心脏植入式电子设备中的心房颤动负担与心力衰竭住院风险之间的时间关系

IF 9.1 1区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Nikhil Ahluwalia, Jodi Koehler, Shantanu Sarkar, Neethu Vasudevan, Shubha Majumder, Sean R Landman, Richard J Schilling
{"title":"心脏植入式电子设备中的心房颤动负担与心力衰竭住院风险之间的时间关系","authors":"Nikhil Ahluwalia, Jodi Koehler, Shantanu Sarkar, Neethu Vasudevan, Shubha Majumder, Sean R Landman, Richard J Schilling","doi":"10.1161/CIRCEP.124.012842","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Atrial fibrillation (AF) events in cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are temporally associated with stroke risk. This study explores temporal differences in AF burden associated with HF hospitalization risk in patients with CIEDs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with HF events from the Optum de-identified Electronic Health Records from 2007 to 2021 and 120 days of preceding CIED-derived rhythm data from a linked manufacturer's data warehouse were included. AF burden ≥5.5 h/d was defined as an AF event. The AF event burden in the case period (days 1-30 immediately before the HF event) was considered temporally associated with the HF event and compared with the AF event burden in a temporally dissociated control period (days 91-120 before the HF event). The odds ratio for temporally associated HF events and the odds ratio associated with poorly rate-controlled AF (>110 bpm) were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 7257 HF events with prerequisite CIED data were included; 957 (13.2%) patients had AF events recorded only in either their case (763 [10.5%]) or control (194 [2.7%]) periods, but not both. The odds ratio for a temporally associated HF event was 3.93 (95% CI, 3.36-4.60). This was greater for an HF event with a longer stay of >3 days (odds ratio, 4.51 [95% CI, 3.57-5.68]). In patients with AF during both the control and case periods, poor AF rate control during the case period also increased HF event risk (1.78 [95% CI, 1.22-2.61]). In all, 222 of 4759 (5%) patients without AF events before their HF event had an AF event in the 10 days following.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In a large real-world population of patients with CIED devices, AF burden was associated with HF hospitalization risk in the subsequent 30 days. The risk is increased with AF and an uncontrolled ventricular rate. Our findings support AF monitoring in CIED algorithms to prevent HF admissions.</p>","PeriodicalId":10319,"journal":{"name":"Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology","volume":" ","pages":"e012842"},"PeriodicalIF":9.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11338027/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Temporal Association Between Atrial Fibrillation Burden in Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices and the Risk of Heart Failure Hospitalization.\",\"authors\":\"Nikhil Ahluwalia, Jodi Koehler, Shantanu Sarkar, Neethu Vasudevan, Shubha Majumder, Sean R Landman, Richard J Schilling\",\"doi\":\"10.1161/CIRCEP.124.012842\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Atrial fibrillation (AF) events in cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are temporally associated with stroke risk. This study explores temporal differences in AF burden associated with HF hospitalization risk in patients with CIEDs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with HF events from the Optum de-identified Electronic Health Records from 2007 to 2021 and 120 days of preceding CIED-derived rhythm data from a linked manufacturer's data warehouse were included. AF burden ≥5.5 h/d was defined as an AF event. The AF event burden in the case period (days 1-30 immediately before the HF event) was considered temporally associated with the HF event and compared with the AF event burden in a temporally dissociated control period (days 91-120 before the HF event). The odds ratio for temporally associated HF events and the odds ratio associated with poorly rate-controlled AF (>110 bpm) were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 7257 HF events with prerequisite CIED data were included; 957 (13.2%) patients had AF events recorded only in either their case (763 [10.5%]) or control (194 [2.7%]) periods, but not both. The odds ratio for a temporally associated HF event was 3.93 (95% CI, 3.36-4.60). This was greater for an HF event with a longer stay of >3 days (odds ratio, 4.51 [95% CI, 3.57-5.68]). In patients with AF during both the control and case periods, poor AF rate control during the case period also increased HF event risk (1.78 [95% CI, 1.22-2.61]). In all, 222 of 4759 (5%) patients without AF events before their HF event had an AF event in the 10 days following.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In a large real-world population of patients with CIED devices, AF burden was associated with HF hospitalization risk in the subsequent 30 days. The risk is increased with AF and an uncontrolled ventricular rate. Our findings support AF monitoring in CIED algorithms to prevent HF admissions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10319,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e012842\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11338027/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCEP.124.012842\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/28 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCEP.124.012842","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:心脏植入式电子装置(CIEDs)中的房颤(AF)事件与中风风险在时间上相关。本研究探讨了植入式心脏电子装置患者心房颤动负担与高血压住院风险的时间差异:方法:研究纳入了 2007 年至 2021 年期间 Optum 去标识化电子健康记录中发生高频事件的患者,以及链接制造商数据仓库的 120 天前 CIED 派生节律数据。房颤负荷≥5.5小时/天定义为房颤事件。病例期(高频事件发生前的第 1-30 天)的房颤事件负荷被视为与高频事件在时间上相关,并与时间上不相关的对照期(高频事件发生前的第 91-120 天)的房颤事件负荷进行比较。计算与时间相关的高频事件的几率以及与心率控制不佳的房颤(>110 bpm)相关的几率:共纳入了 7257 例具有 CIED 前提数据的高频事件;其中 957 例(13.2%)患者仅在病例期(763 例 [10.5%])或对照期(194 例 [2.7%])有房颤事件记录,而不是同时在病例期和对照期均有房颤事件记录。与时间相关的房颤事件的几率比为 3.93(95% CI,3.36-4.60)。对于住院时间超过 3 天的房颤患者来说,这一几率更高(几率比为 4.51 [95% CI,3.57-5.68])。在对照期和病例期均有房颤的患者中,病例期房颤率控制不佳也会增加心房颤动事件风险(1.78 [95% CI, 1.22-2.61])。总之,4759 名患者中有 222 名(5%)在发生高频事件前没有房颤事件,但在发生高频事件后的 10 天内发生了房颤事件:结论:在使用 CIED 装置的大型真实世界患者群体中,房颤负担与随后 30 天的心房颤动住院风险相关。心房颤动和心室率失控会增加风险。我们的研究结果支持在CIED算法中监测房颤,以预防高血压入院:URL:https://www.clinicaltrials.gov;唯一标识符:NCT04452149和NCT04987723。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Temporal Association Between Atrial Fibrillation Burden in Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices and the Risk of Heart Failure Hospitalization.

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) events in cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are temporally associated with stroke risk. This study explores temporal differences in AF burden associated with HF hospitalization risk in patients with CIEDs.

Methods: Patients with HF events from the Optum de-identified Electronic Health Records from 2007 to 2021 and 120 days of preceding CIED-derived rhythm data from a linked manufacturer's data warehouse were included. AF burden ≥5.5 h/d was defined as an AF event. The AF event burden in the case period (days 1-30 immediately before the HF event) was considered temporally associated with the HF event and compared with the AF event burden in a temporally dissociated control period (days 91-120 before the HF event). The odds ratio for temporally associated HF events and the odds ratio associated with poorly rate-controlled AF (>110 bpm) were calculated.

Results: In total, 7257 HF events with prerequisite CIED data were included; 957 (13.2%) patients had AF events recorded only in either their case (763 [10.5%]) or control (194 [2.7%]) periods, but not both. The odds ratio for a temporally associated HF event was 3.93 (95% CI, 3.36-4.60). This was greater for an HF event with a longer stay of >3 days (odds ratio, 4.51 [95% CI, 3.57-5.68]). In patients with AF during both the control and case periods, poor AF rate control during the case period also increased HF event risk (1.78 [95% CI, 1.22-2.61]). In all, 222 of 4759 (5%) patients without AF events before their HF event had an AF event in the 10 days following.

Conclusions: In a large real-world population of patients with CIED devices, AF burden was associated with HF hospitalization risk in the subsequent 30 days. The risk is increased with AF and an uncontrolled ventricular rate. Our findings support AF monitoring in CIED algorithms to prevent HF admissions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
13.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
187
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology is a journal dedicated to the study and application of clinical cardiac electrophysiology. It covers a wide range of topics including the diagnosis and treatment of cardiac arrhythmias, as well as research in this field. The journal accepts various types of studies, including observational research, clinical trials, epidemiological studies, and advancements in translational research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信