Clinical Management of New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in COVID-19 Patients Referred to a Tertiary Cardiac Arrhythmia Center after Hospital Discharge

A systematic review and meta-analysis of new-onset atrial fibrillation in the context of COVID-19 infection

New-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) in COVID-19 raises significant clinical and public health issues. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compile and analyze the current literature on NOAF in COVID-19 and give a more comprehensive understanding of the prevalence and outcomes of NOAF in COVID-19. A comprehensive literature search was carried out using several databases. The random effect model using inverse variance method and DerSimonian and Laird estimator of Tua2 was used to calculate the pooled prevalence and associated 95% confidence interval (CI). Results for outcome analysis were presented as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CI and pooled using the Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model. The pooled prevalence of NOAF in COVID-19 was 7.8% (95% CI: 6.54%-9.32%),a pooled estimate from 30 articles (81 929 COVID-19 patients). Furthermore, our analysis reported that COVID-19 patients with NOAF had a higher risk of developing severe disease compared with COVID-19 patients without a history of atrial fibrillation (OR = 4.78, 95% CI: 3.75-6.09) and COVID-19 patients with a history of pre-existing atrial fibrillation (OR = 2.75, 95% CI: 2.10-3.59). Similarly, our analysis also indicated that COVID-19 patients with NOAF had a higher risk of all-cause mortality compared with, COVID-19 patients without a history of atrial fibrillation (OR = 3.83, 95% CI: 2.99-4.92) and COVID-19 patients with a history of pre-existing atrial fibrillation (OR = 2.32, 95% CI: 1.35-3.96). The meta-analysis did not reveal any significant publication bias. The results indicate a strong correlation between NOAF and a higher risk of severe illness and mortality. These results emphasize the importance of careful surveillance, early detection, and customized NOAF management strategies to improve clinical outcomes for COVID-19 patients.

Burden of delayed discharge on acute hospital medical wards: A retrospective ecological study in Rome, Italy

INTRODUCTION

Delayed discharge represents the difficulty in proceeding with discharge of patients who do not have any further benefit from prolonged stay. A quota of this problem is related to organizational issues. In the Lazio region in Italy, a macro service re-organization in on the way, with a network of hospital and territorial centers engaged in structuring in- and out- of hospital patient pathways, with a special focus on intermediate care structures. Purpose of this study is to quantify the burden of delayed discharge on a single hospital structure, in order to estimate costs and occurrence of potential resource misplacement.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Observational Retrospective study conducted at the Santo Spirito Hospital in Rome, Italy. Observation period ranged from 1/09/2022, when the local database was instituted, to 1/03/2023 (6 months). Data from admissions records was anonymously collected. Data linkage with administrative local hospital database was performed in order to identify the date a discharge request was fired for each admission. Surgical discharges and Intensive Care Unit (ICU) discharges were excluded from this study. A Poisson hierarchical regression model was employed to investigate for the role of ward, Severity of Disease (SoD) and Risk of Mortality (RoM) on elongation of discharge time.

RESULTS

1222 medical ward admissions were recorded in the timeframe. 16% of them were considered as subject to potentially elongated stay, and a mean Delay in discharge of 6.3 days (SD 7.9) was observed.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Delayed discharge may cause a "bottleneck" in admissions and result in overcrowded Emergency Department, overall poor performance, and increase in overall costs. A consisted proportion of available beds can get inappropriately occupied, and this inflates both direct and indirect costs. Clinical conditions on admission are not a good predictor of delay in discharge, and the root causes of this phenomenon likely lie in organizational issues (on structure\system level) and social issues (on patient's level).

Safety and Efficacy of Uninterrupted Oral Anticoagulation in Patients Undergoing Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation with Different Techniques

BACKGROUND

The safety and efficacy of an uninterrupted direct anticoagulation (DOAC) strategy during catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) has not been fully investigated with different ablation techniques.

METHODS

We evaluated consecutive AF patients undergoing catheter ablation with three different techniques. All patients were managed with an uninterrupted DOAC strategy. The primary endpoint was the rate of periprocedural thromboembolic and bleeding events. The secondary endpoints of the study were the rate of MACE and bleeding events at one-year follow-up.

RESULTS

In total, 162 patients were enrolled. Overall, 53 were female and the median age was 60 [55.5-69.5] years. The median CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores were 2 [1-4] and 2 [1-2], respectively. In total, 16 patients had a past stroke or TIA while 11 had a predisposition or a history of bleeding. The CA procedure was performed with different techniques: RF 43%, cryoballoon 37%, or laser-balloon 20%. Overall, 35.8% were on rivaroxaban, 20.4% were on edoxaban, 6.8% were on apixaban, and 3.7% were on dabigatran. All other patients were all naïve to DOACs; the first anticoagulant dose was given before the ablation procedure. As for periprocedural complications, we found three groin hematomas not requiring interventions, one ischemic stroke, and one systemic air embolism (the last two likely due to several catheter changes through the transeptal sheath). Five patients reached the secondary endpoints: one patient for a myocardial infarction while four patients experienced minor bleeding during 1-year follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results corroborate the safety and the efficacy of uninterrupted DOAC strategy in patients undergoing CA for AF, regardless of the ablation technique.

Long-Term Clinical Implications of Atrial Fibrillation on Mortality in Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19: A Nationwide Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) increases the risk of long-term mortality in patients hospitalized with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), but the evidence is limited.

METHODS

This study used data from the Common Data Model of the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service of Korea collected between 1 January 2020 and 30 April 2022. A total of 107,247 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were included in this study. They were divided into two groups according to a history of AF. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

After propensity score stratification, 1919 patients with a history of AF and 105,328 patients without a history of AF who were hospitalized with COVID-19 were analyzed to determine long-term mortality. The primary outcome occurred in 99 of 1919 patients (5.2%) with a history of AF and in 1397 of 105,328 patients (1.3%) without a history of AF (hazard ratio, 1.49; 95% confidence interval 1.20-1.82; p < 0.01). A history of AF was also associated with an increased risk of within 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSION

A history of AF was associated with an increased risk of long-term mortality in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Our findings indicate the necessity for physicians to reevaluate the optimal management of patients with AF following discharge.

Impact of New Onset Atrial Fibrillation in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19. Results of the "ACO-VID" Registry

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) on patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

METHODS

Multicenter and retrospective study that included subjects >55 years hospitalized with COVID-19 from March to October 2020 in Spanish hospitals. Patients were divided into 3 groups (no AF, new-onset AF, and preexisting AF) and followed-up to 90 days.

RESULTS

A total of 668 patients were included, of whom 162 (24.3%) had no AF, 107 (16.0%) new-onset AF and 399 (59.7%) preexisting AF. Compared to patients without AF, those patients with new-onset AF were older and had more comorbidities, but without differences with preexisting AF. During hospitalization, in the univariate analysis, compared to patients without AF, major bleeding and cardiovascular mortality were more frequent in patients with new-onset AF (10.3% vs 0.6%; P < .001; 2.8% vs 0.6%; P = .025, respectively), with a trend toward more stroke (1.9% vs 0%; P = .085). Outcomes were similar between AF groups, but the length of stay was greater in preexisting AF patients. Among patients with new-onset AF taking reduced doses of anticoagulant treatment was associated with higher risks of stroke and major bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

In COVID-19 hospitalized patients, new-onset AF may be associated with worse outcomes, but influenced by the dose of anticoagulants.