Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common complication of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and contributes to high rates of in-hospital adverse events. However, there are few contemporary studies examining rates of AF in the contemporary era of AMI or the impact of new-onset AF on key in-hospital and post-discharge outcomes. We examined trends in AF among 6,384 residents of Worcester, Massachusetts who were hospitalized with confirmed AMI during 7 biennial periods between 1999 and 2011. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to examine associations between occurrence of AF and various in-hospital and post-discharge complications. The overall incidence of AF complicating AMI was 10.8%. Rates of new-onset AF increased from 1999 to 2003 (9.8% to 13.2%), and declined thereafter. In multivariable adjusted models, patients developing new-onset AF following AMI were at higher risk for inhospital stroke [Odds Ratio (OR) 2.5, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.6–4.1], heart failure [OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.7 to 2.4], cardiogenic shock [OR 3.7, 95% CI 2.8–4.9] and death [OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.9 to 3.0] than patients without AF. Development of AF during hospitalization for AMI was associated with higher rates of readmission within 30-days after discharge [21.7% vs. 16.0%], but no significant difference was noted in early post-discharge 30-day all-cause mortality rates [8.3% vs. 5.1%]. In conclusion, new-onset AF following AMI is strongly related to in-hospital complications of AMI as well as higher short-term readmission rates.

The SYNTAX score characterizes the anatomical extent of CAD in terms of the number of lesions, functional importance, and complexity. Studies not limited to patients with DM suggest that percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a reasonable alternative to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with low-medium SYNTAX scores, while patients with high SYNTAX scores should be revascularized with CABG if operable. Similar findings were also observed for diabetes patients with multivessel disease in retrospective pooled analysis. The SYNTAX II score combines anatomical and clinical risk to improve upon the decision regarding the optimal revascularization strategy. The SYNTAX II score can be applied to patients with DM. The SYNTAX scores provide guidance to clinicians faced with determining the optimal revascularization strategy in patients with DM and advanced CAD. Using a heart team approach, the information can be considered along with other factors that influence PCI or CABG risk.

BackgroundOnly 50% of eligible atrial fibrillation (AF) patients receive anticoagulation (AC). Feasibility and effectiveness of electronic medical record (EMR)–based interventions to profile and raise provider AC percentage is poorly understood. The SUPPORT‐AF (Supporting Use of AC Through Provider Profiling of Oral AC Therapy for AF) study aims to improve rates of adherence to AC guidelines by developing and delivering supportive tools based on the EMR to providers treating patients with AF.Methods and ResultsWe emailed cardiologists and community‐based primary care providers affiliated with our institution reports of their AC percentage relative to peers. We also sent an electronic medical record–based message to these providers the day before an appointment with an atrial fibrillation patient who was eligible but not receiving AC. The electronic medical record message asked the provider to discuss AC with the patient if he or she deemed it appropriate. To assess feasibility, we tracked provider review of our correspondence. We also tracked the change in AC for intervention providers relative to alternate primary care providers not receiving our intervention. We identified 3786, 1054, and 566 patients cared for by 49 cardiology providers, 90 community‐based primary care providers, and 88 control providers, respectively. At baseline, the percentage of AC was 71.3%, 63.5%, and 58.3% for these 3 respective groups. Intervention providers reviewed our e‐mails and electronic medical record messages 45% and 96% of the time, respectively. For providers responding, patient refusal was the most common reason for patients not being on AC (21%) followed by high bleeding risk (19%). At follow‐up 10 weeks later, change in AC was no different for either cardiology or community‐based primary care providers relative to controls (0.2% lower and 0.01% higher, respectively).ConclusionsOur intervention profiling AC was feasible, but not sufficient to increase AC in our population.

No abstract

No abstract