AFFECT: a prospective, open-label, multicenter trial to evaluate the feasibility and safety of a short-term treatment with subcutaneous certoparin in patients with persistent non-valvular atrial fibrillation

Tebbe, Ulrich; Oeckinghaus, R.; Appel, Karl‐Friedrich; Heuer, H.; Haake, Hendrik; Eggers, Egbert; Seidel, K; Adams, Jan S.; Harenberg, Job

doi:10.1007/s00392-008-0644-y

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In line with previous findings [20]–[23], data from RealiseAF have shown that patients with AF are medically complex, with a number of cardiac and non-cardiac comorbidities. Over time, AF typically progresses from paroxysmal, to persistent, and eventually to “end-stage” or PermAF [10].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Clinical Characteristics, Management, and Control of Permanent vs. Nonpermanent Atrial Fibrillation: Insights from the RealiseAF Survey

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAtrial fibrillation can be categorized into nonpermanent and permanent atrial fibrillation. There is less information on permanent than on nonpermanent atrial fibrillation patients. This analysis aimed to describe the characteristics and current management, including the proportion of patients with successful atrial fibrillation control, of these atrial fibrillation subsets in a large, geographically diverse contemporary sample.Methods and ResultsData from RealiseAF, an international, observational, cross-sectional survey of 10,491 patients with atrial fibrillation, were used to characterize permanent atrial fibrillation (N = 4869) and nonpermanent atrial fibrillation (N = 5622) patients. Permanent atrial fibrillation patients were older, had a longer time since atrial fibrillation diagnosis, a higher symptom burden, and were more likely to be physically inactive. They also had a higher mean (SD) CHADS2 score (2.2 [1.3] vs. 1.7 [1.3], p<0.001), and a higher frequency of CHADS2 score ≥2 (67.3% vs. 53.0%, p<0.001) and comorbidities, most notably heart failure. Physicians indicated using a rate-control strategy in 84.2% of permanent atrial fibrillation patients (vs. 27.5% in nonpermanent atrial fibrillation). Only 50.2% (N = 2262/4508) of permanent atrial fibrillation patients were controlled. These patients had a longer time since atrial fibrillation diagnosis, a lower symptom burden, less obesity and physical inactivity, less severe heart failure, and fewer hospitalizations for acute heart failure than uncontrolled permanent atrial fibrillation patients, but with more arrhythmic events. The most frequent causes of hospitalization in the last 12 months were acute heart failure and stroke.ConclusionPermanent atrial fibrillation is a high-risk subset of atrial fibrillation, representing half of all atrial fibrillation patients, yet rate control is only achieved in around half. Since control is associated with lower symptom burden and heart failure, adequate rate control is an important target for improving the management of permanent atrial fibrillation patients.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Clinical Characteristics, Management, and Control of Permanent vs. Nonpermanent Atrial Fibrillation: Insights from the RealiseAF Survey

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the flutter group, in turn, the prevalence of males was higher. The mean age of the patients in most reports is between 65 and 70 years, which is comparable to the mean age of our population 14 , 16 - 19 , 23 - 26 . Similar to reports from other registries 14 , 21 , our patients with PaAF were on average 5 years younger, which is compatible with the temporal progression of the disease to chronicity.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Clinical Differences between Subtypes of Atrial Fibrillation and Flutter: Cross-Sectional Registry of 407 Patients

Almeida

Guimarães

Stephan

et al. 2015

Arquivos Brasileiros De Cardiologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionAtrial fibrillation and atrial flutter account for one third of hospitalizations due to arrhythmias, determining great social and economic impacts. In Brazil, data on hospital care of these patients is scarce.ObjectiveTo investigate the arrhythmia subtype of atrial fibrillation and flutter patients in the emergency setting and compare the clinical profile, thromboembolic risk and anticoagulants use.MethodsCross-sectional retrospective study, with data collection from medical records of every patient treated for atrial fibrillation and flutter in the emergency department of Instituto de Cardiologia do Rio Grande do Sul during the first trimester of 2012.ResultsWe included 407 patients (356 had atrial fibrillation and 51 had flutter). Patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation were in average 5 years younger than those with persistent atrial fibrillation. Compared to paroxysmal atrial fibrillation patients, those with persistent atrial fibrillation and flutter had larger atrial diameter (48.6 ± 7.2 vs. 47.2 ± 6.2 vs. 42.3 ± 6.4; p < 0.01) and lower left ventricular ejection fraction (66.8 ± 11 vs. 53.9 ± 17 vs. 57.4 ± 16; p < 0.01). The prevalence of stroke and heart failure was higher in persistent atrial fibrillation and flutter patients. Those with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and flutter had higher prevalence of CHADS2 score of zero when compared to those with persistent atrial fibrillation (27.8% vs. 18% vs. 4.9%; p < 0.01). The prevalence of anticoagulation in patients with CHA2DS2-Vasc ≤ 2 was 40%.ConclusionsThe population in our registry was similar in its comorbidities and demographic profile to those of North American and European registries. Despite the high thromboembolic risk, the use of anticoagulants was low, revealing difficulties for incorporating guideline recommendations. Public health strategies should be adopted in order to improve these rates.

show abstract

“…The rate of thromboembolic complications was very low (6/719; 0.8%), as was major bleeding (2/719; 0.3%). The AFFECT study, which treated 162 patients with the LMWH certoparin, only reported one embolic event and three major bleedings [20].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

SAfety of Fondaparinux in transoesophageal echocardiography-guided Electric cardioversion of Atrial Fibrillation (SAFE-AF) study: A pilot study

Cohen¹,

Stellbrink

Heuzey

et al. 2015

Archives of Cardiovascular Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

AFFECT: a prospective, open-label, multicenter trial to evaluate the feasibility and safety of a short-term treatment with subcutaneous certoparin in patients with persistent non-valvular atrial fibrillation

Cited by 7 publications

References 16 publications

Clinical Characteristics, Management, and Control of Permanent vs. Nonpermanent Atrial Fibrillation: Insights from the RealiseAF Survey

Clinical Characteristics, Management, and Control of Permanent vs. Nonpermanent Atrial Fibrillation: Insights from the RealiseAF Survey

Clinical Differences between Subtypes of Atrial Fibrillation and Flutter: Cross-Sectional Registry of 407 Patients

SAfety of Fondaparinux in transoesophageal echocardiography-guided Electric cardioversion of Atrial Fibrillation (SAFE-AF) study: A pilot study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About