Long-term outcome and risk factors associated with events in patients with atrial fibrillation treated with oral anticoagulants: The ASSAF-K registry

Hatori, Yutaka; Sakai, Hiroyuki; Hatori, Nobuo; Kunishima, Tomoyuki; Namiki, Atsuo; Shimizu, Makoto; Toyosaki, Nobuo; Kuwajima, Masaomi; Sato, Naoki

doi:10.1016/j.jjcc.2022.08.012

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The cumulative incidence of clinical outcomes was stratified according to the EF levels (EF ≥ 50% vs. EF < 50%) and compared between the two groups using a log-rank test. Cox proportional hazard ratio regression analyses were performed to evaluate the prognostic impact of EF ≥ 50% following AF catheter ablation, which was adjusted for other potential confounders according to the previous literature [6,7,10,13]. A two-sided p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adverse Events Requiring Hospitalization Following Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation in Heart Failure with versus without Systolic Dysfunction

Kataoka,

Imamura,

Koi

et al. 2024

JCDD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The safety and efficacy of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation in individuals with heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (EF), particularly concerning the occurrence of post-procedural adverse events necessitating hospitalization, including anticoagulant-associated major bleeding, still lack conclusive determination. Methods: Data from patients with HF and AF who underwent catheter ablation for AF between 2019 and 2022 at our institution were retrospectively reviewed. All participants were divided into an EF < 50% group or an EF ≥ 50% group according to their baseline left ventricular EF. The composite incidence of the clinical events following catheter ablation was compared between the two groups: (1) all-cause death, (2) HF hospitalization, (3) stroke or systemic embolism, and (4) major bleeding. Results: A total of 122 patients (75 years old, 68 male) were included. Of them, 62 (50.8%) patients had an EF ≥ 50%. EF ≥ 50% was an independent predictor of the composite endpoint (adjusted odds ratio 6.07, 95% confidence interval 1.37–26.99, p = 0.018). The incidences of each adverse event were not significantly different between the two groups, except for a higher incidence of major bleeding in the EF ≥ 50% group (12.7% vs. 0%, p = 0.026). Conclusions: Among patients with HF coupled with AF, the incidence of adverse events following AF ablation proved notably elevated in patients with EF ≥ 50% in contrast to their counterparts with EF < 50%. This disparity primarily stems from a heightened occurrence of major bleeding within the EF ≥ 50% cohort. The strategy to reduce adverse events, especially in patients with EF ≥ 50%, remains the next concern.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%