在瑞典65岁及以上人群中,使用详细表型、风险预测模型结合贴片心电图进行系统、随机房颤筛查:The regards - af试验。

IF 7.4 1区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Europace Pub Date : 2025-09-01 DOI:10.1093/europace/euaf190
Emelie Rakai, Farzaneh Etminani, Ninia Younan, Anton Andersson, Maria Andersson, Torbjörn Vik, Stefan Kunkel, Anna Sundin, Johan Holm, Angelo Modica, Helena M Linge, Purvee Parikh, Manish Wadhwa, Johan Engdahl, Emma Sandgren
{"title":"在瑞典65岁及以上人群中,使用详细表型、风险预测模型结合贴片心电图进行系统、随机房颤筛查:The regards - af试验。","authors":"Emelie Rakai, Farzaneh Etminani, Ninia Younan, Anton Andersson, Maria Andersson, Torbjörn Vik, Stefan Kunkel, Anna Sundin, Johan Holm, Angelo Modica, Helena M Linge, Purvee Parikh, Manish Wadhwa, Johan Engdahl, Emma Sandgren","doi":"10.1093/europace/euaf190","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Atrial fibrillation (AF), often asymptomatic and underdiagnosed, is an independent risk factor for ischaemic stroke. A knowledge gap remains regarding the optimal target population and method to use for AF screening. We aimed to test whether screening for AF using a machine learning-based risk prediction model (RPM) and 14-day continuous patch electrocardiogram (ECG) (Philips ePatch) in high-risk individuals ≥ 65 years is more effective than standard care.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>Individuals ≥ 65 years were assigned to general or RPM cohort. The general cohort was randomized to control or invitation. In the RPM cohort, high-risk individuals, identified by RPM, were randomized to control or invitation. The primary outcome was 6-month AF incidence, analysed as intention-to-invite, comparing RPM + invitation with general + control. Of the 2960 randomized individuals, participation was 43% (632/1480) in invitation arms. Atrial fibrillation incidence was higher in RPM + invitation than in general + control arm (3.8%, 28/740 vs. 0.7%, 5/740; P < 0.001), yielding a risk ratio of 5.6, [95% confidence interval (2.2, 14.4)], and a number needed to invite of 32. Atrial fibrillation was more often detected in RPM + invitation than in general + invitation arm (1.1%, 8/740; P < 0.001), but not more often than in RPM + control arm (2.2%, 16/740; P = 0.07). No difference was found between general + invitation and general + control arms (1.1%, 8/740 vs. 0.7%, 5/740; P = 0.40).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Among high-risk individuals ≥ 65 years, the combination of a machine learning-based RPM and long-term ECG recording was superior to standard care in identifying new AF cases.</p>","PeriodicalId":11981,"journal":{"name":"Europace","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Systematic, randomized atrial fibrillation screening using detailed phenotyping with a risk prediction model combined with patch electrocardiogram in a Swedish population aged 65 years or older: the CONSIDERING-AF trial.\",\"authors\":\"Emelie Rakai, Farzaneh Etminani, Ninia Younan, Anton Andersson, Maria Andersson, Torbjörn Vik, Stefan Kunkel, Anna Sundin, Johan Holm, Angelo Modica, Helena M Linge, Purvee Parikh, Manish Wadhwa, Johan Engdahl, Emma Sandgren\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/europace/euaf190\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Atrial fibrillation (AF), often asymptomatic and underdiagnosed, is an independent risk factor for ischaemic stroke. A knowledge gap remains regarding the optimal target population and method to use for AF screening. We aimed to test whether screening for AF using a machine learning-based risk prediction model (RPM) and 14-day continuous patch electrocardiogram (ECG) (Philips ePatch) in high-risk individuals ≥ 65 years is more effective than standard care.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>Individuals ≥ 65 years were assigned to general or RPM cohort. The general cohort was randomized to control or invitation. In the RPM cohort, high-risk individuals, identified by RPM, were randomized to control or invitation. The primary outcome was 6-month AF incidence, analysed as intention-to-invite, comparing RPM + invitation with general + control. Of the 2960 randomized individuals, participation was 43% (632/1480) in invitation arms. Atrial fibrillation incidence was higher in RPM + invitation than in general + control arm (3.8%, 28/740 vs. 0.7%, 5/740; P < 0.001), yielding a risk ratio of 5.6, [95% confidence interval (2.2, 14.4)], and a number needed to invite of 32. Atrial fibrillation was more often detected in RPM + invitation than in general + invitation arm (1.1%, 8/740; P < 0.001), but not more often than in RPM + control arm (2.2%, 16/740; P = 0.07). No difference was found between general + invitation and general + control arms (1.1%, 8/740 vs. 0.7%, 5/740; P = 0.40).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Among high-risk individuals ≥ 65 years, the combination of a machine learning-based RPM and long-term ECG recording was superior to standard care in identifying new AF cases.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11981,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Europace\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Europace\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euaf190\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Europace","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euaf190","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:房颤(AF)是缺血性脑卒中的独立危险因素,通常无症状且诊断不足。关于最佳目标人群和用于房颤筛查的方法,知识差距仍然存在。我们的目的是测试在≥65岁的高危人群中,使用基于机器学习的风险预测模型(RPM)和14天连续贴片心电图(ECG) (Philips ePatch)筛查AF是否比标准护理更有效。方法:年龄≥65岁的个体被分配到普通或RPM队列。一般队列随机分为对照或邀请组。在RPM队列中,通过RPM识别的高危个体被随机分为对照组或邀请组。主要终点是6个月房颤发生率,以邀请意向分析,比较RPM +邀请与普通+对照组。结果:在2,960名随机个体中,邀请组的参与率为43%(632/1480)。结论:在≥65岁的高危人群中,基于机器学习的风险预测模型和长期心电图记录相结合在识别新的房颤病例方面优于标准护理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Systematic, randomized atrial fibrillation screening using detailed phenotyping with a risk prediction model combined with patch electrocardiogram in a Swedish population aged 65 years or older: the CONSIDERING-AF trial.

Aims: Atrial fibrillation (AF), often asymptomatic and underdiagnosed, is an independent risk factor for ischaemic stroke. A knowledge gap remains regarding the optimal target population and method to use for AF screening. We aimed to test whether screening for AF using a machine learning-based risk prediction model (RPM) and 14-day continuous patch electrocardiogram (ECG) (Philips ePatch) in high-risk individuals ≥ 65 years is more effective than standard care.

Methods and results: Individuals ≥ 65 years were assigned to general or RPM cohort. The general cohort was randomized to control or invitation. In the RPM cohort, high-risk individuals, identified by RPM, were randomized to control or invitation. The primary outcome was 6-month AF incidence, analysed as intention-to-invite, comparing RPM + invitation with general + control. Of the 2960 randomized individuals, participation was 43% (632/1480) in invitation arms. Atrial fibrillation incidence was higher in RPM + invitation than in general + control arm (3.8%, 28/740 vs. 0.7%, 5/740; P < 0.001), yielding a risk ratio of 5.6, [95% confidence interval (2.2, 14.4)], and a number needed to invite of 32. Atrial fibrillation was more often detected in RPM + invitation than in general + invitation arm (1.1%, 8/740; P < 0.001), but not more often than in RPM + control arm (2.2%, 16/740; P = 0.07). No difference was found between general + invitation and general + control arms (1.1%, 8/740 vs. 0.7%, 5/740; P = 0.40).

Conclusion: Among high-risk individuals ≥ 65 years, the combination of a machine learning-based RPM and long-term ECG recording was superior to standard care in identifying new AF cases.

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
Europace
Europace 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
8.20%
发文量
851
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: EP - Europace - European Journal of Pacing, Arrhythmias and Cardiac Electrophysiology of the European Heart Rhythm Association of the European Society of Cardiology. The journal aims to provide an avenue of communication of top quality European and international original scientific work and reviews in the fields of Arrhythmias, Pacing and Cellular Electrophysiology. The Journal offers the reader a collection of contemporary original peer-reviewed papers, invited papers and editorial comments together with book reviews and correspondence.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信