-
Postepy W Kardiologii Interwencyjnej =... 2017Numerous epidemiologic studies have investigated the link between nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and long-term atrial fibrillation (AF) risk, but the results...
INTRODUCTION
Numerous epidemiologic studies have investigated the link between nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and long-term atrial fibrillation (AF) risk, but the results are surprisingly conflicting.
AIM
Therefore, we systematically reviewed all published studies assessing the risk of AF in patients with NAFLD and conducted a meta-analysis.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
We performed a literature search using PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases in February 2017 with no restrictions. Two cohort studies and two cross-sectional studies were identified, involving a total of 5150 subjects (NAFLD: 1655; controls: 3495) in this meta-analysis. Data from selected studies were extracted and a meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model.
RESULTS
Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease patients had a significantly higher risk of AF compared to controls (relative risk (RR): 2.61; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.34-5.06, = 0.00; = 52.5%, = 0.097). In a further analysis stratified by presence of type 2 diabetes, the increased risk was present predominantly in patients with type 2 diabetes (RR = 5.10; 95% CI: 2.43-10.7, < 0.001; = 0, = 0.958). However, subjects without type 2 diabetes were at slightly increased risk of AF but the relative risk did not reach statistical significance (RR = 1.68; 95% CI: 0.99-2.82, = 0.05; = 0, = 0.461).
CONCLUSIONS
Our meta-analysis suggested that ultrasound-diagnosed NAFLD patients have a significantly higher risk for AF after adjustment for numerous important clinical risk factors for AF. These results need to be confirmed in large prospective studies.
PubMed: 29056998
DOI: 10.5114/aic.2017.70198 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2016People with atrial fibrillation (AF) often undergo cardiac surgery for other underlying reasons and are frequently offered concomitant AF surgery to reduce the frequency... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
People with atrial fibrillation (AF) often undergo cardiac surgery for other underlying reasons and are frequently offered concomitant AF surgery to reduce the frequency of short- and long-term AF and improve short- and long-term outcomes.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of concomitant AF surgery among people with AF who are undergoing cardiac surgery on short-term and long-term (12 months or greater) health-related outcomes, health-related quality of life, and costs.
SEARCH METHODS
Starting from the year when the first "maze" AF surgery was reported (1987), we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library (March 2016), MEDLINE Ovid (March 2016), Embase Ovid (March 2016), Web of Science (March 2016), the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE, April 2015), and Health Technology Assessment Database (HTA, March 2016). We searched trial registers in April 2016. We used no language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials evaluating the effect of any concomitant AF surgery compared with no AF surgery among adults with preoperative AF, regardless of symptoms, who were undergoing cardiac surgery for another indication.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected studies and extracted data. We evaluated the risk of bias using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. We included outcome data on all-cause and cardiovascular-specific mortality, freedom from atrial fibrillation, flutter, or tachycardia off antiarrhythmic medications, as measured by patient electrocardiographic monitoring greater than three months after the procedure, procedural safety, 30-day rehospitalisation, need for post-discharge direct current cardioversion, health-related quality of life, and direct costs. We calculated risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous data with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a fixed-effect model when heterogeneity was low (I² ≤ 50%) and random-effects model when heterogeneity was high (I² > 50%). We evaluated the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework to create a 'Summary of findings' table.
MAIN RESULTS
We found 34 reports of 22 trials (1899 participants) with five additional ongoing studies and three studies awaiting classification. All included studies were assessed as having high risk of bias across at least one domain. The effect of concomitant AF surgery on all-cause mortality was uncertain when compared with no concomitant AF surgery (7.0% versus 6.6%, RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.59, I² = 0%, 20 trials, 1829 participants, low-quality evidence), but the intervention increased freedom from atrial fibrillation, atrial flutter, or atrial tachycardia off antiarrhythmic medications > three months (51.0% versus 24.1%, RR 2.04, 95% CI 1.63 to 2.55, I² = 0%, eight trials, 649 participants, moderate-quality evidence). The effect of concomitant AF surgery on 30-day mortality was uncertain (2.3% versus 3.1%, RR 1.25 95% CI 0.71 to 2.20, I² = 0%, 18 trials, 1566 participants, low-quality evidence), but the intervention increased the risk of permanent pacemaker implantation (6.0% versus 4.1%, RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.54, I² = 0%, 18 trials, 1726 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Investigator-defined adverse events, including but limited to, need for surgical re-exploration or mediastinitis, were not routinely reported but were not different between the two groups (other adverse events: 24.8% versus 23.6%, RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.34, I² = 45%, nine trials, 858 participants), but the quality of this evidence was very low.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
For patients with AF undergoing cardiac surgery, there is moderate-quality evidence that concomitant AF surgery approximately doubles the risk of freedom from atrial fibrillation, atrial flutter, or atrial tachycardia off anti-arrhythmic drugs while increasing the risk of permanent pacemaker implantation. The effects on mortality are uncertain. Future, high-quality and adequately powered trials will likely affect the confidence on the effect estimates of AF surgery on clinical outcomes.
Topics: Anti-Arrhythmia Agents; Atrial Fibrillation; Atrial Flutter; Cardiac Surgical Procedures; Cause of Death; Humans; Pacemaker, Artificial; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tachycardia
PubMed: 27551927
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011814.pub2 -
Journal of Intensive Care 2015Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common arrhythmia in the ICU. The aim of this review is to summarize relevant information on new-onset AF in non-cardiac critical illness...
BACKGROUND
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common arrhythmia in the ICU. The aim of this review is to summarize relevant information on new-onset AF in non-cardiac critical illness with respect to epidemiology, prevention, and treatment.
METHODS
We conducted a PubMed search in June 2014 and included studies describing the epidemiology, prevention, and treatment of new-onset AF and atrial flutter during ICU stay in non-cardiac adult patients. Selected studies were divided into the three categories according to the extracted information. The methodological quality of selected studies was described according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system.
RESULTS
We identified 1,132 citations, and after full-text-level selection, we included 10 studies on etiology/outcome and five studies on treatment. There was no study related to prevention. Overall quality of evidence was mostly low or very low due to their observational study designs, small sample sizes, flawed diagnosis of new-onset AF, and the absence of mortality evaluation. The incidence of new-onset AF varied from 4.5% to 15.0%, excluding exceptional cases (e.g., septic shock). Severity scores of patients with new-onset AF were higher than those without new-onset AF in eight studies, in four of which the difference was statistically significant. Five studies reported risk factors for new-onset AF, all of which used multivariate analyses to extract risk factors. Multiple risk factors are reported, e.g., advanced age, the white race, severity scores, organ failures, and sepsis. Hospital mortality in new-onset AF patients was higher than that of patients without AF in all studies, four of which found statistical significance. Among the five studies on treatment, only one study was randomized controlled, and various interventions were studied.
CONCLUSIONS
New-onset AF occurred in 5%-15% of the non-cardiac critically ill patients. Patients with new-onset AF had poor outcomes compared with those without AF. Despite the high incidence of new-onset AF in the general ICU population, currently available information for AF, especially for management (prevention, treatment, and anticoagulation), is quite limited. Further research is needed to improve our understanding of new-onset AF in critically ill patients.
PubMed: 25914828
DOI: 10.1186/s40560-015-0085-4 -
Critical Care (London, England) Dec 2014Critically ill patients with sepsis are prone to develop cardiac dysrhythmias, most commonly atrial fibrillation (AF). Systemic inflammation, circulating stress... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Critically ill patients with sepsis are prone to develop cardiac dysrhythmias, most commonly atrial fibrillation (AF). Systemic inflammation, circulating stress hormones, autonomic dysfunction, and volume shifts are all possible triggers for AF in this setting. We conducted a systematic review to describe the incidence, risk factors and outcomes of new-onset AF in patients with sepsis.
METHODS
MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web Of Science were searched for studies reporting the incidence of new-onset AF, atrial flutter or supraventricular tachycardia in patients with sepsis admitted to an intensive care unit, excluding studies that primarily focused on postcardiotomy patients. Studies were assessed for methodological quality using the GRADE system. Risk factors were considered to have a high level of evidence if they were reported in ≥ 2 studies using multivariable analyses at a P value <0.05. Subsequently, the strength of association was classified as strong, moderate or weak, based on the reported odds ratios.
RESULTS
Eleven studies were included. Overall quality was low to moderate. The weighted mean incidence of new-onset AF was 8% (range 0 to 14%), 10% (4 to 23%) and 23% (6 to 46%) in critically ill patients with sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock, respectively. Independent risk factors with a high level of evidence included advanced age (weak strength of association), white race (moderate association), presence of a respiratory tract infection (weak association), organ failure (moderate association), and pulmonary artery catheter use (moderate association). Protective factors were a history of diabetes mellitus (weak association) and the presence of a urinary tract infection (weak association). New-onset AF was associated with increased short-term mortality in five studies (crude relative effect estimates ranging from 1.96 to 3.32; adjusted effects 1.07 to 3.28). Three studies reported a significantly increased length of stay in the ICU (weighted mean difference 9 days, range 5 to 13 days), whereas an increased risk of ischemic stroke was reported in the single study that looked at this outcome.
CONCLUSIONS
New-onset AF is a common consequence of sepsis and is independently associated with poor outcome. Early risk stratification of patients may allow for pharmacological interventions to prevent this complication.
Topics: Atrial Fibrillation; Humans; Incidence; Intensive Care Units; Risk Factors; Sepsis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 25498795
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-014-0688-5