrillation in critically ill patients: The AFTER-ICU study

PURPOSE

Epidemiological information is lacking after identification of new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) in critically ill patients. This study aimed to describe the clinical course after the identification of new-onset AF.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective cohort study enrolled adult patients with new-onset AF in 32 Japanese ICUs during 2017-2018. We collected data on patient comorbidities, physiological information before and at the AF onset, interventions for AF, cardiac rhythm transition, adverse events and in-hospital death and stroke.

RESULTS

We included 423 new-onset AF patients. At the AF onset, mean arterial pressure decreased and the heart rate increased. Eighty-four patients (20%) spontaneously restored sinus rhythm and 328 patients (78%) received various pharmacological interventions (rate-control drugs, 67%; rhythm-control drugs, 34%). Anticoagulants were administered in 173 patients (40%) and 13 patients (3%) experienced bleeding complications. Twenty-four patients (6%) were still in AF at 168 h after the onset (sustained AF 4%; recurrent AF 2%). The overall hospital mortality was 26% and the incidence of in-hospital stroke was 4.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the proportion of patients with AF continued to decrease with various treatments, these patients had high risk of death. Further research to assess the management of new-onset AF in critically ill patients is warranted.

Sepsis With Preexisting Heart Failure: Management of Confounding Clinical Features

Preexisting heart failure (HF) in patients with sepsis is associated with worse clinical outcomes. Core sepsis management includes aggressive volume resuscitation followed by vasopressors (and potentially inotropes) if fluid is inadequate to restore perfusion; however, large fluid boluses and vasoactive agents are concerning amid the cardiac dysfunction of HF. This review summarizes evidence regarding the influence of HF on sepsis clinical outcomes, pathophysiologic concerns, resuscitation targets, hemodynamic interventions, and adjunct management (ie, antiarrhythmics, positive pressure ventilatory support, and renal replacement therapy) in patients with sepsis and preexisting HF. Patients with sepsis and preexisting HF receive less fluid during resuscitation; however, evidence suggests traditional fluid resuscitation targets do not increase the risk of adverse events in HF patients with sepsis and likely improve outcomes. Norepinephrine remains the most well-supported vasopressor for patients with sepsis with preexisting HF, while dopamine may induce more cardiac adverse events. Dobutamine should be used cautiously given its generally detrimental effects but may have an application when combined with norepinephrine in patients with low cardiac output. Management of chronic HF medications warrants careful consideration for continuation or discontinuation upon development of sepsis, and β-blockers may be appropriate to continue in the absence of acute hemodynamic decompensation. Optimal management of atrial fibrillation may include β-blockers after acute hemodynamic stabilization as they have also shown independent benefits in sepsis. Positive pressure ventilatory support and renal replacement must be carefully monitored for effects on cardiac function when HF is present.

Prevalence, Outcomes, and Risk Factors of New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in Critically Ill Patients

The purpose of this article is to systematically evaluate the prevalence, outcomes, and risk factors of new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) in critically ill patients.Medline, Embase, Science Citation Index, Wanfang, CNKI, and Wiley Online Library were thoroughly searched to identify relevant studies. Studies were assessed for methodological quality using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Odds ratio (OR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to assess the strength of the association. Heterogeneity, subgroup, sensitivity analyses, and publication bias were conducted.A total of 25 studies were included. The prevalence of new-onset AF ranged from 4.1% to 46%.The random-effects pooled prevalence was 10.7%. The pooled result jumped up to 35.8% in patients with septic shock. Pooled analysis showed significant associations between new-onset AF with intensive care unit (ICU) mortality and in-hospital mortality over those patients without AF (OR = 3.11; 95%CI 2.45-3.96 and OR = 1.63; 95%CI 1.27-2.08). The pooled analysis also indicated that both ICU and hospital length of stay are longer in patients with new-onset AF than those without AF (WMD = 1.87; 95%CI 0.89-2.84 and WMD = 2.73; 95%CI 0.77-4.69). Independent risk factors included increasing age, shock, sepsis, use of a pulmonary artery catheter and mechanical ventilation, fluid loading, and organ failures.New-onset AF incidence rate is high in critically ill patients. New-onset AF is associated with worse outcomes. Further studies should be done to explore how to prevent and treat new-onset AF in critically ill patients.

Managing new-onset atrial fibrillation in critically ill patients: a systematic narrative review

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review is to summarise the latest evidence on efficacy and safety of treatments for new-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) in critical illness.

PARTICIPANTS

Critically ill adult patients who developed NOAF during admission.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES

Primary outcomes were efficacy in achieving rate or rhythm control, as defined in each study. Secondary outcomes included mortality, stroke, bleeding and adverse events.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Knowledge on 11 March 2019 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies reporting treatment efficacy for NOAF in critically ill patients. Data were extracted, and quality assessment was performed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool, and an adapted Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

Of 1406 studies identified, 16 remained after full-text screening including two RCTs. Study quality was generally low due to a lack of randomisation, absence of blinding and small cohorts. Amiodarone was the most commonly studied agent (10 studies), followed by beta-blockers (8), calcium channel blockers (6) and magnesium (3). Rates of successful rhythm control using amiodarone varied from 30.0% to 95.2%, beta-blockers from 31.8% to 92.3%, calcium channel blockers from 30.0% to 87.1% and magnesium from 55.2% to 77.8%. Adverse effects of treatment were rarely reported (five studies).

CONCLUSION

The reported efficacy of beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, magnesium and amiodarone for achieving rhythm control was highly varied. As there is currently significant variation in how NOAF is managed in critically ill patients, we recommend future research focuses on comparing the efficacy and safety of amiodarone, beta-blockers and magnesium. Further research is needed to inform the decision surrounding anticoagulant use in this patient group.

Efficacy and safety of 1C class antiarrhythmic agent (propafenone) for supraventricular arrhythmias in septic shock compared to amiodarone: protocol of a prospective randomised double-blind study

INTRODUCTION

Supraventricular arrhythmias contribute to haemodynamic compromise in septic shock. A retrospective study generated the hypothesis that propafenone could be more effective than amiodarone in achieving and maintaining sinus rhythm (SR). Certain echocardiographic parameters may predict a successful cardioversion and help in the decision on rhythm or rate control strategy.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The trial includes septic shock patients with new-onset arrhythmia, but without severe impairment of the left ventricular ejection fraction. After baseline echocardiography, the patient is randomised to receive a bolus and maintenance dose of either amiodarone or propafenone. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients that have achieved rhythm control at 24 hours after the start of the infusion. The secondary outcomes are the percentages of patients that needed rescue treatments (DC cardioversion or unblinding and crossover of the antiarrhythmics), the recurrence of arrhythmias, intensive care unit mortality, 28-day and 1-year mortality. In the posthoc analysis, we separately assess subgroups of patients with pulmonary hypertension and right ventricular dysfunction. In the exploratory part of the study, we assess whether the presence of a transmitral diastolic A wave and its higher velocity-time integral is predictive for the sustainability of mechanical SR and whether the indexed left atrial endsystolic volume is predictive of recurrent arrhythmia. Considering that the restoration of SR within 24 hours occurred in 74% of the amiodarone-treated patients and in 89% of the patients treated with propafenone, we plan to include 200 patients to have an 80% chance to demonstrate the superiority of propafenone at p=0.05.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The trial is recruiting patients according to its second protocol version approved by the University Hospital Ethical Board on the 6 October 2017 (No. 1691/16S-IV). The results will be disseminated through peer reviewed publications and conference presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03029169.

[Atrial fibrillation in patients with sepsis and non-cardiac infections]

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is by far the most frequent cardiac arrhythmia associated with sepsis and infections. Newly occurring AF due to infections is associated with a deterioration of the prognosis for acute events and also for the long-term prognosis of patients. The risk of developing AF during an infection depends on general (e.g. age, structural heart disease) as well as infection-specific risk factors (e.g. sepsis severity, vasopressor treatment). Current guidelines do not make specific recommendations on the treatment of infection-associated AF and very few prospective data are available. The use of beta blockers appears to be safe for both prevention and frequency control of AF even in patients requiring catecholamines. For specific antiarrhythmic treatment, the use of class I antiarrhythmic agents is conceivable as an alternative to the predominantly used amiodarone. Newly occurring AF within infections has long been considered a specific entity with a low risk of recurrence, so that only a small proportion of patients received long-term effective anticoagulation; however, data from large retrospective studies suggest significantly higher recurrence rates. Therefore, the question of whether this group of patients benefits from long-term effective anticoagulation and extended monitoring of arrhythmia should be the subject of future research.

Norepinephrine and Vasopressin Compared With Norepinephrine and Epinephrine in Adults With Septic Shock

Background: The optimal adjuvant vasopressor to norepinephrine in septic shock remains controversial. Objective: To compare durations of shock-free survival between adjuvant vasopressin and epinephrine. Methods: A retrospective, single-center, matched cohort study of adults with septic shock refractory to norepinephrine was conducted. Patients receiving norepinephrine not at target mean arterial pressure (MAP; 65 mm Hg) were initiated on vasopressin or epinephrine to raise MAP to target. Vasopressin-exposed patients were matched to epinephrine-exposed patients using propensity scores. Mortality outcomes were examined using multivariable Poisson regression with robust variance estimation. Results: Of 166 patients, 96 (entire cohort) were included in the propensity score-matched cohort. Shock-free survival durations in the first 7 days were similar between epinephrine- and vasopressin-exposed patients in the matched cohort (median = 13.2 hours, interquartile range [IQR] = 0-121.0, vs median = 41.3 hours, IQR = 0-125.9; P = 0.51). Seven- and 28-day mortality rates were similar in the matched cohort (7-day: 47.9% vs 39.6%, P = 0.35; 28-day: 56.3% vs 58.3%, P = 0.84). Mortality rates were similar between epinephrine- and vasopressin-exposed patients in propensity score-matched regression models with and without adjustments at 7 (relative risk [RR] = 1.28, 95% CI = 0.92-1.79; RR = 1.21, 95% CI = 0.81-1.81) and 28 days (RR = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.81-1.34; RR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.69-1.34). Conclusion and Relevance: Shock-free survival durations were similar in matched epinephrine- and vasopressin-exposed groups. Adjuvant epinephrine or vasopressin alongside norepinephrine to raise MAP to target requires further investigation.

Atrial fibrillation detected initially during acute medical illness: A systematic review

Objective:

There is uncertainty about the incidence of and prognosis associated with atrial fibrillation that is documented for the first time in the setting of an acute stressor, such as surgery or medical illness. Our objective was to perform a systematic review of the incidence and long-term recurrence rates for atrial fibrillation occurring transiently with stress in the setting of acute medical illness.

Data sources:

Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central to September 2017.

Study selection:

We included retrospective and prospective observational studies, and randomised controlled trials. The population of interest included patients hospitalised for medical (i.e. non-surgical) illness who developed newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation. Studies were included if they included data on either the incidence of atrial fibrillation or the rate of atrial fibrillation recurrence in atrial fibrillation occurring transiently with stress patients following hospital discharge.

Data extraction:

Two reviewers collected data independently and in duplicate. We characterised each study’s methodology for ascertainment of prior atrial fibrillation history, atrial fibrillation during hospitalisation and atrial fibrillation recurrence after hospital discharge.

Data synthesis:

Thirty-six studies reported the incidence of atrial fibrillation. Ten used a prospective design and included a period of continuous electrocardiographic (ECG) monitoring. Atrial fibrillation incidence ranged from 1% to 44%, which was too heterogeneous to justify meta-analysis ( I2=99%). In post-hoc meta-regression models, the use of continuous ECG monitoring explained 13% of the variance in atrial fibrillation incidence, while care in an intensive care unit explained none. Two studies reported the long-term rate of atrial fibrillation recurrence following atrial fibrillation occurring transiently with stress. Neither of these studies used prospective, systematic monitoring. Recurrence rates at 5 years ranged from 42% to 68%.

Conclusions:

The incidence of atrial fibrillation with medical illness may be as high as 44%, with higher estimates in reports using continuous ECG monitoring. Within 5 years following hospital discharge, atrial fibrillation recurrence is documented in approximately half of patients; however, the true rate may be higher.

Protocol registration

PROSPERO CRD42016043240

[New onset atrial fibrillation in patients with sepsis]

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation is the most common new onset arrhythmia in patients hospitalized with sepsis; however, there are no specific treatment guidelines and the ideal therapeutic approaches still remain unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To begin with the current state of knowledge concerning the underling mechanisms, the incidence and prognostic impact of new onset atrial fibrillation during sepsis are presented. Then a possible therapeutic algorithm for the special situation of sepsis is derived with respect to the currently existing atrial fibrillation guidelines. Finally necessary future research topics are outlined.

MATERIAL ANS METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in MEDLINE. All publications (reviews and studies) relevant for the summary of the current knowledge regarding new onset atrial fibrillation in septic patients were included.

RESULTS

The underlying patchomechanism is primarily systemic inflammation. Approximately 8% of patients with sepsis and more than 20% of patients with septic shock develop new onset atrial fibrillation. The occurrence of atrial fibrillation is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The necessity of rhythm control therapy is dependent on the hemodynamic stability. The success rate of electrical cardioversion can be increased by the administration of amiodarone. The necessity of systemic anticoagulation is based on the individual risk of thromboembolism.

CONCLUSION

Further research is needed to unveil the optimal therapeutic strategies for patients with new onset atrial fibrillation during sepsis.

Predictors for sustained new-onset atrial fibrillation in critically ill patients: a retrospective observational study

PURPOSE

Although new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) is frequently observed in the intensive care unit (ICU), the incidence and predictors for sustained new-onset AF have not been investigated, except for cardiac surgery patients. We have evaluated potential predictors for sustained new-onset AF in a mixed ICU.

METHODS

In this retrospective observational study, we screened non-cardiac surgery patients who were admitted to the ICU between January 2010 and December 2013 and had been hospitalized for > 24 h in the ICU. We collected information about heart rhythm 6 h after the onset of AF. We compared detailed patient characteristics between patients with sinus rhythm (SR) and those with sustained AF at 6 h after the onset of AF. Additionally, we applied variable selection using backward elimination based on Akaike's Information Criterion (AIC). Calibration was performed based on the Hosmer-Lemeshow test.

RESULTS

New-onset AF occurred in 151 of 1718 patients and 99 patients converted to SR at 6 h. Backward elimination identified predictors as follows (AIC = 175.3): CHADS₂ score, elective surgery, infection on ICU admission, serum potassium > 4.0 mmol/L, male sex, mechanical ventilation, and diagnostic grouping. The model showed good calibration for sustenance of AF at 6 h after the onset using the Hosmer-Lemeshow Chi-square value of 4.36 (degrees of freedom = 4, p = 0.360) indicating a good fit.

CONCLUSIONS

These predictors might be useful in future interventional studies to identify patients who are likely to sustain new-onset AF.

Landiolol for managing atrial fibrillation in intensive care

Landiolol is an injectable ultrashort acting beta-blocker with high beta1 selectivity indicated for heart rate control of atrial fibrillation in the emergency and critical care setting. Accordingly, landiolol is associated with a significantly reduced risk of arterial hypotension and negative inotropic effects. Based on this particular profile along with the clinical experience in Japan for more than a decade landiolol represents a promising agent for the management of elevated heart rate and atrial fibrillation in intensive care patients even with catecholamine requirements. This article provides a review and perspective of landiolol for heart rate control in intensive care patients based on the current literature.

Current practice in the management of new-onset atrial fibrillation in critically ill patients: a UK-wide survey

BACKGROUND

New-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia in critically ill patients. Although evidence base and expert consensus opinion for management have been summarised in several international guidelines, no specific considerations for critically ill patients have been included. We aimed to establish current practice of management of critically ill patients with new-onset AF.

METHODS

We designed a short user-friendly online questionnaire. All members of the Intensive Care Society were invited via email containing a link to the questionnaire, which comprised 21 questions. The online survey was conducted between November 2016 and December 2016.

RESULTS

The response rate was 397/3152 (12.6%). The majority of respondents (81.1%) worked in mixed Intensive Care Units and were consultants (71.8%). Most respondents (39.5%) would start intervention on patients with fast new-onset AF and stable blood pressure at a heart rate between 120 and 139 beats/min. However, 34.8% of participants would treat all patients who developed new-onset fast AF. Amiodarone and beta-blockers (80.9% and 11.6% of answers) were the most commonly used anti-arrhythmics. A total of 63.8% of respondents do not regularly anti-coagulate critically ill patients with new-onset fast AF, while 30.8% anti-coagulate within 72 hours. A total of 68.0% of survey respondents do not routinely use stroke risk scores in critically ill patients with new-onset AF. A total of 85.4% of participants would consider taking part in a clinical trial investigating treatment of new-onset fast AF in the critically ill.

DISCUSSION

Our results suggest a considerable disparity between contemporary practice of management of new-onset AF in critical illness and treatment recommendations for the general patient population suffering from AF, particularly with regard to anti-arrhythmics and anti-coagulation used. Amongst intensivists, there is a substantial interest in research for management of new-onset AF in critically ill patients.