Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2023 ACC Atrial Fibrillation
2023 ACC Atrial Fibrillation
-, 2023
ª 2023 BY THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY FOUNDATION
AND THE AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION, INC.
PUBLISHED BY ELSEVIER
Developed in Collaboration With and Endorsed by the American College of Clinical Pharmacy
and the Heart Rhythm Society
Writing José A. Joglar, MD, FACC, FAHA, FHRS, Chair Nimesh Patel, MD
Committee Mina K. Chung, MD, FACC, FAHA, FHRS, Vice Chair Kristen K. Patton, MD, FACC, FAHA, FHRS
Members* Marco V. Perez, MD, FAHA
Anastasia L. Armbruster, PHARMD, FACCy Jonathan P. Piccini, MD, MHS, FACC, FAHA, FHRS
Emelia J. Benjamin, MD, SCM, FACC, FAHA Andrea M. Russo, MD, FACC, FAHA, FHRS{
Janice Y. Chyou, MD, FACC, FAHA, FHRS Prashanthan Sanders, MBBS, PHD, FAHA, FHRS
Edmond M. Cronin, MB, BCH, BAO, FHRS Megan M. Streur, PHD, MN, ARNP
Anita Deswal, MD, MPH, FACC, FAHAy Kevin L. Thomas, MD, FACC, FHRS
Lee L. Eckhardt, MD, MS, FHRS Sabrina Times, DHSC, MPH#
Zachary D. Goldberger, MD, FACC, FAHA, FHRS James E. Tisdale, PHARMD, FACC, FAHA, FCCP
Rakesh Gopinathannair, MD, MA, FACC, FAHA, FHRS Anne Marie Valente, MD, FACC, FAHA**
Bulent Gorenek, MD, FACC David R. Van Wagoner, PHD, FAHA, FHRS
Paul L. Hess, MD, MHSz
Mark Hlatky, MD, FACC, FAHA
Gail Hoganx
Chinwe Ibeh, MD *Writing committee members are required to recuse themselves from
voting on sections to which their specific relationships with industry may
Julia H. Indik, MD, PHD, FACC, FAHA, FHRS
apply; see Appendix 1 for detailed information.
Kazuhiko Kido, PHARMD, PHD, MS, FCCPk yACC/AHA Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines liaison.
Fred Kusumoto, MD, FACC, FAHA, FHRS zACC/AHA Joint Committee on Performance Measures liaison.
Mark S. Link, MD, FACC, FAHA, FHRS xLay stakeholder representative.
kAmerican College of Clinical Pharmacy representative.
Kathleen T. Lintax
{Heart Rhythm Society representative.
Gregory M. Marcus, MD, MAS, FACC, FAHA, FHRS #Joint ACC/AHA staff representative.
Patrick M. McCarthy, MD, FACC **ACC/AHA Joint Committee on Clinical Data Standards liaison.
This document was approved by the American College of Cardiology Clinical Policy Approval Committee and the American Heart Association Science
Advisory and Coordinating Committee in July 2023, and the American College of Cardiology Science and Quality Committee and the American Heart
Association Executive Committee in August 2023.
The American College of Cardiology requests that this document be cited as follows: Joglar JA, Chung MK, Armbruster AL, Benjamin EJ, Chyou JY,
Cronin EM, Deswal A, Eckhardt L, Goldberger ZD, Gopinathannair R, Gorenek B, Hess PL, Hlatky M, Hogan G, Ibeh C, Indik JH, Kido K, Kusumoto F, Link
MS, Linta KT, Marcus GM, McCarthy PM, Patel N, Patton KK, Perez MV, Piccini JP, Russo AM, Sanders P, Streur MM, Thomas KL, Times S, Tisdale JE,
Valente AM, Van Wagoner DR. 2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS guideline for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation: a report of the American
College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. November 30, 2023.
This article has been copublished in Circulation.
Copies: This document is available on the websites of the American College of Cardiology (www.acc.org) and the American Heart Association
(professional.heart.org). For copies of this document, please contact the Elsevier Inc. Reprint Department via fax (212-633-3820) or e-mail (reprints@
elsevier.com).
Permissions: Multiple copies, modification, alteration, enhancement, and/or distribution of this document are not permitted without the express
permission of the American College of Cardiology. Requests may be completed online via the Elsevier site (http://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/
author-agreement/obtaining-permission).
Peer Review Andrew D. Krahn, MD, FHRS, Chair Edward P. Gerstenfeld, MD, MS, FACC, FHRS
Committee Aubrey E. Jones, PHARMD, MSCI
Members Jason G. Andrade, MD, FHRS Stephanie Dwyer Kaluzna, PHARMD
Craig J. Beavers, PHARMD, FACC, FAHA, FCCP, Luke Masha, MD, MPH
BCCP, BCPS (AQ-Cardiology), CACP Isabelle Nault, MD
James M. Bischoff Peter A. Noseworthy, MD, FHRS
T. Jared Bunch, MD, FACC, FHRS Cara N. Pellegrini, MD, FACC, FHRS
Kristen Bova Campbell, PHARMD, FACC Stylianos E. Tzeis, MD
Lin Yee Chen, MD, MS, FAHA, FHRS Annabelle Santos Volgman, MD, FACC, FAHA
Robin Dharia, MD, FAHA Emily P. Zeitler, MD, MHS, FACC
Michael P. Dorsch, PHARMD, MS, FACC, FAHA
ACC/AHA Joint Joshua A. Beckman, MD, MS, FACC, FAHA, Chair W. Schuyler Jones, MD, FACC
Committee on Catherine M. Otto, MD, FACC, FAHA, Chair-Elect Prateeti Khazanie, MD, MPH
Clinical Practice Michelle M. Kittleson, MD, PHD, FACC
Guidelines Anastasia L. Armbruster, PHARMD, FACC Debabrata Mukherjee, MD, FACC, FAHA
Leslie L. Davis, PHD, ANP-BC, FACC, FAHA Latha Palaniappan, MD, MS, FAHA, FACC
Lisa de las Fuentes, MD, MS, FAHA Tanveer Rab, MD, FACC
Anita Deswal, MD, MPH, FACC, FAHA Jacqueline E. Tamis-Holland, MD, FACC, FAHA
Victor A. Ferrari, MD, FACC, FAHA Y. Joseph Woo, MD, FACC, FAHA
Adrian F. Hernandez, MD, FAHA Boback Ziaeian, MD, PHD, FAHA
Heather M. Johnson, MD, MS, FAHA, FACC
ABSTRACT
AIM The “2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation” provides
recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation.
METHODS A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 12, 2022, to November 3, 2022, encompassing studies,
reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane
Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant
studies, published through November 2022, during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee and
added to the evidence tables, where appropriate.
STRUCTURE Atrial fibrillation is the most sustained common arrhythmia, and its incidence and prevalence are increasing in the
United States and globally. Recommendations from the “2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial
Fibrillation” and the “2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With
Atrial Fibrillation” have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing atrial
fibrillation and thromboembolic risk assessment, anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion, atrial fibrillation catheter or sur-
gical ablation, and risk factor modification and atrial fibrillation prevention have been developed.
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 3
-, 2023:-–- ---
TABLE OF CONTENTS
6. PREVENTION OF THROMBOEMBOLISM . . . . . . . . . . -
2. BACKGROUND AND PATHOPHYSIOLOGY . . . . . . . . -
6.1. Risk Stratification Schemes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -
2.1. Epidemiology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -
6.2. Risk-Based Selection of Oral Anticoagulation:
2.1.1. Prevalence, Incidence, Morbidity,
and Mortality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -
Balancing Risks and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -
2.1.2. Risk Factors and Associated Heart Disease . - 6.3. Oral Anticoagulants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -
7.2. Specific Pharmacological Agents for 10.6. WPW and Preexcitation Syndromes . . . . . . . . . -
Rate Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -
10.7. Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -
7.2.1. Acute Rate Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -
7.2.2. Long-Term Rate Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - 10.8. Adult Congenital Heart Disease (ACHD) . . . . . . -
10.13. Pregnancy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -
8.3. Antiarrhythmic Drugs for Maintenance of
Sinus Rhythm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - 10.14. Cardio-Oncology and Anticoagulation
8.3.1. Specific Drug Therapy for Long-Term Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -
cessation, alcohol moderation, hypertension, and appendage occlusion devices, the Class of Recom-
other comorbidities. mendation has been upgraded to 2a compared with
3. Flexibility in using clinical risk scores and expanding the 2019 AF Focused Update for use of these devices
beyond CHA 2DS2-VASc for prediction of stroke and in patients with long-term contraindications to
systemic embolism: Recommendations for anti- anticoagulation.
coagulation are now made based on yearly thrombo- 10. Recommendations are made for patients with AF
embolic event risk using a validated clinical risk score, identified during medical illness or surgery (pre-
such as CHA 2DS 2-VASc. However, patients at an in- cipitants): Emphasis is made on the risk of recurrent
termediate annual risk score who remain uncertain AF after AF is discovered during noncardiac illness or
about the benefit of anticoagulation can benefit from other precipitants, such as surgery.
consideration of other risk variables to help inform
the decision, or the use of other clinical risk scores to PREAMBLE
improve prediction, facilitate shared decision making,
and incorporate into the electronic medical record. Since 1980, the American College of Cardiology (ACC) and
4. Consideration of stroke risk modifiers: Patients with American Heart Association (AHA) have translated scien-
AF at intermediate to low (<2%) annual risk of tific evidence into clinical practice guidelines with rec-
ischemic stroke can benefit from consideration of ommendations to improve cardiovascular health. These
factors that might modify their risk of stroke, such as guidelines, which are based on systematic methods to
the characteristics of their AF (eg, burden), non- evaluate and classify evidence, provide a foundation for
modifiable risk factors (sex), and other dynamic or the delivery of quality cardiovascular care. The ACC and
modifiable factors (blood pressure control) that may AHA sponsor the development and publication of clinical
inform shared decision-making discussions. practice guidelines without commercial support, and
5. Early rhythm control: With the emergence of new and members volunteer their time to the writing and review
consistent evidence, this guideline emphasizes the efforts. Guidelines are the official policy of the ACC and
importance of early and continued management of AHA. For some guidelines, the ACC and AHA collaborate
patients with AF that should focus on maintaining with other organizations.
sinus rhythm and minimizing AF burden.
6. Catheter ablation of AF receives a Class 1 indication Intended Use
as first-line therapy in selected patients: Recent Clinical practice guidelines provide recommendations
randomized studies have demonstrated the superior- applicable to patients with or at risk of developing car-
ity of catheter ablation over drug therapy for rhythm diovascular disease. The focus is on medical practice in
control in appropriately selected patients. In view of the United States, but these guidelines are relevant to
the most recent evidence, we upgraded the Class of patients throughout the world. Although guidelines may
Recommendation. be used to inform regulatory or payer decisions, the intent
7. Catheter ablation of AF in appropriate patients with is to improve quality of care and align with patients’ in-
heart failure with reduced ejection fraction receives a terests. Guidelines are intended to define practices
Class 1 indication: Recent randomized studies have meeting the needs of patients in most, but not all, cir-
demonstrated the superiority of catheter ablation cumstances and should not replace clinical judgment.
over drug therapy for rhythm control in patients with
heart failure and reduced ejection failure. In view of Clinical Implementation
the data, we upgraded the Class of Recommendation Management, in accordance with guideline recommen-
for this population of patients. dations, is effective only when followed by both practi-
8. Recommendations have been updated for device- tioners and patients. Adherence to recommendations can
detected AF: In view of recent studies, more pre- be enhanced by shared decision-making between clini-
scriptive recommendations are provided for patients cians and patients, with patient engagement in selecting
with device-detected AF that consider the interaction interventions on the basis of individual values, prefer-
between episode duration and the patient’s underly- ences, and associated conditions and comorbidities.
ing risk for thromboembolism. This includes consid-
erations for patients with AF detected via implantable Methodology and Modernization
devices and wearables. The ACC/AHA Joint Committee on Clinical Practice
9. Left atrial appendage occlusion devices receive Guidelines (Joint Committee) continuously reviews, up-
higher level Class of Recommendation: In view of dates, and modifies guideline methodology on the basis of
additional data on safety and efficacy of left atrial published standards from organizations, including the
6 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
Institute of Medicine, 1,2 and on the basis of internal members’ comprehensive and relevant RWI; for the pur-
reevaluation. Similarly, presentation and delivery of poses of full transparency, comprehensive and relevant
guidelines are reevaluated and modified in response to disclosure information for the Joint Committee is also
evolving technologies and other factors to optimally available online.
facilitate dissemination of information to health care
professionals at the point of care. Evidence Review and Evidence Review Committees
Numerous modifications to the guidelines have been In developing recommendations, the writing committee
implemented to make them shorter and enhance “user uses evidence-based methodologies that are based on all
friendliness.” Guidelines are written and presented in a available data.4,5 Literature searches focus on randomized
modular, “knowledge chunk” format, in which each controlled trials (RCTs) but also include registries, non-
chunk includes a table of recommendations, a brief syn- randomized comparative and descriptive studies, case
opsis, recommendation-specific supportive text and, series, cohort studies, systematic reviews, and expert
when appropriate, flow diagrams or additional tables. opinion. Only key references are cited.
Hyperlinked references are provided for each modular An independent evidence review committee is
knowledge chunk to facilitate quick access and review. commissioned when there are $1 questions deemed of
In recognition of the importance of cost–value consid- utmost clinical importance and merit formal systematic
erations, in certain guidelines, when appropriate and review to determine which patients are most likely to
feasible, an analysis of value for a drug, device, or inter- benefit from a drug, device, or treatment strategy, and to
vention may be performed in accordance with the ACC/ what degree. Criteria for commissioning an evidence re-
AHA methodology.3 view committee and formal systematic review include
To ensure that guideline recommendations remain absence of a current authoritative systematic review,
current, new data will be reviewed on an ongoing basis by feasibility of defining the benefit and risk in a time frame
the writing committee and staff. Going forward, targeted consistent with the writing of a guideline, relevance to a
sections/knowledge chunks will be revised dynamically substantial number of patients, and likelihood that the
after publication and timely peer review of potentially findings can be translated into actionable recommenda-
practice-changing science. The previous designations of tions. Evidence review committee members may include
“full revision” and “focused update” will be phased out. methodologists, epidemiologists, clinicians, and bio-
For additional information and policies on guideline statisticians. Recommendations developed by the writing
development, readers may consult the ACC/AHA guide- committee on the basis of the systematic review are
line methodology manual 4 and other methodology arti- marked “ SR”.
cles.5-7
Guideline-Directed Management and Therapy
Selection of Writing Committee Members The term guideline-directed management and therapy
The Joint Committee strives to ensure that the (GDMT) encompasses clinical evaluation, diagnostic
guideline writing committee contains requisite content testing, and both pharmacological and procedural treat-
expertise and is representative of the broader cardiovas- ments. For these and all recommended drug treatment
cular community by selection of experts across a spec- regimens, the reader should confirm dosage with product
trum of backgrounds, representing different geographic insert material and evaluate for contraindications and
regions, sexes, races, ethnicities, intellectual perspec- interactions. Recommendations are limited to drugs, de-
tives/biases, and clinical practice settings. Organizations vices, and treatments approved for clinical use in the
and professional societies with related interests and United States.
expertise are invited to participate as partners or Joshua A. Beckman, MD, MS, FAHA, FACC
collaborators. Chair, ACC/AHA Joint Committee on
Clinical Practice Guidelines
Relationships With Industry and Other Entities
The ACC and AHA have rigorous policies and methods to 1. INTRODUCTION
ensure that documents are developed without bias or
improper influence. The complete policy on relationships 1.1. Methodology and Evidence Review
with industry and other entities (RWI) can be found on- The recommendations listed in this guideline are, when-
line. Appendix 1 of the guideline lists writing committee ever possible, evidence based. An initial extensive
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 7
-, 2023:-–- ---
evidence review, which included literature derived from This document was approved for publication by the
research involving human subjects, published in English, governing bodies of the ACC and the AHA and was
and indexed in MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE, endorsed by ACCP and HRS.
the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research
and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this 1.4. Scope of the Guideline
guideline, was conducted from May 2022 to November In developing the “2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline
2022. Key search words included but were not limited to for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation”
the following: atrial fibrillation; pregnancy; heart defects, (2023 atrial fibrillation guideline), the writing committee
congenital; smoking; cardiomyopathy, hypertrophic; reviewed previously published guidelines. Table 1 con-
alcohol; caffeine; sleep; diet; fitness; obesity; anticoag- tains a list of these publications deemed pertinent to this
ulants; diabetes; rhythm monitoring; heart failure; ge- writing effort and is intended for use as a resource, thus
netics; heart valve diseases; rate control; catheter obviating the need to repeat existing guideline
ablation; social determinants of health; chronic kidney recommendations.
disease; sinus rhythm; chronic coronary syndromes; left
atrial appendage occlusion; left atrial appendage exclu-
sion; cardiac surgical procedures; amiodarone; electrical TABLE 1 Associated ACC/AHA Guidelines
cardioversion; thromboembolism; rhythm control; Publication
Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome. Additional relevant Year
Title Organization (Reference)
studies, published through November 2022 during the
Guidelines
guideline writing process, were also considered by the
Atrial fibrillation AHA/ACC/HRS 20191,*
writing committee and added to the evidence tables
20142
when appropriate. The final evidence tables are
Atrial fibrillation ESC/EACTS/EHRA 20213
included in the Online Data Supplement and summarize
Atrial fibrillation CCS 20204
the evidence used by the writing committee to formu-
Management of adults with AHA/ACC 20185
late recommendations. References selected and pub- congenital heart disease
lished in the present document are representative and
Diagnosis and treatment of patients AHA/ACC 20206
not all-inclusive. with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy
included representatives from the ACC and AHA, ACCP, Prevention of stroke in patients with AHA/ASA 202110
stroke and transient ischemic attack
and HRS. Appendix 1 of the current document lists
Management of heart failure AHA/ACC/HFSA 202211
writing committee members’ comprehensive and rele-
Management of arrhythmias in HRS 202312
vant RWI. pregnancy
*The full-text AF guideline is from 2014.2 A focused update was published in 2019.1
1.3. Document Review and Approval AATS indicates American Association for Thoracic Surgery; ACC, American College of
Cardiology; AF, atrial fibrillation; AHA, American Heart Association; ASA, American
The Joint Committee appointed a peer review committee
Stroke Association; ASE, American Society of Echocardiography; CCS, Canadian Car-
to review the document. The peer review committee diovascular Society; CHEST, American College of Chest Physicians; EACTS, European
Association for Cardio Thoracic Surgery; EHRA, European Heart Rhythm Association;
comprised individuals nominated by the ACC, AHA, and
ESC, European Society of Cardiology; HFSA, Heart Failure Society of America; HRS,
the collaborating organizations. Reviewers’ RWI infor- Heart Rhythm Society; SAEM, Society for Academic Emergency Medicine; SCAI, Society
for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions; SCCT, Society of Cardiovascular
mation was distributed to the writing committee and is
Computed Tomography; SCMR, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance; and
published in this document (Appendix 2). STS, Society of Thoracic Surgery.
8 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
1.5. Class of Recommendations and Level of Evidence risk. The Level of Evidence (LOE) rates the quality of
The Class of Recommendation (COR) indicates the scientific evidence supporting the intervention on the
strength of recommendation and encompasses the esti- basis of the type, quantity, and consistency of data from
mated magnitude and certainty of benefit in proportion to clinical trials and other sources (Table 2).
Applying American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Class of Recommendation and Level of Evidence to
TABLE 2
Clinical Strategies, Interventions, Treatments, or Diagnostic Testing in Patient Care* (Updated May 2019)
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 9
-, 2023:-–- ---
1.6. Abbreviations
ACE angiotensin-converting enzyme HFrEF heart failure with reduced ejection fraction
CABG coronary artery bypass graft surgery PCI percutaneous coronary intervention
CHADS2 congestive heart failure, hypertension, age >75 years, PH pulmonary hypertension
diabetes mellitus, stroke/transient ischemia attack/
thromboembolism PHPVD pulmonary hypertension with pulmonary vascular disease
CHA2DS2-VASc congestive heart failure, hypertension, age $75 years PITP pill-in-the-pocket
(doubled), diabetes mellitus, prior stroke or transient ischemic pLAAO percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion
attack or thromboembolism (doubled), vascular disease, age
65 to 74 years, sex category PV pulmonary veins
DAT dual antithrombotic therapy S-LAAO surgical removal of the left atrial appendage occlusion
eGFR estimated glomerular filtration rate UREG underrepresented racial and ethnic groups
F I G U R E 1 Temporal Trends in Counts and Age-Standardized Rates of AF-Prevalent Cases by Social Demographic Index Quintile for Both Sexes
Combined, 1990–2017
30 000 000
25 000 000
20 000 000
15 000 000
10 000 000
5 000 000
0
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2017
Year
Trends in counts of AF-prevalent cases by SDI quintile, 1990–2017. SDI was made up of the geometric mean of 3 common indicators: the lag distributed
income per capita, mean educational achievement for those aged $15 y, and total fertility rate <25 y. SDI ranged from 0 to 1, where 0 represents the
theoretical minimum level of development, whereas 1 represents the theoretical maximum level of development. Modified from Dai et al7 by permission of
Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. Copyright 2020 Oxford University Press. AF indicates atrial fibrillation; and SDI,
Social Demographic Index.
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 11
-, 2023:-–- ---
(A) In the overall cohort, (B) by age group, (C) by sex, and (D) by race. The dashed lines in panel A represent 95% CIs. Reproduced with permission from Piccini et al.8
Copyright 2012 American Heart Association, Inc. AF indicates atrial fibrillation.
million cases in 2030.1 The rate of AF diagnosis varies by of cognitive impairment or dementia, 8 1.5-fold risk of
2 3,4 3
education, income, clinical, and genetic factors. myocardial infarction (MI), 9 2-fold risk of sudden cardiac
Overall lifetime risk is about 30% to 40% in White in- death,10 5-fold risk of heart failure (HF), 7 1.6-fold risk of
2-4 2
dividuals, about 20% in African American individuals, chronic kidney disease (CKD),7 and 1.3-fold risk of pe-
5
and about 15% in Chinese individuals. ripheral artery disease (PAD). 7 In Medicare beneficiaries,
AF is associated with a 1.5- to 2-fold increased risk of the most frequent outcome in the 5 years after AF diag-
death6,7; studies suggest that the mortality risk may be nosis was death (19.5% at 1 year; 48.8% at 5 years)11 ; the
6
higher in women than in men. In meta-analyses, AF is next most common diagnosis was HF (13.7%), followed by
also associated with increased risk of multiple adverse new-onset stroke (7.1%), gastrointestinal hemorrhage
outcomes, including a 2.4-fold risk of stroke, 7 1.5-fold risk (5.7%), and MI (3.9%). 11
12 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
F I G U R E 3 Age-Standardized Global Prevalence Rates of AF and Atrial Flutter per 100,000, Both Sexes, 2020
During each annual GBD Study cycle, population health estimates are produced for the full-time series. Improvements in statistical and geospatial modeling methods
and the addition of new data sources may lead to changes in past results across GBD Study cycles. Modified with permission from Tsao et al.2 Copyright 2023 American
Heart Association, Inc. Modified Source: Institute for Health Metrics Evaluation. Used with permission. All rights reserved. AF indicates atrial fibrillation; and GBD, Global
Burden of Disease.
2.1.2. Risk Factors and Associated Heart Disease biomarkers (eg, electrocardiographic, imaging, circu-
In Table 3, we present the evidence for the most widely lating), and genetic markers. 1 Models predicting risk of AF
reported and validated factors for AF from single studies, onset are presented in Section 4.1 (“Risk Stratification
meta-analyses, and Mendelian randomization studies. and Population Screening”). Most studies of AF risk fac-
Risk factors include demographic, anthropometric, and tors and outcomes have been reported from high-income
cardiovascular risk factors, CVD, noncardiac conditions, countries and in individuals of European ancestry.
Summary Risk of
Condition Study Type Effect on Risk of AF Incident AF Effect of LRFM
Risk Factors
Advancing age n SR/MA n Age per 5 y: [ risk (HR, 1.43-1.66)2,3 [ Risk N/A
TABLE 3 Continued
Summary Risk of
Condition Study Type Effect on Risk of AF Incident AF Effect of LRFM
Alcohol n Single studies n Risk of AF episode within 4 h of 1 drink: [ Risk n Randomized abstinence: Y AF recurrence and
[ risk (OR, 2.02)17 burden 19
n Greater access to alcohol law: [ risk18 n N-of-1 studies of alcohol avoidance:
Y near-term AF 20
n SR/MA n Dose response (#drinks/d): [ risk (RR) n Alcohol avoidance or reduction as part of a
n 1: 1.08; 2: 1.17; 3: 1.33; 4: 1.36; 5: 1.4725 comprehensive LRFM program: Y AF burden,
symptoms, progression of AF21-24
n MR n Genetically predicted heavy alcohol
consumption (>35 U/wk for women and
>50 U/wk for men): [ risk (OR, 1.11)7
Adiposity markers: n Single study n Obesity: population attributable fraction [ Risk n Weight loss in overweight or obese patients
weight, BMI, 12.7%-16.9% 5,26 with AF as part of a comprehensive LRFM
obesity program: Y AF symptoms, burden,
n SR/MA n BMI: RR, 1.28 per 5-unit [ in BMI31 recurrence, progression21-24
n Weight:2 HR, 1.12 per 15 kg [ n Bariatric surgery in class III obesity:
3
associated with reversal of AF type, [ sinus
n MR n Obesity rhythm postablation27-29
n Birthweight: 1.26 per SD [32 n Weight loss in long-lasting persistent AF and
n Childhood BMI (OR, 1.18)32 obesity: 430
n BMI 1.31 per unit BMI33
3
n SR/MA n Increasing height: [ risk
Hypertension and BP n Single studies n Elevated BP: [ risk, population attributable n Hypertension: [ risk n Renal denervation: Y AF postablation34
fraction, 21.6%5 n SBP: [ risk n Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists:
n Presence of hypertension treatment: [ risk n DBP: [Y4 risk Y AF burden 35
(HR, 1.35-1.68), incidence 9.8%-19.5%; both n BP control postablation: 436
AF and SBP decreased over time 26
n Intensive BP control to SBP <120 mm Hg in
n MA n BP: SBP: [ risk (HR per 20 mm Hg, 1.22); DBP patients with hypertension at high risk for
per 10 mm Hg Y risk (HR, 0.90); use of BP CVD: Y AF risk37
medications [ risk (HR, 1.42)2 n BP control as part of a comprehensive LRFM
program: Y AF burden 21-24,38
n SR/MA n Hypertension: [ risk 3
Resting heart rate n SR/MA n Resting heart rate: J-shaped relationship n Slow heart rate: N/A
with incident AF. Lowest risk at 68-80 [Y variable risk
bpm; <70 bpm (RR, 1.09 per 10 bpm Y); n Higher heart rate:
>70 bpm (RR, per 10 bpm [ RR 1.06)41 [Y variable risk
n MR n Heart rate: <65 bpm slower (HR [ risk);
heart rate per 5 bpm [, 0.82 42
Diabetes n Single study n Diabetes: [ risk, population attributable [ Risk n Optimal glycemic control preablation
fraction 3.1%5 may Y AF recurrence postablation43
n Diabetes: [ risk, population attributable
fraction [ over time 3.2%-5.9%26
Cardiovascular disease
TABLE 3 Continued
Summary Risk of
Condition Study Type Effect on Risk of AF Incident AF Effect of LRFM
CAD n Single study n MI: Population attributable fraction 3.6% 26 [ Risk N/A
2
n MA n History of MI: HR, 1.64
VHD n Single studies n Significant heart murmur: [ risk (HR, 2.38) 47 [ Risk N/A
n Significant heart murmur (any diastolic and
grade $3/6 systolic murmur): [ risk, popu-
lation attributable fraction 21.9% Y d over
time to 3.1%26
Cardiac surgery n Single study n Multicenter validated risk prediction model: [ Risk n Prophylactic amiodarone, beta blockers:
[ risk AF after CABG49 Y4 postop AF50-54
n Posterior left pericardiotomy during CABG,
n SR/MA n Postop AF incidence: 23.7%-25.5%56 of
aortic valve, ascending aortic aneurysm
cardiac surgery patients57
surgery: Y postop AF 55,56
Other conditions
59
n MR n Bidirectional relation between CKD and AF
n AF causal for CKD; CKD not causal for AF60
Obstructive sleep n SR/MA n OSA: [ risk (OR, 1.71), with potential dose [ Risk n Observational studies of SDB treatment:
apnea response relation by severity61 Y AF burden62-67
n Small RCTs of SDB treatment: 4 68-70
n MR n Genetically predicted OSA: [ risk (OR, 1.21)71
Sepsis n Single study n Severe sepsis: [ risk (OR, 6.82)74; Medicare [ Risk N/A
population75
Markers on ECG
PR interval n SR/MA n Prolonged PR: [ risk (RR, 1.45) 77 n Prolonged PR: [ risk N/A
n PR interval poly-
n MR n Polygenic risk score PR interval prolonga-
genic risk score:
tion: Y AF risk (OR, 0.95; P¼4.30108) with
Y risk
some variants associated with [ and some
n PR interval risk
with Y AF risk78
SNPs: variable
[Y risk
LVH n Single study n ECG LVH: Population attributable fraction [ Risk N/A
10.4% Y d over time to 1.8%26
Biomarkers
Natriuretic peptides n MA n BNP: [ risk (HR per 1-SD ln-BNP, 1.66) 80 [4 Risk N/A
Inflammatory n SR/MA n CRP: [ risk (SMD, 0.95) 82 n CRP, IL-6, TNF- a, N/A
markers DUSP13, FKBP7,
n IL-6: [ risk (SMD, 0.89)82
Spondin-1: [ risk
n TNF-a: [ risk (SMD, 2.20)82
n IL-6R, TNFS12:
n MR n DUSP13, FKBP7, Spondin-1 [ risk33 Y risk
n IL-6R, TNFS12 Y risk33
Lp(a) n SR/MA n Lp(a): HR, 1.03; only 39% of Lp(a) risk [ Risk N/A
mediated via ASCVD 83
TABLE 3 Continued
Summary Risk of
Condition Study Type Effect on Risk of AF Incident AF Effect of LRFM
Imaging markers
LA size or function n Single studies n LA anterior-posterior dimension: [ risk (HR [ LA size, emptying Surgical LA reduction in conjunction with cardiac
per 5 mm [, 1.39)84 fraction: [ risk surgery or surgical AF ablation in patients with
persistent AF may [ rates of sinus rhythm86-89
n End diastolic LA volume (min): [ risk (HR, 1.12)85
n LA emptying fraction: [ risk (HR, 1.03)85
LV wall thickness n Single study n LV posterior wall thickness: [ risk (HR per [ Risk N/A
4-mm [, 1.28)84
Education n Single studies n Higher education: [ lifetime risk of AF Variable [Y risk N/A
(U.S.-based ARIC study)91
n Higher education in young individuals: Y risk
of AF diagnosis (Danish study)92
Income n Single studies n Higher income: [ lifetime risk of AF Variable [Y risk N/A
(U.S.-based ARIC study)91
n Higher income in young individuals: Y risk of
AF diagnosis (Danish study)92
SES n Single studies n Cumulative socioeconomic disadvantage: Low SES: [4 risk N/A
[ risk (HR, 1.57)94
n Individual’s poorest areas: 12% [ d risk 95
Genetics
Family history/ n Single studies n Family history of AF: [ risk97-99 [ Risk N/A
heritability
n MR n Proportion heritability explained by loci in
European ancestry analysis, 42% 100
Population attributable fraction: the proportional disease incidence in the population that is estimated to be due to the risk factor. Statistically significant associations reported, unless otherwise
indicated.
Y indicates decreased; [, increased; 4 no significant change in risk; AF, atrial fibrillation; ASCVD, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease; BMI, body mass index; BNP, brain naturiuretic peptide;
BP, blood pressure; CABG, coronary artery bypass graft surgery; CAD, coronary artery disease; CI, confidence interval; CKD, chronic kidney disease; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; ECG, elec-
trocardiogram; GWAS, genome-wide association study; HF, heart failure; HR, hazard ratio; LA, left atrial; LRFM, lifestyle and risk factor modification; LV, left ventricular; LVH, left ventricular
hypertrophy; MA, meta-analysis; MR, Mendelian randomization; N/A, not available/applicable; OR, odds ratio; RR, relative risk; OSA, obstructive sleep apnea; SMD, standardized mean difference;
SBP, systolic blood pressure; SES, socioeconomic status; SR, systematic review; and VHD, valvular heart disease.
2.2. Atrial Arrhythmia Classification and Definitions control therapies. The different stages better define AF as
2.2.1. AF Classification a progressive disease and highlight the need to address it
at the earliest stages, especially emphasizing the impor-
The previous classification of AF, which was based only
tance of prevention, risk factor management, and timing
on arrhythmia duration, although useful, tended to
for screening in those patients at the highest risk. The
emphasize AF once it was diagnosed and focused mainly
stages are not mutually exclusive (eg, risk factors should
on therapeutic interventions. The new proposed classifi-
be managed through multiple stages) (Figure 4).
cation using stages aims to correct the deficiencies of the
AF is the most common arrhythmia in the world and
previous classification by recognizing AF as a progressive
accounts for significant morbidity and mortality. Over the
disease that requires different strategies at the different
past decade, evidence has consistently shown that the
stages, from prevention to screening, to rate and rhythm
best treatment of atrial fibrillation requires multiple
16 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
*Heart failure, valve disease, coronary artery disease, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, neuromuscular disorders, thyroid disease. Original figure created by the 2023 Atrial
Fibrillation Guideline Writing Committee. AF indicates atrial fibrillation.
stakeholders committed to providing comprehensive with their goals of therapy: Stroke risk assessment and
patient-centered care. In addition, as emphasized in this treatment, if appropriate, Optimizing all modifiable risk
guideline, AF should be thought of in a more holistic factors, and Symptom management using rate- and
sense over an individual patient’s lifetime. rhythm-control strategies that consider AF burden in the
The foundation of optimal AF management is the context of an individual patient’s needs (SOS). The over-
treatment of risk factors and implementing lifestyle arching principle for AF management is Access to All
changes to decrease the likelihood of developing AF Aspects of care to All (4 As).
(Figure 5). Once AF develops, patient care should focus on
assessing the risk of stroke and implementing any
necessary treatment, continued optimization of all 2.2.2. Associated Arrhythmias
modifiable risk factors, and managing potential symp- Other atrial arrhythmias are often encountered in patients
toms of AF, with an initial focus on evaluating and with AF.
minimizing AF burden. However, as outlined in this Atrial Tachycardia (AT): It is a regular atrial rhythm at
guideline, access to all aspects of health care to all pa- a constant rate of >100 beats per minute (bpm) with
tients is necessary for any true improvement to be discrete P waves and atrial activation sequences origi-
realized. nating outside of the sinus node.1 The mechanism can be
When AF develops, holistic and optimal care of the automaticity, triggered activity, or a microreentry circuit.
patient at risk for AF, or who has developed AF, can be Focal ATs arise from a single discrete site within the left
simply modeled using a building. The foundation of care or right atrium, in contrast to macroreentrant atrial ar-
is treatment of comorbidities and risk factors and imple- rhythmias and AF, which involve multiple sites or larger
menting behavioral change in all individuals to decrease circuits. In multifocal AT, the atrial activation sequence
the likelihood of developing AF and reducing its burden and P-wave morphology vary.
(Screening for all risk factors from HEAD 2 TOES). Once AF Atrial Flutter (AFL) and Macroreentrant AT: They
develops, there are 3 important care processes that must occur in many of the same situations as AF. Typical AFL,
be specifically addressed with all patients and aligned also known as “typical AFL” or “cavotricuspid isthmus
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 17
-, 2023:-–- ---
TABLE 4 Definitions
Term Definition
AF A supraventricular tachyarrhythmia with uncoordinated atrial activation and ineffective atrial contraction
Electrocardiographic characteristics include (1) irregular R-R intervals (when atrioventricular conduction is present), (2) absence of distinct
P waves, and (3) irregular atrial activity also known as fibrillatory waves. AF can be documented by, for example, 12-lead ECG, rhythm
strips, wearables, intracardiac electrograms, but will always require visual confirmation that the diagnosis is accurate.
Clinical AF With the increasing availability of wearable devices and other continuous monitoring technologies, the distinction between clinical and
subclinical AF has become increasingly blurred, thus the writing committee felt the term clinical AF has become less useful. Yet, the term
was kept because most of the evidence from randomized trials that have led to guideline recommendations for the treatment of AF refer to
“clinical AF.” These trials required electrocardiographic documentation of the arrhythmia for inclusion and most patients presented for
clinical evaluation and/or therapy of the arrhythmia.
Subclinical AF Subclinical AF refers to this arrhythmia identified in individuals who do not have symptoms attributable to AF and in whom there are no
previous ECGs documenting AF
This includes AF identified by implanted devices (pacemakers, defibrillators, or implantable loop recorders) or wearable monitors
Atrial high-rate These are defined as atrial events exceeding the programmed detection rate limit set by the device. These are recorded by implanted devices
episodes but require visual inspection to confirm AF and exclude other atrial arrhythmias, artifact or oversensing.
AF burden AF burden encompasses both frequency and duration and refers to the amount of AF that an individual has. AF burden has been defined
differently across studies. For the purpose of this guideline, AF burden will be defined as the durations of an an episode or as a percentage
of AF duration during the monitoring period depending on how it was defined in the individual studies.
Persistent AF AF that is continuous and sustains for >7 d and requires intervention. Of note, patients with persistent AF who, with therapy, become
paroxysmal should still be defined as persistent as this reflects their original pattern and is more useful to predict outcomes and define
substrate.
TABLE 4 Continued
Term Definition
Terms considered obsolete
Chronic AF This historical term has had variable definitions and should be abandoned. It has been replaced by the “paroxysmal,” “persistent,” “long-
standing persistent,” and “permanent” terminology.
Valvular and The distinction between “valvular” and “nonvalvular “AF remains a matter of debate. Their definitions may be confusing. Recent trials
nonvalvular AF comparing vitamin K antagonists with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in AF were performed among patients with so-called
“nonvalvular” AF. These trials have all allowed native valvular heart disease other than mitral stenosis (mostly moderate and severe) and
prosthetic heart valves to be included. We should no longer consider the classification of AF as ‘‘valvular’’ or “nonvalvular” for the purpose
of defining the etiology of AF, since the term was specific for eligibility of stroke risk reduction therapies. Valvular and nonvalvular
terminology should be abandoned.
Lone AF This term has been used in the past to identify AF in younger patients without structural heart disease who are at a lower risk for
thromboembolism. This term does not enhance patient care, is not currently used, and should be abandoned.
Scar MRT
The typical, reverse typical, and the lower-loop flutter all have the low right atrial isthmus incorporated in the flutter circuit. Other macroreentrant flutters include scar-
mediated reentrant tachycardia and left mitral isthmus flutter. Modified with permission from Wellens et al.3 Copyright 2002 American Heart Association, Inc.
Fl indicates flutter; LA, left atrium; and MRT, macroreentrent.
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 19
-, 2023:-–- ---
The pathways that contribute to the development of AF create a substrate for reentry and provide triggers that can initiate arrhythmic activity. AF indicates atrial
fibrillation; PAC, premature atrial contraction; NLRP3, NOD-, LRR- and pyrin domain-containing protein 3; and RAAS, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system.
(CTI)-dependent AFL,” 2 involves a macroreentrant circuit the atria in smooth waves initiated by the sinoatrial node,
around the tricuspid annulus traversing the CTI on the AF is the result of either electrophysiological abnormal-
right side of the heart (Figure 6). This is the arrhythmia ities that underlie impulse generation and/or structural
associated with the classic electrocardiogram (ECG) abnormalities of cellular connections that typically facil-
finding of sawtooth flutter waves in the inferior leads itate rapid and uniform impulse conduction. AF often
when the circuit goes in the counterclockwise direction. stems from waves of electrical activity originating from
The same circuit in the clockwise direction is called ectopic action potentials most commonly generated in the
“reverse typical AFL.” If the flutter involves a different pulmonary veins (PVs) of the left atrium (LA),1 or in
circuit than tricuspid valve/isthmus, then it is called response to reentrant activity promoted by heteroge-
“atypical” AFL, which is also known as “noncavotricuspid neous conduction due to interstitial fibrosis.2 Atrial
2
isthmus–dependent macroreentrant AT.” AFL was pre- ectopy can generate runs of tachycardia, while persistent
viously classified as either type I or type II. That termi- AF requires a substrate that is either sufficiently large or
nology is no longer used. conduction that is sufficiently heterogeneous to enable
reentrant activity to persist. The electrical abnormalities
2.3. Mechanisms and Pathophysiology evident on the ECG during AF likely represent a shared
AF is a chaotic, rapid (300-500 bpm), and irregular atrial phenotype of a condition with many distinct etiologies
rhythm. Although normal rhythms are conducted through (genetic, environmental, and metabolic) (Figure 7).
20 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
2.3.1. Electrophysiological Mechanisms and increased NT-proBNP levels, and impaired LA emptying
Electrical Remodeling are associated with increased PAC burden.3 In a study of
The observation by Haissaguerre et al1 that ectopic firing 100 patients undergoing PV isolation, PACs induced 41
from PVs triggers AF revolutionized treatments for AF. PV episodes of AF in 22 patients, with most episodes origi-
features that increase vulnerability for initiating ectopy nating in the PVs.4 Earlier studies also reported an LA
include a higher resting membrane potential, stretch- gradient of background potassium currents, resulting in
activated channels, 2 and pattern of cross myofiber shorter LA than right atrial effective refractory period in
orientation. patients with AF.5 Mapping studies of AF electrograms in
Electrical remodeling, which can contribute to and canine models documented a left-right gradient of high
result from AF, includes perturbations that culminate in frequency sources (drivers), with the highest frequency
abnormal Ca2þ handling and shortened, proarrhythmic regions located near the PVs in the LA. 6
triangulated action potentials (eg, from decreased L-type
Ca2þ current3 and increase in I K1 ).4 Heterogeneity in I K1 2.3.2. Atrial Structural Abnormalities, Remodeling,
between left and right atria further promotes arrhyth- and Atrial Myopathy
mogenicity. 5 Downregulation of connexin results in Atrial cardiomyopathy has been identified as “any com-
decreased gap junctions, leading to slow heterogeneous plex of structural, architectural, contractile or electro-
atrial conduction velocity and repolarization, 6 promoting physiological changes affecting the atria with the
regional functional conduction block that can support potential to produce clinically relevant manifestations.” 1
reentry. Connexin remodeling can be due to genetic7 or Atrial cardiomyopathy is common, associated with aging
acquired factors, such as inflammatory state,8,9 older age, and other comorbidities with metabolic or hemodynamic
or sleep-disordered breathing (SDB).10 stress, and often leads to or results from AF. Structural and
Calcium mishandling from remodeling increases cal- electrical remodeling promote AF and include interstitial
cium load in the sarcoplasmic reticulum and dysfunction changes, increased myofibroblast activity, and collagen
of ryanodine receptors, which regulate intracellular cal- deposition, fibrofatty deposits, altered ion channel
cium release. Remodeling in AF of sarcoplasmic reticulum expression, calcium signaling and contractility, and in-
calcium ATPase underlies sequestration of intracellular flammatory infiltrates.1 Myeloperoxidase, an oxidase in
calcium between beats, and/or altered regulation of neutrophils and macrophages, is associated with fibroblast
sarcoplasmic reticulum calcium ATPase by phospho- activation, interstitial fibrosis, and inducibility of AF in a
lamban and sarcolipin.11 Increased intracellular sodium mouse model.2 Prothrombotic changes are often evident in
from calcium-calmodulin II-induced increased late so- the LA, including increased endocardial expression of von
dium current or cardiac glycosides can also increase Willebrand factor, vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 and
sarcoplasmic reticulum calcium through the sodium- monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 changes, which may
calcium exchanger. 12,13 Several upstream mechanisms increase risk of thrombus formation and stroke.1
(eg, oxidative stress, inflammatory signaling) promote Experimental hemodynamic overload, such as revers-
calcium-calmodulin II -activation. CaMKII-mediated and ible aortopulmonary artery shunting promotes atrial
hyperphosphorylation of ryanodine receptor 2 promotes dilation, atrial myocyte hypertrophy, interstitial fibrosis,
spontaneous diastolic Ca2þ leak by increasing ryanodine alterations in extracellular matrix composition and
receptor 2 channel open probability, leading to higher vascular dysfunction, and increased vulnerability to atrial
intracellular Ca2þ levels and the milieu for delayed ectopy and AF inducibility.3 Electrical remodeling similar
afterdepolarizations, the most likely trigger for AF initi- to that seen during AF is observed, with characteristic loss
ation. 14 Electrogenic action of sodium-calcium exchanger of calcium currents. Shunt closure reverses electrophysi-
drives afterdepolarizations, and expression of sodium- ological changes.3 Clinically, the hemodynamic structural
calcium exchanger is increased in HF and AF. Action po- changes are difficult or impossible to reverse.
tential alternans related to Ca2þ mishandling can be noted
to precede AF onset and increases with age. 2.3.2.1. Upstream Pathways
Upstream pathways include inflammatory, oxidative
2.3.1.1. Triggers of AF stress, fibrosis, calcium handling, genetic, metabolic,
The atria of patients with AF tend to have both shorter obesity, and other mechanisms implicated in increasing
effective refractory periods and slower conduction, which susceptibility to or progression of AF. The renin-
enhances dispersion of repolarization and favor reentry. angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS), oxidative stress,
This substrate is sensitive to AF initiation, frequently af- inflammatory signaling, and calcium overload are dis-
ter premature atrial contractions (PACs). 1 PAC burden is cussed here and in Section 2.3.1 (“Electrophysiological
associated with development of AF. 2 Larger LA volume, Mechanisms and Electrical Remodeling”). Upstream
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 21
-, 2023:-–- ---
Original figure created by the 2023 Atrial Fibrillation Guideline Writing Committee. AF indicates atrial fibrillation; ANS, autonomic nervous system; HRV, heart rate
variability; and LA, left atrium.
therapies are discussed in Section 8.3.4 (“Upstream Systemic inflammatory activation, first documented
Therapy”). with AF after cardiac surgery, 9 has also been associated
The RAAS regulates blood pressure (BP) and is acti- with nonsurgical AF. 10 NLRP3 knockdown prevented AF
vated in hypertension and obesity. RAAS activation pro- inducibility in a mouse model, implicating the NLRP3
motes vascular smooth muscle constriction (increasing inflammasome in AF pathophysiology.11 NLRP3-blocking
BP), activates fibroblasts (increasing atrial interstitial drugs are in development.
collagen), and increases reactive oxygen species in the
sympathetic nervous system. BP and weight control, 2.3.2.2. Persistence of AF
including treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme
In general, persistence of AF reflects the substrate for AF.
(ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin-II receptor blockers,
A suitable substrate for AF has a wavelength
attenuate pathologic changes.
(wavelength ¼ refractory period conduction velocity)
Oxidative stress is associated with: (1) activation of
that is shorter than the dimensions of the tissue, with
calcium-dependent calmodulin kinase II 1,2 and jun
heterogenous conduction velocity and/or repolarization
kinase 2, 3 which promotes ryanodine receptor phosphor-
duration. Thus, an individual with large, fibrotic, and/or
ylation and leads to spontaneous calcium release4 ; (2)
fatty atria is more likely to have persistent AF than one
increased late sodium current, INa,L , and lower calcium
with a normal-sized atria with little interstitial fibrosis or
current amplitude; (3) formation of reactive lipid products
adipose infiltration. Electrophysiologic remodeling is
(isolevuglandins) in hypertension5 and AF6 ; (4) activation
typically a response to persistent AF rather than the
of the redox-sensitive transcription factor nuclear factor-
trigger.
kappa B and the NLRP3 inflammasome 7; (5) increase in
mitochondrial and metabolic stress; (6) inflammatory
changes; and (7) myofilament protein degradation, 2.3.3. Role of the Autonomic Nervous System
impairing atrial contractility, which may increase throm- The autonomic nervous system (ANS) has an important
boembolism risk.8 role as trigger and substrate (Figure 8).
22 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
1. Patients with AF, regardless of sex1 and gender diversity, race and ethnicity,2 or adverse social de-
1 B-NR terminants of health (SDOH), 3,4, * should be equitably offered guideline-directed stroke risk reduction
therapies as well as rate or rhythm control strategies and LRFM as indicated to improve quality of life
(QOL) and prevent adverse outcomes.
*Including lower income, lower education, inadequate or lack of insurance coverage, or rurality.3-5
stroke risk reduction therapies.6,7 Although women and individuals from UREG, and those with adverse SDOH
individuals from UREGs with AF are more symptomatic for rhythm control therapy is important.
and report worse QOL than their counterparts, they also In patients with AF, indicators of lower socioeconomic
are less likely to be referred to an electrophysiologist7 status were associated with lower oral anticoagulation
and receive catheter ablation. 2,7-9,16 Women are rates,21 lower rate of adherence during direct oral
referred for ablation later in the disease course and at anticoagulant (DOAC) initiation, 22 specialty care,21,23
7,17,18
older ages than men. These differences or delays and less use of cardioversion4,21 and catheter abla-
in therapy may result in worse outcome given early tion.4,21,24 Indicators of socioeconomic disadvantages,
1,19
rhythm control of AF improves outcomes in select such as increased risk of hospitalization,25 stroke,4,21
patients. In addition, in the Catheter Ablation versus HF,4,21,26 and death, were also associated with compli-
Antiarrhythmic Drugs in AF trial, individuals from cations in patients with AF.4,21,27
UREGs treated with catheter ablation had a 72% relative
reduction in the all-cause mortality rate.20 Therefore, 3. SHARED DECISION-MAKING (SDM)
ensuring timely and equitable referral of women, IN AF MANAGEMENT
1. In patients with AF, the use of evidence-based decision aids might be useful to guide stroke reduction
2b B-R therapy treatment decisions throughout the disease course to improve engagement, decisional quality,
and patient satisfaction. 1-4
4. CLINICAL EVALUATION TABLE 6 CHARGE-AF Risk Score for Detecting Incident AF*
Estimated b
4.1. Risk Stratification and Population Screening Variable (X) Coefficient (SE) HR (95% CI)
There are >20 risk prediction models for incident AF in Age (per 5-y increment) 0.508 (0.022) 1.66 (1.59-1.74)
the community. 1 The most widely replicated risk predic- White race 0.465 (0.093) 1.59 (1.33-1.91)
tion model for newly diagnosed AF is CHARGE-AF (Co- Height (per 10-cm increment) 0.248 (0.036) 1.28 (1.19-1.38)
horts for Heart and Aging Research in Genomic Weight (per 15-kg increment) 0.115 (0.033) 1.12 (1.05-1.20)
Epidemiology model for atrial fibrillation; Table 6),2 while
Systolic BP (per 20-mm Hg increment) 0.197 (0.033) 1.22 (1.14-1.30)
the C2HEST score (coronary artery disease or chronic
Diastolic BP (per 10-mm Hg increment) 0.101 (0.032) 0.90 (0.85-0.96)
obstructive pulmonary disease [1 point each]; hyperten-
Smoking (current versus 0.359 (0.063) 1.42 (1.25-1.60)
sion [1 point]; elderly [age $75 years, 2 points]; systolic former/never)
HF [2 points]; thyroid disease [hyperthyroidism, 1 point]) Diabetes (yes) 0.237 (0.073) 1.27 (1.64-2.48)
was derived and validated in Asian cohorts (Table 7). 3,4 Myocardial infarction (yes) 0.496 (0.089) 1.64 (1.38-1.96)
Screening for AF has been investigated, mostly in
Table 6 does not encompass all complications.
patients >65 years of age, using various protocols that *Five-year risk is given by: 1 – 0.9718412736exp(SbX – 12.4411305), where b is the regression
include both 1-time electrocardiographic recordings, coefficient (column 2) and X is the level of each variable risk factor.2
AF indicates atrial fibrillation; BP, blood pressure; CHARGE-AF, Cohorts for Heart and
recurring intermittent ECGs (including consumer-based
Aging Research in Genomic Epidemiology model for atrial fibrillation; HR, hazard ratio;
devices), or continuous electrocardiographic external and SE, standard error.
monitors. Most screening trials have shown higher AF
detection using intermittent or continuous electrocar-
diographic recordings 5 and higher AF detection in pa-
tients with higher predicted risk for AF. 6 A recent study
also showed that an AI algorithm able to risk-stratify a TABLE 7 C 2 HEST Risk Score for Detecting Incident AF*
relatively uniform population (eg, older adults at risk for Acronym Risk Factor Points
stroke) to detect undiagnosed AF during short-term C2 CAD/COPD 1-2
cardiac monitoring was associated with increased AF. 7 H Hypertension 1
Conversely, mass population screening with a smart-
E Elderly (age ‡75 y) 2
watch app only rarely detected a new diagnosis of AF.8
S Systolic heart failure 2
Ultimately, for risk stratification models and screening
T Thyroid disease (hyperthyroidism) 1
programs to be useful, they would need to improve
outcomes and be cost-effective.9 It is not yet established *Total points 0-8. For the C2HEST score, the C statistic was 0.749, with 95% CI of
0.729–0.769.10 The incident rate of AF increased significantly with higher C2HEST
that patients at high risk of developing AF by a validated scores.
risk score benefit from screening and interventions to AF indicates atrial fibrillation; CAD, coronary artery disease; C2HEST, coronary artery
disease or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [1 point each]; hypertension [1 point];
improve rates of ischemic stroke, systemic embolism, elderly [age $75 y, 2 points]; systolic HF [2 points]; thyroid disease [hyperthyroidism, 1
and survival. point]; and COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 25
-, 2023:-–- ---
1. In patients with newly diagnosed AF, a transthoracic echocardiogram1-4 to assess cardiac structure,
1 B-NR laboratory testing to include a complete blood count, metabolic panel, and thyroid function, 5-7 and when
clinical suspicion exists, targeted testing to assess for other medical conditions associated with AF are
recommended to determine stroke and bleeding risk factors, as well as underlying conditions that will
guide further management.
2. In patients with newly diagnosed AF, protocolized testing for ischemia, acute coronary syndrome (ACS),
3: No benefit B-NR and pulmonary embolism (PE) should not routinely be performed to assess the etiology of AF unless there
are additional signs or symptoms to indicate those disorders. 8-10
1. Among individuals without a known history of AF, it is recommended that an initial AF diagnosis be made
1 B-NR by a clinician using visual interpretation of the electrocardiographic signals, regardless of the type of
rhythm or monitoring device.1-5
2. In patients with an intracardiac rhythm device capable of a diagnosis of AF, such as from an atrial
1 B-NR pacemaker lead, a diagnosis of AF should only be made after it is visually confirmed by reviewing
intracardiac tracings to exclude signal artifacts and other arrhythmias.6-9
3. For patients who have had a systemic thromboembolic event without a known history of AF and in whom
2a B-R maximum sensitivity to detect AF is sought, an implantable cardiac monitor is reasonable. 10,11
4. Among patients with a diagnosis of AF, it is reasonable to infer AF frequency, duration, and burden using
2a B-NR automated algorithms available from electrocardiographic monitors, implantable cardiac monitors, and
cardiac rhythm devices with an atrial lead, recognizing that periodic review can be required to exclude
other arrythmias. 1,4,5,12
5. Among patients with AF in whom cardiac monitoring is advised, it is reasonable to recommend use of a
2a B-R consumer-accessible electrocardiographic device that provides a high-quality tracing to detect
recurrences. 13
AF. 10,19 Randomized trials, predominately among 5. Cardiac monitoring may be advised to AF patients for
cryptogenic stroke patients, have revealed that various reasons, such as for detecting recurrences,
implantable cardiac monitors exhibit the highest screening, or response to therapy. Among patients with
sensitivity in detecting AF in view of extended moni- AF who are undergoing cardioversion or AF ablation, a
toring periods compared with external monitors.10,11 single-center, randomized trial demonstrated that use
4. It is often not feasible to manually review all electro- of a self-administered handheld ECG resulted in earlier
cardiographic strips from various monitoring devices, detection of recurrent AF13 and possibly improvement
either due to inaccessibility or time and resource con- in survey-determined AF-related QOL20 compared with
straints on health care professionals. Although vari- usual care.
ability in accuracy across different devices may be
present, the validity demonstrated in automated al-
gorithms is generally sufficient to infer frequency, 5. LIFESTYLE AND RISK FACTOR MODIFICATION
duration, and burden of AF using electrocardiographic (LRFM) FOR AF MANAGEMENT
devices such as continuously wearable monitors,
implantable cardiac monitors, and cardiac rhythm de- 5.1. Primary Prevention
vices with an atrial lead. 1,4,5,12
1. Patients at increased risk of AF should receive comprehensive guideline-directed LRFM for AF, targeting
1 B-NR obesity, 1 physical inactivity,2 unhealthy alcohol consumption, 3 smoking,4 diabetes, 5 and hypertension. 6
1. In patients with AF who are overweight or obese (with body mass index [BMI] >27 kg/m2 ), weight loss is
1 B-R recommended, with an ideal target of at least 10% weight loss to reduce AF symptoms, burden, recur-
rence, and progression to persistent AF. 1-4
1. In individuals with AF,* moderate-to-vigorous exercise training to a target of 210 minutes per week is
1 B-R recommended to reduce AF symptoms1-3 and burden, 2,3 increase maintenance of sinus rhythm,3-5 increase
functional capacity, and improve QOL. 3,5,6
based cohort study. 7 Exercise training should be mod- higher incidence of AF.9,10 Exercise training may be
erate- to vigorous-intensity aerobic exercise, with a delivered as a stand-alone intervention or as a
target of 210 minutes per week, and should be pre- component of multidisciplinary cardiac rehabilitation.
scribed to reduce the frequency and duration of AF Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation improves QOL
episodes, while improving cardiorespiratory fitness and and functional capacity among patients with AF un-
symptom severity. 3 Exercise prescription may be dergoing ablation,11,12 although available studies have
further modified to patient comorbidities, such as not been adequately powered to assess AF-specific
obesity, hypertension, and diabetes.4 Caution should outcomes, such as arrhythmia recurrence.13 There is
be applied to ensure adequate ventricular rate control mixed evidence for a reduction in hospitalization or all-
during exercise training and absence of atrial myopathy cause mortality with exercise training or exercise-based
related to excessive exercise training. To date, there is cardiac rehabilitation. 12,14,15
little evidence that high-intensity aerobic exercise may
be favorable over moderate-intensity activities, 8 and
5.2.3. Smoking Cessation
extreme levels of exercise have been associated with
1. Patients with a history of AF who smoke cigarettes should be strongly advised to quit smoking and should
1 B-NR receive GDMT for tobacco cessation 1,2 to mitigate increased risks of AF-related cardiovascular compli-
cations and other adverse outcomes. 3-6
1. Patients with AF seeking a rhythm-control strategy should minimize or eliminate alcohol consumption to
1 B-R reduce AF recurrence and burden.1-3
standard drinks per week has been demonstrated to 5.2.5. Caffeine Consumption
reduce AF symptoms,5 AF burden, 6,7 and progression of
AF from paroxysmal to persistent.8
1. For patients with AF, recommending caffeine abstention to prevent AF episodes is of no benefit, although
3: No Benefit B-NR it may reduce symptoms in patients who report caffeine triggers or worsens AF symptoms. 1-9
1. For patients with AF and hypertension, optimal BP control is recommended to reduce AF recurrence and
1 B-NR AF-related cardiovascular events. 1-7
1. Among patients with AF, it may be reasonable to screen for obstructive sleep apnea, given its high
2b B-NR prevalence in patients with AF, although the role of treatment of sleep-disordered breathing (SDB) to
maintain sinus rhythm is uncertain. 1-13
Multiple observational studies have described fewer including after cardioversion or PVI ablation,12,13,22
recurrences of AF and a reduction in AF burden, although studies tended to exclude patients who
including after cardioversion and catheter ablation might benefit most from SDB treatment (eg, those who
procedures, among those undergoing treatment for SDB had more symptomatic sleep apnea [Epworth Sleepiness
compared with those not treated for their SDB.6-11,22 Scale score >10 or 15], severe cardiovascular disease
However, small trials randomizing patients with AF [LVEF <40% or 45%], or severe obesity).
and SDB treatment versus usual care have not shown
significant differences in AF burden or AF recurrence, 5.2.10. Comprehensive Care
1. Patients with AF should receive comprehensive care addressing guideline-directed LRFM, AF symptoms, risk
1 A of stroke, and other associated medical conditions to reduce AF burden, progression, or consequences. 1-3
2. In patients with AF, use of clinical care pathways, such as nurse-led AF clinics, is reasonable to promote
2a B-R comprehensive, team-based care and to enhance adherence to evidence-based therapies for AF and
associated conditions. 4-6
1. Patients with AF should be evaluated for their annual risk of thromboembolic events using a validated
1 B-NR clinical risk score, such as CHA 2DS 2 -VASc.1-4
2. Patients with AF should be evaluated for factors that specifically indicate a higher risk of bleeding, such as
1 B-NR previous bleeding and use of drugs that increase bleeding risk, in order to identify possible interventions
to prevent bleeding on anticoagulation. 5-7
3. Patients with AF at intermediate annual risk of thromboembolic events by risk scores (eg, equivalent to
2a C-LD CHA2 DS 2-VASc score of 1 in men or 2 in women), who remain uncertain about the benefit of anti-
coagulation, can benefit from consideration of factors that might modify their risk of stroke to help
inform the decision.*
4. In patients who are deemed at high risk for stroke, bleeding risk scores should not be used in isolation to
3: No Benefit B-NR determine eligibility for oral anticoagulation but instead to identify and modify bleeding risk factors and
to inform medical decision-making. 8-10
Overall stroke rate in atrial fibrillation cohorts in order of descending stroke rate (events per 100 person-years). Reproduced with permission from Quinn et al.4
Copyright 2017 American Heart Association, Inc.
score of 2 had annual rates of stroke that ranged from conducted to predict ischemic stroke in patients with
low to high: <1% in 4 cohorts, 1% to 2% in 6 cohorts, AF.19 Potential differences of the most studied risk
4
and >2% in 5 cohorts, although higher scores were scores are listed in Table 9. Some potential advantages
associated with higher stroke risk in each cohort of other scores, for example, the GARFIELD-AF score,
(Figure 9). The CHA 2DS2-VASc score is considered the includes mortality and bleeding risk to facilitate dis-
most validated score, most therapies have used that cussion with patients in a more comprehensive way.
score to prove efficacy, and thus CHA 2DS2-VASc is Also, when uncertainty exists, a score such as
generally the preferred score. Yet, despite its extensive GARFIELD-AF adds additional variables to consider,
use, CHA 2DS2-VASc has shown suboptimal perfor- such as smoking status, renal disease, and dementia.
mance in selected populations, such as those with This guideline does not intend to preclude the future
renal disease, prompting the creation of other scores. development of more accurate scores for stratifying
Newer risk scores, such as the ATRIA 1,16,17 and GAR- patients.
FIELD-AF3,18 scores, modestly improve risk discrimi- 2. Clinical decisions surrounding stroke prevention therapy
nation (c-index) compared with CHA 2DS 2-VASc, but in patients with AF must balance the risks of ischemic
their calibration and risk reclassification performance stroke, the risks of bleeding with treatment, net clinical
has not been as rigorously evaluated. A recent meta- benefit, and patient preferences. The most studied
analysis reported that 19 risk scores, 329 external val- bleeding risk scores (HAS-BLED,5 HEMORR2HAGES,6 and
idations, and 76 risk score updates have been ATRIA7) discriminate poorly between patients with and
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 35
-, 2023:-–- ---
TABLE 9 Some Best Known Published Clinical Scores With Potential Advantages
Year of No. of
Publication, Validation Hyperlink to Online Score
Score Name Score Components Potential Advantages Studies 19 Calculator, if Available
2001 CHF, hypertension, age ($65 y is 1 point, $75 CHADS2 was superior to existing risk classification 46 https://www.mdcalc.com/calc/4
CHADS225 y is 2 points), diabetes, stroke/TIA (2 points) schemes 0/chads2-score-atrial-
AFI scheme: C-statistic, 0.68 (0.65–0.71) fibrillation-stroke-risk
SPAF-III scheme: C-statistic, 0.74 (0.71–0.76)
CHADS2 score: C-statistic, 0.82 (0.80–0.84)
2010 CHF, hypertension, age $75 y, diabetes, stroke Most commonly used and studied, superior to CHADS2 82 https://www.mdcalc.com/calc/8
CHA2DS2- or TIA, vascular disease, age 65–74 y, score. C-statistic, 0.606 (0.513–0.699) for CHA2DS2- 01/cha2ds2-vasc-score-
VASc2 female sex VASc score vs 0.561 (0.450–0.672) for CHADS2 score atrial-fibrillation-stroke-
Improved compared with original CHADS2 score risk#next-steps
2013 Age (65–74 y is 3 points, 75–84 y is 5 Includes more age categories, renal function, and 11 https://www.mdcalc.com/
ATRIA1 points, $85 y is 6 points), hypertension, proteinuria More patients were classified as low or calc/1842/atria-stroke-risk-
diabetes, CHF, proteinuria, GFR <45 mL/ high risk but not as well tested in general. score
min/1.73 m2, sex
2017 Web-based, uses routinely collected clinical Web-based tool for predicting stroke and mortality, 4 https://af.garfieldregistry.org/
GARFIELD- data, and includes a total of 16 questions includes the effect of the different anticoagulants, garfield-af-risk-calculator
AF3 bleeding risk and mortality to facilitate shared
decision-making on the potential benefits/risks of
anticoagulation
ATRIA indicates Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation: anemia, renal disease, elderly (age $75 y), any previous bleeding, hypertension; CHADS2, congestive heart failure,
hypertension, age >75 y, diabetes, stroke/transient ischemia attack/thromboembolism; CHA2DS2 -VASc, indicates congestive heart failure, hypertension, age $75 y (doubled), diabetes
mellitus, prior stroke or transient ischemic attack or thromboembolism (doubled), vascular disease, age 65 to 74 y, sex category; CHF, congestive heart failure; GARFIELD-AF, Global
Anticoagulant Registry in the Field-Atrial Fibrillation; GFR, glomerular filtration rate; SPAF-III, stroke prevention atrial fibrillation, and TIA, transient ischemic attack.
36 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
Risk Factor Definitions for CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc Score as in the Additional Risk Factors That Increase Risk of
TABLE 10 TABLE 11
Original Article 2 Stroke Not Included in CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc
C Heart Failure The presence of signs and symptoms of either right (elevated Higher AF burden/Long duration
central venous pressure, hepatomegaly, dependent edema) or
Persistent/permanent AF versus paroxysmal
left ventricular failure (exertional dyspnea, cough, fatigue,
orthopnea, paroxysmal nocturnal dyspnea, cardiac Obesity (BMI, ‡30 kg/m2)
enlargement, rales, gallop rhythm, pulmonary venous
congestion) or both, confirmed by noninvasive or invasive HCM
measurements demonstrating objective evidence of cardiac
Poorly controlled hypertension
dysfunction
eGFR (<45 mL/h)
H Hypertension A resting blood pressure >140 mm Hg systolic and/or >90 mm Hg
diastolic on at least 2 occasions or current antihypertensive Proteinuria (>150 mg/24 h or equivalent)
pharmacological treatment
Enlarged LA volume (‡73 mL) or diameter (‡4.7 cm)
A2 Age, additional Age $75 y
risk/point AF indicates atrial fibrillation; BMI, body mass index; eGFR, estimated glomerular
filtration rate; HCM, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy; and LA, left atrium.
D Diabetes Fasting plasma glucose level $7.0 mmol/L (126 mg/dL) or
treatment with hypoglycemic agent and/or insulin
patients, other factors, such as AF burden, can be
S2 Thromboembolism Either an ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack, peripheral considered when interpreting a stroke risk score.12-14,23
embolism, or pulmonary embolism
Additional factors, such as degree of hypertension
V Vascular Disease Coronary artery disease (prior myocardial infarction, angina
pectoris, percutaneous coronary intervention, or coronary artery control, can also affect the risk of stroke; in the ARIS-
bypass surgery) or peripheral vascular disease (the presence of TOTLE (Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other
any of the following: intermittent claudication, previous surgery
or percutaneous intervention on the abdominal aorta or the Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation) trial, a
lower extremity vessels, abdominal or thoracic vascular surgery, single elevated BP measurement during the study was
arterial and venous thrombosis)
associated with a 50% increased risk of stroke. 23,24
A Age standard risk/ Age 65–74 y
weight Additional patient-specific risk factors, such as
TABLE 12 Thromboembolic Event Rates by Point Score for ATRIA, CHADS 2 , and CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc Risk Scores*
10 75 1,181 6.35 — — — — — —
11 31 501 6.18 — — — — — —
12 20 183 10.95 — — — — — —
13 4 53 7.52 — — — — — —
14 2 12 16.36 — — — — — —
15 0 7 0 — — — — — —
1
Reproduced with permission from Singer et al. Copyright 2013 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley-Blackwell. This is an open access article under
the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not
used for commercial purposes.
*Black lines identify thresholds for low-, moderate-, and high-risk categories for the 3 stroke risk point scores using published cut points.8,9
†The CHADS2 score assigns points as follows: 1 point each for the presence of congestive heart failure, hypertension, age $75 y, and diabetes mellitus and 2 points for history of stroke/transient
ischemic attack.
‡The CHA2DS2-VASc score assigns points as follows: 1 point each for congestive heart failure/left ventricular dysfunction, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, vascular disease, age 65 to 74 y, and
female sex, and 2 points each for age $75 y and stroke/transient ischemic attack/thromboembolism.
ATRIA indicates Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation: anemia, renal disease, elderly (age $75 y), any previous bleeding, hypertension; CHADS2, congestive heart failure, hy-
pertension, age >75 y, diabetes, stroke/transient ischemia attack/thromboembolism; and CHA2DS2-VASc, indicates congestive heart failure, hypertension, age $75 y (doubled), diabetes mellitus,
prior stroke or transient ischemic attack or thromboembolism (doubled), vascular disease, age 65 to 74 y, sex category.
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 37
-, 2023:-–- ---
demonstrated to influence stroke risk, yet it is unclear stroke. Furthermore, a bleeding risk score cannot be
how to incorporate them into clinical practice. 12 interpreted in isolation because it does not assess the
Antithrombotic treatment with DOACs seems to offer net clinical benefit of anticoagulation or balance the risk
a superior net-benefit with regard to prevention of of bleeding against the risk of stroke. Population-based
thromboembolic events and the risk of major bleeding studies suggest that the benefits of stroke prevention
compared with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). Consid- with oral anticoagulation generally outweigh the risks
eration of these additional factors may inform of bleeding, even in patients determined to be at high
decision-making for patients with an intermediate risk risk for bleeding. 8,9 Decision-making about oral anti-
of stroke who remain uncertain on deciding coagulation should be based on consideration of both
anticoagulation. benefits and harms, not by using bleeding risk scores in
4. Unless an absolute contraindication to anticoagulation isolation, and the best utility of these scores may be
is present, bleeding risk scores have limitation in clin- identifying potential modifying risk factors. 8,9
ical decision-making because the most commonly used
scores (HAS-BLED,5 HEMORR 2HAGES,6 and ATRIA7 ) are
based on several clinical factors that indicate higher 6.2. Risk-Based Selection of Oral Anticoagulation:
risks of both stroke and bleeding, and patients with Balancing Risks and Benefits
higher risk of bleeding also tend to have a higher risk of
Recommendations for Risk-Based Selection of Oral Anticoagulation: Balancing Risks and Benefits
Referenced studies that support the recommendations are summarized in the Online Data Supplement.
1. In patients diagnosed with AF who have an estimated annual risk of stroke or thromboembolic
1 B-R events ‡2%, selection of therapy to reduce the risk of stroke should be based on the risk of thrombo-
embolism, regardless of whether the AF pattern is paroxysmal, persistent, long-standing persistent, or
permanent. 1-3
2. In patients with AF at risk for stroke, reevaluation of the need for and choice of stroke risk reduction
1 B-NR therapy at periodic intervals is recommended to reassess stroke and bleeding risk, net clinical benefit, and
proper dosing.4,5
1. For patients with AF and an estimated annual thromboembolic risk of ‡2% per year (eg, CHA 2DS 2 -VASc
1 A score of ‡2 in men and ‡3 in women), anticoagulation is recommended to prevent stroke and systemic
thromboembolism. 1-7
2. In patients with AF who do not have a history of moderate to severe rheumatic mitral stenosis or a
1 A mechanical heart valve, and who are candidates for anticoagulation, DOACs are recommended over
warfarin to reduce the risk of mortality, stroke, systemic embolism, and ICH. 1-7
3. For patients with AF and an estimated annual thromboembolic risk of ‡1% but <2% per year (equivalent
2a A to CHA 2DS 2-VASc score of 1 in men and 2 in women), anticoagulation is reasonable to prevent stroke and
systemic thromboembolism.1,3
4. In patients with AF who are candidates for anticoagulation and without an indication for antiplatelet
3: Harm B-R therapy, aspirin either alone or in combination with clopidogrel as an alternative to anticoagulation is not
recommended to reduce stroke risk. 8,9
5. In patients with AF without risk factors for stroke, aspirin monotherapy for prevention of thromboembolic
3: No Benefit B-NR events is of no benefit. 10,11
included patients with this level of risk.1-4 Patients at P<0.0001), a relative risk of mortality of 0.90 (95% CI,
intermediate risk (1%-2%/y) can also benefit from anti- 0.85-0.95; P¼0.0003), relative risk of ICH of 0.48 (95%
coagulation, and the RE-LY 1 and ARISTOTLE3 trials CI, 0.39-0.59; P<0.0001), and increased relative risk of
included this population. Stroke risk scores applied to bleeding of 1.25 (95% CI, 1.01-1.55; P¼0.043). Although
cohorts give different stroke rates, and therefore any patients with moderate to severe mitral stenosis or
score should be viewed as only an estimate of true risk; in mechanical valve were excluded from DOAC trials (and
addition some scores used stroke, while others used subsequently shown they may have worse outcomes
thromboembolic events. Nonetheless, it is practical to use with DOACS), other forms of VHD were allowed, such
a validated risk score, such as CHA 2 DS2-VASc, ATRIA, or as aortic stenosis or regurgitation or mitral regurgita-
GARFIELD-AF. Future research may yield improved risk tion. Bioprosthetic valves and valve repair were
scores that refine how to incorporate risk modifiers, such allowed in the edoxaban (ENGAGE AF) and apixaban
as female sex12 and other parameters such as AF burden. (ARISTOTLE) trials, and valve repair in the rivaroxaban
Anticoagulation has also been shown to be superior to (ROCKET AF) trial. A systematic review18 of patients
8,9
antiplatelet therapy to reduce stroke risk. Recommen- with VHD (other than mitral stenosis or mechanical
dations for antithrombotic selection in valvular heart valve) concluded that DOACs were safe.
disease (VHD) are provided in Section 6.8.5 (“AF in VHD”) 3. As the DOAC trials 1-4 demonstrated improved safety
and for AFL in Section 6.8.6 (Figure 10). compared with warfarin, the threshold of using a DOAC
might be different than for warfarin.16 A Markov deci-
Recommendation-Specific Supportive Text
sion model found the tipping point for warfarin to be at
1. Randomized trials published in the 1990s established 1.7%/year stroke risk.16 Considering the improved ICH
the superiority of anticoagulation, at that time limited and mortality risk of DOACs compared with warfarin in
to warfarin, to reduce stroke. 11 Since that time, man- meta-analyses of the DOAC trials, 5-7 it is appropriate to
agement has advanced considerably, and the random- designate a lower stroke risk threshold if a DOAC is
ized trials that compared DOACs with warfarin1-4 are utilized. The dabigatran1 and apixaban 3 trials included
more relevant to current antithrombotic management. lower risk patients and about one-third of patients had
In these trials 1-4 and metanalyses,5-7 DOACs were a CHADS 2 score of 0 or 1. This likely corresponds to an
favored for lower risk of stroke, systemic embolism, and estimated annual stroke risk of about 1%, considering
ICH.1-7 These trials reported the CHADS2 score. The more recent cohorts. 13,14 This is further supported by
recently studied ATRIA and Swedish cohorts13,14 re- meta-analyses that showed a consistent benefit of
ported lower stroke rates, by CHADS 2 score, compared DOACs across a broad range of vulnerable patients,
with that previously reported.15 A CHADS 2 score of 1 including as classified by CHADS2 scores.6,7
gave a stroke rate of 1.20 in ATRIA14 and 2.4 in a Swedish 4. A meta-analysis of AF trials from the 1990s and early
cohort. 13 A CHADS 2 score of 2 gave a stroke rate of 2.59 in 2000s found that while antiplatelet therapy (APT),
ATRIA14 and 3.5 in the Swedish cohort.13 Therefore, the most commonly aspirin, reduced stroke and systemic
stroke risk of patients in the rivaroxaban 2 and edox- embolism compared with placebo, APT was inferior to
aban 4 trials was likely >2% given a required minimum warfarin in patients with AF. 11 Aspirin was studied
CHADS 2 score of 2, and lower in the apixaban 3 and compared to apixaban in the AVERROES trial (Apix-
dabigatran 1 trials that included scores of 0 and 1. A aban Versus ASA to Prevent Stroke In AF Patients Who
Markov state transition decision model16 concluded Have Failed or Are Unsuitable for Vitamin K Antagonist
that anticoagulation was preferred for a stroke rate of Treatment) 9 for patients unsuitable for VKAs; this trial
1.7%. Therefore, a stroke and systemic embolism risk was stopped early due to the benefit of apixaban over
threshold of 2% is likely to yield a benefit that far ex- aspirin to prevent stroke or systemic embolism, while
ceeds risk. In some conditions, such as hypertrophic major bleeding was similar between the 2 arms. The
cardiomyopathy, the risk of stroke is high enough in- combination of clopidogrel and aspirin was compared
dependent of risk score to indicate anticoagulation.17 to VKAs in ACTIVEW (Atrial fibrillation Clopidogrel
2. In the randomized DOAC trials, all DOACs achieved Trial with Irbesartan for prevention of Vascular
noninferiority 1-4 and in 2 trials (for dabigatran, RE-LY, Events),8 and this trial was stopped prematurely due to
and for apixaban, ARISTOTLE) were superior to the superiority of anticoagulation with VKAs to pre-
warfarin. With warfarin, regular assessment of the INR vent stroke, non–central nervous system systemic
is necessary to maintain a therapeutic value. In the embolus, MI, or vascular death. Unless there is an
RCTs, the mean time in therapeutic range was only 55% indication for antiplatelet therapy, such as coronary
in ROCKET AF2 and highest at 66% in ARISTOTLE. 3 In a artery disease (CAD) or vascular disease, patients with
meta-analysis,6 DOACs, compared with warfarin, had a AF should not be prescribed antiplatelet therapy to
relative risk of stroke of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.73-0.91; reduce stroke risk.
40 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
Colors correspond to Table 2. AF indicates atrial fibrillation; and DOAC, direct oral anticoagulant.
5. Aspirin therapy was compared with no treatment in per year, with a number needed to treat of 125.11
patients with low stroke risk in a multicenter RCT in Although aspirin has not been studied in patients
Japan, the Japan Atrial Fibrillation Stroke Trial. 10 This without any risk factors for stroke, patients without
trial was stopped early when an interim analysis stroke risk may derive no benefit from aspirin therapy.
showed that aspirin gave a marginally higher risk of In fact, 1 study that analyzed stroke mechanisms in the
major bleeding and was unlikely to prevent primary or SPAF (Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation) I-III tri-
secondary endpoints. The primary endpoint was non- als demonstrated that aspirin did not decrease the rate
cardiovascular death, ICH, major bleeding, and pe- of cardioembolic stroke and that AF patients at highest
ripheral embolization. A meta-analysis of 7 trials that risk for stroke are those with the highest rates of car-
studied aspirin versus placebo found that aspirin dioembolic stroke and have the greatest reduction in
reduced stroke by 19%, which did not reach statistical stroke with anticoagulants.19 Thus, modest reduction
significance with a CI that included 0 (–1% to 35%). in stroke observed in some trials may have been related
Four of these were primary prevention trials and to noncardioembolic stroke in patients with additional
showed an absolute risk reduction with aspirin of 0.8% risk factors.
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 41
-, 2023:-–- ---
1. For patients with AF receiving DOACs, optimal management of drug interactions is recommended for
1 C-LD those receiving concomitant therapy with interacting drugs, especially CYP3A4 and/or p-glycoprotein
inhibitors or inducers (Table 13). 1-7
2. For patients with AF receiving warfarin,* a target INR between 2 and 3 is recommended, as well as optimal
1 B-R management of drug-drug interactions, consistency in vitamin K dietary intake, and routine INR moni-
toring to improve time in therapeutic range and to minimize risks of preventable thromboembolism or
major bleeding. 8-10
3. For patients with AF, nonevidence-based doses of DOACs should be avoided to minimize risks of pre-
3: Harm B-NR ventable thromboembolism or major bleeding and to improve survival.11,12
Excretion 0% renal; very 80% renal 66% renal, 28% feces 27% renal, 73% biliary and 50% renal, 50% liver and
little warfarin intestinal biliary/intestinal
excreted
unchanged in
urine
Renal dosing N/A CrCl >30 mL/min 150 mg twice CrCl >50 20 mg daily with the 5 mg CrCl >50–#95 60 mg
adjustment daily mL/min biggest meal* twice mL/ min once
based on daily daily
actual body
CrCl 15-30 mL/ 75 mg twice CrCl 15-50 15 mg daily with the If any 2 of the 2.5 mg CrCl 15-50 30 mg
weight
min daily mL/min biggest meal* following: twice mL/min once
age $80y, daily daily
body weight
#60 kg,
SCr $1.5
mg/dL
Drug interaction Adjust dose based CrCl 30-50 mL/min with Avoid rivaroxaban use with In patients receiving No dose adjustment
management based on INR trends concomitant use of concomitant therapy of apixaban 5 mg twice daily, is required
on concomitant dronedarone or systemic combined p-glycoprotein and reduce dose to 2.5 mg
therapy of CYP3A4 ketoconazole: 75 mg twice daily strong CYP3A4 inhibitors (eg, twice daily when
inhibitors/ CrCl <30 mL/min: avoid dabigatran systemic ketoconazole and combined p-glycoprotein
p-glycoprotein use concomitantly with ritonavir) and strong CYP3A4
inhibitors dronedarone or systemic No dose adjustment required inhibitors (eg,
ketoconazole with clarithromycin itraconazole, systemic
Avoid rivaroxaban use in patients ketoconazole, ritonavir)
with CrCl 15–<80 mL/min are used concomitantly
receiving combined If patients already receiving
p-glycoprotein and apixaban 2.5 mg twice
moderate CYP3A4 inhibitors daily, avoid apixaban use
(eg, erythromycin) if combined p-
glycoprotein and strong
CYP3A4 inhibitors are
concomitantly used
Drug interaction Adjust dose based Avoid use Avoid use Avoid use Avoid use with rifampin.
management based on INR trends No study evaluated
on concomitant the effect of other
therapy of p-glycoprotein/
p-glycoprotein/ CYP3A4 inducers on
CYP3A4 inducers edoxaban drug levels
(eg, carbamazepine,
phenytoin, rifampin,
St. John’s wort)
Appropriate use based Not mentioned in No dose adjustment No dose adjustment No dose adjustment No dose adjustment
on liver function the labeling needed needed needed needed
(Child-Pugh score)†
Child-Pugh A (mild)
Child-Pugh B Use with caution Avoid use Use with caution Use with caution
(moderate)
Information obtained from manufacturer package inserts.13,14,20-22 Adapted with permission from pgs. 28-31 of Kido et al.23 Copyright 2021 American College of Clinical Pharmacy.
*The effect of food (high-fat, high-calorie meal) on bioavailability for 10- and 20-mg tablet was evaluated in 24 subjects under fed and fasting conditions. After a single oral 20-mg dose, area
under the curve was increased by 39%, and Cmax was increased by 76% under fed condition, but area under the curve and Cmax were similar between fasting and fed conditions.19
†Child-Pugh scoring: the severity of liver disease, primarily cirrhosis. Child-Pugh A (mild): 5 to 6 points; Child-Pugh B (moderate): 7 to 9 points; Child-Pugh C (severe): 10 to 15 points. The score is
based on the 5 variables: encephalopathy (none¼1 point, grade 1 and 2¼2 points, grade 3 and 4¼3 points); ascites (none¼1 point, slight¼2 points, moderate¼3 points); total bilirubin (<2 mg/
mL¼1 point, 2-3 mg/mL¼2 points, >3 mg/mL¼3 points); albumin (>3.5 mg/mL¼1 point, 2.8-3.5 mg/mL¼2 points, <2.8 mg/mL¼3 points); INR (<1.7¼1 point, 1.7-2.2¼2 points, >2.2¼3 points).
CrCl indicates creatinine clearance; INR, international normalized ratio; OAC, oral anticoagulant; Scr, serum creatinine; and VKA, vitamin K antagonist.
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 43
-, 2023:-–- ---
*HAS-BLED scoring (low risk¼score 0, moderate risk¼score 1-2, high risk¼score $3): uncontrolled hypertension (systolic blood pressure >160 mm Hg)¼1 point;
abnormal renal (serum creatinine >2.26 mg/dL, dialysis, or kidney transplant) or hepatic function (bilirubin >2 times upper limit normal, alanine aminotransferase/
aspartate aminotransferase/alkaline phosphatase >3 times upper limit normal, or cirrhosis)¼1 or 2 points; stroke (hemorrhagic or ischemic)¼1 point; bleeding history or
predisposition¼1 point; labile INR (time in therapeutic range <60%)¼1 point; elderly age $65 years¼1 point; drugs (antiplatelet agents or nonsteroidal anti-
inflammatory drugs) or excessive alcohol intake (8 units/week)¼1 or 2 points. †Child-Pugh scoring: the severity of liver disease, primarily cirrhosis in patients with
documented liver disease. Child-Pugh A (mild): 5 to 6 points; Child-Pugh B (moderate): 7 to 9 points; Child-Pugh C (severe): 10 to 15 points. The score is based on the 5
variables: encephalopathy (none¼1 point, grade 1 and 2¼2 points, grade 3 and 4¼3 points); ascites (none¼1 point, slight¼2 points, moderate¼3 points); total bilirubin
(<2 mg/mL¼1 point, 2-3 mg/mL¼2 points, >3 mg/mL¼3 points); albumin (>3.5 mg/mL¼1 point, 2.8-3.5 mg/mL¼2 points, <2.8 mg/mL¼3 points); INR (<1.7¼1 point,
1.7-2.2¼2 points, >2.2¼3 points). Original figure created by the 2023 Atrial Fibrillation Guideline Writing Committee. CrCL indicates creatinine clearance based on actual
body weight; DOAC, direct oral anticoagulant; and INR, international normalized ratio.
44 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
2. Warfarin remains the preferred agent in patients with 3. A significant number of patients with nonvalvular AF
AF receiving CYP3A4/p-glycoprotein–inducing agents, are receiving DOAC off-label doses not compliant with
or moderate-severe mitral stenosis or mechanical heart labeling.15-18 A meta-analysis of cohort studies showed
valve. Also, warfarin may be selected over DOACs in that inappropriately lower DOAC doses are significantly
patients with AF due to higher cost or intolerances of associated with higher stroke or systemic embolism
DOACs. The optimal INR control, with a therapeutic risks compared with the standard labeled doses (OR,
INR goal of 2 to 3, needs to be achieved through the 1.21 [95% CI, 1.02-1.43]; P¼0.03), but no significant
appropriate drug-drug interaction management, differences in bleeding risks were observed (OR, 1.03
vitamin K dietary education, and routine INR moni- [95% CI, 0.92-1.15]; P¼0.62). 11 Of note, 9 of 16 included
toring. A systematic review of 47 studies found that studies were performed in Asia, while 4 studies in the
time in therapeutic INR range showed negative corre- United States, 2 studies in Europe, and 1 worldwide
lation with risks of thromboembolism (R, –0.59; study were included. Another meta-analysis of obser-
P¼0.01) and major bleeding (R, –0.59; P¼0.002). 8 An vational studies found that inappropriately higher
RCT revealed that a weekly vitamin K dietary modifi- DOAC doses were significantly associated with higher
cation significantly achieved a therapeutic INR more risks of ischemic stroke/systemic embolism (hazard
frequently than a conventional group (74 versus 58%; ratio [HR], 1.26 [95% CI, 1.11-1.43]; P¼0.003) or major
P¼0.04) at 90 days after randomization.9 A meta- bleeding (HR, 1.30 [95% CI, 1.04-1.62]; P¼0.025)
analysis of 11 RCTs and 61 observational studies for compared with the standard doses. 12 In this study,
warfarin drug interactions found that the concomitant underdosing was also associated with a higher risk of
use of APT (odds ratio [OR], 1.74 [95% CI, 1.56-1.94]), net clinical outcome (HR, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.04-1.40];
nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (OR, 1.83 [95% P¼0.04) and all-cause death (HR, 1.24 [95% CI, 1.04-
CI, 1.29-2.59]), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors 1.48]; P¼0.02). Off-label dosing should be avoided to
(OR, 1.62 [95% CI, 1.42-1.85]), or antimicrobial agents optimize the efficacy and safety of DOACs.
(OR, 1.63 [95% CI, 1.45-1.83]) was significantly associ-
ated with higher risks of clinically relevant bleeding.10 6.4. Silent AF and Stroke of Undetermined Cause
1. In patients with stroke or TIA of undetermined cause, initial cardiac monitoring and, if needed, extended
2a B-R monitoring with an implantable loop recorder are reasonable to improve detection of AF. 1
2.0%), and 3 years (30% versus 3%).9 In FIND-AF (Future Implantable vs External Monitoring) RCT also showed a
Innovations in Novel Detection of Atrial Fibrillation), significantly greater proportion of patients with AF
which compared repeated sets of 10-day Holter monitoring detected at 1 year with prolonged monitoring.13 Additional
(at baseline, 3-month, and 6-month timepoints) to con- studies are needed, however, to determine whether
ventional 24-Holter in patients $60 years of age with extended cardiac monitoring improves long-term post-
recent stroke, higher rates of detection were associated stroke outcomes.
with repeated monitoring (14% versus 5%; absolute dif-
6.4.1. Oral Anticoagulation for Device-Detected Atrial High-Rate
ference, 9.0% [95% CI, 3.4-14.5]; P¼0.002).10 Finally, the
Episodes Among Patients Without a Previous Diagnosis of AF
PER DIEM (Post-Embolic Rhythm Detection with
Recommendations for Oral Anticoagulation for Device-Detected Atrial High-Rate Episodes Among Patients Without a Previous
Diagnosis of AF
Referenced studies that support the recommendations are summarized in the Online Data Supplement.
1. For patients with a device-detected atrial high-rate episode (AHRE) lasting ‡24 hours1 and with a
2a B-NR CHA 2DS 2-VASc score ‡2 or equivalent stroke risk, 2 it is reasonable to initiate oral anticoagulation3 within a
SDM framework that considers episode duration and individual patient risk.
2. For patients with a device-detected AHRE lasting between 5 minutes and 24 hours and with a CHA 2DS 2-
2b B-NR VASc score ‡3 or equivalent stroke risk, 2 it may be reasonable to initiate anticoagulation within a SDM
framework that considers episode duration and individual patient risk.
3. Patients with a device-detected AHRE lasting <5 minutes and without another indication for oral anti-
3: No Benefit B-NR coagulation should not receive oral anticoagulation. 4,5
F I G U R E 1 2 Consideration of Oral Anticoagulation for Device-Detected AHREs According to Patient Stroke Risk by CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc Score and Episode Duration
A potential approach to patients with SCAF could consider both patient risk (as gauged by the CHA2DS2-VASc score) and SCAF burden/duration. Circle A indicates
patients at low risk or with short and infrequent AHREs do not require anticoagulation; Circle B, patients with intermediate risk and AHREs lasting >6 min to 24 h are an
uncertain population but are currently under study in 2 prospective randomized controlled trials; and Circle C, patients at high risk with longer episodes could be
considered reasonable candidates for anticoagulation, although the precise threshold for SCAF duration remains uncertain. Reproduced with permission from Nose-
worthy et al.13 Copyright 2019 American Heart Association, Inc. Modified from Freedman et al.14 Copyright 2017 Springer Nature Limited. AF indicates atrial fibrillation;
AHRE, atrial high-rate episode; ARTESiA, Apixaban for the Reduction of Thrombo-Embolism in Patients With Device-Detected Subclinical Atrial Fibrillation trial;
COMMANDER HF, A Study to Assess the Effectiveness and Safety of Rivaroxaban in Reducing the Risk of Death, Myocardial Infarction, or Stroke in Participants With
Heart Failure and Coronary Artery Disease Following an Episode of Decompensated Heart Failure; COMPASS, Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation
Strategies; ECG, electrocardiogram; NOAH, Non–Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Atrial High Rate Episodes Trial; OAC, oral anticoagulation;
and SCAF, subclinical atrial fibrillation. Female sex is treated as a modifier in the computation of the CHA2DS2-VASc score.
CHA 2DS2-VASc score. In ASSERT, AHREs lasting >6 exceeded 2% among patients with a sex-modified
minutes to 24 hours were not associated with stroke or CHA2DS 2-VASc score $5.2
systemic embolism compared with patients without 3. Brief episodes of subclinical AF are at low risk of clin-
AHREs.1 The CHA2DS2-VASc score of this subpopulation ical events. In RATE (Registry of Atrial Tachycardia and
was 2.21.0 (meanSD). In the aforementioned study Atrial Fibrillation), patients with clinical events such as
linking administrative claims data to a device database hospitalization, death, or stroke were more likely than
in which continuous rhythm monitoring data were those without to have AHREs with either onset or offset
available, the risk of stroke and systemic embolism off of an adjudicated, single ECG (31.9% versus 22.1%
anticoagulation exceeded 1% among patients with a among patients with pacemakers and 28.7% and 20.2%
sex-modified CHA2 DS2-VASc score of 3 to 4 and among patients with implantable cardioverter-
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 47
-, 2023:-–- ---
defibrillators [ICDs]).4 AHREs >5 minutes are highly contraindicated in some patients due to an excess risk of
correlated with AF and AFL, whereas shorter episodes major bleeding. Surgical and percutaneous techniques to
often represent other tachyarrhythmias. 9 To remove occlude the LAA have been developed to reduce the risk
most episodes of oversensing, AHREs lasting #5 mi- of ischemic stroke. These techniques have the potential to
nutes were excluded from analysis of MOST (Mode obviate the need for or supplement long-term oral anti-
Selection Trial).10 A similar threshold was used in coagulation in select patients. Surgical LAAO is a partic-
several subsequent key studies to exclude spurious ularly important consideration in patients with AF who
events.1,3,5,11,12 undergo cardiac surgery.
6.5. Nonpharmacological Stroke Prevention 6.5.1. Percutaneous Approaches to Occlude the LAA
1. In patients with AF, a moderate to high risk of stroke (CHA 2DS 2-VASc score ‡2), and a contraindication
2a B-NR (Table 14) to long-term oral anticoagulation due to a nonreversible cause, percutaneous LAAO (pLAAO) is
reasonable.1-4
2. In patients with AF and a moderate to high risk of stroke and a high risk of major bleeding on oral
2b B-R anticoagulation, pLAAO may be a reasonable alternative to oral anticoagulation based on patient pref-
erence, with careful consideration of procedural risk and with the understanding that the evidence for
oral anticoagulation is more extensive.1-3,5,6
1. In patients with AF undergoing cardiac surgery with a CHA 2DS 2-VASc score ‡2 or equivalent stroke risk,
1 A surgical LAA exclusion, in addition to continued anticoagulation, is indicated to reduce the risk of stroke
and systemic embolism. 1-3
2. In patients with AF undergoing cardiac surgery and LAA exclusion, a surgical technique resulting in
1 A absence of flow across the suture line and a stump of <1 cm as determined by intraoperative trans-
esophageal echocardiography should be used. 1,4,5
3. In patients with AF undergoing cardiac surgery with CHA 2DS 2-VASc score ‡2 or equivalent stroke risk, the
2b A benefit of surgical LAA exclusion in the absence of continued anticoagulation to reduce the risk of stroke
and systemic embolism is uncertain. 1-3
addition to OAC provides a 33% reduction in risk of stroke thromboembolism is associated with incomplete S-
and systemic embolism.1 LAAO 5,12; however, many studies do not report
LAAOS III enrolled only patients with preexisting AF; assessment of occlusion success. 9 This inconsistency
evidence of the effectiveness of S-LAAO in patients has likely contributed to the variability in outcome. 7,9
without AF is inconsistent and suggests the benefit of LAAOS III permitted 4 techniques: amputation and
adjunctive S-LAAO is unclear in patients without preop- closure (which was promoted as the preferred tech-
erative AF. 7,9 The results of ongoing RCTs in this popu- nique), used in 56%; stapler closure, used in 11%;
lation are awaited. double-layer linear closure (if confirmed by TEE), used
in 14%; or an approved LAAO device, used in 15%.
Recommendation-Specific Supportive Text
Other techniques were approved on a case-by-case
1. LAAOS III was performed with 4770 patients with AF basis (4%). Intraoperative TEE was recommended to
and a CHA2DS 2-VASc score $2 undergoing cardiac sur- assess successful closure, defined as absence of flow
gery randomized to S-LAAO or no S-LAAO. Intra- across the suture line and a stump of <1 cm. If the
operative transesophageal echocardiogram (TEE) was initial closure was unsuccessful, additional suturing
recommended to assess successful closure using an was performed for repair. Contemporary data show
endorsed technique. Oral anticoagulation was closure success of >95% using a surgical clip device. 13
continued postoperatively. After a mean follow-up of In the LAAOS series, the mean cross-clamp and
3.8 years, the primary endpoint of stroke or systemic bypass times were similar, and perioperative bleeding
embolism occurred in 4.8% of the S-LAAO group and was not increased in the S-LAAO group. 1,4 These data
7.0% of the no S-LAAO group (HR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.53- support the importance of complete S-LAAO in
0.85]; P¼0.001). Mortality rate, cross-clamp and bypass achieving beneficial outcomes.
time, chest tube output, and bleeding were not 3. In LAAOS III, S-LAAO reduced stroke and thrombo-
different between groups. More than 75% of subjects in embolism by 33% in addition to OAC. LAAOS III was
both groups received OAC. These data indicate S-LAAO not designed to resolve whether oral anticoagulation
provides additional benefit to oral anticoagulation can be safely stopped after S-LAAO; at hospital
without increasing risk of adverse events. discharge, >80% of subjects in both groups were
These findings cannot be extrapolated to patients receiving OAC, with >75% on OAC at the 3-year visit.1
without AF or patients who are not candidates for OAC. A systematic review and meta-analysis focusing on
Most subjects underwent CABG or valve surgery, and the the effects of anticoagulation found no statistically
mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4.2. Surgical AF ablation significant difference in stroke rates of S-LAAO/no S-
was performed in one-third of both groups. Patients un- LAAO subjects on OAC versus off OAC, with high
dergoing mechanical valve surgery, transplant, off-pump heterogeneity noted for both ischemic events and
bypass, left ventricular assistive device surgery, and mortality, 14 and findings are subject to confounding
congenital heart disease (CHD) cases were excluded. by indication and the potentially beneficial effects of
A subsequent meta-analysis of 5 RCTs and 22 surgical AF ablation. The LAACS (Left Atrial
observational studies including 540,111 patients showed a Appendage Closure with Surgery) study of 187 sub-
significant decrease in stroke and thromboembolism with jects undergoing CABG, valve surgery, or both who
S-LAAO.11 The postoperative mortality rate did not differ were randomized to S-LAAO versus no S-LAAO
but, in follow-up, was reduced in the S-LAAO group after 2 showed a reduction in the risk of stroke in the S-
years. No difference in major bleeding, all-cause rehospi- LAAO group, independent of anticoagulation status.15
talizations, or cross-clamp time was observed.11 These results must be interpreted with caution,
2. Substantial heterogeneity in S-LAAO methods exists in however, because the study was not powered to
the literature, and not all techniques effectively demonstrate a reduction in stroke, and substantial
exclude the LAA. 4 An increased risk of stroke and crossover occurred.
50 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
1. In patients with AF receiving dabigatran who develop life-threatening bleeding, treatment with idar-
1 B-NR ucizumab is recommended to rapidly reverse dabigatran’s anticoagulation effect. 1-3
2. In patients with AF receiving dabigatran who develop life-threatening bleeding, treatment with activated
2a C-LD prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) is reasonable to reverse dabigatran’s anticoagulation effect if
idarucizumab is unavailable. 4,5
B-NR* 3. In patients with AF receiving factor Xa inhibitors who develop life-threatening bleeding, treatment with
1 either andexanet alfa (apixaban or rivaroxaban,* edoxaban†) or 4-factor prothrombin complex concen-
C-LD†
trate† is recommended to rapidly reverse factor Xa inhibitor’s anticoagulation effect. 6,7
4. In patients with AF receiving warfarin who develop life-threatening bleeding, treatment with 4-factor
1 A prothrombin complex concentrate (if available) in addition to intravenous vitamin K is recommended to
rapidly achieve INR correction over fresh frozen plasma and intravenous vitamin K treatment. 8-10
5. In patients with AF who develop major gastrointestinal bleeding, resumption of oral anticoagulation
2b B-NR therapy may be reasonable after correction of reversible causes of bleeding and reassessment of its long-
term benefits and risks with a multidisciplinary team approach during SDM with patients. 11,12
*B-NR LOE applies to data on apixaban or rivaroxaban. †C-LD LOE applies to data on edoxaban.
Class Humanized monoclonal antibody A recombinant modified human factor PCC: coagulation factors II, Nonactivated factors II, IX, and X
fragment binding to dabigatran and Xa protein binding and VII, IX, and X Activated VII
neutralizing anticoagulation effects sequestering the factor Anticoagulation proteins C
Xa inhibitors and S
FDA Reversal of dabigatran effects Reversal of apixaban or rivaroxaban The urgent reversal for acute Control and prevention of bleeding
indications n For emergency surgery/urgent n For life-threatening or major bleeding or need episodes, perioperative
procedures uncontrolled bleeding for an urgent surgery/ management, prophylaxis to
invasive procedure in prevent or reduce bleeding
n Life-threatening or uncontrolled
patients receiving VKAs frequency in patients with
bleeding
hemophilia A and B
Dosing 5-g (2 separate vials of 2.5 g/vial) Low-dose regimen: 400-mg bolus at a Warfarin reversal based on Dabigatran-associated life-threatening
intravenous infusion over 5 min. target rate of 30 mg/min followed pretreatment INR (units bleeding: 50 units/kg once
Additional 5 g may be given if by 4 mg/min for up to 120 min of factor IX):
reappearance of bleeding with High-dose regimen: 800-mg bolus at a 1. INR 2–<4: 25 units/kg
elevated coagulation parameters target rate of 30 mg/min followed (up to 2500 units)
have been observed or patients by 8 mg/min for up to 120 min
2. INR 4–6: 35 units/kg
require second emergency The recommended dosing is based on
(up to 3500 units)
surgery/procedure and elevated apixaban or rivaroxaban, dose, and
coagulation parameters time since the patient’s last dose of 3. INR >6: 50 units/kg
apixaban or rivaroxaban (up to 5000 units)
Oral factor Xa inhibitors:
2000 units once or 25 to
50 units/kg
Duration 12-24 h 2h 8h 12 h
Monitoring Coagulation parameters (aPTT, Current commercial anti-Xa activity Warfarin reversal: Repeat INR N/A
diluted thrombin time, or ecarin assays are unsuitable for measuring within 30 min after the
clotting time) between 12 and factor Xa activities after administration
24 h to assess redistribution of andexanet alfa use
dabigatran from peripheral to
plasma
Others Risk of serious reactions (hypoglycemia, No FDA indication for other factor Xa May not be indicated for It does not include heparin
hypophosphatemia, metabolic inhibitors other than apixaban or patients with Coagulation parameters do not
acidosis, increase in uric acid, rivaroxaban thromboembolic events correlate with the drug’s efficacy
acute liver failure) in patients Andexanet alfa may interfere with the in the previous 3 mo Not effective to reverse factor Xa
with hereditary fructose anticoagulation effect of heparin It includes heparin inhibitors
intolerance (due to sorbitol US black box warning: Serious and Administer intravenous
excipient 4 g in each 5 g of life-threatening adverse events vitamin K 10 mg over
idarucizumab) (arterial and venous 10-20 min in addition to
No procoagulant effect based on thromboembolism, myocardial 4-factor PCC
endogenous thrombin potential infarction, ischemic stroke,
cardiac arrest, sudden deaths)
prospective multicenter cohort study compared the PCC completely reversed rivaroxaban’s effect based
use of activated PCC in 14 patients with dabigatran- the prothrombin time, but it did not reverse dabiga-
associated major bleeding compared with historical tran’s effect based on the coagulation tests (aPTT,
matched cases.4 The study was prematurely stopped ecarin clotting time, and thrombin time). Four-factor
due to the availability of idarucizumab in the market. PCC may not be appropriate for dabigatran-associated
The effectiveness of activated PCC was assessed based major bleeding management until further investiga-
on the assessment guide rating from good, moderate, tion is performed in prospective studies.
and poor. Nine patients (64%) were rated as good, 5 3. The ANNEXA 4 (Andexanet Alfa, a Novel Antidote to
patients (36%) as moderate, and none as poor. No the Anticoagulation Effects of Factor Xa Inhibitors)
thromboembolic events were found. A randomized, trial evaluated the use of andexanet alfa in adult pa-
placebo-controlled crossover trial in 12 healthy sub- tients with acute major bleeding (safety population,
jects evaluated the reversal effect of 4-factor PCC on n¼254; efficacy population, n¼254) receiving factor Xa
rivaroxaban or dabigatran’s effect.5 It showed 4-factor inhibitors (apixaban 55%, rivaroxaban 36%, edoxaban
52 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
TABLE 16 Bleeding Events (Percentage Per Year) in DOAC Pivotal Clinical Trials
Bleeding Event RE-LY (n¼18,113) ARISTOTLE (n¼18,201) ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 (n¼21,105) ROCKET AF (n¼14,264)
Major bleeding Dabigatran 150 mg 3.11% (RR, 0.93 Apixaban 2.13% (HR, 0.69 Edoxaban 60 mg 2.75% vs warfarin Rivaroxaban 3.6% vs warfarin 3.4%
[95% CI, 0.81–1.07]; P¼0.31) [95% CI, 0.60–0.80]; 3.43% (HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.71– (HR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.90–1.20];
Dabigatran 110 mg 2.71% (RR, 0.80 P<0.001) 0.91]; P<0.001) P¼0.58)
[95% CI, 0.69–0.93]; P¼0.003) Warfarin 3.09% Edoxaban 30 mg 1.61% vs warfarin
Warfarin 3.36% 3.43% (HR, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.41–
0.55]; P<0.001)
Gastrointestinal Dabigatran 150 mg 1.51% vs warfarin Apixaban 0.76% (HR, 0.89 Edoxaban 60 mg 1.51% (HR, 1.23 Rivaroxaban 3.2% (HR not reported;
bleeding 1.02% (RR, 1.50 [95% CI, 1.19–1.89]; [95% CI, 0.70–1.15]; [95% CI, 1.02–1.50] ; P¼0.03) P<0.001)
P<0.001) P¼0.37) Edoxaban 30 mg 0.82% (HR, 0.67 Warfarin 2.2%
Dabigatran 110 mg 1.12% vs warfarin Warfarin 0.86% [95% CI, 0.53–0.83]; P<0.001)
1.02% (RR, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.86–1.41]; Warfarin 1.23%
P¼0.43)
Intracranial Dabigatran 150 mg 0.30% (RR, 0.40 Apixaban 0.33% (HR, 0.42 Edoxaban 60 mg 0.39% (HR, 0.47 Rivaroxaban 0.80% (HR, 0.67
bleeding [95% CI, 0.27–0.60]; P<0.001) [95% CI, 0.30–0.58]; [95% CI, 0.34–0.63]; P<0.001) [95% CI, 0.47–0.93]; P¼0.02)
Dabigatran 110 mg 0.23% (RR, 0.31 P<0.001) Edoxaban 30 mg 0.26% (HR, 0.30 Warfarin 1.20%
[95% CI, 0.20–0.47]; P<0.001) Warfarin 0.80% [95% CI, 0.21–0.43]; P<0.001)
Warfarin 0.74% Warfarin 0.85%
Adapted with permission from Kido et al.22 Copyright 2021 American College of Clinical Pharmacy.
ARISTOTLE indicates Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation; DOAC, direct anticoagulant; ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48, Effective Anti-
coagulation with Factor Xa Next Generation in Atrial Fibrillation – Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 48; HR indicates hazard ratio; RE-LY, Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term
Anticoagulation Therapy; ROCKET AF, Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in
Atrial Fibrillation; and RR, relative risk.
3%, and enoxaparin 6%). 6 It found that after the bolus analysis (79% [95% CI, 64%-89%]); however, throm-
administration, the median anti-factor Xa activity botic events occurred in 12 of 67 patients (18%) during
decreased by 89%. Twelve hours after the andexanet the 30-day follow-up. Currently, andexanet alfa is
infusion, clinical hemostasis was adjudicated as FDA-approved for only apixaban- or rivaroxaban-
excellent or good in 37 of 47 patients in the efficacy associated life-threatening or uncontrolled bleeding,
because only limited data are available for other factor 5. A meta-analysis of 10 cohort studies compared anti-
Xa inhibitors. For 4-factor PCC, a meta-analysis of 22 coagulation resumption (n¼2,080) versus discontinua-
observational studies compared andexanet alfa tion (n¼2,296) after gastrointestinal bleeding in patients
(n¼438) with PCC (n¼1278) in patients with acute receiving OACs for AF, venous thromboembolism, or
bleeding associated with oral factor Xa inhibitors. 7 It prosthetic valve.11 Restarting anticoagulation was
showed that mean hemostatic effectiveness for significantly associated with higher risks of recurrent
andexanet alfa was 82% at 12 hours and 71% at 24 hours gastrointestinal bleeding (10.1% versus 5.3%) but also
versus 88% at 12 hours and 76% at 24 hours for PCC. with lower risks of thromboembolic events (6.3% versus
Mean 30-day venous thromboembolism rate was 5.0% 10.6% ) and a reduction in all-cause mortality (21.3%
in the andexanet alfa group versus 1.9% in the PCC versus 31%). Another meta-analysis of 7 observational
group. However, the meta-analysis had more signifi- studies in patients with AF found no significant differ-
cant methodological issues than the ANNEXA 4 trial. ence in stroke rates between resumption and discon-
Thus, the level of evidence for the 4-factor PCC use was tinuation groups (9.1% versus 8.3%; OR, 0.75 [95% CI,
downgraded. 0.37-1.51]).12 Resumption of anticoagulation therapy was
4. A meta-analysis of 13 studies (5 randomized trials and 8 associated with significant reduction in any thrombo-
observational studies) compared 4-factor PCC with embolic events (8.0% versus 12.2%; OR, 0.54 [95% CI,
fresh frozen plasma for warfarin-associated bleeding or 0.43-0.68]) and all-cause mortality (10.8% absolute risk
urgent surgery/procedure.8 Four-factor PCC use was reduction; OR, 0.38 [95% CI, 0.24-0.60]), at the expense
significantly associated with lower risk of all-cause of recurrent major bleeding (10.2% versus 5.0%). One
mortality (25.1% versus 28.8%; OR, 0.56 [95% CI, study found the optimal timing of resuming a VKA after
0.37-0.84]), higher probability to achieve INR correc- upper gastrointestinal bleeding was between 3 and 6
tion (60.6% versus 12.8%; OR, 10.8 [95% CI, 6.12- weeks, while other studies revealed that resuming a VKA
19.07]), shortened time to INR correction (–6.5 h [95% 1 week after gastrointestinal bleeding is the optimal
CI, –9.75 h to –3.24 h]), and lower risk of volume timing.19-21 There is a paucity of data evaluating the
overload (2.1% versus 8.8%; OR, 0.27 [95% CI, 0.13- timing of DOACs after gastrointestinal bleeding.
0.58]) compared with fresh frozen plasma. No signifi-
cant difference in thromboembolic events (4.2% versus
4.8%; OR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.44-1.89]; P¼0.81) was found.
6.6.1. Management of Patients With AF and ICH
1. In patients with AF and conditions associated with very high risk of thromboembolic events (>5%/year),
2a C-LD such as rheumatic heart disease or a mechanical heart valve, early (1-2 weeks) resumption of anti-
coagulation after ICH is reasonable to reduce the risk of thromboembolic events. 1
2. In patients with AF and ICH, delayed (4-8 weeks) resumption of anticoagulation may be considered to
2b C-LD balance the risks of thromboembolic and hemorrhagic complications after careful risk benefit assess-
ment. 2-5
3. In patients with AF and conditions associated with high risk of recurrent ICH (eg, cerebral amyloid
2b B-NR angiopathy) anticoagulation-sparing strategies (eg, LAAO) may be considered to reduce the risk of
recurrent hemorrhage. 6,7
hypertensive parenchymal hemorrhage, hemorrhagic addressing risks and benefits in this population. Pre-
transformation after ischemic stroke, cerebral amyloid vious observational reports evaluating risk of recurrent
angiopathy-associated hemorrhage, chronic subdural ICH, thromboembolism, and mortality in patients with
hemorrhage) are generally associated with higher risk of nonvalvular AF have suggested possible reduction in
recurrence. Clinical decision-making regarding the thromboembolic risk and mortality with resumption of
appropriateness of resumption in these patients is based anticoagulation but are limited by discordant patient
largely on individual risk-benefit calculations given the populations and study designs, predominant use of
lack of randomized data assessing safety and long-term VKAs, and potential selection biases.16-22 In a meta-
outcomes. For patients with ICH deemed at high risk of analysis of 2,452 patients with AF and ICH, resump-
recurrence, LAA closure may be a viable alternative to tion of OACs was associated with lower risk of ischemic
anticoagulation, although data on efficacy and safety are stroke (RR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.29-0.72]) and no difference
lacking in the ICH population. in risk of recurrent ICH compared with patients in
whom anticoagulation was not resumed2 (Table 17).
Recommendation-Specific Supportive Text
However, data are limited on the optimal timing for
1. Rheumatic valvular disease is associated with a >5% resumption. In an analysis of 2,619 ICH survivors with
per year risk of embolic events.8 In patients with me- AF, a composite net benefit minimizing risk of bleeding
chanical heart valves, the rate can range from 4% to and thromboembolic complications occurred when
23% per year depending on the type and position of the
prosthetic.9-11 These rates are even higher in patients Risk Factors for Thromboembolic Complications
TABLE 17
with concurrent AF but are significantly reduced with and Recurrent ICH
the use of VKAs. Data are limited that explore the Factors Associated With High Risk of Factors Associated With High
safety and timing of anticoagulation resumption in Thromboembolism Risk of Recurrent ICH
patients with ICH and high-risk valvular disease. In 1 Mechanical heart valve Suspected cerebral amyloid
angiopathy
observational analysis of 137 patients with ICH and
Rheumatic valve disease Lobar IPH
mechanical heart valves, resuming anticoagulation
Previous history of stroke/ Older age
within 2 weeks from index ICH was associated with thromboembolism
increased hemorrhagic complications (HR, 7.06 [95%
Hypercoagulable state (eg, active >10 cerebral microbleeds on MRI
CI, 2.33-21.37]). 1 However, in balancing the risk of malignancy, genetic thrombophilia)
hemorrhagic with thrombotic complications, the High CHA2DS2-VASc score (>5) Disseminated cortical superficial
optimal window of resumption was found to be be- siderosis on MRI
tween 1 and 2 weeks post-ICH after weighing individual Poorly controlled hypertension
anticoagulation was resumed at 7 to 8 weeks after ICH.3 with associated cortical superficial siderosis.24 Thus, in
In a retrospective study that included 1,752 patients patients with AF and cerebral amyloid angiopathy-
with OAC-related ICH across 3 Danish registries, anti- related ICH, alternative strategies for secondary
coagulation resumed a median of 34 days was associ- stroke prevention are often pursued. The LAA is
ated with an adjusted HR of ischemic stroke, systemic considered the most common site for thrombus for-
embolism, and all-cause mortality of 0.55 (95% CI, mation in patients with AF. 25,26 Two RCTs—PROTECT
4
0.39-0.78) compared with no anticoagulation. In AF study and PREVAIL study—compared rates of stroke
another meta-analysis of 8 observational studies, and mortality after LAA closure versus VKA in patients
resuming OAC was associated with reduced risk of with AF.6,7 In a meta-analysis examining 5-year out-
ischemic stroke without increased risk of recurrent ICH comes in the 2 RCTs, LAA closure was associated with
at a median time to resumption of 10 to 39 days 5 significant reductions in hemorrhagic stroke, disabling
(Table 17). Of note, DOACs have been associated with and fatal stroke, and all-cause mortality, with compa-
lower rates of major bleeding complications compared rable rates of stroke and systemic embolism compared
with VKAs. 23 with warfarin. 27 Of note, both studies excluded pa-
3. Anticoagulation is used for stroke risk reduction in tients who were not candidates for anticoagulation.
patients with AF at risk of thromboembolism. For some Additionally, newer treatment options such as epicar-
patients, however, risk of recurrent ICH may be pro- dial LAA clipping are emerging for stroke prevention
hibitively high with anticoagulation. Cerebral amyloid without need for postprocedure APT. 28,29
angiopathy is the most common cause of lobar hem-
orrhage in older adults and is associated with annual
ICH recurrence risk that ranges from 5% in patients
6.7. Periprocedural Management
with isolated microhemorrhages to 26.9% in patients
B-R*
1. In patients with AF (excluding those with recent stroke or TIA, or a mechanical valve) and on oral anti-
1 coagulation with either warfarin* or DOAC† who are scheduled to undergo an invasive procedure or
B-NR†
surgery, temporary cessation of oral anticoagulation without bridging anticoagulation is recommended. 1-4
2. In patients with AF on warfarin anticoagulation and an annual predicted risk of thromboembolism of ‡5%
1 A undergoing pacemaker or defibrillator implantation or generator change, continued anticoagulation is
recommended in preference to interruption of warfarin and bridging anticoagulation with heparin to
reduce the risk of pocket hematoma. 5-7
3. In patients with AF with CHA2 DS 2-VASc score ‡2 or equivalent risk of stroke, on DOAC anticoagulation and
2a A undergoing pacemaker or defibrillator implantation or generator change, either uninterrupted or inter-
rupted DOAC is reasonable.8-10
4. In patients with AF on DOAC and scheduled to undergo an invasive procedure or surgery that cannot be
1 B-NR performed safely on uninterrupted anticoagulation, the timing of interruption of DOAC should be guided
by the specific agent, renal function, and the bleeding risk of the procedure (Table 18).4,11,12
5. In patients with AF on DOAC that has been interrupted for an invasive procedure or surgery, in general,
2a B-NR resumption of anticoagulation the day after low bleeding risk surgery and between the evening of the
second day and the evening of the third day after high bleeding risk surgery is reasonable, as long as
hemostasis has been achieved and further bleeding is not anticipated.4
6. In patients with AF on warfarin anticoagulation, who are undergoing surgeries or procedures for which
3: Harm B-R they are holding warfarin, except in patients with mechanical valve or recent stroke or TIA, bridging
anticoagulation with low-molecular-weight heparin should not be administered.1,3,13-15
*B-R LOE applies to the data on warfarin. †B-NR LOE applies to the data on DOAC.
facilitate hemostasis and avoid intra- and postoperative Timing of Discontinuation of OACs in Patients
bleeding. Considerations include the bleeding risk of the With AF Scheduled to Undergo an Invasive Pro-
TABLE 18
procedure, consequences of bleeding should it occur, cedure or Surgery in Whom Anticoagulation Is to
Be Interrupted
patient-specific risk factors, and thrombotic risk while off
anticoagulation. Invasive procedures and surgeries have Low Bleeding Risk High Bleeding Risk
Anticoagulant Procedure Procedure
been divided into high and low bleeding risks in several
Apixaban (CrCl >25 mL/min)* 1 d† 2d
different classifications.16 Generally, endoscopic, dental
extraction, many ophthalmologic procedures, and percu- Dabigatran (CrCl >50 mL/min) 1d 2d
taneous vascular access, such as cardiac catheterization, Dabigatran (CrCl 30-50 mL/min) 2d 4d
are considered to be of low bleeding risk. Higher bleeding Edoxaban (CrCl >15 mL/min) 1d 2d
risk surgeries include intra-abdominal, pelvic, orthope- Rivaroxaban (CrCl >30 mL/min) 1d 2d
dic, neurosurgical, cardiac, and transvenous lead extrac- Warfarin 5 d for a target 5d
INR <1.5
tion procedures. Very high bleeding risk procedures
2-3 d for a target
include neuraxial anesthesia and spinal surgery. Available INR <2
data do not suggest high rates of bleeding from these
*For patients on DOAC with creatinine clearance lower than the values in the table, few
procedures, although bleeding could cause significant clinical data exist. Consider holding for an additional 1 to 3 days, especially for high
bleeding risk procedures.
consequences. 17 Patient-specific factors include abnormal
†The number of days is the number of full days before the day of surgery in which the
liver and kidney function, bleeding or clotting disorders, patient does not take any dose of anticoagulant. The drug is also not taken the day of
surgery. For example, in the case of holding a twice daily drug for 1 day, if the drug is
concomitant antiplatelet or nonsteroidal anti-
taken at 8 pm, and surgery is at 8 am, at the time of surgery, it will be 36 hours since the
inflammatory use, alcohol, and anemia. Recent bleeding last dose was taken.
or thromboembolism may increase the risk for recurrent AF indicates atrial fibrillation; CrCl, creatinine clearance; DOAC, direct oral anti-
coagulation; INR, international normalized ratio; and OAC, oral anticoagulant.
events. To put thrombotic risk in perspective, the inci-
dence of thromboembolism while anticoagulation was
temporarily held has generally been <1%. 3,18
interruption of anticoagulation, without bridging, may
Recommendation-Specific Supportive Text
provide a low risk of bleeding with an acceptable risk of
1. To mitigate thromboembolic risk during interruption stroke/TIA. Patients with mechanical valves, and
of warfarin therapy for a procedure or surgery, recent stroke/TIA, or other high-risk markers, were not
“bridging” anticoagulation can be administered. How- included in most studies and may still benefit from
ever, observational studies consistently showed an bridging anticoagulation: in these scenarios, manage-
increased risk of bleeding without a difference in ment should be individualized.
3 2. Evidence has accrued that periprocedural unfractio-
thromboembolic risk with this strategy. The BRIDGE
(Bridging Anticoagulation in Patients who Require nated or low-molecular-weight heparin bridging has
Temporary Interruption of Warfarin Therapy for an been associated with an increased risk of pocket he-
Elective Invasive Procedure or Surgery) trial included matoma after pacemaker or ICD procedures. 19 BRUISE-
patients with a mean CHADS 2 score of 2.3 (range, 1-6); CONTROL (Bridge or Continue Coumadin for Device
61.7% of patients had a CHADS2 score <3. 1 In this study, Surgery Randomized Controlled Trial) randomized
discussed in more depth below, interruption of patients with AF (88%) or a mechanical valve with an
warfarin without bridging anticoagulation was supe- estimated annual stroke risk of $5%, and undergoing
rior to bridging. 1 In a meta-analysis of 6 observational elective device surgery, to continued warfarin versus
studies reporting on patients not at high thromboem- warfarin interruption with bridging anticoagulation.
bolic risk receiving prophylactic dose or no bridging The incidence of clinically significant pocket hema-
had an overall thromboembolic event rate of 0.6% (11 toma was >4 times higher in the bridging group. 5
3 Several other procedures have been performed on un-
of 1,702). A similar RCT has not been done in the
DOAC era, given the ease of brief interruption of DOAC interrupted anticoagulation. 20 Further study is needed
therapy; however, observational studies have shown to define which procedures, in which patients, can
similar results. 2 The PAUSE (Perioperative Anti- safely be performed with uninterrupted anti-
coagulation Use for Surgery Evaluation) cohort study, coagulation. Lead extraction procedures are generally
discussed below, enrolling patients with a mean considered high bleeding risk and therefore should be
CHADS 2 score of 2.1 (range, 1-6) and CHA2DS 2-VASc treated as such (high bleeding risk procedures in
score of 3.5 (range, 1-9), found a low incidence of Table 18) and warfarin interrupted, with occasional
thromboembolic events when DOAC was briefly inter- exceptions.
rupted without bridging.4 This suggests that in pa- 3. Two RCTs and several observational studies have
tients at low-to-moderate thromboembolic risk, shown little or no difference in the risk of pocket
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 57
-, 2023:-–- ---
Colors correspond to Table 2. AF indicates atrial fibrillation; CHA2DS2-VASc, congestive heart failure, hypertension, age $75 y (doubled), diabetes mellitus, prior stroke
or transient ischemic attack or thromboembolism (doubled), vascular disease, age 65 to 74 y, sex category; DOAC, direct oral anticoagulant; ICD, implantable
cardioverter-defibrillator; TE, thromboembolism; and TIA, transient ischemic attack.
hematoma and thromboembolic events in patients patients 24 to 48 hours after the last drug intake.11
with AF anticoagulated with DOACs and undergoing Similar results were observed for apixaban.12 A drug
8-10
device surgery. Therefore, brief interruption of “hold” of 48 hours in clinical practice typically means 2
DOAC therapy (low bleeding risk procedures in Table 18 full days without drug intake, in addition to the day of
may be preferable for many, while uninterrupted DOAC the procedure, leading to a longer interval between last
may be preferred for those at particularly high throm- drug intake and procedure start longer than 48 hours,
boembolic risk. Lead extraction procedures are gener- usually an additional 12 hours. Meta-analysis of the
ally considered high bleeding risk and therefore should reports of periprocedural events from the pivotal trials
be treated as such (high bleeding risk procedures in of each of the 4 available DOACs suggested similar
Table 18) and DOAC interrupted, with occasional outcomes in patients on DOAC or warfarin, with
exceptions. reduced major bleeding during an uninterrupted strat-
4. To achieve the goals of reducing or eliminating antico- egy with DOACs.21 The PAUSE protocol was studied in
agulant effect at the time of surgery, while also mini- patients on apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban, and
mizing the time the patient spends without resulted in low rates of major bleeding (0.9%-1.85%)
anticoagulation to prevent thromboembolism, the and thromboembolism (<1%). A high rate (>90%) of
duration of cessation of anticoagulation should take minimal anticoagulant level (<50 ng/mL) was achieved.
into account both the pharmacokinetics and pharma- Similar results have been observed with edoxaban in
codynamics of the agent, the patient’s renal function, clinical practice. 22 Different protocols have not been
and the bleeding risk of the procedure. Direct mea- directly compared. Table 18 presents recommended
surement of DOAC levels is unavailable in clinical DOAC interruption times based on agent, renal func-
practice, but levels <30 ng/mL, which correspond to the tion, and the bleeding risk of the procedure.
expected plasma DOAC concentration reached after 3 5. The timing of resumption of interrupted anti-
half-lives, when most of the drug (87.5% of the Cmax) coagulation after surgery is a complex decision that
has been eliminated, is reached in two-thirds of should integrate patient and surgical characteristics.
58 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
Warfarin, which takes several days (usually 3-5) to Placebo Bridging Therapy for Patients Who Are at High
become therapeutic, can often be restarted the evening Risk for Arterial Thromboembolism) randomized pa-
of the procedure. Postoperative bridging anti- tients, about two-thirds of whom were undergoing
coagulation has not been shown to be generally bene- high bleeding risk procedures, and 79% of whom had
ficial.1,13 In the PAUSE study, DOACs were started on AF, to postoperative bridging with dalteparin or pla-
the first postoperative day for low bleeding risk pro- cebo until the INR was >1.9. All patients received
cedures and between the evening of the second and preoperative bridging. Bleeding and thromboembolism
third postoperative days for high bleeding risk pro- outcomes were similar.13 These studies also excluded
4
cedures. This resulted in a low risk of major bleeding. patients with recent bleeding or thromboembolism,
Input from the proceduralist should always be incor- and those undergoing spinal and neurological surgery,
porated into decisions. and in these cases, management should be individu-
6. Several studies have compared a strategy of bridging alized and may include bridging anticoagulation.1,13 A
anticoagulation with a comparator of no bridging in small randomized trial found that dental extractions
patients on anticoagulants who were scheduled to could be performed on uninterrupted warfarin without
undergo an invasive procedure or surgery. The BRIDGE bridging. 14 A large multicenter registry also did not
trial randomized 1,884 patients with AF or AFL to find a difference in thromboembolism, but an increase
bridging anticoagulation before and after the proced- in bleeding, in bridged patients. 15 Patients with me-
1
ure with dalteparin versus placebo. Almost 90% of chanical valves should be managed as outlined in the
patients were undergoing low bleeding risk proced- “2020 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Management of Pa-
ures. No bridging was superior to bridging with respect tients With Valvular Heart Disease.” 23
to major bleeding and was noninferior with respect to
thromboembolism, although the observed rate (0.4%)
6.8. Anticoagulation in Specific Populations
was lower than anticipated (1.0%). PERIOP2 (A Double
Blind Randomized Control Trial of Post-Operative Low 6.8.1. AF Complicating ACS or Percutaneous Coronary
1. In patients with AF and an increased risk for stroke who undergo PCI, DOACs are preferred over VKAs in
1 A combination with APT to reduce the risk of clinically relevant bleeding.1-5
2. In most patients with AF who take oral anticoagulation and undergo PCI, early discontinuation of aspirin
1 A (1-4 wk) and continuation of dual antithrombotic therapy with OAC and a P2Y12 inhibitor is preferred over
triple therapy (OAC, P2Y12 inhibitor, and aspirin) to reduce the risk of clinically relevant bleeding.1-4,6
Rivaroxaban and a Dose-Adjusted Oral Vitamin K and aspirin to reduce the risk of clinically relevant
Antagonist Treatment Strategy in Subjects with Atrial bleeding in patients with AF after PCI, including
Fibrillation who Undergo Percutaneous Coronary WOEST (What Is the Optimal Antiplatelet and Antico-
Intervention) (rivaroxaban), RE-DUAL PCI trial (Ran- agulant Therapy in Patients with Oral Anticoagulation
domized Evaluation of Dual Antithrombotic Therapy and Coronary Stenting) (VKA), PIONEER AF-PCI
with Dabigatran versus Triple Therapy with Warfarin in (rivaroxaban), RE-DUAL (dabigatran), and AUGUSTUS
Patients with Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Undergo- (apixaban).1,2,4,6 A meta-analysis of PIONEER AF-PCI,
ing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) (dabigatran), RE-DUAL, and AUGUSTUS demonstrated a 40% rela-
and AUGUSTUS (Open-Label, 22 Factorial, Random- tive risk reduction for International Society on
ized, Controlled Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Safety of Thrombosis and Haemostasis major bleeding in dual
Apixaban vs Vitamin K Antagonist and Aspirin vs therapy regimens compared with triple therapy (OR,
Aspirin Placebo in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and 0.598 [95% CI, 0.491-0.727]; P<0.001).5 Patients in the
Acute Coronary Syndrome and/or Percutaneous Coro- intervention group received varying duration of triple
nary Intervention) (apixaban), showed a 42% relative therapy with aspirin after PCI up to 7 days. This meta-
risk reduction for major bleeding in DOAC-based regi- analysis showed that DAT with DOAC and P2Y12 in-
mens compared with VKA-based regimens (OR, 0.577 hibitor was associated with an increased risk of stent
[95% CI, 0.477-0.698]; P<0.001). 5 There was no statis- thrombosis (OR, 1.672 [95% CI, 1.022-2.733]; P¼0.041)
tically significant difference in the risk of ischemic compared with triple therapy. 5 This finding was mainly
events between groups. The ENTRUST-AF PCI (Edox- driven by outcomes in the 110-mg dosing group of
aban Treatment vs Vitamin K Antagonist in Patients dabigatran in the RE-DUAL trial. The number needed to
With Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing Percutaneous Cor- treat for International Society on Thrombosis and
onary Intervention) trial showed that edoxaban-based Haemostasis major bleeding (n¼42) was substantially
regimens were noninferior to VKA-based regimens in lower than the number needed to harm for stent
terms of clinically relevant bleeding after PCI. 3 An thrombosis (n¼223) with DAT compared with triple
important limitation of the aforementioned data is that therapy.5 Based on these findings, extended triple
most studies compared DOACs monotherapy against therapy up to 30 days after PCI is a consideration when
VKA plus aspirin, the only VKA-based dual antith- the perceived risk of stent thrombosis is high (eg,
rombotic therapy (DAT) regimen was available in complex revascularization, multivessel PCI, previous
AUGUSTUS trial, thus providing limited information in history of stent thrombosis).
comparison to DOAC-based DAT regimens available in
all trials.5
6.8.2. Chronic Coronary Disease (CCD)
2. RCTs have supported DAT with OAC and a P2Y12 in-
hibitor over triple therapy with OAC, P2Y12 inhibitor,
1. In patients with AF and CCD (beyond 1 year after revascularization or CAD not requiring coronary
1 B-R revascularization) without history of stent thrombosis, oral anticoagulation monotherapy is recom-
mended over the combination therapy of OAC and single APT (aspirin or P2Y12 inhibitor) to decrease the
risk of major bleeding. 1-3
Recommendation-Specific Supportive Text stroke, or systemic embolism (15.7% versus 13.6%; HR,
1.16 [95% CI, 0.79-1.72]; P¼0.20 for noninferiority); the
1. An RCT compared the rivaroxaban monotherapy
major bleeding risk in the oral anticoagulation mono-
(n¼1107) with the combination of rivaroxaban and a
therapy group was numerically lower than the combi-
single APT (n¼1,108) in patients with AF and CCD or
1 nation therapy group (7.8% versus 10.4%; HR, 0.73
CAD not requiring revascularization. The primary ef-
[95% CI, 0.44-1.20]).2 However, this trial was termi-
ficacy outcome was the composite of stroke, systemic
nated prematurely because of slow enrollment and did
embolism, MI, unstable angina requiring revasculari-
not have enough power for noninferiority; thus, it was
zation, or death from any cause. Rivaroxaban mono-
inconclusive. Of note, both clinical trials excluded pa-
therapy was noninferior to dual therapy for the primary
tients with history of stent thrombosis. Further inves-
outcome (4.14% versus 5.75%/patient-year; HR, 0.72
tigation of oral anticoagulation therapy in patients with
[95% CI, 0.55-0.95]) and was superior for primary safety
a history of stent thrombosis is needed.
endpoint of major bleeding (1.62% versus 2.76%/pa-
tient-year; HR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.39-0.89]) compared with
combination therapy. Another clinical trial also showed 6.8.3. Peripheral Artery Disease (PAD)
the composite outcome of death from all causes, MI,
1. In patients with AF and concomitant stable PAD, monotherapy oral anticoagulation is reasonable over
2a B-NR dual therapy (anticoagulation plus aspirin or P2Y12 inhibitors) to reduce the risk of bleeding. 1-5
between patients on OAC monotherapy versus dual while dual therapy was associated with an increased
therapy (OAC plus APT). Major adverse cardiac or risk of bleeding (HR, 2.27 [95% CI, 1.38-3.73]; P¼0.001). 5
neurological events (HR, 1.5 [95% CI, 1.00-2.25]) did not
differ significantly between mono- and dual therapy,
6.8.4. Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD)/Kidney Failure
1. For patients with AF at elevated risk for stroke and CKD stage 3, treatment with warfarin or, preferably,
1 B-R evidence-based doses of direct thrombin or factor Xa inhibitors (Table 19) is recommended to reduce the
risk of stroke. 1-3
2. For patients with AF at elevated risk for stroke and CKD stage 4, treatment with warfarin or labeled doses
2a B-NR of DOACs is reasonable to reduce the risk of stroke. 4,5
3. For patients with AF at elevated risk for stroke and who have end-stage CKD (CrCl <15 mL/min) or are on
2b B-NR dialysis, it might be reasonable to prescribe warfarin (INR 2.0-3.0) or an evidence-based dose of apixaban
for oral anticoagulation to reduce the risk of stroke. 6,7
warfarin, driven by the higher dose of each.15 Only dabi- Apixaban 5 or 2.5 mg 5 or 2.5 mg 5 or 2.5 mg 5 or 2.5 mg 5 or 2.5 mg
twice daily* twice twice twice twice daily*
gatran is substantially removed by dialysis. 16 A small RCT daily* daily* daily*
and a retrospective population-based cohort study found a Dabigatran 150 mg twice 150 mg twice 150 mg twice 75 mg twice Contraindicated
lower risk of thromboembolism with rivaroxaban versus daily daily daily daily
warfarin,17,18 but these findings await confirmation in Edoxaban Contraindicated 60 mg once 30 mg once 30 mg once Contraindicated
daily daily daily
larger studies. Limited data on LAAO exist in this group of
Rivaroxaban 20 mg once 20 mg once 15 mg once 15 mg once 15 mg once
patients, and prospective comparison to anticoagulation
daily daily daily daily daily†
19
or no therapy is awaited.
Note that other, nonrenal considerations such as drug interactions may also apply. The gray area
Recommendation-Specific Supportive Text indicates doses not studied in the pivotal clinical trials of these agents.
*If at least 2 of the following are present: serum creatinine $1.5 mg/dL, age $80 y, or body
1. Early trials demonstrating the role of warfarin anti- weight #60 kg, the recommended dose is 2.5 mg twice daily. The ARISTOTLE trial excluded pa-
tients with either a creatinine of >2.5 mg/dL or a calculated CrCl <25 mL/min.
coagulation in preventing stroke did not enroll or †Rivaroxaban is not recommended for other indications in patients with a CrCl <15 mL/min, but such
separately report outcomes in patients with CKD. An a recommendation is not made for the AF indication. However, pharmacokinetic data are limited.
AF indicates atrial fibrillation; ARISTOTLE, Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Throm-
analysis of the SPAF III trial showed that dose-adjusted
boembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation; CrCl, creatinine clearance; and DOAC, direct oral
warfarin, compared with fixed low-dose warfarin plus anticoagulant.
62 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
1. In patients with rheumatic mitral stenosis or mitral stenosis of moderate or greater severity and history of
1 B-R AF, long-term anticoagulation with warfarin is recommended over DOACs, independent of the CHA2DS 2-
VASc score to prevent cardiovascular events, including stroke or death.1
2. In patients with AF and valve disease other than moderate or greater mitral stenosis or a mechanical heart
1 B-NR valve, DOACs are recommended over VKAs.2-8
trials, other forms of VHD were allowed, such as aortic Evaluate the Safety and Pharmacokinetics of Oral
stenosis or mitral regurgitation. Bioprosthetic valves Dabigatran Etexilate in Patients After Heart Valve
and valve repair were allowed in the edoxaban (ENGAGE Replacement) 10 trial was halted during phase II after
AF) and apixaban (ARISTOTLE) trials, and valve repair enrolling 252 subjects due to increased thromboembo-
in the rivaroxaban (ROCKET AF) trial. A systematic re- lism and bleeding in the dabigatran arm. PROACT Xa (A
view 13 of patients with VHD (other than moderate to Trial to Determine if Participants with an On-X Aortic
severe mitral stenosis or mechanical valve) concluded Valve Can be Maintained Safely on Apixaban) was also
that DOACs were safe. A meta-analysis confirmed that terminated early due to higher thromboembolic events
DOACs decreased the risk of stroke/systemic embolism with apixaban in patients who were >3 months after
compared with warfarin in patients with (HR, 0.70 [95% mechanical On-X aortic valves.
CI, 0.58-0.86]) and without VHD (HR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.75-
0.95]).14 However, for patients with mechanical heart 6.8.6. Anticoagulation of Typical AFL
valves,15 the RE-ALIGN (Randomized, Phase II Study to
1. For patients with AFL, anticoagulant therapy is recommended according to the same risk profile used for
1 B-NR AF. 1-3
2. In patients with AFL who undergo successful cardioversion or ablation resulting in restoration of sinus
1 C-LD rhythm, anticoagulation should be continued for at least 4 weeks postprocedure. 1-4
3. Patients with typical AFL who have undergone successful CTI ablation and have had AF previously
1 A detected before AFL ablation should receive ongoing oral anticoagulation postablation as indicated for
AF. 5,6
4. Patients with typical AFL who have undergone successful CTI ablation and are deemed to be at high
1 B-NR thromboembolic risk, without any known previous history of AF, should receive close follow-up and
arrhythmia monitoring to detect silent AF if they are not receiving ongoing anticoagulation in view of
significant risk of AF. 7-9
5. In patients with typical AFL who have undergone successful CTI ablation without any known previous
2b B-NR history of AF who are at high risk for development of AF (eg, LA enlargement, inducible AF, chronic
obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD], HF), it may be reasonable to prescribe long-term anticoagulation
if thromboembolic risk assessment suggests high risk (>2% annual risk) for stroke. 5,10-13
*This section refers to typical right-sided (CTI-dependent) AFL. Left-sided AFLs or atrial tachycardias (ATs) that develop after ablation of AF should be anticoagulated and managed in a manner
similar to AF. “Typical” AFL is defined as either typical counterclockwise AFL when the macroreentrant circuit is dependent on the CTI using the isthmus from the patient’s right to left or typical
clockwise AFL when the macroreentrant circuit is dependent on the CTI and uses this isthmus from the patient’s left to right. “Atypical” AFL is not dependent on the CTI and may arise from a
macroreentrant circuit in the LA, such as perimitral or LA roof flutter or could be dependent on scar from previous ablation or surgery.
*Intraprocedural documentation of bidirectional block. †For example, left atrial enlargement, inducible AF, COPD, concomitant heart failure. Colors correspond to
Table 2. AF indicates atrial fibrillation; AFL, atrial flutter; COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; and CTI, cavotricuspid isthmus.
Recommendation-Specific Supportive Text 13.9% of patients who did not receive anticoagulation.3
Observational studies report an elevated risk of stroke
1. AFL is associated with increased thromboembolic risk,
with AFL compared with a control group (RR, 1.4 [95% CI,
but the exact risk and benefit of oral anticoagulation
1.35-1.46]) and elevated mortality risk (risk ratio, 1.9 [95%
are difficult to ascertain as AFL and AF often coexist. In
CI, 1.2-3.1]) with long-term follow-up.3
a population-based retrospective cohort study of pa-
tients with typical AFL and no history of AF, stroke 2. The incidence of embolism after cardioversion of AFL
occurred in 4.1% of patients with AFL compared with is similar to that of AF (0.72% versus 0.46%; P¼not
1.2% of a general population-matched cohort significant).4 Atrial stunning has been noted on TEE in
(P<0.001). 1 However, no large, randomized trials spe- patients undergoing cardioversion of AF, with partial
cifically address thromboembolic risks and benefits of atrial recovery 15 to 30 days and full recovery 30 to 90
anticoagulation in patients who have only AFL. days postcardioversion. 15 LAA stunning also occurs in
In patients referred for ablation of typical AFL without patients with AFL, although it appears to occur at a
adequate previous appropriate anticoagulation, and no lesser degree than what is seen with AF.16 Although
previous history of AF, TEE showed evidence for LA limited data are available for AFL, 1 study demon-
thrombus or dense spontaneous echocardiographic strated more forceful mechanical LAA contraction and
contrast in 3%.2 A systematic review identified thrombo- absence of spontaneous echocardiographic contrast 2
embolic event rates of 0% to 6% with cardioversion, with weeks after ablation of persistent AFL, suggesting
the highest incidence of thromboembolic events occurring earlier recovery.17 Because LA and LAA stunning are
3
1 to 2 days postcardioversion of AFL. Echocardiographic thought to contribute to thrombus formation and
studies reported LA thrombus in 0% to 38% and sponta- thromboembolic events after cardioversion, continued
neous echocardiographic contrast in 21% to 28% of cases.3 anticoagulation is recommended early after conversion
In 1 ablation study, thromboembolic events occurred in to sinus rhythm.
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 65
-, 2023:-–- ---
1. In patients with AF, SDM with the patient is recommended to discuss rhythm- versus rate-control stra-
1 B-NR tegies (taking into consideration clinical presentation, comorbidity burden, medication profile, and pa-
tient preferences), discuss therapeutic options, and for assessing long-term benefits. 1-3
2. In patients with AF without HF who are candidates for select rate-control strategies, heart rate target
2a B-R should be guided by underlying patient symptoms, in general aiming at a resting heart rate of <100 to 110
bpm.2,4-6
3.5; P<0.001] for the noninferiority margin) 2 or the sec- Clinical Presentations and Objectives of Heart
TABLE 20
ondary outcome of QOL 7 at 3 years. These data suggest Rate Control
heart rate control intensity is not a central determinant of
Presentation Objective
clinical outcomes. However, interpretation is limited by a
Symptomatic AF To reduce symptoms
difference of only 10 bpm between study groups attrib-
Tachycardia-induced cardiomyopathy To improve heart function or reduce the
utable to the proportion of patients assigned to strict risk of recurrent cardiomyopathy19
control who did not achieve target rate control (32.6%; ICD use To reduce risk of inappropriate shock20
n¼98/301) and because 78% of lenient rate control par-
Cardiac resynchronization therapy use To enhance biventricular pacing,
ticipants having heart rate <100 bpm.8 In addition, likelihood of myocardial recovery,
and/or preservation of function21
because patients with HF were underrepresented,
whether the results can be extrapolated to those with HF Tachycardia-bradycardia form of sick To reduce the risk of hospitalization22
sinus syndrome among those with a
is unknown. Nonrandomized data focused on target pacemaker
heart rate among outpatients,4,9,10 as well as those with
AF indicates atrial fibrillation; and ICD, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator.
HF,5,11-16 are divergent.
Elimination
Intravenous Administration Oral Maintenance Dose Half-Life Notes
Beta blockers
Metoprolol 2.5-5 mg bolus over 2 min; up to 3 doses 25-200 mg, twice daily 3-4 h
tartrate
Propranolol 1 mg over 1 min; repeat as needed every 2 min; 10-40 mg, 3-4 times daily IV: 2.4 h
up to 3 doses Oral: 3-6 h
ER: 8-20 h
Diltiazem 0.25 mg/kg (actual body weight) IV over 2 min 120-360 mg daily (ER) IV: 3-5 h Avoid in HFrEF
May repeat 0.35 mg/kg over 2 min; Oral immediate
then 5-15 mg/h continuous infusion release: 3-4.5 h
ER: 4-9.5 h
Verapamil 5-10 mg over $2 min (may repeat twice); then 180-480 mg daily (ER) IV: 6-8 h Avoid in HFrEF
5 mg/h continuous infusion (max 20 mg/h) Oral: 2-7 h
ER: 12-17 h
Digitalis glycoside
Digoxin 0.25-0.5 mg over several min; repeat doses of 0.0625-0.25 mg daily 1-2 d Renally eliminated Increased mortality at
0.25 mg every 6 h (maximum 1.5 mg/24 h) plasma concentrations exceeding 1.2 ng/mL
Other
Amiodarone 150-300 mg IV over 1 h, 100-200 mg daily (generally IV: 9-36 d Loading dose 6-10 g administered over 2-4 wk;
then 10-50 mg/h over 24 h IV form used for rate control) Oral: 26-107 d can combine IV and oral dosing to complete
AF indicates atrial fibrillation; ER, extended release; HFrEF, heart failure with reduced ejection fraction; IV, intravenous; and N/A, not applicable.
1. In patients with AF with rapid ventricular response who are hemodynamically stable, beta blockers or
1 B-R nondihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (verapamil, diltiazem; provided that EF >40%) are recom-
mended for acute rate control (Figure 17). 1-4
2. In patients with AF with rapid ventricular response in whom beta blockers and nondihydropyridine cal-
2a B-R cium channel blockers are ineffective or contraindicated, digoxin can be considered for acute rate control,
either alone or in combination with the aforementioned agents.5-9
3. In patients with AF with rapid ventricular response, the addition of intravenous magnesium to standard
2a A rate-control measures is reasonable to achieve and maintain rate control. 10,11
4. In patients with AF with rapid ventricular response who are critically ill and/or in decompensated HF in
2b B-NR whom beta blockers and nondihydropyridine calcium channel blockers are ineffective or contraindicated,
intravenous amiodarone may be considered for acute rate control.* 12,13
5. In patients with AF with rapid ventricular response and known moderate or severe LV systolic dysfunction
3: Harm B-NR with or without decompensated HF, intravenous nondihydropyridine calcium channel blockers should not
be administered.14,15
*Consider the risk of cardioversion and stroke when using amiodarone as a rate-control agent.
68 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
*Contraindicated in patients with moderate-severe LV dysfunction regardless of decompensated HF. Colors correspond to Table 2. AF indicates atrial
fibrillation; AV, atrioventricular; HF, heart failure; LV, left ventricular; and RVR, rapid ventricular response.
4. Intravenous amiodarone has been shown to be 5. Limited data exist regarding the use of non-
effective in controlling ventricular rates in patients dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers in patients
who are critically ill. In a retrospective study of 38 with HFrEF, due to the presumed limitation of nega-
patients admitted to the intensive care unit, intra- tive inotropic effects. Two retrospective analyses
venous amiodarone was associated with a statistically highlight potential for increased morbidity when
significant decrease in heart rate without decrease in administered in this population. In a retrospective
BP compared with intravenous diltiazem and analysis of patients hospitalized with AF with rapid
digoxin.12 One study of 60 critically ill patients, ventricular rate (RVR), diltiazem was associated with
predominantly with AF, with heart rate consistently an increased risk of acute kidney injury within 48
>120 bpm randomized patients to 1 of 3 intravenous hours of initiation of diltiazem in those patients with
treatment regimens: diltiazem in a 25-mg bolus fol- LVEF #50%, compared with those with normal EF (10%
lowed by a continuous infusion of 20 mg/h for 24 versus 3.6%; P¼0.002).14 An additional retrospective
hours; amiodarone in a 300-mg bolus; and amiodar- analysis compared patients with HFrEF receiving
one in a 300-mg bolus followed by 45 mg/h for 24 either intravenous metoprolol or diltiazem. There was
hours.13 A >30% rate reduction within 4 hours was a higher incidence of worsening HF symptoms
not statistically different in either treatment arm, (increased oxygen requirement within 4 hours or
with less effective control more frequently observed initiation of inotropic support with 48 hours) in those
in those receiving a bolus of amiodarone alone; thus patients receiving diltiazem (33% versus 15%;
overall, diltiazem allowed for significantly better P¼0.019). Neither analysis noted an increase in the in-
heart rate control over 24 hours, but it also caused a hospital mortality rate, need for a higher level of care,
significantly higher incidence of hypotension or hypotension.
requiring discontinuation of the drug.
70 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
1. In patients with AF, beta blockers or nondihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (diltiazem, verapamil)
1 B-NR are recommended for long-term rate control with the choice of agent according to underlying substrate
and comorbid conditions. 1,2
2. For patients with AF in whom measuring serum digoxin levels is indicated, it is reasonable to target
2a B-NR levels <1.2 ng/mL.3-6
3. In patients with AF and HF symptoms, digoxin is reasonable for long-term rate control in combination
2a B-R with other rate-controlling agents, or as monotherapy if other agents are not preferred, not tolerated, or
contraindicated. 7-9
4. In patients with AF and LVEF <40%, nondihydropyridine calcium channel–blocking drugs should not be
3: Harm C-LD administered given their potential to exacerbate HF.10,11
5. In patients with permanent AF who have risk factors for cardiovascular events, dronedarone should not be
3: Harm B-R used for long-term rate control. 12
Colors correspond to Table 2. AF indicates atrial fibrillation; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; and NDCC, nondihydropyridine calcium channel blocker.
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 71
-, 2023:-–- ---
Recommendation-Specific Supportive Text were associated with a significant (56%) increased risk
of death. 4 Serum digoxin concentrations of 0.5 to 0.8
1. One prospective, randomized, investigator-blinded,
ng/mL seem safest in terms of benefit without adverse
crossover study compared the effect of 4 rate-
effects in patients with HFrEF.17
reducing once-daily drug regimens on the ventricular
3. Digoxin may have added efficacy as rate control in
heart rate and arrhythmia-related symptoms in pa-
conjunction with beta blockers in patients with AF. A
tients with permanent AF. The 24-hour mean heart rate
small RCT of 47 patients with persistent AF and
was 9612 bpm at baseline (no treatment), 7510 bpm
concomitant HFrEF compared the effects of digoxin
with diltiazem, 8111 bpm with verapamil, 8211 bpm
alone, carvedilol alone, and their combination.10
with metoprolol, and 8411 bpm with carvedilol. All
Combination therapy was significantly associated
drugs significantly reduced the heart rate compared
13 with better rate control and symptom relief than
with baseline. In a retrospective cohort study, in-
monotherapy with either agent. The RATE-AF trial
vestigators used a database from 2 urban emergency
randomized 160 patients with persistent AF and
departments to identify consecutive patients with
concomitant HFrEF to digoxin and bisoprolol.11 No
emergency department discharge diagnoses of AF. A
significant differences in the primary endpoint of QOL
total of 259 consecutive patients were enrolled, with
were noted at 6 months with either agent. Several
100 receiving calcium channel blockers and 159
secondary outcomes, including N-terminal pro-brain
receiving beta blockers. Baseline demographics and
natriuretic peptide level, were significantly lower in
comorbidities were similar. Twenty-seven percent of
the digoxin group, without a significant difference in
patients taking beta blockers were admitted, 31.0% of
resting heart rate between the 2 groups at 12 months.
patients taking calcium channel blockers were
Adverse effects were less common in the digoxin
admitted, and there were no significant differences in
group. A large meta-analysis of 75 studies and
emergency department length of stay, adverse events,
approximately 620,000 patients found a significantly
or 7- or 30-day emergency department revisits. A
increased risk of death in digoxin users overall but,
follow-up analysis of the AFFIRM study examined the
when limited to 7 RCTs (w8,400 patients), no differ-
difference in all hospitalization and all-cause mortality
ence in mortality rate was observed between digoxin or
in participants treated with a single rate-control agent
placebo—of note, these 7 RCTs in the subanalysis were
at baseline. No difference was found among those
in patients with concomitant HF.9 A post hoc sensi-
participants receiving beta blockers, non-
tivity analysis assessing the impact of digoxin on
dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers, or digoxin.2
mortality in patients with HF and concomitant AF
2. Seminal work investigating digoxin toxicity was based found no impact on overall mortality in patients taking
on a small series of patients, where toxicity was digoxin, most with HFrEF.
determined by electrocardiographic abnormalities. 14 4. MDPIT (Multicenter Diltiazem Postinfarction Trial)
Toxicity was seen when serum digoxin concentra- demonstrated an association of worsening HF in pa-
tions exceeded 2.0 ng/mL, and almost certainly at tients with a recent MI, with LV dysfunction random-
levels >3.0 ng/mL. Based on this small study, the ized to diltiazem. Among those with a baseline EF
narrow therapeutic range of digoxin is usually cited as of <40%, late HF appeared in significantly more pa-
0.8 to 2.0 ng/mL, with substantial variation across tients receiving diltiazem compared with placebo (21%
institutional laboratories and published references. 15,16 versus 12%; P¼0.004). Life table analysis in patients
However, 3 post hoc analyses of the DIG (Digitalis with an EF of <40% confirmed significantly more
Investigation Group) trial suggested that safe use of frequent late HF in those taking diltiazem. In addition,
digoxin is seen at lower serum concentrations.4-6 the diltiazem-associated rise in the frequency of late
Serum digoxin concentrations of 0.5 to 0.9 ng/mL congestive heart failure (CHF) was progressively
were associated with significantly lower all-cause greater with increasingly severe decrements in base-
mortality rates and hospitalizations compared with line EF. 10
3
concentrations $1.0 ng/mL. Another analysis sug- 5. The safety and efficacy of dronedarone, originally
gested that serum digoxin concentrations >1.2 ng/mL designed as an antiarrhythmic to maintain sinus
may be harmful, particularly in women.7 A post hoc rhythm in patients with AF, was addressed in several
analysis comparing patients with AF taking digoxin seminal trials.18-20 PALLAS (Palbociclib Collaborative
with propensity score-matched controls suggested that Adjuvant Study) was designed to investigate whether
patients with serum digoxin concentrations <0.9 ng/ dronedarone would reduce major vascular events or
mL had no increased risk of death, concentrations of hospitalizations in patients with permanent AF. The
0.9 to 1.1 ng/mL had a nonsignificant increased risk of benefits of dronedarone in patients with permanent AF
death, and serum digoxin concentrations $1.2 ng/mL were initially suggested from the ERATO (Efficacy and
72 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
Safety of Dronedarone for the Control of ventricular rate events. The trial was terminated early, because of the
during atrial fibrillation) trial, which showed a signifi- strong signal for harm in 43 patients receiving drone-
cant reduction in the ventricular response for patients darone versus 19 receiving placebo, namely death (13/21
with paroxysmal and permanent AF in the 24-hour due to arrhythmia), stroke, and hospitalization for HF.12
setting, which were carried forward in a 6-month
follow-up. 12 PALLAS randomized approximately 3,200
patients with permanent AF at high risk for adverse 7.3. Atrioventricular Nodal Ablation (AVNA)
1. In patients with AF and a persistently rapid ventricular response who undergo AVNA, initial pacemaker
1 C-LD lower rate programming should be 80 to 90 bpm to reduce the risk of sudden death. 1,2
2. In patients with AF and uncontrolled rapid ventricular response refractory to rate-control medications
2a B-R (who are not candidates for or in whom rhythm control has been unsuccessful), AVNA can be useful to
improve symptoms and QOL. 3-6
3. In patients with AF who are planned to undergo AVNA, implantation of a pacemaker before the ablation
1 B-NR (ie, before or same day of ablation) is recommended to ensure adequacy of the pacing leads before
performing ablation. 7-9
4. In patients with AF with normal EF undergoing AVNA, conduction system pacing of the His bundle10-13 or
2b C-LD left bundle area12,13 may be reasonable.
of the risk of pacemaker-mediated cardiomyopathy, compared outcomes in patient with persistent AF and
and long-term follow-up data are scant. 9 uncontrolled rates undergoing AVNA and RVP with AVNA
3. Although few studies concerning AVNA and pacing and biventricular pacing (BiVP) and found an improve-
report complication rates for the pacemaker implant, ment in 6-minute walk test and EF, but benefit was pre-
the overall risk of lead dislodgement or failure is dominantly seen in subjects with EF <45% or New York
approximately 2%, and many operators perform both Heart Association (NYHA) class II to III HF at baseline.27
AVNA and pacemaker implant during the same pro- Not all patients appear to be at high risk of HF after
cedure.9,13,24 Practice patterns vary, however, and a AVNA and RVP.28 Because the benefit is less and the risk of
European survey indicated up to 80% of operators will complications is higher in BiVP compared with conven-
choose to perform AVNA 1 to 3 months after pacemaker tional pacing, RVP is advised in patients with preserved EF
implantation to reduce risk of adverse outcome due to undergoing AVNA.19
25
early lead dislodgement. In the prospective FOL- Conduction system pacing of the His bundle or left
LOWPACE registry from 23 centers in the Netherlands, bundle area offers promise to reduce the risk of RVP-
lead dislodgment was the most frequent lead-related induced cardiomyopathy and improve outcomes. Early
complication, occurring in 3.3% of patients within the studies have justifiably focused on patients with HF un-
first 2 months of implant. 7 Relevant to the older age dergoing AVNA, and limited data are available in patients
population usually undergoing AVNA, a pooled with preserved EF and no HF diagnosis.27 His bundle
patient-level analysis of 4814 subjects from CTOPP pacing with AVNA has been shown to be feasible and
(Canadian Trial of Physiologic Pacing), UKPACE associated with improvements in EF in patients with
(United Kingdom pacing and cardiovascular events), EF <40%, and NYHA class, albeit with elevated pacing
and Danish pacing trials—designed to compare pace- thresholds.10,11 Left bundle area pacing may deliver the
maker implantation complication rates in age <75 advantages of His bundle pacing with reduced risk of
years versus age $75 years—found a higher risk of early elevated pacing thresholds or lead dislodgement.12 Early
complications in those age $75 years (5% versus 3%), studies have shown stable EF with conduction system
driven by a higher rate of lead dislodgement (2%) and pacing and AVNA in follow-up, and improvement in pa-
pneumothorax (1.6%). 8 If AVNA and pacing are per- tients with EF <50%.12,24
formed concomitantly, ideally, leads should be placed
first to ensure adequate lead function. 8. RHYTHM CONTROL
4. HF after AVNA is attributed to the deleterious effects of
RVP,26 and risk is correlated with baseline cardiac func- 8.1. Goals of Therapy With Rhythm Control
tion.9 The PAVE (Post AV Nodal Ablation Evaluation) trial
1. In patients with reduced LV function and persistent (or high burden) AF, a trial of rhythm control should
1 B-R be recommended to evaluate whether AF is contributing to the reduced LV function.1-6
2. In patients with symptomatic AF, rhythm control can be useful to improve symptoms.7-11
2a B-R
3. In patients with a recent diagnosis of AF (<1 year), rhythm control can be useful to reduce hospitaliza-
2a B-R tions, stroke, and mortality. 12-14
4. In patients with AF and HF, rhythm control can be useful for improving symptoms and improving out-
2a B-R comes, such as mortality and hospitalizations for HF and ischemia. 15-19
5. In patients with AF, rhythm-control strategies can be useful to reduce the likelihood of AF progression.20-27
2a B-NR
6. In patients with AF where symptoms associated with AF are uncertain, a trial of rhythm control (eg,
2b C-LD cardioversion or pharmacological therapy) may be useful to determine what if any symptoms are
attributable to AF.28-32
7. In patients with AF, rhythm-control strategies may be useful to reduce the likelihood of development of
2b B-NR dementia or worsening cardiac structural abnormalities. 33-45
74 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
F I G U R E 1 9 Patient and Clinical Considerations for Choosing Between Rhythm Control and Rate Control
Patient and clinical considerations for deciding between rhythm- and rate-control strategies in a patient with a high burden of AF. AF indicates atrial fibrillation;
AV, atrioventricular; LA, left atrium; and LV, left ventricular.
66%), and additionally the benefit of rhythm control in Large registry studies have reported that AF pro-
patients with HF is likely greatest in those patients gression is more commonly observed with a rate-
with recently identified AF.15-18,49 control strategy compared to a rhythm-control strat-
5. AF commonly, but not always, progresses over time egy over a 1- to 2-year period, although the absolute
to higher burdens and becomes more sustained. 20,59 magnitude and difference has varied. For example, in
76 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
*Younger with few comorbidities. Colors correspond to Table 2. AF indicates atrial fibrillation.
2 registry studies, progression to a more sustained comorbidities, LA size, heart rate, and modifiable risk
form of AF burden was observed in 26% to 28% of factors are also important. 21-27
patients undergoing a rate-control strategy compared 6. The reported prevalence of asymptomatic AF varies
with 6% to 11% of patients treated with a rhythm- from 10% to 40% depending on study cohort.28
control strategy while, in an analysis of the ORBIT Asymptomatic and symptomatic patients with AF
AF trial, although rhythm control was associated have similar risks for death and stroke. 28,29 In a post
with a lower likelihood of progression, AF progres- hoc analysis of EAST-AFNET 4, similar magnitudes of
sion was much more common regardless of strategy benefit were observed in symptomatic and asymp-
(66% for rate control and 56% for rhythm control) tomatic patients for reducing the combined endpoint
likely due to older patients in this cohort. 21-23 AF of cardiovascular death, stroke, and hospitalization for
progression is a complex process, and although the HF. 30 Nevertheless, the evidence base for the benefits
choice between rhythm-control and rate-control of a rhythm-control trial in asymptomatic patients with
strategy has an impact, many other factors such as sinus rhythm is limited. Improved energy with return
age, presence or absence of HF or other to sinus rhythm was noted in 1 observational study of
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 77
-, 2023:-–- ---
13 asymptomatic patients with persistent AF. 31 In have been found in tricuspid valve function as
another study that included 18 asymptomatic patients, assessed by echocardiography.42-45
at 1-month follow-up, no patients had improvement in
symptoms, although sinus rhythm was maintained in 8.2. Electrical and Pharmacological Cardioversion
only 35% of patients.32 In 2 small studies that focused
Cardioversion to restore sinus rhythm is a mode of acute
on the impact of catheter ablation in asymptomatic
rhythm control. Cardioversion can be achieved electri-
patients, maintenance of sinus rhythm was associated
cally or pharmacologically. Electrical cardioversion, given
with improved QOL indices in all patients, but 24% to
rapidity and efficacy, is the treatment of choice for pa-
34% of patients developed symptoms mainly due to AT
tients with hemodynamic instability attributable to AF.
after the ablation procedure.53,54
Acute rhythm control with cardioversion should also be
7. AF is associated with increased cognitive impairment,
considered for patients with hemodynamically stable AF
progressive increase in AF burden, and structural
intolerant of atrioventricular dyssynchrony, loss of atrial
changes in the heart.33,34 Nonrandomized studies from
kick, or unable to achieve adequate rate control. In pa-
registries or post hoc analyses of randomized trials
tients with hemodynamically stable AF, both electrical
have reported that rhythm control is associated with a
cardioversion and pharmacological cardioversion are
reduction in the incidence of dementia and develop-
acceptable, safe, and efficacious methods for acute
ment of HF.36-38 Furthermore, AF can also be an etio-
rhythm control. 1-3 Electrical cardioversion is more effec-
logic reason for mitral regurgitation or tricuspid
tive than pharmacological cardioversion alone4,5 but in-
regurgitation.39-45 In 1 study of 53 patients referred for
volves the trade-off of anesthesia or sedation.6
AF ablation with moderate mitral regurgitation or
Thromboembolic risks and considerations for anti-
worse, maintenance of sinus rhythm at follow-up was
coagulation apply to both pharmacological cardioversion
associated with significant decreases in LA size, mitral
and electrical cardioversion.7,8
annular dilatation, and mitral regurgitation. 39 In
another study, 70% of patients undergoing ablation for
AF who maintained sinus rhythm at follow-up had 8.2.1. Prevention of Thromboembolism in the Setting of
improvement in mitral regurgitation. 40 Similar results Cardioversion
1. In patients with AF duration of ‡48 hours, a 3-week duration of uninterrupted therapeutic anticoagulation
1 B-R or imaging evaluation to exclude intracardiac thrombus is recommended before elective cardioversion.1
3. In patients with AF in whom cardioversion is deferred due to LAA thrombus detected on precardioversion
1 C-LD imaging, therapeutic anticoagulation should be instituted for at least 3 to 6 weeks, after which imaging
should be repeated before cardioversion. 1,8
4. In patients with AF and previous LAAO who are not on anticoagulation, imaging evaluation to assess the
2b B-NR adequacy of LAAO and exclude device-related thrombosis before cardioversion may be reasonable.9-19
5. In patients with AF and previous LAAO with residual leak, pericardioversion anticoagulation may be
2b C-LD considered and continued thereafter. 9-11,20
6. In patients with reported AF duration of <48 hours (not in the setting of cardiac surgery) and who are not
2b C-LD on anticoagulation, precardioversion imaging to exclude intracardiac thrombus may be considered in
those who are at elevated thromboembolic risk (CHA 2DS 2 -VASc score ‡2 or equivalent). 21,22
7. In patients with low thromboembolic risks (CHA2 DS 2-VASc 0-1 or equivalent) and AF duration of <12
2b C-LD hours, the benefit of precardioversion imaging or pericardioversion anticoagulation is uncertain given the
low incidence of pericardioversion thromboembolic events in this population. 21,22
78 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
Colors correspond to Table 2. AC indicates anticoagulation; AF, atrial fibrillation; and LAAO, left atrial appendage occlusion.
analysis of patients with Watchman LAAO device.20 stratified National Cardiovascular Data Registry LAAO
These 4 patients were treated with oral anti- registry Watchman 2.5 device patients by trans-
coagulation and after 6 to 8 weeks, on confirmation of esophageal echocardiographic observation of residual
thrombus resolution by repeat TEE, underwent suc- leak (none, #5 mm, >5 mm) at 45 days, found #5 mm
cessful electrical cardioversion. 20 residual leak to be common (13,258 of 51,333 patients;
5. Data are limited to guide pericardioversion anti- 25.8%) and associated with modestly higher incidence
coagulation in patients with LAAO. In the broader (not of thromboembolic events over 1-year follow-up
limited to cardioversion) context, residual leak #5 mm compared with no leak.11 OAC use was more frequent
by computed tomography after LAAO by surgical liga- in patients with large (>5 mm) residual leak.11 Data
tion has been associated with particularly elevated specific to the setting of cardioversion are further
stroke/system embolism risks (especially in the limited. The largest to date is a retrospective multi-
absence of anticoagulation) 9 and similarly for residual center study of 148 Watchman LAAO device patients
leak <5 mm by TEE post-Lariat. 10 A large analysis that who underwent electrical cardioversion after
80 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
precardioversion exclusion of intracardiac thrombus or cardioversion for AF of <48 hours duration did not
large residual leak ($5 mm in this study) by TEE. 20 No observe thromboembolic events in patients with
thromboembolic events were observed within 6 weeks CHA2DS2 -VASc score of 0 or 1 or patients with post-
of cardioversion, in recipients or nonrecipients of operative AF but noted differential thromboembolic
pericardioversion anticoagulation. 20 However, detec- rates in CHA2DS2 -VASc score $2. 42 Larger studies
tion of thromboembolic events may be limited by similarly demonstrated that among patients with <48
study’s sample size. Pericardioversion antithrombotic hours of AF, postcardioversion thromboembolic risks
regimen was at the discretion of the treating physi- increased with increasing CHA 2DS2 -VASc score,22,43
20
cians, and the relationship of anticoagulation with especially in those with CHA 2DS2 -VASc score $2 in
presence/absence of small residual leak was not re- the absence of anticoagulation.22
ported. Considerations for anticoagulation may also 7. Retrospective observational data from the FinCV
vary based on specific surgical or pLAAO procedures (Finnish CardioVersion) study noted low incidence of
and devices. 30-day pericardioversion thromboembolic event rate
6. The safety of cardioversion without further assessment of 0.4% in patients with AF with CHA 2DS 2-VASc of 0 to
or previous anticoagulation in patients with AF dura- 122 or 0.3% in patients with duration of <12 hours of
tion of <48 hours has been challenged. In addition to AF.21 Other retrospective studies have similarly
concerns for underestimation of actual duration of demonstrated low pericardioversion thromboembolic
episode and burden due to potential for asymptomatic risks in patients with CHA 2DS2-VASc score of 0 to 1.42
occurrence of AF, emerging data demonstrate that The combination of CHA2 DS2-VASc of 0 to 1 in
thromboembolic risks in patients with <48 hours of AF conjunction with duration of <12 hours of AF may
were not homogenously low. Time to cardioversion identify a population at particularly low risk for peri-
>12 hours has been reported as an independent pre- cardioversion thromboembolism.
dictor for thromboembolic complications. 21 A single-
center observational study of patients undergoing 8.2.2. Electrical Cardioversion
1. In patients with hemodynamic instability attributable to AF, immediate electrical cardioversion should be
1 C-LD performed to restore sinus rhythm.1
2. In patients with AF who are hemodynamically stable, electrical cardioversion can be performed as initial
1 B-R rhythm-control strategy or after unsuccessful pharmacological cardioversion. 2
3. In patients with AF undergoing electrical cardioversion, energy delivery should be confirmed to be syn-
1 C-LD chronized to the QRS to reduce the risk of inducing VF. 3
4. For patients with AF undergoing elective electrical cardioversion, the use of biphasic energy of at least
2a B-R 200 J as initial energy can be beneficial to improve success of initial electrical shock. 4,5
5. In patients with AF undergoing elective cardioversion, with longer duration of AF or unsuccessful initial
2a B-NR shock, optimization of electrode vector, use of higher energy, and pretreatment with antiarrhythmic
drugs can facilitate success of electrical cardioversion. 5-9
6. In patients with obesity and AF, use of manual pressure augmentation and/or further escalation of
2b C-LD electrical energy may be beneficial to improve success of electrical cardioversion. 10
energy output is optimized as biphasic and maximal pressure augmentation (using electrically silent objects
output and the AF is of recent onset, either vector as insulator), and further escalation of electrical energy
orientation may be reasonable, but for patients with improved success of electrical cardioversion of obese
longer duration of AF, the anterior-posterior orienta- patients with AF, 10 and the benefits of these maneu-
2
tion of electrode vector may be favorable. Manual vers may mechanistically relate to overcoming
pressure augmentation 26 or administration of antiar- increased transthoracic impedance. Other alternatives
rhythmic drugs as pretreatment (Section 8.2.3, “Phar- in refractory cases include the use of 2 defibrillators
macological Cardioversion”) 6,8,9 may also facilitate simultaneously, effectively doubling the delivered
electrical cardioversion. energy.
6. Increased body weight has been associated with
reduced success of electrical cardioversion.27 In a small
randomized clinical study, use of paddles, manual 8.2.3. Pharmacological Cardioversion
1. For patients with AF, pharmacological cardioversion is reasonable as an alternative to electrical cardio-
2a C-LD version for those who are hemodynamically stable or in situations when electrical cardioversion is
preferred but cannot be performed. 1
2. For patients with AF, ibutilide 2,3 is reasonable for pharmacological cardioversion for patients without
2a A depressed LV function (LVEF <40%).
3. For patients with AF, intravenous amiodarone is reasonable for pharmacological cardioversion, although
2a A time to conversion is generally longer than with other agents (8-12 hours). 4-8
4. For patients with recurrent AF occurring outside the setting of a hospital, the “pill-in-the-pocket” (PITP)
2a A approach with a single oral dose of flecainide 9-11 or propafenone, 10-14 with a concomitant atrioventricular
nodal blocking agent,15 is reasonable for pharmacological cardioversion if previously tested in a moni-
tored setting.16-18
5. For patients with AF, use of intravenous procainamide may be considered for pharmacological cardio-
2b B-R version when other intravenous agents are contraindicated or not preferred. 19
Synopsis for efficacy and therefore are not practical choices for
Pharmacological cardioversion is indicated for patients acute pharmacological cardioversion. Data do not support
with new-onset or persistent AF that is hemodynamically intravenous sotalol for pharmacological cardioversion of
stable, or in rare instances when electrical cardioversion is AF.29,30
desired but contraindicated. Ibutilide works rapidly for
Recommendation-Specific Supportive Text
pharmacological cardioversion of AF but is associated with
QT interval prolongation and torsades de pointes, partic- 1. No studies compare the efficacy of electrical cardio-
ularly in patients with HFrEF. 2,3 20,21
Data support intra- version with that of pharmacological cardioversion in
venous amiodarone for pharmacological cardioversion,4-8 patients with AF who are hemodynamically unstable.
although intravenous amiodarone requires a longer time However, in a retrospective, propensity score-matched
for AF conversion than ibutilide. Evidence from random- analysis of 374 hemodynamically stable patients with
ized studies support the efficacy of flecainide 9-11 and AF who presented to an emergency department, the
propafenone 10-14 for pharmacological cardioversion, and incidence of successful cardioversion was higher in the
these drugs are reasonable for administration via the PITP direct current cardioversion group (78.2%) than in
approach for AF occurring outside of the hospital.16-18 those who underwent pharmacological conversion
Intravenous procainamide is more effective than placebo (59.2%) or those for whom a “wait-and-watch”
for pharmacological conversion of AF 19 but is less effective approach (37.9%) was used (P<0.001). 1 Compared with
than ibutilide.22,23 Dofetilide,24,25 oral amiodarone,26-28 the “wait-and-watch” strategy, the ORs for conversion
and oral sotalol27,28 have been shown to be effective for to sinus rhythm for direct current cardioversion and
conversion of AF to sinus rhythm but require several days pharmacological cardioversion were 6.00 (95% CI, 3.38-
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 83
-, 2023:-–- ---
Approximate Time to
Route of Conversion to Primary Route(s) Elimination Major Adverse
Drug Administration Loading Dose Maintenance Dose Sinus Rhythm of Elimination Half-Life Effects
Amiodarone IV 5-7 mg/kg or 300 mg* 1200-3000 mg via 8-12 h Liver metabolism 9-36 d Bradycardia
continuous Biliary excretion Hypotension
infusion over 24 h QT prolongation
Phlebitis
TdP
Flecainide Oral† 200 mg if <70 kg, N/A 3-8 h Liver (70%) 12-27 h Atrial flutter
300 mg if >70 kg, Kidney (30%)‡ AV block
single dose Dizziness
Dyspnea
Exacerbation of HFrEF
Headache
Nausea
QT prolongation
VT
Visual disturbances
Ibutilide IV $60 kg: 1 mg over 10 min N/A 30-90 min Liver 2-12 h Nonsustained VT
<60 kg: 0.01 mg/kg over QT prolongation
10 min TdP
If arrhythmia does not
terminate within 10
min after the end of
the first infusion, may
administer a second
dose, equal to the first
dose.
Procainamide IV 1 g over 30 min 2 mg/min continuous 30-60 min Liver (16-33%) 3-4 h Agranulocytosis
infusion over 1 h Kidney (50-65%)‡ (parent) AV block
7 h (NAPA) Exacerbation of HFrEF
Hypotension
Neutropenia
QT prolongation
Rash
Thrombocytopenia
TdP
Propafenone Oral 450 mg if <70 kg, N/A 3-8 h Liver 9h Atrial flutter
600 mg if >70 kg, AV block
single dose Dizziness
Dyspnea
Exacerbation of HFrEF
Nausea
Taste disturbances
VT
Visual disturbances
*Some studies have administered intravenous amiodarone for 24 h followed by oral administration.
†Flecainide is available in an intravenous dosage form in Europe.
‡Percentage of a dose excreted unchanged in urine.
AV indicates atrioventricular; AF, atrial fibrillation; HFrEF, heart failure with reduced ejection fraction; IV, intravenous; N/A, not applicable; NAPA, N-acetylprocainamide; TdP,
torsades de pointes; and VT, ventricular tachycardia.
10.66) and 2.47 (1.45-4.20), respectively (P<0.001). Due (conversion rates, 38%-63%) than for AF.2,3 Ibutilide
to the potential greater efficacy of direct current car- terminates AF rapidly, with most patients converting
dioversion compared with that of pharmacological to sinus rhythm within 30 to 90 minutes (Table 22).
cardioversion, and due to the need for rapid successful Ibutilide is associated with a risk of QT interval
conversion to sinus rhythm, immediate electrical car- prolongation and torsades de pointes. The incidence
dioversion is generally the favored option, yet some of torsades de pointes associated with ibutilide is
patients may not be candidates (eg, cannot undergo higher in patients with reduced LVEF than in those
anesthesia), for whom pharmacological options are with normal LVEF, 2,3 and the risk seems particularly
available. 31 high in patients with severely depressed LVEF.20
2. Randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled studies HFrEF is an independent risk factor for ibutilide-
have established the efficacy of ibutilide 2,3 for con- associated torsades de pointes.3,21 Therefore, ibuti-
version of AF to sinus rhythm, with AF conversion lide is best avoided in patients with LVEF #40%. Of
rates of about 30% (compared with 2% in placebo note, studies have shown that a magnesium infusion
groups).2,3 The efficacy of ibutilide is greater for AFL immediately before administration of ibutilide may
84 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
*In the absence of preexcitation. †First dose administered in a facility that can provide continuous electrocardiographic monitoring and cardiac resuscitation
because of the potential for proarrhythmia or postconversion bradycardia. ‡IV amiodarone requires several hours for efficacy; ibutilide is generally effective
in 30 to 90 min but carries a higher risk of QT interval prolongation and torsades de pointes. §Recommend avoidance of IV procainamide for patients initially
treated with amiodarone or ibutilide to avoid excessive QT interval prolongation and torsades de pointes. Rather, procainamide may be considered for
patients for whom amiodarone and ibutilide are not considered optimal as first-line drugs. Colors correspond to Table 2. AF indicates atrial fibrillation; HFrEF,
heart failure with reduced ejection fraction; IV, intravenous; LV, left ventricular; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction.
mitigate the risk of torsades de pointes and excessive flecainide or propafenone to prevent 1:1 atrioventric-
QT prolongation.32,33 ular conduction during AFL.15 The PITP strategy was
3. Multiple randomized studies have found intravenous studied in 268 patients with stable AF of recent onset
amiodarone to be effective for conversion of AF to si- who presented to the emergency department.16 Pa-
4-7
nus rhythm. A meta-analysis of randomized, tients received single-dose oral flecainide or prop-
placebo-controlled studies reported relative risks of afenone, and those who were successfully treated
sinus rhythm associated with intravenous amiodarone (n¼210) were discharged with a plan for the PITP
at 6 to 8 hours and at 24 hours of 1.23 (P¼0.022) and approach. In the 155-month follow-up period, single-
1.44 (P<0.001), respectively.8 However, pharmacolog- dose flecainide or propafenone was successful in 94%
ical cardioversion of AF with intravenous amiodarone of episodes. However, the incidence of adverse effects
requires 8 to 12 hours, compared with a much shorter is not insignificant (6%-17%). 16-18 In view of this, and
response time with ibutilide (Table 22). because in most studies, most patients received the
4. Single oral doses of flecainide 9-11 and propafenone10-14 first dose in the hospital before taking it as an outpa-
are effective for conversion of AF to sinus rhythm, tient, the PITP strategy should only be used for highly
with 3- to 4-hour conversion rates of 58% to 68% for selected patients and after it first has been observed to
flecainide (compared with 18%-29% for placebo) and be safe and effective in an inpatient setting.17,18,34
45% to 57% for propafenone (compared with 17%-29% 5. Intravenous procainamide was shown to be more
for placebo) (Table 22). A beta blocker or non- effective than placebo for conversion of AF to sinus
dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker is generally rhythm (conversion rates at 1 hour, 69% versus 38%;
administered at least 30 minutes before a dose of P¼0.012) in a randomized, double-blind study of 114
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 85
-, 2023:-–- ---
patients.19 However, intravenous procainamide is less incidence of clinically significant hypotension (5%-
effective than ibutilide for conversion of AF to sinus 12%) 19,23 and can exacerbate HFrEF.
22
rhythm (conversion rates, 14% versus 76%; P¼0.001).
The efficacy of procainamide for conversion of AF to
sinus rhythm was similarly inferior to that of ibutilide 8.3. Antiarrhythmic Drugs for Maintenance of Sinus Rhythm
23 8.3.1. Specific Drug Therapy for Long-Term Maintenance of
in an analysis of pooled data. In addition, intrave-
nous procainamide is associated with a relatively high Sinus Rhythm
Recommendations for Specific Drug Therapy for Long-Term Maintenance of Sinus Rhythm
Referenced studies that support the recommendations are summarized in the Online Data Supplement.
1. For patients with AF and HFrEF (£40%), therapy with dofetilide* 1 or amiodarone† 2 is reasonable for long-
2a A*
term maintenance of sinus rhythm.
B-NR†
2. For patients with AF and no previous MI, or known or suspected significant structural heart disease, or
2a A ventricular scar or fibrosis, use of flecainide 3-5 or propafenone5-12 is reasonable for long-term mainte-
nance of sinus rhythm.
4. For patients with AF without significant baseline QT interval prolongation or uncorrected hypokalemia or
2a A hypomagnesemia, use of dofetilide1,5,16 5-7,10,17,18 is reasonable for long-term maintenance of sinus
rhythm, with proper dose selection based on kidney function and close monitoring of the QT interval,
serum potassium and magnesium concentrations, and kidney function.
5. For patients with AF and normal LV function, use of low-dose amiodarone (100-200 mg/d) is reasonable
2a A for long-term maintenance of sinus rhythm 2,5,17-22 but, in view of its adverse effect profile, 5,23,24 should
be reserved for patients in whom other rhythm control strategies are ineffective, not preferred, or
contraindicated.
6. For patients with AF without significant baseline QT interval prolongation, hypokalemia, hypomagne-
2b A semia, or bradycardia, use of sotalol 5-7,10,17,18 may be considered for long-term maintenance of sinus
rhythm, with proper dose selection based on kidney function and close monitoring of the QT interval,
heart rate, serum potassium and magnesium concentrations, and kidney function.
7. In patients with previous MI and/or significant structural heart disease, including HFrEF (LVEF £40%),
3: Harm B-R flecainide and propafenone 25 should not be administered due to the risk of worsening HF, potential
proarrhythmia, and increased mortality.26,27
8. For patients with AF, dronedarone should not be administered for maintenance of sinus rhythm to those
3: Harm B-R with NYHA class III and IV HF or patients who have had an episode of decompensated HF in the past 4
weeks, due to the risk of increased early mortality associated with worsening HF.28
reserved for patients for whom other antiarrhythmic Fibrillation or Flutter Patients Receiving Dronedarone
drugsare ineffective, not preferred, or contraindicated. for the Maintenance of Sinus Rhythm) and ADONIS
However, amiodarone and dofetilide are options for (American-Australian-African Trial with Dronedarone
maintenance of sinus rhythm for patients with HFrEF, as in Atrial Fibrillation or Flutter Patients for the Main-
they are effective, 1,2 and most other drugs are tenance of Sinus Rhythm) reported longer median
contraindicated. times to AF recurrence in dronedarone groups versus
placebo (EURIDIS: 96 versus 41 days; P¼0.001; ADONIS
Recommendation-Specific Supportive Text
158 versus 59 days; P¼0.002). 14
1
1. In subanalyses of randomized trials, dofetilide and 4. Randomized, controlled studies and a comprehensive
amiodarone2 have been shown to be effective for Cochrane database analysis 5 have established the effi-
maintenance of sinus rhythm in patients with AF who cacy of dofetilide for maintenance of sinus rhythm in
have HF. Most antiarrhythmic agents, except amio- patients with AF. In the SAFIRE-D (Symptomatic Atrial
darone and dofetilide, are contraindicated in patients Fibrillation Investigative Research on Dofetilide)
with HFrEF due to worsening of HF and/or increased study, 1,16 the probability of remaining in sinus rhythm
mortality. Sotalol is best avoided in most patients with at 1 year was higher in patients receiving dofetilide 500
HFrEF, because most patients with HFrEFare already mg twice daily compared with placebo (0.58 versus
taking a beta blocker for mortality reduction, and the 0.25; P<0.001). Patients undergoing initiation or
addition of a second beta blocker (sotalol) is unlikely to reloading of dofetilide 29,30 should be admitted for at
be well-tolerated. Therefore, although amiodarone is least 3 days to a health care facility that can provide
associated with a wide range of adverse effects and calculations of CrCl, continuous electrocardiographic
many clinically important drug interactions, amiodar- monitoring, and cardiac resuscitation.
one is often used as a first-line agent for maintenance 5. Multiple randomized, controlled studies have estab-
of sinus rhythm in patients with AF and HFrEF. Dofe- lished the efficacy of amiodarone for maintenance of
tilide is also an option for this indication. Patients sinus rhythm in AF and have shown amiodarone to be
undergoing initiation or reloading of dofetilide 29,30 superior to other antiarrhythmic agents. In SAFE-T
should be admitted for at least 3 days to a health care (Sotalol Amiodarone Atrial Fibrillation Efficacy Trial),
facility that can provide calculations of CrCl, contin- amiodarone was superior to sotalol and placebo with
uous electrocardiographic monitoring, and availability respect to median time to recurrence of AF (487 versus
of cardiac resuscitation. 74 versus 6 days, respectively; P<0.001, for amiodar-
2. Randomized, controlled studies and a comprehensive one versus placebo and amiodarone versus sotalol).17
Cochrane database analysis have established the effi- In CTAF (Canadian Trial of Atrial Fibrillation), AF
cacy of flecainide 3-5 and propafenone 5-11 for mainte- recurrence rates at 16 months were 35% in the amio-
nance of sinus rhythm in patients with AF. In the Flec- darone group and 63% in those randomized to com-
SL (Short-term versus long-term antiarrhythmic drug bined propafenone or sotalol (P<0.001).19 However,
treatment after cardioversion of atrial fibrillation) the adverse effects profile of amiodarone is onerous.
trial, 4 flecainide prevented episodes of paroxysmal AF Amiodarone is associated with a wide range of adverse
in 31% of patients over 4 months compared with 9% in effects, including pulmonary fibrosis, hypo- or hyper-
the placebo group (0.013). Sustained-release prop- thyroidism, elevated transaminases, and more rarely
afenone 425, 325, and 225 mg twice daily extended the hepatotoxicity, photosensitivity, changes in skin
median time to the occurrence of AF, AFL, or supra- pigmentation, peripheral neuropathy, sinus brady-
ventricular tachycardia (SVT) compared with placebo cardia, QT interval prolongation and torsades de
(>300, 291, and 112 days versus 41 days, P<0.001, for all pointes, corneal microdeposits, and rarely optic neu-
propafenone doses versus placebo).8 Patients with ropathy.24 In addition, amiodarone is associated with
previous MI or significant structural heart disease (scar many clinically relevant drug interactions. 31 Therefore,
or fibrosis) should not take flecainide of prop- amiodarone is best reserved for patients who do not
afenone,26,27 and individuals taking flecainide or respond to other recommended antiarrhythmic agents
propafenone should be concomitantly taking an atrio- or for whom other antiarrhythmic drugs are
ventricular nodal blocking agent to reduce the risk of contraindicated.
1:1 AFL.12 6. Randomized, controlled studies and a comprehensive
3. Randomized, controlled studies 13-15 and a comprehen- Cochrane database analysis 5 have established the effi-
5
sive Cochrane database analysis have established the cacy of sotalol 6,7,10,17,18 for maintenance of sinus
efficacy of dronedarone for maintenance of sinus rhythm in patients with AF. In SAFE-T, the median
rhythm in patients with AF. The combined analysis time to AF recurrence was 74 days in the sotalol group,
(n¼1,237) of EURIDIS (European Trial in Atrial compared with 6 days for placebo (P<0.001). 16
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 87
-, 2023:-–- ---
In each box, drugs are listed in alphabetical order. Significant structural heart disease with scar or fibrosis. Colors correspond to Table 2. HFrEF indicates heart
failure with reduced ejection fraction; HF, heart failure; IV, intravenous; LV, left ventricular; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; MI, myocardial infarction;
and NYHA FC, New York Heart Association functional class.
A Cochrane database meta-analysis of 5 randomized most patients also had LVEF <50%. 26 In the continua-
5
studies totaling 1,882 patients with AF reported sota- tion of the study (CAST-II), the class IC agent mor-
lol to be associated with an increase in all-cause mor- icizine also increased the mortality rate within the first
tality (RR, 2.23 [95% CI, 1.03-4.81]). However, this 14 days of treatment.33 In CASH (Cardiac Arrest Study
study included patients with advanced HF, and sotalol Hamburg),34 propafenone was associated with worse
may still have a role in patients with preserved heart outcomes and increased mortality in a population of
function. Patients undergoing initiation or reloading of cardiac arrest survivors, most of whom had structural
oral sotalol should be admitted for at least 3 days to a heart disease. Thus, IC agents are best avoided in pa-
health care facility that can provide calculations of tients with AF who have a previous MI or significant
CrCl, continuous electrocardiographic monitoring, and structural heart disease, including HFrEF, due to the
cardiac resuscitation. A recent FDA-approved intrave- risk of worsening HF and increased mortality.
nous sotalol formulation can be used to evaluate the 8. ANDROMEDA (Antiarrhythmic Trial with Dronedarone
drug safety and tolerability within 6 hours and thus in Moderate to Severe CHF Evaluating Morbidity
may reduce cost and length of stay, although the data Decrease) 28 was a randomized, double-blind placebo-
are limited to a small sample size and very selected controlled study that tested the hypothesis that dro-
population. 32 nedarone would reduce the rate of hospitalization
7. In the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled attributable to HF and possibly reduce mortality by
CAST (Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial), 26,27 the reducing the incidence of arrhythmic death. The study
Vaughan Williams class IC antiarrhythmic agents fle- enrolled patients who were hospitalized with new or
cainide and encainide were associated with an worsening HF and who had at least 1 episode of NYHA
increased mortality rate in patients with recent MI; class III or IV HF (shortness of breath on minimal
88 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
TABLE 23 Specific Drug Therapy for Maintenance of Sinus Rhythm in Patients With AF
Primary
Route(s) of Elimination Mechanism of Major Adverse Important Pharmacokinetic Drug
Drug Loading Dose Maintenance Dose Elimination Half-Life Action Effects Interactions
Amiodarone Total loading dose 200 mg once daily Liver metabolism 14-59 d Inhibits IKr, IKs, INa, AV block Moderate* inhibitor of CYP2C9,
6-10 g, given Biliary excretion IKur, Ito, ICa-L, Bradycardia weak† inhibitor of CYP2D6
400-800 mg IKAch Corneal Some inhibition of CYP3A
daily in 2-4 Noncompetitive microdeposits Increases plasma concentrations of
divided doses beta blocker Elevation in warfarin, lovastatin,‡
for 1-4 wk transaminases simvastatin,§ cyclosporine
Hepatotoxicity Inhibits p-gp
Hyperthyroidism Increases plasma concentrations of
Hypothyroidism digoxin
Nausea
QT prolongation
Peripheral
neuropathy
Photosensitivity
Pulmonary fibrosis
Skin pigmentation
(blue-gray)
TdP
Dofetilide N/A CrCl >60 mL/min: Kidney 10 h Inhibits IKr and QT prolongation Dofetilide is renally excreted via the
500 mg twice daily augments late TdP renal cation transport system.
CrCl 40-60 mL/min: INa These drugs inhibit renal cation
250 mg twice daily transport, increase plasma
CrCl 20-40 mL/min: dofetilide concentrations, and are
125 mg twice daily contraindicated in patients taking
CrCl <20 mL/min: dofetilide:
Contraindicated Cimetidine
Dolutegravir
Ketoconazole
Megestrol
Prochlorperazine
Trimethoprim (alone or in
combination with
sulfamethoxazole)
Verapamil
In addition, hydrochlorothiazide
(alone or in combination with
triamterene) increases plasma
dofetilide concentrations and
should not be coadministered
with dofetilide
Dronedarone N/A 400 mg twice daily Liver metabolism 13-19 h Inhibits IKr IKs, INa, Abdominal pain Dronedarone is a substrate for CYP3A
IKur, Ito, ICa-L, Asthenia and is a moderate inhibitor of
IKAch Bradycardia CYP3A and CYP2D6
Noncompetitive Diarrhea Dronedarone is also a substrate for,
beta blocker Nausea and vomiting and inhibitor of, p-gp
QT prolongation Dronedarone may increase plasma
Rash concentrations of:
TdP Dabigatran
Digoxin
Simvastatink
Sirolimus
Tacrolimus
Warfarin
These drugs may increase plasma
dronedarone concentrations:
Grapefruit juice
These drugs may decrease plasma
dronedarone concentrations:
CYP3A inducers including St. John’s
wort, rifampin, and phenytoin
Flecainide N/A 50-300 mg/d PO Liver (70%) 12-27 h Inhibits INa Atrial flutter Flecainide is a substrate for CYP2D6
divided q 8-12 h Kidney (30%)¶ AV block These drugs may increase plasma
Dizziness flecainide concentrations:
Dyspnea Amiodarone
Exacerbation of Duloxetine
HFrEF Fluoxetine
Headache Paroxetine
Nausea
QT prolongation
VT
Visual disturbances
TABLE 23 Continued
Primary
Route(s) of Elimination Mechanism of Major Adverse Important Pharmacokinetic Drug
Drug Loading Dose Maintenance Dose Elimination Half-Life Action Effects Interactions
Propafenone N/A 150-300 mg PO q 8 h, Liver 9h Inhibits INa Atrial flutter Propafenone is a substrate for
ER 225-425 PO q 12 h Bradycardia CYP2D6
AV block These drugs may increase plasma
Dizziness propafenone concentrations:
Dyspnea Fluoxetine
Exacerbation of Paroxetine
HFrEF Propafenone may increase plasma
Nausea digoxin concentrations
Taste disturbances Propafenone may increase plasma
VT warfarin concentrations
Visual disturbances
Sotalol CrCl >60 mL/min: CrCl >60 mL/min: 80- Kidney 12 h Inhibits IKr AV block None
40-80 mg 160 mg twice daily Beta blocker d- Bradycardia
twice daily for CrCl: 40-60 mL/min: Sotalol Bronchospasm
3d 80-160 mg once augments late Diarrhea
CrCl: 40-60 mL/ daily INa Exacerbation of
min: 80 mg CrCl <40 mL/min: HFrEF
once daily for Contraindicated Fatigue
3d Nausea and vomiting
CrCl <40 mL/min: QT prolongation
Contraindicated TdP
*Moderate inhibitor: Causes a 2-fold to <5-fold increase in AUC or a 50% to 80% decrease in clearance.
†Mild inhibitor: Causes a $1.25-fold but <2-fold increase in AUC or a 20% to 50% decrease in clearance.
‡Lovastatin doses should not exceed 40 mg daily in patients taking amiodarone.
§Simvastatin doses should not exceed 20 mg daily in patients taking amiodarone.
kSimvastatin doses should not exceed 10 mg daily in patients taking dronedarone.
¶Percentage of a dose excreted unchanged in urine.
AF indicates atrial fibrillation; AUC, area under the plasma concentration versus time curve; AV, atrioventricular; CrCl, creatinine clearance; CYP, cytochrome P-450; ER, extended release; HFrEF,
heart failure with reduced ejection fraction; IV, intravenous; N/A, not applicable; NAPA, N-acetylprocainamide; p-gp, p-glycoprotein; PO, orally; TdP, torsades de pointes; and VT, ventricular
tachycardia.
exertion or at rest). More than 40% of the patients had 3.8%; HR, 2.13 [95% CI, 1.07-4.25]; P¼0.03). The higher
NYHA class II HF at baseline. The investigators re- mortality rate was principally associated with wors-
ported that, contrary to the study’s hypothesis, the ening HF.
mortality rate was higher in the dronedarone group
compared with that in the placebo group (8.1% versus 8.3.2. Inpatient Initiation of Antiarrhythmic Agents
1. Patients with AF who are initiating, increasing the dose of, or reinitiating dofetilide therapy should be
1 A admitted for a minimum of 3 days to a facility that can provide continuous electrocardiographic moni-
toring, calculations of CrCl, and cardiac resuscitation, given the potential for proarrhythmia. 1-7
2. In patients with AF, it is reasonable to initiate sotalol therapy in a facility that can provide continuous
2a B-R electrocardiographic monitoring, calculations of CrCl, and cardiac resuscitation, given the potential for
proarrhythmia and bradycardia.4,8-10
3. In patients with AF who are initiating PITP dosing of flecainide and propafenone with concomitant
2a B-NR atrioventricular nodal blocking drugs, it is reasonable to receive the first dose in a facility that can provide
continuous electrocardiographic monitoring, given the potential for proarrhythmia. 9-13
90 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
8.3.3. Antiarrhythmic Drug Follow-Up Amiodarone has also been associated with neurological
Antiarrhythmic drugs are associated with important toxicity, particularly peripheral neuropathy.
adverse effects, and monitoring is recommended to assess Although less common than class III antiarrhythmic
their efficacy for maintaining sinus rhythm and for pre- agents, oral amiodarone may cause torsades de pointes9 ; 1
vention and/or early detection of adverse events. analysis estimated the incidence to be 0.7%. 10
Amiodarone Other Antiarrhythmic Drugs
Recommendations for follow-up monitoring for pa- Recommendations for follow-up of other antiar-
tients taking oral amiodarone are provided in Table 24. rhythmic agents used for management of AF are provided
Amiodarone contains 37% iodine by weight and is there- in Table 25.
fore associated with thyroid abnormalities in 2% to 24% of Dofetilide
patients.1 In 1 study, the median time to onset of Dofetilide is a potent inhibitor of IKr, augments I Na-L ,
amiodarone-induced hypothyroidism was 183 days, with and is associated with torsades de pointes.9 The inci-
a median onset of hyperthyroidism of 720 days. 2 Oral dence of torsades de pointes associated with dofetilide
amiodarone may also provoke elevations in hepatic ranges from 0.9% to 3.3%. 11,12 However, the incidence
transaminases and, rarely, hepatotoxicity. 3 can be substantially higher if the dofetilide dose is not
Amiodarone may cause pulmonary toxicity, most properly adjusted for kidney function. Patients under-
commonly in the form of interstitial lung disease or hy- going initiation or reloading of dofetilide are generally
persensitivity syndrome, 4 in 1% to 2% of patients and is admitted for at least 3 days to a health care facility that
fatal in approximately 10% of cases. Consequently, a can provide calculations of CrCl, continuous electrocar-
chest x-ray is recommended at baseline and when there is diographic monitoring, and cardiac resuscitation. After
a clinical suspicion for pulmonary toxicity.4,5 Pulmonary discharge on a stable dose of these drugs, a 12-lead ECG,
function testing, including diffusing capacity for carbon and levels for serum magnesium, potassium, and creat-
monoxide, can reveal relatively early changes in pulmo- inine are recommended every 3 to 6 months for assess-
nary function that may be attributable to amiodarone- ment of QTc interval duration, electrolyte balance, and
associated pulmonary toxicity; however, the sensitivity renal function, and more frequently for patients
of the test for routine screening of drug-induced lung concomitantly taking other QT interval-prolonging drugs
toxicity in general is uncertain.4-7 or with changing kidney function, to minimize the risk
In patients who develop unexplained cough and dys- of drug-associated torsades de pointes.
pnea while taking amiodarone, a chest CT scan can be Dronedarone
helpful for diagnosis. 5 Rare cases of severe liver injury have been reported in
Corneal microdeposits (epithelial keratopathy) are association with dronedarone. These cases have occurred
common, but visual abnormalities and light sensitivity 4.5 to 6 months after initiation of dronedarone therapy,
are rare. 8
Therefore, an ophthalmologic examination is although 1 case of hepatotoxicity was reported as early as
reasonable only if visual abnormalities develop. 2 days after initiation of dronedarone (and was ultimately
Adverse Effect Baseline Testing Initial Follow-Up Testing Additional Follow-Up Testing
Interstitial lung disease Chest x-ray: Chest x-ray: Unexplained cough or dyspnea or other signs/ CT chest: As indicated to follow-up ongoing
Recommended symptoms suspicious for interstitial lung disease symptoms or chest x-ray findings
CT chest: Not
recommended
Corneal microdeposits (epithelial Not recommended Development of visual abnormalities, which may indicate optic –
keratopathy) neuropathy
Dermatologic (blue-gray skin Not recommended Physical examination annually Development of skin discoloration, severe
discoloration), photosensitivity sunburn
ALT indicates alanine transaminase; AST, aspartate transaminase; CT, computed tomography; ECG, electrocardiogram; TSH, thyroid-stimulating hormone; and TdP, torsades de
pointes.
92 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
Dofetilide 12-lead ECG* In 3-6 mo: Every 3-6 mo (more frequently for patients
Continuous electrocardiographic monitoring during 12-lead ECG* concomitantly taking other QT interval-
3-d hospitalization for dofetilide initiation Serum potassium and magnesium concentration prolonging drugs or with changing
Serum potassium and magnesium concentration Serum creatinine for estimation of CrCl kidney function:
Serum creatinine for estimation of CrCl 12-lead ECG*
Serum potassium and magnesium
concentration
Serum creatinine for estimation of CrCl
Sotalol 12-lead ECG* In 3-6 mo: Every 3-6 mo (more frequently for patients
Continuous electrocardiographic monitoring during 12-lead ECG* concomitantly taking other QT interval-
3-d hospitalization for sotalol initiation Serum potassium and magnesium concentration prolonging drugs or with changing
Serum potassium and magnesium concentration Serum creatinine for estimation of CrCl kidney function:
Serum creatinine for estimation of CrCl 12-lead ECG*
Serum potassium and magnesium
concentration
Serum creatinine for estimation of CrCl
fatal a few days later), 13 although a severe case of been reported to be a contributing factor to numerous
dronedarone-associated toxic hepatitis occurred 9 published cases of drug-induced torsades de pointes.27-29
14
months after initiation of therapy. Therefore, maintenance of serum potassium and magne-
Ibutilide sium concentrations within the normal range is important
Ibutilide may prolong the QT interval and cause tor- before administration of ibutilide, and magnesium sup-
sades de pointes15-22 and therefore continuous electro- plementation may mitigate the risk of torsades de
cardiographic monitoring is recommended during pointes.
infusion and for 4 hours after completion of ibutilide Procainamide
infusion. Ibutilide is associated with nonsustained ven- Intravenous procainamide is associated with hypoten-
tricular tachycardia (VT), QT interval prolongation, and sion in 5% to 12% of patients when used for management
torsades de pointes. The incidence of nonsustained VT of AF, 30,31 and BP monitoring is recommended. Intrave-
23
has been reported to be as high as 8.3%. Torsades de nous procainamide is also associated with widening of the
pointes occurs in approximately 2% to 7% of patients,15-22 QRS complex and prolongation of the QT interval and may
but the incidence increases substantially in patients with provoke proarrhythmia in the form of monomorphic VT 32
22
depressed LVEF. Most reported cases of ibutilide- and torsades de pointes.33
associated nonsustained VT and torsades de pointes Sotalol
have occurred within 30 minutes after the last dose; tor- Sotalol is a potent inhibitor of IKr, augments I Na-L, and
sades de pointes has rarely been reported as late as 2.5 is associated with torsades de pointes, with an incidence
hours after an ibutilide infusion.22 QTc intervals generally ranging from 0.4% to 2.3%. 34,35 Patients undergoing
return to baseline within 2 to 3 hours after a dose. initiation or dose escalation of sotalol are often admitted
The risk of drug-induced torsades de pointes is higher for at least 3 days to a health care facility that can provide
in patients with hypokalemia and/or hypomagnesemia. calculations of CrCl, continuous electrocardiographic
Hypokalemia has been reported to be present in 17% to monitoring, and cardiac resuscitation. A new intravenous
70% of patients who have developed drug-induced tor- form of sotalol was recently FDA approved, which may
sades de pointes. 24-27 Similarly, hypomagnesemia has obviate the need for 3-day admission. After discharge on a
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 93
-, 2023:-–- ---
stable dose of these drugs, a 12-lead ECG, and levels of However, an adequately powered placebo-controlled trial
serum magnesium, potassium, and creatinine are recom- of rosuvastatin did not reduce postoperative AF.15 Statins
mended every 3 to 6 months for assessment of QTc in- do not prevent AF in other cardiovascular settings.16 RCTs
terval duration, electrolyte balance, and renal function, and a meta-analysis provide limited though consistent
and more frequently for patients concomitantly taking support for the antioxidant ascorbic acid for postoperative
other QT interval-prolonging drugs or with changing AF.17 Targeting fibrosis, small or secondary studies of RCTs
kidney function, to minimize the risk of drug-associated reported lower new AF with ACE inhibitors or ARBs. 2-9
torsades de pointes. However, larger RCTs targeting AF failed to reduce
recurrent AF.18-20 RCTs showed that MRAs reduced new-
8.3.4. Upstream Therapy onset atrial arrhythmias in patients with HFrEF along
Pharmacological treatments targeting upstream path- with improvement of other cardiovascular outcomes. 21,22
ways have included glucocorticoids, ACE inhibitors, In patients with type 2 diabetes, HF, or CKD, sodium-
ARBs, aldosterone antagonists, statins, omega-3 poly- glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors appear to prevent new
unsaturated fatty acids, antioxidants, and sodium-glucose AF.23-25 In contrast, omega-3 fatty acids do not appear to
cotransporter 2 inhibitors (see Section 5, “Lifestyle and reduce AF and, in 1 large study, was associated with
Risk Factor Modification for AF Management”). Targeting higher occurrence of AF. 26-31 With only limited or incon-
inflammation, a randomized study of glucocorticoids sistent data, no recommendations are made for use of
reduced recurrent AF after first occurrence of persistent these upstream therapies for prevention of AF.
AF, but adverse effects inhibit long-term steroid use.1-9
Statins reduced postoperative AF in small RCTs.10-14 8.4. AF Catheter Ablation
1. In patients with symptomatic AF in whom antiarrhythmic drugs have been ineffective, contraindicated,
1 A not tolerated or not preferred, and continued rhythm control is desired, catheter ablation is useful to
improve symptoms. 1-10
2. In selected patients (generally younger with few comorbidities) with symptomatic paroxysmal AF in
1 A whom rhythm control is desired, catheter ablation is useful as first-line therapy to improve symptoms and
reduce progression to persistent AF. 11-16
3. In patients with symptomatic or clinically significant AFL, catheter ablation is useful for improving
1 A symptoms. 17-19
4. In patients who are undergoing ablation for AF, ablation of additional clinically significant supraven-
2a B-NR tricular arrhythmias can be useful to reduce the likelihood of future arrhythmia.17,18,20-27
5. In patients (other than younger with few comorbidities) with symptomatic paroxysmal or persistent AF
2a B-R who are being managed with a rhythm-control strategy, catheter ablation as first-line therapy can be
useful to improve symptoms. 11-13,28
Cost Value
6. Catheter ablation for symptomatic AF provides intermediate economic value compared with antiar-
Statement:
Intermediate
B-R rhythmic drug therapy. 29,30
7. In selected* patients with asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic AF, catheter ablation may be useful
2b B-NR for reducing progression of AF and its associated complications. 31-39
*Younger patients with few comorbidities and a moderate to high burden of AF or persistent AF and AFL.
Atrial Fibrillation) study, at 1-year follow-up, recurrent antiarrhythmic medication, freedom from persistent
atrial arrhythmias were identified in 43% of the abla- AF or AT was significantly higher with catheter abla-
tion group and 68% of the antiarrhythmic drug group tion (ablation: 2.4%, versus antiarrhythmic medica-
(P<0.001), and in the STOP AF First (Cryoballoon tion, 17.5%, 1-sided P¼0.0009).57 However, serious
Catheter Ablation in an Antiarrhythmic Drug Naive adverse events associated with the ablation were
Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation) study, recurrent atrial observed in 8% of patients.57 Despite the potential
arrhythmias were identified in 25% of the ablation risks associated with catheter ablation, in a
group and 55% of the antiarrhythmic drug group recent analysis of a large registry that specifically
(P<0.001).12,13 Procedural complications were observed evaluated asymptomatic patients, rhythm control
in 2% to 5% of patients in all 3 studies. 11-13 Although AF was associated with an improvement in the
burden was significantly reduced with ablation composite outcome of cardiac death, ischemic stroke,
compared with antiarrhythmic drug therapy in EARLY- and hospitalization for HF.58 The impact was largest in
AF, AF burden was low with either strategy (percent- those patients who underwent catheter ablation for
age of time in AF: ablation, 0.6% versus antiarrhythmic rhythm control, particularly in those with paroxysmal
drugs, 3.9%) and, in all 3 trials, the average age AF, LA diameters #50 mm,58 or higher stroke risk
11-13
was #60 years. Although these trials enrolled pa- (CHA 2DS2-VASc score $3). In a post hoc analysis of
tients with paroxysmal AF, recent studies have EAST-AFNET 4, the magnitude of benefit from a
consistently found that catheter ablation is more rhythm-control strategy for reducing the primary
commonly used and also effective in patients with composite outcome of cardiovascular death, stroke, or
persistent AF, particularly if of relatively recent onset hospitalizations for HF or ACS was independent of
(<1 year).28 symptom status, and catheter ablation for rhythm
6. Catheter ablation for AF is a costly procedure yet ap- control was used in approximately 20% of patients,
pears to provide value by improving the symptoms of whether symptomatic or not.59
AF and patient QOL. Some of the initially higher costs
of the ablation procedure may be offset by reductions 8.4.1. Patient Selection
in subsequent cardiovascular hospitalizations. Formal Patient selection is the first step and a critically important
economic analyses have been performed alongside 2 step in deciding candidacy for catheter ablation.1-4
randomized controlled clinical trials. Both trials Younger patients are likely to derive greater long-term
showed higher costs and improved QOL during follow- benefit, including delaying AF progression. However,
up, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of clinical trials have demonstrated improved cardiovascular
$58,000 and V51,000 per quality adjusted life-year outcomes with rhythm control, even with median ages in
added, values within the intermediate value range the 70s.5 Patients with minimal atrial enlargement have
(between $50,000 and $150,000 per quality29,30,52-55 the best outcomes, 6 whereas increased myocardial
7,8
adjusted life-year added) by ACC/AHA criteria. fibrosis and more persistent forms of AF are associated
Models of the cost-effectiveness of catheter ablation with higher rates of recurrence after ablation. Time from
have reported more favorable results, but their results diagnosis to ablation is also associated with improved
generally depended on assumptions that ablation outcomes after ablation. 9,10 Although the likelihood of
reduced mortality, or ischemic stroke, or both, which recurrence of AF is 1 factor that should be considered, it is
have not been proven. difficult to predict, 11 and certain patients may derive even
7. In most patients, continued untreated AF will lead to greater benefits from catheter ablation, such as in patients
progression and higher AF burden associated with with HFrEF, who have been shown to have improved
worse clinical outcomes. 31-39 In patients with subclin- functional status, LV function, and cardiovascular out-
ical AF <24 hours, progression to overt AF or episodes comes. 12-14
>24 hours occurs at a rate of 8.8% per year, and those In some patients, ablation should be avoided as it is
patients who develop AF are more likely to be hospi- unlikely to be successful due to overwhelming substrate
talized for HF.56 Several observational studies have or ongoing physiologic processes that either strongly
reported AF progression may be improved by using perpetuate the risk of AF or make maintenance of sinus
a catheter-based ablation rhythm-control strat- rhythm unlikely. These situations include but are not
egy. 33-35,37,38 As an example, in 1 randomized trial that limited to advanced infiltrative cardiomyopathies like
was stopped prematurely, in 255 patients with parox- amyloid, severe mitral stenosis or regurgitation, and cor
ysmal AF randomized to catheter ablation or pulmonale.
96 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
1. In patients undergoing ablation for AF, PVI is recommended as the primary lesion set for all patients
1 A unless a different specific trigger is identified. 1-7
2. In patients undergoing ablation for AF, the value of other endpoints beyond PVI such as noninducibility
2b B-R and ablation of additional anatomic ablation targets (eg, posterior wall sites, low voltage areas, complex
fractionated electrograms, rotors) is uncertain. 8-18
1. In patients with recurrent symptomatic AF after catheter ablation, repeat catheter ablation or antiar-
1 B-NR rhythmic drug therapy is useful to improve symptoms and freedom from AF. 1-11
2. In some patients who have undergone catheter ablation of AF, short-term antiarrhythmic drug therapy
2a A after ablation can be useful to reduce early recurrences of atrial arrhythmia and hospitalization. 12-16
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 97
-, 2023:-–- ---
1. In patients on warfarin who are undergoing catheter ablation of AF, catheter ablation should be per-
1 B-NR formed on uninterrupted therapeutic anticoagulation with a goal INR of 2.0 to 3.0. 1
2. In patients on a DOAC who are undergoing catheter ablation of AF, catheter ablation should be performed
1 A with either continuous or minimally interrupted oral anticoagulation. 2-10
3. In patients who have undergone catheter ablation of AF, oral anticoagulation should be continued for at
1 B-NR least 3 months after the procedure with a longer duration determined by underlying risk. 11
4. In patients who have undergone catheter ablation of AF, continuation of longer-term oral anticoagulation
1 B-NR should be dictated according to the patients’ stroke risk (eg, CHA 2DS 2 -VASc score ‡2).11-17
98 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
Frequency of Timing of
Complication Complication 1-4 Complication Signs and Symptoms Diagnosis Treatment
LA-esophageal fistula 0.2% 1-4 wk Chest pain, pain with swallowing, fever, CT scan of chest Surgery
stroke symptoms
Cardiac perforation with tamponade 0.4%-1.5% During procedure Hypotension Echocardiography Pericardiocentesis
CVA/TIA 0.1%-1.0% During procedure and Neurological findings MRI or CT scan Anticoagulate
up to 1 wk when safe
Vascular access complications 1%-7% During procedure and Pain, swelling at access site Ultrasound or CT Observation
up to 1 mo scan
Vascular access complications 0.1%-0.3% During procedure and Pain and swelling at access site Ultrasound or CT Surgery
requiring surgery up to 1 mo scan
AF indicates atrial fibrillation; CT, computed tomography; CVA, cerebrovascular accident; LA, left atrial; PV, pulmonary vein; TIA, transient ischemic attack; and MRI, magnetic
resonance imaging.
8.4.5. Complications After AF Catheter Ablation ablations are typically from tamponade but may occur
Complications of AF catheter ablation occur in approxi- with strokes. 1-4
mately 5% of patients, with most being vascular Phrenic and vagal nerve paralysis are seen with cryoa-
(Table 26) 1-4
However, several life-threatening complica- blation but are less common in radiofrequency ablation.2
tions may occur. Complications are more common with Early reports of PV stenosis were largely due to ablation
annual operator procedures <25 patients and hospital inside the veins; with antral ablation this is rarely seen. The
procedures <50 patients.1 Some studies demonstrate a most common complications include bruising and bleeding
higher incidence of complications in women, but the 1 at the vascular access site. Less common vascular compli-
CABANA RCT did not. 5 The most severe complication is an cations include damage to the arterial or venous system or
LA to esophageal fistula, which is often fatal but quite an atrioventricular fistula requiring surgery.
rare. Another life-threatening complication is pericardial
tamponade, but this can usually be treated with prompt 8.5. Role of Pacemakers and ICDs for the Prevention and
pericardiocentesis. Clinically significant strokes and TIAs Treatment of AF
are observed in <1% of patients.1-4 Deaths during
Recommendations for the Role of Pacemakers and ICDs for the Prevention and Treatment of AF
Referenced studies that support the recommendations are summarized in the Online Data Supplement.
1. In patients with bradycardia requiring cardiac-implanted electronic devices who have normal atrioven-
1 A tricular conduction, device selection and programming strategies to maintain atrioventricular synchrony
and minimize ventricular pacing should be used to reduce the incidence and progression of AF. 1-6
2. In selected patients with a pacemaker and symptomatic atrial tachyarrhythmias, antitachycardia atrial
2b B-NR pacing and ventricular pacing minimization may be useful for reducing symptoms. 7-13
3. In patients with AF who require significant ventricular pacing, conduction system pacing may be useful to
2b C-LD reduce progression of AF. 14,15
4. In patients with AF, specialized atrial pacing algorithms designed to suppress AF are not useful for
3: No benefit B-R reducing the incidence or slowing the progression of AF. 12,16-18
100 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
1. For patients with AF who are undergoing cardiac surgery, concomitant surgical ablation can be beneficial
2a B-R to reduce the risk of recurrent AF. 1-3
2. In patients undergoing surgical ablation, anticoagulation therapy is reasonable for at least 3 months after
2a B-NR the procedure to reduce the risk of stroke or systemic embolism.2-4
3. For patients with symptomatic, persistent AF refractory to antiarrhythmic drug therapy, a hybrid epicardial
2b B-R and endocardial ablation might be reasonable to reduce the risk of recurrent atrial arrhythmia. 5-7
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 101
-, 2023:-–- ---
1. In patients who present with a new diagnosis of HFrEF and AF, arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy
1 B-NR should be suspected, and an early and aggressive approach to AF rhythm control is recommended.1,2
2. In appropriate patients with AF and HFrEF who are on GDMT, and with reasonable expectation of pro-
1 A cedural benefit (Figure 24), catheter ablation is beneficial to improve symptoms, QOL, ventricular
function, and cardiovascular outcomes.3-13
3. In appropriate patients with symptomatic AF and HFpEF with reasonable expectation of benefit, catheter
2a B-NR ablation can be useful to improve symptoms and improve QOL. 14,15
4. In patients with AF and HF, digoxin is reasonable for rate control, in combination with other rate-
2a B-R controlling agents or as monotherapy if other agents are not tolerated.16,17
5. In patients with AF and HF with rapid ventricular rates in whom beta blockers or calcium channel blockers
2a B-NR are contraindicated or ineffective, intravenous amiodarone is reasonable for acute rate control.†18,19
6. In patients with AF, HFrEF (LVEF <50%), and refractory rapid ventricular response who are not candi-
2a B-R dates for or in whom rhythm control has failed, AVNA and biventricular pacing therapy can be useful to
improve symptoms, QOL, and EF. 20-23
7. In patients with AF, HF, and implanted biventricular pacing therapy in whom an effective pacing per-
2a B-NR centage cannot be achieved with pharmacological therapy, AVNA can be beneficial to improve functional
class, 24,25 reduce the risk of ICD shock, 26 and improve survival. 24,25
8. In patients with AF-induced cardiomyopathy who have recovered LV function, long-term surveillance can
2a B-NR be beneficial to detect recurrent AF in view of the high risk of recurrence of arrhythmia-induced
cardiomyopathy. 27,28
10. In patients with AF and HFrEF who undergo AVNA, conduction system pacing of the His bundle or left
2b C-LD bundle branch area may be reasonable as an alternative to biventricular pacing to improve symptoms,
QOL, and LV function. 32-35
11. In patients with AF and known LVEF <40%, nondihydropyridine calcium channel–blocking drugs should
3: Harm B-R not be administered because of their potential to exacerbate HF. 36
12. For patients with AF, dronedarone should not be administered for maintenance of sinus rhythm to those
3: Harm B-R with NYHA class III and IV HF or patients who have had an episode of decompensated HF in the past 4
weeks, due to the risk of increased early mortality associated with worsening HF.37
*Please see other recommendations on anticoagulation in AF (Section 8.4.4, “Anticoagulation Therapy Before and After Catheter Ablation”), rate control in HF (Section 7, “Rate Control”), and
agents for pharmacological cardioversion (Section 7.2, “Specific Pharmacological Agents for Rate Control”) and maintenance of sinus rhythm (Section 8.3.1, “Specific Drug Therapy for Long-Term
Maintenance of Sinus Rhythm”). †Consider the risk of cardioversion and stroke when using amiodarone as a rate-control agent.
outcomes in patients with HFrEF, 29,40 although a recent antiarrhythmic drugs; often patients require both.
subgroup analysis of patients with HF (most heart failure Data on LVEF, hospitalizations, and mortality rates
with preserved ejection fraction) demonstrated benefit of are less robust, but nearly every larger RCT does show
early rhythm control compared to rate control on clinical some benefit in these outcomes (Table 27). Charac-
outcomes. 1 Several trials have compared AF catheter teristics that may identify patients with a higher
ablation with medical therapy in patients with HFrEF. likelihood of success or failure with AF catheter
Although earlier trials were small and focused on end- ablation are listed in Figure 24.43
points such as improvement in LVEF, QOL, and 6-minute 3. Data for AF catheter ablation are far less robust for
walk, 2 of the largest trials have shown a benefit in HFpEF. The largest analysis for this group of patients
reducing mortality rate and HF hospitalization.3-13 Pa- was a subanalysis of the CABANA trial of patients with
tients with AF and HF may undergo AVNA for rate control HF; in this subgroup analysis, 778 patients (35% of the
refractory to medical therapy.20,21 Similar to findings in study population) enrolled in the study who had
patients who undergo pacemaker implantation for con- NYHA class II HF experienced improvement in sur-
duction system disease, patients with HF appear to be vival, freedom from AF recurrence, and improved
more likely to develop or have worsened cardiomyopathy QOL compared with the medical therapy group. 14
41,42
related to RV pacing dyssynchrony and have Most of these had HFpEF. In this subanalysis, cath-
improved outcomes with biventricular or conduction eter ablation was associated with a reduction in the
system pacing.23,32,33,35 mortality rate and HF. A meta-analysis on catheter
ablation in patients with HFpEF that included 7
Recommendation-Specific Supportive Text
studies and 764 patients showed the ablation to be
1. It can be difficult to determine the extent of the safe and effective and associated with lower hospi-
contribution of AF to cardiomyopathy and new onset talizations and the mortality rate.15
HFrEF. Allowing AF to persist long term, regardless of 4. A small RCT in patients with persistent AF and HF
reasonable rate control, may result in worsening HF (most HFrEF) compared the effects of digoxin, car-
and cardiomyopathy. An early and aggressive vedilol, and the combination. 16 Combination therapy
approach to rhythm control can reduce AF burden, was associated with better rate control and symptom
resulting in favorable ventricular remodeling and relief than monotherapy. The RATE-AF trial random-
halting of any occult arrhythmia-induced cardiomy- ized 160 patients ($60 years of age) with persistent AF
opathy. In a prespecified subanalysis of 798 HF pa- and HF (81% with LVEF $50%) to digoxin or biso-
tients (NYHA class II/III or LVEF <50%) in EAST- prolol.17 No significant difference was noted in the
AFNET (HFpEF, 442; midrange, 211; HFrEF [<40%], primary endpoint of QOL at 6 months. Secondary
132), early rhythm control significantly improved the outcomes, including natriuretic peptide levels, were
composite outcome of death, stroke, or hospitaliza- significantly lower in the digoxin group, without a
tion for worsening of HF or for ACS (early rhythm significant difference in resting heart rate at 12
control, 94/396; 5.7/100 patient-years) versus usual months. Adverse effects were less common in the
care (130/402; 7.9/100 patient-years; HR, 0.74 [95% CI, digoxin group. Observational and post hoc analyses
0.56-0.97]; P¼0.03), and this was not altered by HF have suggested an excess mortality with digoxin in
status. Safety outcomes in each group were compa- patients with AF; however, residual confounding due
rable. However, only 17% of the HF population had to the use of digoxin in sicker patients may have a
LVEF <40%.1 In a post hoc analysis of the CASTLE-AF role.44 In patients with HF on digoxin chronically,
trial, an AF burden <50% at 6 months postcatheter post hoc analyses have suggested increased mortality
ablation was associated with significant improvement rates and hospitalization with serum digoxin levels $1
in the mortality rate and HF hospitalization in pa- ng/mL; levels <0.8 ng/mL in HF were associated with
tients with AF and HFrEF. 2 the lowest mortality rate, although the study was for
2. Multiple RCTs in HFrEF have shown that in patients therapy of HF and not AF.45 In the DAAF (Digitalis in
with symptoms due to AF, ablation improves symp- Acute Atrial Fibrillation) trial of 239 patients (12% with
toms and QOL compared with a rate control or an HF), intravenous digoxin led to a significant decrease
antiarrhythmic drug strategy. 3-13 In each of 3 meta- in heart rate at 2 hours compared with placebo.
analyses, QOL was improved. 3,10,13 Although in the 5. In trials of critically ill patients, some of which
past a trial of antiarrhythmic drugs was advised before included a smaller proportion of patients with HF,
pursuing catheter ablation, current data support intravenous amiodarone has been shown to be effec-
ablation for AF as first-line therapy even before tive in controlling ventricular rates. 18,19,46 In a
104
---
Joglar et al
TABLE 27 Randomized Trials of Rhythm Control in HF
Study/ Peak
Author Primary Death and Reduction VO 2
(y) No. Pts. Inclusion Exclusion Intervention Outcome Hospitalization Death Hospitalizations in AF LVEF QOL 6MWT Max BNP
MacDonald 41 Persistent AF; PAF; QRS RF to medical Similar increase in No difference Improved Improved No change No change
(2011)8 LVEF <35%, >150 therapy CMR LVEF with RF
CHF II-IV
ARC-HF: 52 Persistent AF; RF to medical Improvement No change No difference No difference No change Improved with No change Improved
Jones LVEF <35%, therapy in peak VO2 RF
(2013)6 CHF with RF
CAMTAF 50 Persistent AF; RF to medical LVEF significantly No change No difference Improved Improved with Improved
(2014)5 LVEF <50%; therapy improved RF
CHF with RF
AATAC 203 Persistent AF; RF to At 24 mo, RF Improvement Improved Improved Improved Improved with Improved
(2016)4 LVEF <40%, amiodarone patients more with RF ablation
CHF II-III likely to be in
NSR
CAMERA 66 Persistent AF; RF to medical Improved LVEF Improved No change No change Improved
MRI LVEF <45%, therapy with RF
(2017)12 CHF II-III;
idiopathic CM
CASTLE-AF 363 PAF or persistent RF to medical Composite of Improvement Improved Improved Improved
(2018)9 AF; therapy death and with RF
LVEF <36%, hospitalization
CHF II-IV and lower with RF
ICD
JACC VOL.
Continued on the next page
-, NO. -, 2023
-, 2023:-–-
-, 2023:-–-
JACC VOL.
-, NO. -, 2023
TABLE 27 Continued
Study/ Peak
Author Primary Death and Reduction VO 2
(y) No. Pts. Inclusion Exclusion Intervention Outcome Hospitalization Death Hospitalizations in AF LVEF QOL 6MWT Max BNP
AMICA 140 Persistent AF; RF to medical No difference in No change No change No change No change
(2019)7 LVEF <36% therapy change in LVEF
RAFT-AF 411 $4 PAF/y or RF to medical No difference in No difference in No change No change Improved Improved Improved with Improved with Improved
(2022)11 persistent AF, therapy change in change in with RF with RF RF RF with RF
NYHA class II mortality/HF mortality/HF
or III HF,
elevated pro-
BNP
AAD indicates antiarrhythmic drug; AATAC, Ablation vs Amiodarone for Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Congestive Heart Failure and an Implanted ICD/CRTD; AF, atrial fibrillation; AMICA, Atrial Fibrillation Management in Congestive Heart Failure With
Ablation; ARC-HF, A Randomised Trial to Assess Catheter Ablation Versus Rate Control in the Management of Persistent Atrial Fibrillation in Chronic Heart Failure; BNP, brain natriuretic peptide; CABANA, Catheter Ablation vs Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial
Fibrillation; CAMERA MRI, Catheter Ablation versus Medical Rate Control in Atrial Fibrillation and Systolic Dysfunction-an MRI-Guided Multi-centre Randomised Controlled Trial; CAMTAF, Catheter Ablation Versus Medical Treatment of AF in Heart Failure; CASTLE-AF,
Catheter Ablation versus Standard Conventional Therapy in Patients with Left Ventricular Dysfunction and Atrial Fibrillation; CHF, congestive heart failure; CM, cardiomyopathy; CMR, cardiac magnetic resonance: HF, heart failure; HFpEF, heart failure with persistent
ejection fraction; ICD, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; MACE, major adverse cardiovascular events; NSR, normal sinus rhythm; NYHA, New York Heart Association; PAF, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation; QOL, quality of life; RAFT-AF,
Rhythm Control–Catheter Ablation With or Without Anti-arrhythmic Drug Control of Maintaining Sinus Rhythm Versus Rate Control With Medical Therapy and/or Atrio-ventricular Junction Ablation and Pacemaker Treatment for Atrial Fibrillation; RF, radiofrequency; VO2
max, maximal oxygen consumption; 6MWT, 6-minute walk test.
Joglar et al
---
105
106 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
Colors correspond to Table 2. AF indicates atrial fibrillation; AV, atrioventricular; CMP, cardiomyopathy; CMR, cardiac magnetic resonance; GDMT, guideline-directed
medical therapy; HF, heart failure; HFpEF, heart failure with preserved ejection fraction; HFrEF, heart failure with reduced ejection fraction; IV, intravenous; LVEF, left
ventricular ejection fraction; NDCC, nondihydropyridine calcium channel blocker; and NYHA, New York Heart Association.
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 107
-, 2023:-–- ---
randomized trial of 60 such patients (13 with HF), regarding similarly improved outcomes with conduc-
significant rate control was achieved with both intra- tion system pacing compared with conventional RV
venous diltiazem and intravenous amiodarone. How- pacing in this population. 32-35
ever, intravenous diltiazem was associated with a 7. Conduction of AF may hinder delivery of biven-
significantly higher frequency of hypotension tricular pacing therapy (CRT) and worsen out-
requiring discontinuation. 19 In another retrospective comes.25 Initial clinical trials of CRT included low
study of 38 patients admitted to the intensive care numbers of patients with AF,50 and observational
unit (9 with HF), intravenous amiodarone was asso- analyses suggested a reduced benefit of CRT in pa-
ciated with a statistically significant decrease in ven- tients with AF due to ineffective biventricular pac-
tricular rate without decrease in BP (and in some cases ing. 51,52 A systematic review to evaluate the impact
improved hemodynamics) compared with intrave- of AVNA in patients with AF and CRT found AVNA
nous diltiazem and digoxin. 18 Intravenous beta was associated with significant reductions in all-
blockers may also cause hypotension and may not be cause mortality (RR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.26-0.68]), car-
tolerated in patients with HF and hemodynamic diovascular mortality (RR, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.24-0.81]),
instability. Although less frequent, intravenous and improvement in NYHA class (RR, –0.52 [95% CI,
amiodarone can also be associated with hypotension, –0.87 to –0.17]).24 Confirmatory evidence of the
specifically with the intravenous bolus. The possibil- importance of adequate biventricular pacing per-
ity of conversion to sinus rhythm with intravenous centage is provided by an analysis of remote moni-
amiodarone and associated potential for thromboem- toring data showing a strong association between
bolism, especially in patients with longer-standing AF increasing percentages of biventricular pacing and
not on anticoagulation, should factor into the risk- reduced mortality, with the greatest magnitude
benefit decision when intravenous amiodarone is reduction at >98% pacing. 53 In a systematic review
chosen for rate control. and meta-analysis of 31 studies in 83,571 individuals,
6. Small RCTs of patients with medically refractory AF CRT alone did not improve the mortality rate in pa-
and HF show that patients who undergo AVNA and tients with AF, but the all-cause mortality rate was
conventional pacemaker implantation are less symp- lower in the AVNA group. 25 Many patients with CRT
tomatic and have improvements in QOL and exercise devices also have combined defibrillator therapy. In a
tolerance compared with subjects who are managed pooled analysis of 664 patients with AF and CRT in
with medical rate control. 20-22,47 A meta-analysis whom 282 underwent AVNA, a significant reduction
comparing outcomes with AVNA or medications in appropriate and inappropriate ICD shocks and a
showed, in 2 studies analyzing patients with reduced decrease in all-cause hospitalizations was associated
EF, a modest, yet significant þ4% increase in EF in with AVNA.26
patients undergoing AVNA and RV pacing, while pa- 8. In an observational study of 24 patients with AF-
tients with normal EF at baseline did not show a sig- induced cardiomyopathy and NYHA class III/IV HF,
nificant change. 48 A meta-analysis of 93 studies the median time from onset of arrhythmia to cardio-
including 11,343 patients who underwent AVNA with myopathy and HF was 4.2 years. Aggressive rate/
either RV pacing or biventricular pacing showed per- rhythm control resulted in significant LVEF recovery
iprocedural complications of arrhythmia, HF, and lead in all patients within 6 months. Five of 24 patients had
dislodgement in 2% to 2.5%,49 few long-term data, recurrent AF, and all had a rapid decline in LVEF
and worse outcomes in younger patients with reduced within 6 months after arrhythmia recurrence. 27 In an
EF and RV pacing.49 Overall, these data showed observational cohort of 69 patients with AF and
improved mortality in patients with HF who are LVEF <40% who underwent catheter ablation, pa-
treated with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), tients who maintained sinus rhythm (65%) had com-
at the risk of increased device-related complica- plete LV function recovery and maintained normal
tions.49 The APAF-CRT (Ablate and Pace in Atrial LVEF over 2811 months of follow-up, compared with
Fibrillation plus Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy) those who had recurrent AF/AT.28 Long-term sur-
mortality trial of 133 subjects with AF, HF, and narrow veillance to detect recurrent AF can be beneficial and
QRS was stopped early due to a HR of 0.26 for all- can be accomplished by various modalities, including
cause mortality, also suggesting that when AVNA is wearable devices, smart watches, random monitoring
performed in patients with HF, CRT is preferable to (Holter, event, mobile telemetry), and implantable
conventional RV pacing. 23 Data are accumulating loop recorders.
108 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
1. In patients with an onset of unexplained AF before 30 years of age, electrophysiological study to evaluate
2b B-NR and treat reentrant supraventricular tachyarrhythmias with a targeted ablation may be reasonable
because of the high prevalence of reentrant arrhythmias in this group. 1-3
2. In patents with an onset of AF before 45 years of age without obvious risk factors for AF, referral for
2b B-NR genetic counseling, genetic testing for rare pathogenic variants, and surveillance for cardiomyopathy or
arrhythmia syndromes may be reasonable.4,5
1. In athletes who develop AF, catheter ablation with PVI is a reasonable strategy for rhythm control
2a B-NR because of its effectiveness and low risk of detrimental effect on exercise capacity.1,2
110 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
Nevertheless, athletes will often choose to continue tively, compared with individuals with normal BMI. In
sport participation, and aggressive rhythm control stra- that study, the excess risk of AF associated with obesity
tegies are often sought. Because many of these patients appeared to be mediated through LA dilatation.2 Other
studies suggest that the risk of AF with obesity is medi-
are young, medications are often not tolerated or
ated through epicardial and abdominal fat, or structural
preferred. PVI has been shown to be safe and effective in
changes in the atria. 1,3 Obesity is also associated with
this population without resulting in a significant reduc-
other comorbidities, including hypertension, HF, and
tion in exercise capacity1 and has been shown to signifi-
cantly improve QOL. 2 sleep apnea, which themselves predispose to an increased
incidence of AF. Further, higher BMI and obesity are
Recommendation-Specific Supportive Text associated with an increase in the burden of AF, including
1. In a prospective cohort study of 144 athletes, AF abla- progression from paroxysmal to permanent AF, and an
increased risk of AF recurrence after AF ablation.4 Special
tion with PVI, including multiple procedures, resulted
considerations for the management of AF in patients with
in freedom from AF at 1 year in 86% of athletes with
obesity include the role of weight loss in the primary and
paroxysmal AF and 68% of athletes with persistent AF
secondary prevention of AF (Section 5, “Lifestyle and
over a median follow-up of 3 years.1 Athletes under-
went cardiopulmonary exercise stress testing before Risk Factor Modification for AF Management”), as well as
and after ablation and, although the sinus rate anticoagulation in patients with severe or class III obesity
increased on average 10 bpm after ablation (which may in this section and in Section 10.4 (“Anticoagulation
bother some athletes and thus should be discussed Considerations in Patients With Class III Obesity”).
1. In patients with AF and class III obesity (BMI ‡40 kg/m2 ), DOACs are reasonable to choose over warfarin
2a B-NR for stroke risk reduction. 1-5
2. In patients with AF who have undergone bariatric surgery, warfarin may be reasonable to choose over
2b C-LD DOACs for stroke risk reduction in view of concerns about DOAC drug absorption. 6,7
undergone bariatric surgery. Thus, warfarin may be 2. Although case reports exist that demonstrate expected
reasonable to choose over DOACs to reduce stroke risk in factor Xa trough levels in patients taking a DOAC who
this population until further data become available. undergo bariatric surgery, a meta-analysis of cohort
studies, case series, and case reports has shown that
Recommendation-Specific Supportive Text
42% of patients who have undergone bariatric surgery
1. Post hoc analyses of the ARISTOTLE (apixaban versus had peak drug levels below the expected range.6,7 Pa-
warfarin), ROCKET AF (rivaroxaban versus warfarin), tients who have undergone bariatric surgery are not
and ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 (edoxaban versus warfarin) well represented in any of the major trials comparing
demonstrated consistent efficacy (stroke and systemic DOACs with warfarin, and few observational data
embolism) and safety (major bleeding) of DOACs support DOAC use in this population. Warfarin’s ther-
compared with warfarin across weight groups in pa- apeutic effect can be routinely monitored. Thus, in
tients with AF.3-5 A meta-analysis including these trials patients with AF who have undergone bariatric sur-
and RE-LY (dabigatran versus warfarin) again showed gery, warfarin may be a reasonable choice over DOACs
similar efficacy and safety of DOACs compared with for stroke risk reduction at this time.
warfarin, although the outcome differences were
attenuated in obese patients. 2 A large retrospective
10.5. AF and VHD
observational study including 36,094 patients
VHD and AF commonly coexist. AF independently pre-
compared risk of ischemic stroke, significant bleeding,
dicts the risk of cerebrovascular events among patients
and mortality in patients receiving a DOAC or warfarin,
1 with valve disease.1 This risk may be addressed with the
stratified by BMI group. For all 3 endpoints, better
use of oral anticoagulation, percutaneous and surgical
outcomes were observed with DOACs across BMI
groups. In patients with a BMI $40 kg/m , a relative 2 LAAO, and surgical ablation as described in Sections 6.5.1
risk reduction of 25% for ischemic stroke (adjusted HR, (“Percutaneous Approaches to Occlude the LAA”), 6.5.2
0.75 [95% CI, 0.64-0.87]; P<0.001), 57% for significant (“Cardiac Surgery—LAA Exclusion/Excision”), and 6.8.5
1. Patients with AF with rapid anterograde conduction (preexcited AF), and hemodynamic instability should
1 B-NR be treated with electrical cardioversion. 1,2
2. For patients with AF with rapid anterograde conduction (preexcited AF), catheter ablation of accessory
1 B-NR pathways (APs) is recommended. 3-7
3. In patients with AF with rapid anterograde conduction (preexcited AF) and hemodynamic stability,
1 C-LD pharmacological cardioversion with intravenous ibutilide or intravenous procainamide is recommended as
an alternative to elective cardioversion. 1,8,9
4. For patients with AF with anterograde accessory pathway conduction (preexcited AF), pharmacological
3: Harm B-NR agents that block atrioventricular nodal conduction (verapamil, diltiazem, amiodarone, digoxin, adenosine,
or beta blockers) are contraindicated due to risk of precipitating VF or hemodynamic deterioration. 10-14
Synopsis higher for those with multiple pathways and short ante-
WPW and preexcitation syndromes refer to the pres- grade pathway refractory period (<250 ms), which allows
ence of extra-atrioventricular nodal connection(s) be- rapid conduction and predisposes to VF and sudden
tween atrium and ventricle; such APs are comprised of death.1,18,19 Moreover, AF in young persons without evi-
15
atrial tissue. AF occurs in approximately 15% of persons dence of comorbid conditions may be associated with an
with WPW and although the mechanism(s) remain un- AP, and pathway ablation is definitive therapy for AF and
clear, the faster conduction properties of atrial tissue SVT in these persons. 1 For those who cannot undergo
compared with the atrioventricular node allow for rapid ablation, preventive pharmacological therapy is directed
rates in preexcited AF.15-17 The risk of preexcited AF is to slowing pathway conduction.20,21
112 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
1. In adults with congenital heart disease and AF, it is recommended to evaluate for and treat precipitating
1 B-NR factors and reversible causes of AF, recognizing that residual hemodynamic sequalae may contribute to
the occurrence of the arrhythmia. 1,2
2. In adults with AF and moderate or complex congenital heart disease, electrophysiological procedures
1 C-LD should be performed by operators with expertise in ACHD procedures and in collaboration with an ACHD
cardiologist, ideally in specialized centers, when available. 3-5
3. In adults with congenital heart disease and symptomatic or hemodynamically significant paroxysmal or
1 C-LD persistent AF, an initial strategy of rhythm control is recommended regardless of lesion severity as AF in
this population is often poorly tolerated. 6
4. In symptomatic patients with simple congenital heart disease with antiarrhythmic drug–refractory AF, it is
2a B-NR reasonable to choose ablation over long-term antiarrhythmic therapies. 4,7
5. In adults with congenital heart disease with AF undergoing PVI, it may be reasonable to include an ablative
2b C-LD strategy in the right atrium directed at reentrant arrhythmia secondary to atriotomy scars and the CTI. 8,9
6. In adults with AF and moderate or severe forms of congenital heart disease, particularly those with low-flow
2b C-LD states such as Fontan circulation, blind-ending cardiac chambers, and cyanosis, it may be reasonable to treat
with anticoagulation independent of conventional risk score to reduce risk of thromboembolic events.10
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 113
-, 2023:-–- ---
1. In patients undergoing cardiac surgery who are at high risk for postoperative AF, it is reasonable to
2a B-R administer short-term prophylactic beta blockers or amiodarone to reduce the incidence of postoperative
AF.1-5
2. In patients undergoing CABG, aortic valve, or ascending aortic aneurysm operations, it is reasonable to
2a B-R perform concomitant posterior left pericardiotomy to reduce the incidence of postoperative AF. 6,7
AF indicates atrial fibrillation; and CABG, coronary artery bypass graft. Colors correspond to Table 2.
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 115
-, 2023:-–- ---
A*
1. In postoperative cardiac surgery patients, beta blockers* are recommended to achieve rate control for
1 AF1-4 unless contraindicated or ineffective in which case a nondihydropyridine calcium channel blocker† is
B-R†
recommended. 5
2. In hemodynamically stable cardiac surgery patients with postoperative AF, rate-control (target heart
1 B-R rate, <100 bpm) and/or rhythm-control medications are recommended as initial therapy, with the choice
of strategy according to patient symptoms, hemodynamic consequences of the arrhythmia, and physician
preference.5,6
3. In patients who develop poorly tolerated AF after cardiac surgery, direct current cardioversion in com-
1 B-R bination with antiarrhythmic drug therapy is recommended, with consideration of imaging to rule out left
appendage thrombus before cardioversion in those patients in whom AF has been present >48 hours and
who have not been on anticoagulation.5,6
4. In patients who develop postoperative AF after cardiac surgery, it is reasonable to administer anti-
2a B-NR coagulation when deemed safe in regard to surgical bleeding for 60 days after surgery unless compli-
cations develop and to reevaluate the need for longer term anticoagulation at that time. 5,7
5. In patients who develop AF after cardiac surgery and who are treated with rate-control strategy, at 30- to
2a C-LD 60-day follow-up it is reasonable to perform rhythm assessment and, if AF does not revert to sinus
rhythm spontaneously, consider cardioversion after an adequate duration of anticoagulation.5,6
*A LOE applies to the data on beta blockers. †B-R LOE applies to the data on nondihydropyridine calcium channel blockers.
Colors correspond to Table 2. AF indicates atrial fibrillation; and HR, heart rate.
1. Patients with AF who are identified in the setting of acute medical illness or surgery should be counseled
1 B-NR about the significant risk of recurrent AF after the acute illness is resolved. 1-6
2. In patients with AF who are identified in the setting of acute medical illness or surgery, outpatient follow-
2a B-NR up for thromboembolic risk stratification and decision-making on OAC initiation or continuation, as well as
AF surveillance, can be beneficial given a high risk of AF recurrence.4-9
3. In patients with AF who are identified in the setting of critical illness due to sepsis, the benefits of
2b B-NR anticoagulation during critical illness for stroke prevention are uncertain. 10,11
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 117
-, 2023:-–- ---
Unadjusted curves displaying cumulative risk of recurrent AF, generated using Kaplan-Meier method. (A) Overall risk of recurrent AF among individuals with and
without acute precipitants. (B) Overall risk of recurrent AF among individuals with infection, cardiac surgery, and noncardiothoracic surgery compared with no pre-
cipitant. These 3 precipitants were selected for display because the risk of recurrent AF was significantly lower compared with the referent group without precipitants in
multivariable adjusted models. Individuals with other AF precipitants were excluded from this plot for clarity. AF indicates atrial fibrillation; and CT, cardiothoracic.
Reproduced with permission from Wang et al.3 Copyright 2020 American Heart Association, Inc.
17
Adapted with permission from Chyou et al. Copyright 2023 American Heart Association, Inc. AF indicates atrial fibrillation.
associated with increased risk of HF (HR, 2.74 [95% CI, 3. In a retrospective cohort study of 38,582 patients
2.39-3.15]; P<0.001), stroke (HR, 1.57 [95% CI, 1.30- with AF and sepsis admitted to US hospitals from
1.90]; P<0.001), and death (HR, 2.96 [95% CI, 2.70- July 1, 2010, to June 30, 2013, 13,611 patients (35.3%)
3.24]; P<0.001). In patients with acute AF after cardiac received parenteral anticoagulation for AF. The
surgery, observational studies show that those who CHA2DS 2-VASc score was a poor predictor of acute
underwent continuous rhythm monitoring had a higher stroke risk, and parenteral anticoagulation did not
detection of AF.4-6 No randomized clinical trial has reduce stroke risk (1.3% versus 1.4%; RR, 0.94 [95%
specifically compared different monitoring strategies CI, 0.77-1.15]) and was associated with an increased
for outpatient follow-up of patients with acute AF. risk of clinically significant bleeding (8.6% versus
However, parallels could be drawn from studies like 7.2%; RR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.10-1.32]). Risk of stroke did
the CRYSTAL-AF8 and SEARCH-AF (Post-Surgical not differ whether patients had preexisting AF and
Enhanced Monitoring for Cardiac Arrhythmias and new onset AF.10 In a retrospective cohort study of 102
9
Atrial Fibrillation) trials, which showed increased patients $65 years of age who were hospitalized with
sensitivity for AF detection with long-term monitoring. sepsis and with new-onset AF, 28% received a pre-
Close outpatient follow-up with consideration of heart scription for OACs within 30 days of admission. Over
rhythm monitoring and thromboembolic risk stratifi- 3-year follow-up, no significant association was noted
cation is important considering the high risk of AF between anticoagulation and a lower incidence of
recurrence in these patients, especially in those who ischemic stroke (OR, 1.98 [95% CI, 0.29-13.47]) or
underwent noncardiac surgery and with risk factors for bleeding (OR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.29-3.21]).11 Gaps in
stroke in whom the AF is likely to recur (Figure 28). The knowledge exist, and further research is needed to
optimal frequency, duration, and type of rhythm better understand the benefits and risks of acute and
monitoring for patients with acute AF remain unclear long-term anticoagulation in critically ill patients
and need further study. with acute AF.
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 119
-, 2023:-–- ---
10.11. Hyperthyroidism
1. In patients with hyperthyroidism and AF who have an elevated risk of stroke based on a standard clinical
1 B-NR risk score, anticoagulation is recommended until thyroid function has returned to normal and sinus
rhythm can be maintained.1,2
1. In patients with AF and COPD, it is reasonable to use cardioselective beta blockers for rate control of AF,
2a B-R especially where other indications exist (eg, MI and HF). 1-3
2. In patients with pulmonary hypertension (PH) with pulmonary vascular disease and AF or AFL, a rhythm-
2a B-NR control strategy is reasonable to improve functional status and potentially prolong survival. 4-12
associated with future AF recurrence, is unknown. AF and less than severe COPD. However, beta blockers can
other supraventricular arrhythmias are important causes exacerbate reactive airway disease and are generally
of decompensation in patients with PH, which is espe- avoided in that setting, such as in patients with
cially well described in World Health Organization groups asthma.
1 and 4. A successful rhythm-control strategy is associated 2. Atrial arrhythmias are common in PH with pulmonary
with better outcomes in these patients. vascular disease (PH PVD; hemodynamically defined as
PH with increased pulmonary vascular resistance and
Recommendation-Specific Supportive Text
normal left heart filling pressures, typical of World
1. AF is common in patients with COPD, with a prevalence Health Organization group 1 but also of groups 3 and 4).
of 11% in a large European registry.16 Furthermore, Right atrial contraction accounts for a significantly
patients with COPD often have other concomitant heart greater proportion of total right heart function in pa-
disease. Because beta-2 agonists can be used for the tients with PH PVD than in normal subjects,18 and the
treatment of COPD, there has been a reluctance to onset of atrial arrhythmia is frequently associated with
prescribe beta blockers in case these would antagonize clinical deterioration.4-12 Restoration of sinus rhythm
17
beta-2 agonists or precipitate bronchospasm. How- results in improvement, whereas persistent arrhythmia
ever, a systematic review and meta-analysis of obser- or recurrence is associated with mortality. 4,8,9 Phar-
vational studies found that beta-blocker use, for macological rhythm control and cardioversion have
diverse indications including HF and CAD, was associ- both been used, although negative inotropy may limit
ated with a significantly reduced risk of mortality in antiarrhythmic drug therapy. Catheter ablation of
patients with COPD.1 Another meta-analysis of RCTs typical AFL has been well described in patients with
assessing the effect of cardioselective beta blockers on PH PVD, with acceptable results and safety, as well as
respiratory function and symptoms did not find any improvement in clinical and hemodynamic parame-
change in these parameters or in response to beta-2 ters.5,7,12 LA ablation has also been described, although
2
agonists. An RCT of patients with advanced COPD at the possibility of creating a right-to-left shunt should
risk of severe exacerbation, but without an indication always be considered when planning transseptal
for beta-blocker treatment, found no difference in the puncture. Anesthetic management is also complex, and
time to first exacerbation but did find an increased risk these patients are best cared for by centers with
of severe exacerbation.3 Therefore, although other extensive clinical expertise in these conditions.
agents can be used for rate control of AF (Section 7,
“Rate Control”), beta blockers, especially car-
10.13. Pregnancy
dioselective beta blockers, for treatment of AF need not
be avoided when indicated, especially in patients with
1. In pregnant patients with AF, DCCV is safe to the patient and fetus and should be performed in the same
1 B-NR manner as in patients who are not pregnant. 1
2. In pregnant individuals with structurally normal hearts and hemodynamically stable AF, pharmacological
2b C-LD cardioversion with agents with history of safe use in pregnancy, such as intravenous procainamide, may
be considered.1,2
3. In pregnant individuals with AF and without structural heart disease, antiarrhythmic agents with history
2a C-LD of safe use in pregnancy (eg, flecainide and sotalol) are reasonable for maintenance of sinus rhythm. 1,2
4. In pregnant individuals with persistent AF, rate-control agents with a record of safety in pregnancy, such as
2a B-NR beta blockers (eg, propranolol or metoprolol) and digoxin, either alone or in combination with beta
blockers, are reasonable as first-line agents. 1,2
5. Pregnant individuals with AF and elevated risk of stroke may be considered for anticoagulation with the
2b C-LD recognition that no anticoagulation strategy is completely safe for both the mother and fetus, and an
SDM discussion should take place regarding risks to both mother and fetus (Table 28). 3
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 121
-, 2023:-–- ---
Synopsis
TABLE 28 Anticoagulation Strategies During Pregnancy.
The incidence of atrial arrhythmias is rising in preg-
nancy, and data from the national inpatient sample sug- Antenatal Options
therapeutic INR is #5 mg. If the dose of warfarin is >5 women, and VKAs are generally held to mitigate risk of
mg/day, low-molecular-weight heparin should be bleeding compliciations.13 Use of novel DOACs is not
administered throughout the first trimester and then recommended during pregnancy in view of lack of
transitioned to warfarin for the remainder of the evidence about safety. 16
antenatal period until 36 hours before a planned de-
livery, at which time unfractionated heparin is star-
10.14. Cardio-Oncology and Anticoagulation Considerations
ted. 15 Vaginal delivery should be advised for most
1. In patients with cancer and AF, multidisciplinary communication including cardiology, oncology and other
1 C-LD clinicians, and SDM with the patient is recommended to optimize cancer and AF treatment and to reduce
the risk of drug-drug interactions, QTc prolongation, proarrhythmia, bleeding, and thromboembolism. 1-3
2. In patients who are to be initiated on cancer therapies associated with an increased risk of developing AF,
2a C-LD increased vigilance for incident AF and treatment of contributing factors is reasonable to decrease
morbidity. 1,4-6
3. In most patients with AF and cancer (remote history or receiving active cancer treatment), DOACs are
2a B-NR reasonable to choose over VKAs for stroke risk reduction. 7,8
Antimetabolites
Clofarabine combined with cytarabine X
5FU X
Cepecitabine X
Gemcitabine X
Alkylating agents *Stem cell transplantation is associated with an increased risk of AF,28,29 and
Cyclophosphamide X the risk may be higher with melphalan-associated regimens.
Melphalan þ stem cell transplantation X*
Immunomodulatory drugs Given rates reported from patients with multiple myeloma, AF due to
Lenalidomide X underlying cardiac AL amyloid may contribute
Interleukin-2 X
TKIs †Reported AF rates with ibrutinib have varied across trials (4%-18%),6,30
Ibrutinib (BTKi) X† X† partly related to varying duration of follow-up and patient factors.
Acalbrutinib (second-generation BTKi) X Second-generation BTKis have more selective BTK activity and are
Zanubrutinib (second-generation BTKi) X associated with a lower incidence of AF than ibrutinib.31
Ponatinib (BCR-ABL TKI) and other TKIs (eg, X Based on FDA adverse event reporting system4
trametinib, osimertinib, nilotinib, ribociclib)
VEGF inhibitor
Sorafenib in combination with 5FU X
BRAF inhibitor
Vemurafenib X
Monoclonal antibodies
Rituximab X
Table developed by 2023 Atrial Fibrillation Guideline Writing Committee. Data extracted from Buza et al32 and Fradley et al.33
AF indicates atrial fibrillation; BTKi, Bruton’s kinase inhibitor; CAR, chimeric antigen receptor; FDA, US Food and Drug Administration; 5FU, 5 fluorouracil; and TKI, tyrosine kinase
inhibitor.
2. Certain medical cancer therapies can increase the risk 3. No large RCTs are available that compare DOACs to
of incident AF (Table 29). Patients with cancer and AF warfarin in patients with AF and cancer. A meta-
are older and have higher rates of hypertension, MI, analysis of post-hoc analyses of RCTs and retrospec-
and HF compared with those who do not develop tive observational studies that compared DOACs with
AF.13-15 The development of perioperative AF has been warfarin in patients with AF and cancer (n¼229,221)
strongly associated with perioperative complications.20 demonstrated a lower risk of stroke or systemic em-
In general, patients with cancer and CVD may be bolism (RR, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.52-0.81]; P¼0.001) and
undertreated with GDMT or less often referred to spe- major bleeding (RR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.50-0.92]; P¼0.01)
cialists for cardiovascular care.21 Optimization of car- with DOACs.8 This meta-analysis included post hoc
diovascular conditions such as hypertension and HF analyses of patients with cancer and AF from the
may decrease the risk of incident AF, AF recurrence, ROCKET AF (rivaroxaban versus warfarin), ENGAGE
and of major adverse cardiovascular events, including TIMI-48 (edoxaban versus warfarin), and ARISTOTLE
stroke.22-25 Therefore, in patients without a history of (apixaban versus warfarin) trials. These findings were
AF, or those with previous history of AF, who are to be consistent in patients defined as having active cancer,
started on cancer therapies associated with a higher although definitions of active cancer varied by study.
risk of AF, evaluation and optimization of cardiovas- An additional large retrospective observation study
cular risk factors or disease by a cardiologist could be comparing DOACs to warfarin in patients with active
beneficial in decreasing incident and recurrent AF and cancer demonstrated a lower risk of the composite
associated cardiovascular events, although no data are endpoint of ischemic stroke/intracranial bleeding in
available specifically in patients with cancer. Further- patients taking DOACs compared with VKA (adjusted
more, elevated natriuretic peptides or a history of HR, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.48-0.88]).7 Although most of the
previous AF can identify patients at higher risk of AF data in this patient population came from retrospective
after major thoracic cancer surgery. 26,27 observational studies that may be prone to selection
124 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
10.15. CKD and Kidney Failure catheters. Anticoagulation in patients with CKD and AF is
covered in Section 6.8.4 (“Chronic Kidney Disease [CKD]/
CKD and kidney failure (formerly end-stage renal disease)
Kidney Failure”).
share common risk factors with AF, such as hypertension
and diabetes, and unsurprisingly, CKD and AF are asso- 10.16. Anticoagulation Use in Patients With Liver Disease
ciated in a disproportionate manner. In population
1. For patients with AF who are at increased risk of systemic thromboembolism and mild or moderate liver
2a B-NR disease (Child-Pugh* class A or B), OAC therapy is reasonable in the absence of clinically significant liver
disease–induced coagulopathy or thrombocytopenia.1-7
2. For patients with AF who are at increased risk of systemic thromboembolism and mild or moderate liver
2a B-NR disease (Child-Pugh class A or B) and who are deemed to be candidates for anticoagulation, it is
reasonable to prescribe DOACs (Child-Pugh class A: any DOAC; Child-Pugh class B: apixaban, dabigatran,
or edoxaban) over warfarin.1,7-11
3. For patients with AF and moderate liver disease (Child-Pugh class B) at increased risk of systemic
3: Harm C-LD thromboembolism, rivaroxaban is contraindicated due to the potentially increased risk of bleeding.12
*Child-Pugh scoring: the severity of liver disease, primarily cirrhosis in patients with diagnosed liver disease. Child-Pugh A (mild): 5-6 points; Child-Pugh B (moderate): 7-9 points; Child-Pugh C
(severe): 10-15 points. The score is based on the 5 variables: encephalopathy (none¼1 point, grade 1 and 2¼2 points, grade 3 and 4¼ 3 points); ascites (none¼1 point, slight¼2 points, moderate¼3
points); total bilirubin (<2 mg/mL¼1 point, 2-3 mg/mL¼2 points, >3 mg/mL¼3 points); albumin (>3.5 mg/mL¼1 point, 2.8-3.5 mg/mL¼2 points, <2.8 mg/mL¼3 points); INR (<1.7¼1 point, INR
1.7-2.2¼2 points, INR >2.2¼3 points).
clinical trials for DOACs excluded patients with active moderate liver disease compared with healthy sub-
liver disease. Four postmarketing retrospective studies jects.12 Although the FDA labeling recommends avoid-
and 2 meta-analyses have evaluated the comparison be- ing edoxaban in patients with moderate liver disease
tween DOACs and VKAs in this population, and they due to the concern of underlying coagulopathy, the
showed DOACs were associated with a lower risk of major edoxaban AUC was not significantly increased after a
bleeding or ICH.1,7-11 Limited data exist on the safety of single dose of edoxaban 15 mg in patients with mod-
DOAC in severe liver disease. The uses of DOACs based on erate liver disease compared with healthy subjects.14
a Child-Pugh Score are summarized in Table 13 (Section Apixaban AUC was not significantly increased after a
6.3.1.1. “Considerations in Managing Anticoagulation”). single dose of apixaban 5 mg in subjects with mild and
moderate liver disease (Child-Pugh class A and B)
Recommendation-Specific Supportive Text
compared with healthy subjects.15 Dabigatran AUC was
1. A meta-analysis showed that VKA use was significantly also not significantly different after a single dose of
associated with lower risks of ischemic stroke or dabigatran 150 mg in patients with moderate liver
thromboembolism but was also associated with signif- disease (Child-Pugh class B) compared with that in
icantly higher risks of major bleeding or ICH in patients healthy subjects. 16
with AF and liver disease compared with no oral anti-
coagulation therapy.7 A large-scale retrospective study
11. FUTURE RESEARCH NEEDS
also corroborated that OAC use was significantly asso-
ciated with a lower risk of stroke or all-cause mortality
Enormous progress and important advances have been
in patients with AF and cirrhosis. 3 VKA use in the liver
made in recent years on the understanding of mecha-
fibrosis group was associated with a higher risk of the
nisms and on the prevention and management of AF,
composite cardiovascular events and major bleeding
including substantial progress since the 2014 guideline, as
than in the nonliver fibrosis group.4 However, no sig-
well as the 2019 focused update. Although the writing
nificant difference in the composite cardiovascular
committee has tried to make significant progress in this
events and major bleeding between the 2 groups
current guideline to address many of the gaps in the
receiving DOACs was found. The efficacy and safety of
clinical management of AF, important gaps in knowledge
VKAs or DOACs were not affected by nonalcohol fatty
remain and are listed below.
liver disease status.5 The subgroup analysis of the
meta-analysis found that the risk of major bleeding was 1. AF as a disease continuum: AF must be seen as a
not affected by the presence of esophageal varices.13 disease continuum, yet historically the emphasis has
2. A meta-analysis found no significant difference in the been on rhythm management. More evidence is
risk of ischemic stroke and thromboembolism between needed on how to best improve in other aspects of AF
DOACs and VKAs (OR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.36-1.88]; P¼0.64) care, such as prevention, modification of risk factors,
in patients with almost exclusively mild-to-moderate and how to incorporate holistic approaches to AF
liver disease (Child-Pugh class A-B), but DOAC use management into daily clinical practice.
was associated with lower risks of major bleeding (OR, 2. Downstream consequences: The downstream conse-
0.54 [95% CI, 0.38-0.75]; P¼0.0003) and ICH (OR, 0.35 quences of AF over the long term must be better
[95% CI, 0.23-0.53]; P<0.0001) compared with the studied and defined. Most studies generally focus on
warfarin group.7 Another meta-analysis showed that, short-term effects of therapy, usually 6 to 12 months.
in patients with exclusively mild-to-moderate cirrhosis Many long-term consequences of AF remain poorly
(Child-Pugh score A-B), DOAC use was associated with characterized, such as dementia and valvular
lower risks of ischemic stroke (HR, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.10- insufficiency.
0.90]), major bleeding (HR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.57-0.72]), or 3. Better goal and outcome definition: Historically,
ICH (HR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.40-0.59]) compared with ablation failure has been defined as having 30 seconds
warfarin.11 DOACs are reasonable oral anticoagulation of AF identified during a follow-up period. However,
agents in patients with AF and mild-to-moderate liver that number might be too simplistic because AF
disease (Child-Pugh class A-B). However, data on burden may be a more important metric and because
DOACs are lacking on patients with AF and severe liver the 30-second metric might not reflect significant
disease (Child-Pugh class C). burden reduction that may be observed in many pa-
3. Rivaroxaban is currently avoided in patients with tients. Patient-oriented outcomes would also be more
moderate liver disease (Child-Pugh class B). Rivarox- important, such as QOL.
aban AUC significantly increased by 2.27-fold after a 4. Role of risk modifiers in AF stroke prevention: Great
single dose of rivaroxaban 10 mg in patients with variation exists in risk of stroke depending on
126 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
nonbinary or dynamic risk factors. Yet it is unclear response to therapy in patients with AF. Validation on
how to best manage patients accordingly. For the accuracy of the most common available technol-
example, how should risk of stroke be assessed in a ogies is needed. How to best use these devices in
person with hypertension in whom the BP is very well practice, including for AF screening, must be better
controlled? Or, perhaps, how do we incorporate AF defined.
burden on the risk calculation? 10. Standardization of ablation procedures: Great prac-
5. Individualization of AF and stroke risk: Although tice variation exists on how AF ablation procedures
some studies have demonstrated an effective role of are performed, either as first or repeat procedures.
biomarkers in predicting AF and stroke, how to Large registries and more data are required to better
incorporate these findings into clinical practice re- define standards of care in this field. Many in-
mains elusive. Similarly, how to incorporate other terventions, such as extra ablation lines, are still
clinical markers of atrial cardiopathy into clinical performed despite limited data demonstrating effi-
practice must be better defined, as well as clarification cacy, whereas the best approaches to persistent AF
as to how these nontraditional risk factors help better and repeat ablation are poorly defined.
stratify patient risk. 11. Candidates for ablation: We must better identify
6. Incorporating other stroke risk scores: The ubiqui- clinical markers to better identify when catheter
tous nature and simplicity of the CHA 2DS 2-VASc score ablation is unlikely to benefit patients and define
have diminished with consideration of other scores of specific criteria for candidacy for first time and repeat
potential utility, better c-statistics, and with potential procedures.
advantages in particular populations. Additional 12. Artificial intelligence for AF management: Artificial
studies are needed to better take advantage of scores intelligence could potentially be used to better tailor
for specific groups, scores that could potentially be therapy to the individual patient, taking into consid-
incorporated into the electronic medical record, and eration numerous factors that may better select can-
perhaps some with the potential benefit of better didates for therapeutic approaches, such as
discriminating the true low-risk patients. anticoagulation versus LAAO, rhythm versus rate
7. Surgical exclusion and LAAO: Increasingly available control, catheter ablation versus medical therapy,
evidence has demonstrated the benefit of surgical modification of risk factors, genetics, and others.
LAA exclusion for stroke prevention, but the most 13. Strategies for anticoagulation: Ongoing clinical trials
scientifically rigorous trials included patients who are assessing different strategies for oral anti-
received concomitant anticoagulation. More evidence coagulation in persons who have undergone catheter
is needed on the magnitude of benefit of LAA exclu- ablation, including the OCEAN (Optimal Anti-
sion in preventing stroke in patients who have con- Coagulation for Enhanced-Risk Patients Post-
traindications to anticoagulation and how to best Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation) trial
manage those patients around rhythm-control in- (NCT02168829) 1 and ODIn-AF (Prevention of Silent
terventions, such as cardioversion. Clinicians would Cerebral Thromboembolism by Oral Anticoagulation
also like to see additional data on pLAAO, particularly With Dabigatran After Pulmonary Vein Isolation for
peri-implant stroke management and longer-term Atrial Fibrillation) (NCT02067182) 2 trial, because it is
outcomes in patients in whom periprocedure anti- unclear in whom anticoagulation can be dis-
coagulation is not possible. continued after successful ablation. Several studies
8. Subclinical AF: What magnitude of AF burden man- also have investigated the use of intermittent or
dates stroke prevention therapy in patients with continuous rhythm monitoring to guide oral anti-
subclinical AF must be better defined. Certainly, large coagulation in persons with AF, including those who
general risk categories have been identified, and have undergone ablation.3,4 These so-called “PITP”
general guidelines exist, but extensive practice vari- or “electrocardiographic-guided” approaches are
ations remain, and more precise recommendations for investigational. Ongoing clinical trials like REACT
the community are needed. In addition, the role and (Rescue Angioplasty versus Conservative Treatment
impact on outcomes of AF screening in general and or Repeat Thrombolysis) will help determine whether
poststroke should be better defined. they are suitable for clinical practice. Also, anti-
9. Use and applicability of consumer-based wearable coagulation/DOAC use in pregnancy needs to be
heart monitoring devices: These devices are now investigated because it is currently contraindicated
widespread and are used to diagnose and monitor in view of lack of data on safety.
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 127
-, 2023:-–- ---
14. Sleep: Among patients with AF and SDB, the impact PRESIDENTS AND STAFF
of treatment of SDB on maintenance of sinus rhythm
and on general cardiovascular outcomes remains American College of Cardiology
uncertain. Most studies have been observational, B. Hadley Wilson, MD, FACC, President
which introduces confounding factors. Once diag- Cathleen C. Gates, Chief Executive Officer
nosed, the adherence to treatment for SDB is also Richard J. Kovacs, MD, MACC, Chief Medical Officer
suboptimal. Mindy J. Saraco, MHA, Director, Clinical Policy
15. SDM and decision aids: Decision aids are perceived as and Guidelines
important tools to better inform patients about options Grace D. Ronan, Senior Production and Operations
for AF management; yet, it is unclear if those tools Manager, Clinical Policy Publications
improve clinical outcomes. Most decision aids devel- Leah Patterson, Project Manager, Clinical Content
oped for AF focus on anticoagulation; there is a paucity Development
of validated decision aids, including for AF rhythm American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology
management using antiarrhythmic drugs or ablation. Thomas S.D. Getchius, National Senior Director,
16. Genetic testing: The use and applicability of Guidelines
consumer-based or targeted genetic testing for AF Abdul R. Abdullah, MD, Director, Guideline Science and
remains uncertain. Polygenic risk scores can indicate Methodology
higher risk for AF, but the use of genetic testing to American Heart Association
impact clinical surveillance, management, and clinical Joseph C. Wu, MD, PhD, FAHA, President
outcomes remains uncertain. Nancy Brown, Chief Executive Officer
17. Race, ethnicity, gender, and sex differences: In sex- Mariell Jessup, MD, FAHA, Chief Science and
ual- and gender-diverse individuals, additional Medical Officer
research is recommended to identify the incidence Nicole Aiello Sapio, EdD, Executive Vice President, Office
and outcomes of AF as well as the impact of gender- of Science Strategies and Operations
affirming therapies on arrhythmia incidence and Radhika Rajgopal Singh, PhD, Senior Vice President,
outcomes. Additional data across racial and ethnic Office of Science and Medicine
groups should also be encouraged. Prashant Nedungadi, BPharm, PhD, Vice President,
18. Standardized measures: For patients with AF, a Science and Medicine, Clinical Guidelines
standardized measure might be useful to assess Anne Leonard, MPH, BSN, RN, FAHA, National
symptoms and/or QOL and impact of management Senior Director, Science and Medicine
strategies. Jody Hundley, Senior Production and Operations
19. SDOH: The measurement and impact of SDOH in AF is Manager, Scientific Publications, Office of
underutilized and understudied. Science Operations
128 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
REFERENCES
3. Hindricks G, Potpara T, Dagres N, et al. 2020 ESC and mortality in the Framingham Heart Study: a cohort
guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial study. Lancet. 2015;386:154–162.
PREAMBLE
fibrillation. Developed in collaboration with the Euro-
2. Tsao CW, Aday AW, Almarzooq ZI, et al. Heart dis-
pean Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS):
ease and stroke statistics—2023 update: a report from
1. Committee on Standards for Developing Trust- the Task Force for the Diagnosis and Management of
the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2023;147:
worthy Clinical Practice Guidelines, Institute of Medi- Atrial Fibrillation of the European Society of Cardiol-
e93–e621.
cine (US). Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust. ogy (ESC). Developed with the special contribution of
National Academies Press; 2011. the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) of the 3. Chugh SS, Havmoeller R, Narayanan K, et al.
ESC. Eur Heart J. 2021;42:373–498. Worldwide epidemiology of atrial fibrillation: a Global
2. Committee on Standards for Systematic Reviews of
Burden of Disease 2010 study. Circulation. 2014;129:
Comparative Effectiveness Research, Institute of 4. Andrade JG, Aguilar M, Atzema C, et al. The 2020 837–847.
Medicine (US). Finding What Works in Healthcare: Canadian Cardiovascular Society/Canadian Heart
Standards for Systematic Reviews. National Academies Rhythm Society comprehensive guidelines for the 4. Turakhia MP, Guo JD, Keshishian A, et al. Contem-
Press; 2011. management of atrial fibrillation. Can J Cardiol. porary prevalence estimates of undiagnosed and
2020;36:1847–1948. diagnosed atrial fibrillation in the United States. Clin
3. Anderson JL, Heidenreich PA, Barnett PG, et al.
Cardiol. 2023;46:484–493.
ACC/AHA statement on cost/value methodology in 5. Stout KK, Daniels CJ, Aboulhosn JA, et al. 2018
clinical practice guidelines and performance measures: 5. Deshmukh A, Iglesias M, Khanna R, et al. Healthcare
AHA/ACC guideline for the management of adults with
a report of the American College of Cardiology/ utilization and costs associated with a diagnosis of
congenital heart disease: a report of the American
American Heart Association Task Force on Perfor- incident atrial fibrillation. Heart Rhythm O2. 2022;3:
College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task
mance Measures and Task Force on Practice Guide- 577–586.
Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol.
lines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:2304–2322. 2019;73:e81–e192. 6. Dieleman JL, Cao J, Chapin A, et al. US health care
4. ACCF/AHA Task Force on Practice Guidelines. spending by payer and health condition, 1996-2016.
6. Ommen SR, Mital S, Burke MA, et al. 2020 AHA/ACC
Methodology Manual and Policies From the ACCF/AHA JAMA. 2020;323:863–884.
guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of patients
Task Force on Practice Guidelines. American College of 7. Dai H, Zhang Q, Much AA, et al. Global, regional, and
with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a report of the
Cardiology and American Heart Association; 2010. national prevalence, incidence, mortality, and risk
American College of Cardiology/American Heart As-
Accessed September 23, 2019. https://www.acc.org/ factors for atrial fibrillation, 1990-2017: results from
sociation Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guide-
Guidelines/About-Guidelines-and-Clinical-Documents/ the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Eur Heart J
lines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;76:e159–e240.
Methodology. https://professional.heart.org/-/media/ Qual Care Clin Outcomes. 2021;7:574–582.
phd-files/guidelines-and-statements/methodology_ 7. Otto CM, Nishimura RA, Bonow RO, et al. 2020 ACC/
manual_and_policies_ucm_319826.pdf AHA guideline for the management of patients with 8. Piccini JP, Hammill BG, Sinner MF, et al. Incidence
valvular heart disease: a report of the American Col- and prevalence of atrial fibrillation and associated
5. Halperin JL, Levine GN, Al-Khatib SM, et al. Further mortality among Medicare beneficiaries, 1993-2007.
lege of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint
evolution of the ACC/AHA clinical practice guideline Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2012;5:85–93.
Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll
recommendation classification system: a report of the
Cardiol. 2021;77:e25–e197.
American College of Cardiology/American Heart As-
sociation Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. 8. Lawton JS, Tamis-Holland JE, Bangalore S, et al. 2.1.1. Prevalence, Incidence, Morbidity, and
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67:1572–1574. 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI guideline for coronary artery Mortality
revascularization: a report of the American College of
6. Arnett DK, Goodman RA, Halperin JL, et al. AHA/
Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Commit- 1. Colilla S, Crow A, Petkun W, et al. Estimates of
ACC/HHS strategies to enhance application of clinical
tee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. current and future incidence and prevalence of atrial
practice guidelines in patients with cardiovascular
2022;79:e21–e129. fibrillation in the U.S. adult population. Am J Cardiol.
disease and comorbid conditions: from the American
2013;112:1142–1147.
Heart Association, American College of Cardiology, 9. Gulati M, Levy PD, Mukherjee D, et al. 2021 AHA/
and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR guideline for the 2. Mou L, Norby FL, Chen LY, et al. Lifetime risk of
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:1851–1856. evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain: a report of the atrial fibrillation by race and socioeconomic status:
American College of Cardiology/American Heart As- ARIC study (Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities). Circ
7. Levine GN, O’Gara PT, Beckman JA, et al. Recent
sociation Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guide- Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2018;11:e006350.
innovations, modifications, and evolution of ACC/AHA
lines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021;78:e187–e285. 3. Weng LC, Preis SR, Hulme OL, et al. Genetic pre-
clinical practice guidelines: an update for our constit-
uencies: a report of the American College of Cardiol- 10. Kleindorfer DO, Towfighi A, Chaturvedi S, et al. disposition, clinical risk factor burden, and lifetime risk
ogy/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical 2021 guideline for the prevention of stroke in patients of atrial fibrillation. Circulation. 2018;137:1027–1038.
Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;73:1990– with stroke and transient ischemic attack: a guideline 4. Staerk L, Wang B, Preis SR, et al. Lifetime risk of
1998. from the American Heart Association/American Stroke atrial fibrillation according to optimal, borderline, or
Association. Stroke. 2021;52:e364–e467. elevated levels of risk factors: cohort study based on
1.4. Scope of the Guideline longitudinal data from the Framingham Heart Study.
11. Heidenreich PA, Bozkurt B, Aguilar D, et al. 2022
BMJ. 2018;361:k1453.
AHA/ACC/HFSA guideline for the management of
1. January CT, Wann LS, Calkins H, et al. 2019
heart failure: a report of the American College of 5. Chao TF, Liu CJ, Tuan TC, et al. Lifetime risks, pro-
AHA/ACC/HRS focused update of the 2014 AHA/
Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Commit- jected numbers, and adverse outcomes in Asian pa-
ACC/HRS guideline for the management of patients
tee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. tients with atrial fibrillation: a report from the Taiwan
with atrial fibrillation: a report of the American
2022;79:e263–e421. Nationwide AF Cohort Study. Chest. 2018;153:453–
College of Cardiology/American Heart Association
466.
Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the 12. Joglar JA, Kapa S, Saarel EV, et al. 2023 HRS expert
Heart Rhythm Society. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;74: consensus statement on the management of arrhyth- 6. Emdin CA, Wong CX, Hsiao AJ, et al. Atrial fibrilla-
104–132. mias during pregnancy. Heart Rhythm. Published on- tion as risk factor for cardiovascular disease and death
line May 19, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm. in women compared with men: systematic review and
2. January CT, Wann LS, Alpert JS, et al. 2014 AHA/
2023.05.01 meta-analysis of cohort studies. BMJ. 2016;532:h7013.
ACC/HRS guideline for the management of patients
with atrial fibrillation: a report of the American College 7. Odutayo A, Wong CX, Hsiao AJ, et al. Atrial fibril-
2.1. Epidemiology
of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force lation and risks of cardiovascular disease, renal dis-
on Practice Guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society. 1. Schnabel RB, Yin X, Gona P, et al. 50 year trends in ease, and death: systematic review and meta-analysis.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:e1–e76. atrial fibrillation prevalence, incidence, risk factors, BMJ. 2016;354:i4482.
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 129
-, 2023:-–- ---
8. Papanastasiou CA, Theochari CA, Zareifopoulos N, 12. Malmo V, Nes BM, Amundsen BH, et al. Aerobic cohort. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2019;12:
et al. Atrial fibrillation is associated with cognitive interval training reduces the burden of atrial fibrilla- e007598.
impairment, all-cause dementia, vascular dementia, tion in the short term: a randomized trial. Circulation.
28. Donnellan E, Wazni OM, Kanj M, et al. Association
and Alzheimer’s disease: a systematic review and 2016;133:466–473.
between pre-ablation bariatric surgery and atrial
meta-analysis. J Gen Intern Med. 2021;36:3122–3135.
13. Elliott AD, Verdicchio CV, Mahajan R, et al. An fibrillation recurrence in morbidly obese patients un-
9. Ruddox V, Sandven I, Munkhaugen J, et al. Atrial exercise and physical activity program in patients dergoing atrial fibrillation ablation. Europace. 2019;21:
fibrillation and the risk for myocardial infarction, all- with atrial fibrillation: the ACTIVE-AF randomized 1476–1483.
cause mortality and heart failure: a systematic review controlled trial. J Am Coll Cardiol EP. 2023;9:455–
29. Donnellan E, Wazni OM, Elshazly M, et al. Impact
and meta-analysis. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2017;24:1555– 465.
of bariatric surgery on atrial fibrillation type. Circ
1566.
14. Pathak RK, Elliott A, Middeldorp ME, et al. Impact Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2020;13:e007626.
10. Rattanawong P, Upala S, Riangwiwat T, et al. Atrial of CARDIOrespiratory FITness on arrhythmia recur-
30. Mohanty S, Mohanty P, Natale V, et al. Impact of
fibrillation is associated with sudden cardiac death: a rence in obese individuals with atrial fibrillation: the
weight loss on ablation outcome in obese patients with
systematic review and meta-analysis. J Interv Card CARDIO-FIT study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66:985–
longstanding persistent atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc
Electrophysiol. 2018;51:91–104. 996.
Electrophysiol. 2018;29:246–253.
11. Piccini JP, Hammill BG, Sinner MF, et al. Clinical 15. Oesterle A, Giancaterino S, Van Noord MG, et al.
31. Aune D, Sen A, Schlesinger S, et al. Body mass in-
course of atrial fibrillation in older adults: the impor- Effects of supervised exercise training on atrial fibril-
dex, abdominal fatness, fat mass and the risk of atrial
tance of cardiovascular events beyond stroke. Eur lation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
fibrillation: a systematic review and dose-response
Heart J. 2014;35:250–256. J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev. 2022;42:258–265.
meta-analysis of prospective studies. Eur J Epidemiol.
2.1.2. Risk Factors and Associated Heart Disease 16. Osbak PS, Mourier M, Kjaer A, et al. A randomized 2017;32:181–192.
study of the effects of exercise training on patients
32. Zhou Y, Zha L, Pan S. The risk of atrial fibrillation
1. Belbasis L, Mavrogiannis MC, Emfietzoglou M, et al. with atrial fibrillation. Am Heart J. 2011;162:1080–
increases with earlier onset of obesity: a Mendelian
Environmental factors, serum biomarkers and risk of 1087.
randomization study. Int J Med Sci. 2022;19:1388–
atrial fibrillation: an exposure-wide umbrella review of
17. Marcus GM, Vittinghoff E, Whitman IR, et al. Acute 1398.
meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol. 2020;35:223–239.
consumption of alcohol and discrete atrial fibrillation 33. Wang Q, Richardson TG, Sanderson E, et al.
2. Alonso A, Krijthe BP, Aspelund T, et al. Simple risk events. Ann Intern Med. 2021;174:1503–1509. A phenome-wide bidirectional Mendelian randomiza-
model predicts incidence of atrial fibrillation in a
18. Dukes JW, Dewland TA, Vittinghoff E, et al. Access tion analysis of atrial fibrillation. Int J Epidemiol.
racially and geographically diverse population: the
to alcohol and heart disease among patients in hos- 2022;51:1153–1166.
CHARGE-AF consortium. J Am Heart Assoc. 2013;2:
pital: observational cohort study using differences in 34. Steinberg JS, Shabanov V, Ponomarev D, et al.
e000102.
alcohol sales laws. BMJ. 2016;353:i2714. Effect of renal denervation and catheter ablation vs
3. Allan V, Honarbakhsh S, Casas JP, et al. Are car-
19. Voskoboinik A, Kalman JM, De Silva A, et al. catheter ablation alone on atrial fibrillation recurrence
diovascular risk factors also associated with the inci-
Alcohol abstinence in drinkers with atrial fibrillation. among patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and
dence of atrial fibrillation? A systematic review and
N Engl J Med. 2020;382:20–28. hypertension: the ERADICATE-AF randomized clinical
field synopsis of 23 factors in 32 population-based
trial. JAMA. 2020;323:248–255.
cohorts of 20 million participants. Thromb Haemost. 20. Marcus GM, Modrow MF, Schmid CH, et al. Indi-
2017;117:837–850. vidualized studies of triggers of paroxysmal atrial 35. Neefs J, van den Berg NW, Limpens J, et al.
fibrillation: the I-STOP-AFib randomized clinical trial. Aldosterone pathway blockade to prevent atrial
4. Roberts JD, Vittinghoff E, Lu AT, et al. Epigenetic
JAMA Cardiol. 2022;7:167–174. fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int
age and the risk of incident atrial fibrillation. Circula-
J Cardiol. 2017;231:155–161.
tion. 2021;144:1899–1911. 21. Abed HS, Wittert GA, Leong DP, et al. Effect of
weight reduction and cardiometabolic risk factor 36. Parkash R, Wells GA, Sapp JL, et al. Effect of
5. Huxley RR, Lopez FL, Folsom AR, et al. Absolute and
management on symptom burden and severity in pa- aggressive blood pressure control on the recurrence of
attributable risks of atrial fibrillation in relation to
tients with atrial fibrillation: a randomized clinical trial. atrial fibrillation after catheter ablation: a randomized,
optimal and borderline risk factors: the Atherosclerosis
JAMA. 2013;310:2050–2060. open-label clinical trial (SMAC-AF [Substrate Modifi-
Risk in Communities (ARIC) study. Circulation.
cation With Aggressive Blood Pressure Control]). Cir-
2011;123:1501–1508. 22. Pathak RK, Middeldorp ME, Lau DH, et al.
culation. 2017;135:1788–1798.
Aggressive risk factor reduction study for atrial fibril-
6. Aune D, Schlesinger S, Norat T, et al. Tobacco
lation and implications for the outcome of ablation: 37. Soliman EZ, Rahman AF, Zhang ZM, et al. Ef-
smoking and the risk of atrial fibrillation: a systematic
the ARREST-AF cohort study. J Am Coll Cardiol. fect of intensive blood pressure lowering on the
review and meta-analysis of prospective studies. Eur J
2014;64:2222–2231. risk of atrial fibrillation. Hypertension. 2020;75:
Prev Cardiol. 2018;25:1437–1451.
1491–1496.
23. Pathak RK, Middeldorp ME, Meredith M, et al.
7. Lu Y, Guo Y, Lin H, et al. Genetically determined
Long-term effect of goal-directed weight manage- 38. Pinho-Gomes AC, Azevedo L, Copland E, et al.
tobacco and alcohol use and risk of atrial fibrillation.
ment in an atrial fibrillation cohort: a long-term Blood pressure-lowering treatment for the prevention
BMC Med Genomics. 2021;14:73.
follow-up study (LEGACY). J Am Coll Cardiol. of cardiovascular events in patients with atrial fibril-
8. Mohanty S, Mohanty P, Tamaki M, et al. Differential 2015;65:2159–2169. lation: an individual participant data meta-analysis.
association of exercise intensity with risk of atrial PLoS Med. 2021;18:e1003599.
24. Middeldorp ME, Pathak RK, Meredith M, et al.
fibrillation in men and women: evidence from a meta-
PREVEntion and regReSsive Effect of weight-loss and 39. Le NN, Tran TQB, Lip S, et al. Unravelling the
analysis. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2016;27:1021–
risk factor modification on Atrial Fibrillation: the distinct effects of systolic and diastolic blood pressure
1029.
REVERSE-AF study. Europace. 2018;20:1929–1935. using Mendelian randomisation. Genes (Basel).
9. Mishima RS, Verdicchio CV, Noubiap JJ, et al. Self- 2022;13:1226.
25. Larsson SC, Drca N, Wolk A. Alcohol consumption
reported physical activity and atrial fibrillation risk: a
and risk of atrial fibrillation: a prospective study and 40. Hyman MC, Levin MG, Gill D, et al. Genetically
systematic review and meta-analysis. Heart Rhythm.
dose-response meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. predicted blood pressure and risk of atrial fibrillation.
2021;18:520–528.
2014;64:281–289. Hypertension. 2021;77:376–382.
10. Newman W, Parry-Williams G, Wiles J, et al. Risk of
26. Schnabel RB, Yin X, Gona P, et al. 50 year trends in 41. Liu X, Guo N, Zhu W, et al. Resting heart rate and
atrial fibrillation in athletes: a systematic review and
atrial fibrillation prevalence, incidence, risk factors, the risk of atrial fibrillation. Int Heart J. 2019;60:805–
meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2021;55:1233–1238.
and mortality in the Framingham Heart Study: a cohort 811.
11. Hegbom F, Stavem K, Sire S, et al. Effects of short- study. Lancet. 2015;386:154–162. 42. Siland JE, Geelhoed B, Roselli C, et al. Resting
term exercise training on symptoms and quality of life 27. Donnellan E, Wazni O, Kanj M, et al. Outcomes of heart rate and incident atrial fibrillation: a stratified
in patients with chronic atrial fibrillation. Int J Cardiol. atrial fibrillation ablation in morbidly obese patients Mendelian randomization in the AFGen consortium.
2007;116:86–92. following bariatric surgery compared with a nonobese PLoS One. 2022;17:e0268768.
130 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
43. Donnellan E, Aagaard P, Kanj M, et al. Associa- 59. Geurts S, van der Burgh AC, Bos MM, et al. Dis- Mendelian randomization study. JAMA Cardiol. 2019;4:
tion between pre-ablation glycemic control and entangling the association between kidney function 144–152.
outcomes among patients with diabetes undergoing and atrial fibrillation: a bidirectional Mendelian
74. Walkey AJ, Wiener RS, Ghobrial JM, et al. Incident
atrial fibrillation ablation. J Am Coll Cardiol EP. randomization study. Int J Cardiol. 2022;355:15–22.
stroke and mortality associated with new-onset atrial
2019;5:897–903.
60. Park S, Lee S, Kim Y, et al. Atrial fibrillation and fibrillation in patients hospitalized with severe sepsis.
44. Aune D, Feng T, Schlesinger S, et al. Diabetes kidney function: a bidirectional Mendelian randomiza- JAMA. 2011;306:2248–2254.
mellitus, blood glucose and the risk of atrial tion study. Eur Heart J. 2021;42:2816–2823.
75. Walkey AJ, Greiner MA, Heckbert SR, et al. Atrial
fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis
61. Zhang D, Ma Y, Xu J, et al. Association between fibrillation among Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized
of cohort studies. J Diabetes Complications.
obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and atrial fibrillation with sepsis: incidence and risk factors. Am Heart J.
2018;32:501–511.
(AF): a dose-response meta-analysis. Medicine (Balti- 2013;165:949–955 e943.
45. Santhanakrishnan R, Wang N, Larson MG, et al. more). 2022;101:e29443. 76. Bosch NA, Cohen DM, Walkey AJ. Risk factors for
Atrial fibrillation begets heart failure and vice versa:
62. Li X, Zhou X, Xu X, et al. Effects of continuous new-onset atrial fibrillation in patients with sepsis: a
temporal associations and differences in preserved
positive airway pressure treatment in obstructive sleep systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care Med.
versus reduced ejection fraction. Circulation. 2016;133:
apnea patients with atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis. 2019;47:280–287.
484–492.
Medicine (Baltimore). 2021;100:e25438. 77. Kwok CS, Rashid M, Beynon R, et al. Prolonged PR
46. Kwok MK, Schooling CM. Mendelian randomiza-
63. Yang Y, Ning Y, Wen W, et al. CPAP is associated interval, first-degree heart block and adverse cardio-
tion study on atrial fibrillation and cardiovascular dis-
with decreased risk of AF recurrence in patients with vascular outcomes: a systematic review and meta-
ease subtypes. Sci Rep. 2021;11:18682.
OSA, especially those younger and slimmer: a meta- analysis. Heart. 2016;102:672–680.
47. Schnabel RB, Sullivan LM, Levy D, et al. Develop- analysis. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2020;58:369– 78. Ntalla I, Weng LC, Cartwright JH, et al. Multi-
ment of a risk score for atrial fibrillation (Framingham 379. ancestry GWAS of the electrocardiographic PR interval
Heart Study): a community-based cohort study. Lan-
64. Congrete S, Bintvihok M, Thongprayoon C, et al. identifies 202 loci underlying cardiac conduction. Nat
cet. 2009;373:739–745.
Effect of obstructive sleep apnea and its treatment of Commun. 2020;11:2542.
48. Gao J, Bai Y, Ji H. Genetically predicted atrial atrial fibrillation recurrence after radiofrequency 79. Xiang H, Xue Y, Chen Z, et al. The association be-
fibrillation and valvular heart disease: a two-sample catheter ablation: a meta-analysis. J Evid Based Med. tween left ventricular hypertrophy and the occurrence
Mendelian randomization study. Front Cardiovasc 2018;11:145–151. and prognosis of atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis.
Med. 2022;9:845734.
65. Deng F, Raza A, Guo J. Treating obstructive sleep Front Cardiovasc Med. 2021;8:639993.
49. Mathew JP, Fontes ML, Tudor IC, et al. apnea with continuous positive airway pressure re- 80. Sinner MF, Stepas KA, Moser CB, et al. B-type
A multicenter risk index for atrial fibrillation after duces risk of recurrent atrial fibrillation after catheter natriuretic peptide and C-reactive protein in the pre-
cardiac surgery. JAMA. 2004;291:1720–1729. ablation: a meta-analysis. Sleep Med. 2018;46:5–11. diction of atrial fibrillation risk: the CHARGE-AF Con-
50. Filardo G, da Graca B, Sass DM, et al. Preoperative 66. Qureshi WT, Nasir UB, Alqalyoobi S, et al. Meta- sortium of community-based cohort studies. Europace.
b-blockers as a coronary surgery quality metric: the analysis of continuous positive airway pressure as a 2014;16:1426–1433.
lack of evidence of efficacy. Ann Thorac Surg. therapy of atrial fibrillation in obstructive sleep apnea. 81. Geelhoed B, Borschel CS, Niiranen T, et al.
2020;109:1150–1158. Am J Cardiol. 2015;116:1767–1773. Assessment of causality of natriuretic peptides and
51. Gillinov AM, Bagiella E, Moskowitz AJ, et al. Rate 67. Szymanski FM, Filipiak KJ, Platek AE, et al. Pres- atrial fibrillation and heart failure: a Mendelian
control versus rhythm control for atrial fibrillation ence and severity of obstructive sleep apnea and randomization study in the FINRISK cohort. Europace.
after cardiac surgery. N Engl J Med. 2016;374:1911– remote outcomes of atrial fibrillation ablations-a long- 2020;22:1463–1469.
1921. term prospective, cross-sectional cohort study. Sleep 82. Wu N, Xu B, Xiang Y, et al. Association of inflam-
52. Mehaffey JH, Hawkins RB, Byler M, et al. Amio- Breath. 2015;19:849–856. matory factors with occurrence and recurrence of atrial
darone protocol provides cost-effective reduction in
68. Caples SM, Mansukhani MP, Friedman PA, et al. fibrillation: a meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol. 2013;169:62–
postoperative atrial fibrillation. Ann Thorac Surg. 72.
The impact of continuous positive airway pressure
2018;105:1697–1702.
treatment on the recurrence of atrial fibrillation post 83. Mohammadi-Shemirani P, Chong M, Narula S, et al.
53. Guarnieri T. Intravenous antiarrhythmic regimens cardioversion: a randomized controlled trial. Int J Elevated lipoprotein(a) and risk of atrial fibrillation: an
with focus on amiodarone for prophylaxis of atrial Cardiol. 2019;278:133–136. observational and Mendelian randomization study.
fibrillation after open heart surgery. Am J Cardiol. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022;79:1579–1590.
69. Traaen GM, Aakeroy L, Hunt TE, et al. Effect of
1999;84:152r–155r.
continuous positive airway pressure on arrhythmia in 84. Vaziri SM, Larson MG, Benjamin EJ, et al. Echo-
54. Mitchell LB, Exner DV, Wyse DG, et al. Prophylactic atrial fibrillation and sleep apnea: a randomized cardiographic predictors of nonrheumatic atrial fibril-
oral amiodarone for the prevention of arrhythmias that controlled trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2021;204: lation. The Framingham Heart Study. Circulation.
begin early after revascularization, valve replacement, 573–582. 1994;89:724–730.
or repair: PAPABEAR: a randomized controlled trial.
70. Hunt TE, Traaen GM, Aakeroy L, et al. Effect of 85. Olsen FJ, Mogelvang R, Jensen GB, et al. Rela-
JAMA. 2005;294:3093–3100.
continuous positive airway pressure therapy on recur- tionship between left atrial functional measures and
55. Gaudino M, Sanna T, Ballman KV, et al. Posterior rence of atrial fibrillation after pulmonary vein isola- incident atrial fibrillation in the general population: the
left pericardiotomy for the prevention of atrial fibril- tion in patients with obstructive sleep apnea: a Copenhagen City Heart Study. J Am Coll Cardiol Img.
lation after cardiac surgery: an adaptive, single-centre, randomized controlled trial. Heart Rhythm. 2022;19: 2019;12:981–989.
single-blind, randomised, controlled trial. Lancet. 1433–1441.
86. Scherer M, Therapidis P, Miskovic A, et al. Left
2021;398:2075–2083.
71. Chen L, Sun X, He Y, et al. Obstructive sleep apnea atrial size reduction improves the sinus rhythm con-
56. Eikelboom R, Sanjanwala R, Le ML, et al. Post- and atrial fibrillation: insights from a bidirectional version rate after radiofrequency ablation for contin-
operative atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery: a Mendelian randomization study. BMC Med Genomics. uous atrial fibrillation in patients undergoing
systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Thorac Surg. 2022;15:28. concomitant cardiac surgery. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg.
2021;111:544–554. 2006;54:34–38.
72. Huang M, Yang S, Ge G, et al. Effects of thyroid
57. Woldendorp K, Farag J, Khadra S, et al. Post- dysfunction and the thyroid-stimulating hormone 87. Scherer M, Dzemali O, Aybek T, et al. Impact of left
operative atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery: a levels on the risk of atrial fibrillation: a systematic atrial size reduction on chronic atrial fibrillation in
meta-analysis. Ann Thorac Surg. 2021;112:2084–2093. review and dose-response meta-analysis from cohort mitral valve surgery. J Heart Valve Dis. 2003;12:469–
58. Shang W, Li L, Huang S, et al. Chronic kidney dis- studies. Endocr Pract. 2022;28:822–831. 474.
ease and the risk of new-onset atrial fibrillation: a 73. Ellervik C, Roselli C, Christophersen IE, et al. 88. Scherer M, Therapidis P, Wittlinger T, et al. Impact
meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. PLoS One. Assessment of the relationship between genetic de- of left atrial size reduction and endocardial radio-
2016;11:e0155581. terminants of thyroid function and atrial fibrillation: a frequency ablation on continuous atrial fibrillation in
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 131
-, 2023:-–- ---
patients undergoing concomitant cardiac surgery: 3. Wellens HJ. Contemporary management of atrial afterdepolarizations in patients with chronic atrial
three-year results. J Heart Valve Dis. 2007;16:126–131. flutter. Circulation. 2002;106:649–652. fibrillation. Circulation. 2012;125:2059–2070.
89. Joshibayev S, Bolatbekov B. Early and long-term 14. Wang X, Chen X, Dobrev D, et al. The crosstalk
2.3. Mechanisms and Pathophysiology
outcomes and quality of life after concomitant mitral between cardiomyocyte calcium and inflammasome
valve surgery, left atrial size reduction, and radio- 1. Haissaguerre M, Jais P, Shah DC, et al. Spontaneous signaling pathways in atrial fibrillation. Pflugers Arch.
frequency surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation. Anatol initiation of atrial fibrillation by ectopic beats origi- 2021;473:389–405.
J Cardiol. 2016;16:797–803. nating in the pulmonary veins. N Engl J Med.
90. van de Vegte YJ, Siland JE, Rienstra M, et al. Atrial 1998;339:659–666. 2.3.1.1. Triggers of AF
fibrillation and left atrial size and function: a Mende- 2. Allessie M, Ausma J, Schotten U. Electrical, con- 1. Haissaguerre M, Jais P, Shah DC, et al. Spontaneous
lian randomization study. Sci Rep. 2021;11:8431. tractile and structural remodeling during atrial fibril- initiation of atrial fibrillation by ectopic beats origi-
91. Mou L, Norby FL, Chen LY, et al. Lifetime risk of lation. Cardiovasc Res. 2002;54:230–246. nating in the pulmonary veins. N Engl J Med.
atrial fibrillation by race and socioeconomic status: 1998;339:659–666.
ARIC study (Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities). Circ 2.3.1. Electrophysiological Mechanisms and
2. Dewland TA, Vittinghoff E, Mandyam MC, et al.
Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2018;11:e006350. Electrical Remodeling
Atrial ectopy as a predictor of incident atrial fibrilla-
92. Lunde ED, Joensen AM, Lundbye-Christensen S, 1. Haissaguerre M, Jais P, Shah DC, et al. Spontaneous tion: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2013;159:721–
et al. Socioeconomic position and risk of atrial fibril- initiation of atrial fibrillation by ectopic beats origi- 728.
lation: a nationwide Danish cohort study. J Epidemiol nating in the pulmonary veins. N Engl J Med. 3. Heckbert SR, Jensen PN, Austin TR, et al. Associa-
Community Health. 2020;74:7–13. 1998;339:659–666. tions of left atrial function and structure with supra-
93. Liu Y, Liu C, Liu Q. Education and atrial fibrillation: ventricular ectopy: the Multi-Ethnic Study of
2. Egorov YV, Rosenshtraukh LV, Glukhov AV.
Mendelian randomization study. Glob Heart. 2022;17: Atherosclerosis. J Am Heart Assoc. 2021;10:e018093.
Arrhythmogenic Interaction Between Sympathetic
22.
Tone and Mechanical Stretch in Rat Pulmonary Vein 4. Howell SJ, Dukes JW, Vittinghoff E, et al. Pre-
94. Bonaccio M, Di Castelnuovo A, Costanzo S, et al. Myocardium. Front Physiol. 2020;11:237. mature atrial contraction location and atrial fibrilla-
Life course socioeconomic status and risk of hospital- tion inducibility. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol.
3. Van Wagoner DR, Pond AL, Lamorgese M, et al.
ization for heart failure or atrial fibrillation in the Moli- 2023;16:e011623.
Atrial L-type Ca2þ currents and human atrial fibrilla-
Sani study cohort. Am J Epidemiol. 2021;Feb 24:
tion. Circ Res. 1999;85:428–436. 5. Voigt N, Trausch A, Knaut M, et al. Left-to-right
kwab046.
atrial inward rectifier potassium current gradients
4. Van Wagoner DR, Pond AL, McCarthy PM, et al.
95. Chung SC, Sofat R, Acosta-Mena D, et al. Atrial in patients with paroxysmal versus chronic atrial
Outward Kþ current densities and Kv1.5 expression are
fibrillation epidemiology, disparity and healthcare fibrillation. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2010;3:
reduced in chronic human atrial fibrillation. Circ Res.
contacts: a population-wide study of 5.6 million in- 472–480.
1997;80:772–781.
dividuals. Lancet Reg Health Eur. 2021;7:100157.
6. Ryu K, Sahadevan J, Khrestian CM, et al. Frequency
96. Lunde ED, Nielsen PB, Riahi S, et al. Associations 5. Voigt N, Trausch A, Knaut M, et al. Left-to-right analysis of atrial electrograms identifies conduction
between socioeconomic status, atrial fibrillation, and atrial inward rectifier potassium current gradients in pathways from the left to the right atrium during atrial
outcomes: a systematic review. Expert Rev Cardiovasc patients with paroxysmal versus chronic atrial fibrilla- fibrillation-studies in two canine models. J Cardiovasc
Ther. 2018;16:857–873. tion. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2010;3:472–480. Electrophysiol. 2009;20:667–674.
97. Alzahrani Z, Ornelas-Loredo A, Darbar SD, et al. 6. Gemel J, Levy AE, Simon AR, et al. Connexin40
Association between family history and early-onset abnormalities and atrial fibrillation in the human heart. 2.3.2. Atrial Structural Abnormalities, Remod-
atrial fibrillation across racial and ethnic groups. J Mol Cell Cardiol. 2014;76:159–168. eling, and Atrial Myopathy
JAMA Netw Open. 2018;1:e182497.
7. Wirka RC, Gore S, Van Wagoner DR, et al. A common 1. Goette A, Kalman JM, Aguinaga L, et al. EHRA/HRS/
98. Arnar DO, Thorvaldsson S, Manolio TA, et al. Fa- connexin-40 gene promoter variant affects connexin- APHRS/SOLAECE expert consensus on atrial cardio-
milial aggregation of atrial fibrillation in Iceland. Eur 40 expression in human atria and is associated with myopathies: definition, characterization, and clinical
Heart J. 2006;27:708–712. atrial fibrillation. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2011;4: implication. Heart Rhythm. 2017;14:e3–e40.
87–93.
99. Lubitz SA, Yin X, Fontes JD, et al. Association 2. Rudolph V, Andrie RP, Rudolph TK, et al. Myelo-
between familial atrial fibrillation and risk of new- 8. Lazzerini PE, Laghi-Pasini F, Acampa M, et al. Sys- peroxidase acts as a profibrotic mediator of atrial
onset atrial fibrillation. JAMA. 2010;304:2263– temic Inflammation Rapidly Induces Reversible Atrial fibrillation. Nat Med. 2010;16:470–474.
2269. Electrical Remodeling: The Role of Interleukin-6-
3. Deroubaix E, Folliguet T, Rucker-Martin C, et al.
100. Roselli C, Chaffin MD, Weng LC, et al. Multi- Mediated Changes in Connexin Expression. J Am
Moderate and chronic hemodynamic overload of sheep
ethnic genome-wide association study for atrial fibril- Heart Assoc. 2019;8:e011006.
atria induces reversible cellular electrophysiologic
lation. Nat Genet. 2018;50:1225–1233. 9. Yan J, Kong W, Zhang Q, et al. c-Jun N-terminal abnormalities and atrial vulnerability. J Am Coll Car-
101. Nielsen JB, Thorolfsdottir RB, Fritsche LG, et al. kinase activation contributes to reduced connexin43 diol. 2004;44:1918–1926.
Biobank-driven genomic discovery yields new insight and development of atrial arrhythmias. Cardiovasc Res.
into atrial fibrillation biology. Nat Genet. 2018;50: 2013;97:589–597. 2.3.2.1. Upstream Pathways
1234–1239.
10. Iwasaki YK, Kato T, Xiong F, et al. Atrial fibrillation 1. Purohit A, Rokita AG, Guan X, et al. Oxidized Ca(2þ)/
2.2.2. Associated Arrhythmias promotion with long-term repetitive obstructive sleep calmodulin-dependent protein kinase II triggers atrial
apnea in a rat model. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:2013– fibrillation. Circulation. 2013;128:1748–1757.
1. Saoudi N, Cosio F, Waldo A, et al. A classification of 2023.
2. Mesubi OO, Rokita AG, Abrol N, et al. Oxidized
atrial flutter and regular atrial tachycardia according to
11. Landstrom AP, Dobrev D, Wehrens XHT. Calcium CaMKII and O-GlcNAcylation cause increased atrial
electrophysiological mechanisms and anatomical ba-
Signaling and Cardiac Arrhythmias. Circ Res. 2017;120: fibrillation in diabetic mice by distinct mechanisms.
ses; a statement from a Joint Expert Group from The
1969–1993. J Clin Invest. 2021;131:e95747.
Working Group of Arrhythmias of the European Society
of Cardiology and the North American Society of 12. Greer-Short A, Musa H, Alsina KM, et al. Calmod- 3. Yan J, Zhao W, Thomson JK, et al. Stress signaling
Pacing and Electrophysiology. Eur Heart J. 2001;22: ulin kinase II regulates atrial myocyte late sodium JNK2 crosstalk with CaMKII underlies enhanced atrial
1162–1182. current, calcium handling, and atrial arrhythmia. Heart arrhythmogenesis. Circ Res. 2018;122:821–835.
Rhythm. 2020;17:503–511. 4. Yan J, Bare DJ, DeSantiago J, et al. JNK2, a newly-
2. Brugada J, Katritsis DG, Arbelo E, et al. 2019 ESC
guidelines for the management of patients with sup- 13. Voigt N, Li N, Wang Q, et al. Enhanced sarco- identified SERCA2 enhancer, augments an arrhythmic
raventricular tachycardia. Eur Heart J. 2020;41:655– plasmic reticulum Ca2þ leak and increased Naþ-Ca2þ [Ca(2þ)]SR leak-load relationship. Circ Res. 2021;128:
720. exchanger function underlie delayed 455–470.
132 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
5. Norlander AE, Madhur MS, Harrison DG. The 12. Malik V, McKitrick DJ, Lau DH, et al. Clinical evi- outcomes: a systematic review. Expert Rev Cardiovasc
immunology of hypertension. J Exp Med. 2018;215:21– dence of autonomic dysfunction due to atrial fibrilla- Ther. 2018;16:857–873.
33. tion: implications for rhythm control strategy. J Interv
4. Hagengaard L, Andersen MP, Polcwiartek C, et al.
Card Electrophysiol. 2019;54:299–307.
6. Prinsen JK, Kannankeril PJ, Sidorova TN, et al. Socioeconomic differences in outcomes after hospital
Highly reactive isolevuglandins promote atrial fibril- 13. Wasmund SL, Li JM, Page RL, et al. Effect of atrial admission for atrial fibrillation or flutter. Eur Heart J
lation caused by hypertension. J Am Coll Cardiol Basic fibrillation and an irregular ventricular response on Qual Care Clin Outcomes. 2021;7:295–303.
Trans Science. 2020;5:602–615. sympathetic nerve activity in human subjects. Circu-
5. Harrington RA, Califf RM, Balamurugan A, et al. Call
lation. 2003;107:2011–2015.
7. Dobrev D, Dudley SC. Oxidative stress: a bystander to action: rural health: a presidential advisory from the
or a causal contributor to atrial remodelling and 14. Mohanty PK, Arrowood JA, Ellenbogen KA, et al. American Heart Association and American Stroke As-
fibrillation? Cardiovasc Res. 2021;117:2291–2293. Neurohumoral and hemodynamic effects of lower sociation. Circulation. 2020;141:e615–e644.
8. Watson T, Shantsila E, Lip GY. Mechanisms of body negative pressure in patients with congestive 6. Thompson LE, Maddox TM, Lei L, et al. Sex differ-
thrombogenesis in atrial fibrillation: Virchow’s triad heart failure. Am Heart J. 1989;118:78–85. ences in the use of oral anticoagulants for atrial
revisited. Lancet. 2009;373:155–166. 15. De With RR, Marcos EG, Dudink E, et al. Atrial fibrillation: a report from the National Cardiovascular
9. Chung MK. Cardiac surgery: postoperative arrhyth- fibrillation progression risk factors and associated Data Registry (NCDR) PINNACLE registry. J Am Heart
cardiovascular outcome in well-phenotyped patients: Assoc. 2017;6:e005801.
mias. Crit Care Med. 2000;28:N136–N144.
data from the AF-RISK study. Europace. 2020;22:352– 7. Bhave PD, Lu X, Girotra S, et al. Race- and sex-
10. Chung MK, Martin DO, Sprecher D, et al. C-reactive 360. related differences in care for patients newly diag-
protein elevation in patients with atrial arrhythmias:
nosed with atrial fibrillation. Heart Rhythm. 2015;12:
inflammatory mechanisms and persistence of atrial 2.4. Genetics
1406–1412.
fibrillation. Circulation. 2001;104:2886–2891.
1. Lubitz SA, Yin X, Fontes JD, et al. Association be- 8. Avgil Tsadok M, Gagnon J, Joza J, et al. Temporal
11. Yao C, Veleva T, Scott L Jr, et al. Enhanced
tween familial atrial fibrillation and risk of new-onset trends and sex differences in pulmonary vein isolation
cardiomyocyte NLRP3 inflammasome signaling pro-
atrial fibrillation. JAMA. 2010;304:2263–2269. for patients with atrial fibrillation. Heart Rhythm.
motes atrial fibrillation. Circulation. 2018;138:2227–
2. Brugada R, Tapscott T, Czernuszewicz GZ, et al. 2015;12:1979–1986.
2242.
Identification of a genetic locus for familial atrial 9. Patel N, Deshmukh A, Thakkar B, et al. Gender, race,
2.3.3. Role of the Autonomic Nervous System fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 1997;336:905–911. and health insurance status in patients undergoing
3. Chen YH, Xu SJ, Bendahhou S, et al. KCNQ1 gain-of- catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol.
1. Chen PS, Chen LS, Fishbein MC, et al. Role of the
function mutation in familial atrial fibrillation. Science. 2016;117:1117–1126.
autonomic nervous system in atrial fibrillation: path-
ophysiology and therapy. Circ Res. 2014;114:1500– 2003;299:251–254. 10. Ugowe FE, Jackson LR 2nd, Thomas KL. Racial and
1515. 4. Weng LC, Choi SH, Klarin D, et al. Heritability of ethnic differences in the prevalence, management, and
atrial fibrillation. Circ Cardiovasc Genet. 2017;10: outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation: a system-
2. Linz D, Elliott AD, Hohl M, et al. Role of autonomic
e001838. atic review. Heart Rhythm. 2018;15:1337–1345.
nervous system in atrial fibrillation. Int J Cardiol.
2019;287:181–188. 5. Roselli C, Chaffin MD, Weng LC, et al. Multi-ethnic 11. Benjamin EJ, Thomas KL, Go AS, et al. Transforming
genome-wide association study for atrial fibrillation. atrial fibrillation research to integrate social de-
3. Malik V, Mishima R, A DE, et al. The "road" to atrial
Nat Genet. 2018;50:1225–1233. terminants of health: a National Heart, Lung, and
fibrillation: the role of the cardiac autonomic nervous
Blood Institute Workshop Report. JAMA Cardiol.
system. J Atr Fibrillation. 2020;13:2400. 6. Low SK, Takahashi A, Ebana Y, et al. Identification of
2023;8:182–191.
4. Lau DH, Schotten U, Mahajan R, et al. Novel six new genetic loci associated with atrial fibrillation in
the Japanese population. Nat Genet. 2017;49:953– 12. Gottlieb LM, Wing H, Adler NE. A systematic review
mechanisms in the pathogenesis of atrial fibrillation:
958. of interventions on patients’ social and economic
practical applications. Eur Heart J. 2016;37:1573–1581.
needs. Am J Prev Med. 2017;53:719–729.
5. Schotten U, Verheule S, Kirchhof P, et al. Patho- 7. Lee JY, Kim TH, Yang PS, et al. Korean atrial fibril-
13. White-Williams C, Rossi LP, Bittner VA, et al.
physiological mechanisms of atrial fibrillation: a lation network genome-wide association study for
early-onset atrial fibrillation identifies novel suscepti- Addressing social determinants of health in the care of
translational appraisal. Physiol Rev. 2011;91:265–325.
bility loci. Eur Heart J. 2017;38:2586–2594. patients with heart failure: a scientific statement from
6. Iwasaki YK, Nishida K, Kato T, et al. Atrial fibrillation the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2020;141:
pathophysiology: implications for management. Cir- 8. Choi SH, Jurgens SJ, Weng LC, et al. Monogenic and e841–e863.
culation. 2011;124:2264–2274. polygenic contributions to atrial fibrillation risk: results
from a national biobank. Circ Res. 2020;126:200–209. 14. Davidson KW, Kemper AR, Doubeni CA, et al.
7. Jayachandran JV, Sih HJ, Winkle W, et al. Atrial Developing primary care-based recommendations for
fibrillation produced by prolonged rapid atrial pacing 9. Yoneda ZT, Anderson KC, Quintana JA, et al. Early- social determinants of health: methods of the U.S.
is associated with heterogeneous changes in atrial onset atrial fibrillation and the prevalence of rare Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med.
sympathetic innervation. Circulation. 2000;101:1185– variants in cardiomyopathy and arrhythmia genes. 2020;173:461–467.
1191. JAMA Cardiol. 2021;6:1371–1379.
15. Davidson KW, Krist AH, Tseng CW, et al. Incorpo-
8. Chang CM, Wu TJ, Zhou S, et al. Nerve sprouting 10. Chalazan B, Mol D, Darbar FA, et al. Association of ration of social risk in US Preventive Services Task
and sympathetic hyperinnervation in a canine model of rare genetic variants and early-onset atrial fibrillation Force recommendations and identification of key
atrial fibrillation produced by prolonged right atrial in ethnic minority individuals. JAMA Cardiol. 2021;6: challenges for primary care. JAMA. 2021;326:1410–
pacing. Circulation. 2001;103:22–25. 811–819. 1415.
9. Yu Y, Wei C, Liu L, et al. Atrial fibrillation increases 2.5. Addressing Health Inequities and Barriers 16. Volgman AS, Benjamin EJ, Curtis AB, et al. Women
sympathetic and parasympathetic neurons in the to AF Management and atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol.
intrinsic cardiac nervous system. Pacing Clin Electro- 2021;32:2793–2807.
physiol. 2014;37:1462–1469. 1. Kim D, Yang PS, You SC, et al. Treatment timing and 17. Russo AM, Zeitler EP, Giczewska A, et al. Associa-
10. Gussak G, Pfenniger A, Wren L, et al. Region-spe- the effects of rhythm control strategy in patients with tion between sex and treatment outcomes of atrial
cific parasympathetic nerve remodeling in the left atrial fibrillation: nationwide cohort study. BMJ. fibrillation ablation versus drug therapy: results from
atrium contributes to creation of a vulnerable sub- 2021;373:n991. the CABANA trial. Circulation. 2021;143:661–672.
strate for atrial fibrillation. JCI Insight. 2019;4: 2. Tamirisa KP, Al-Khatib SM, Mohanty S, et al. Racial 18. Campbell ML, Larson J, Farid T, et al. Sex-based
e130532. and ethnic differences in the management of atrial differences in procedural complications associated
fibrillation. CJC Open. 2021;3:S137–S148. with atrial fibrillation catheter ablation: a systematic
11. Malik V, Elliott AD, Thomas G, et al. Autonomic
afferent dysregulation in atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll 3. Lunde ED, Nielsen PB, Riahi S, et al. Associations review and meta-analysis. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol.
Cardiol EP. 2022;8:152–164. between socioeconomic status, atrial fibrillation, and 2020;31:3176–3186.
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 133
-, 2023:-–- ---
19. Kirchhof P, Camm AJ, Goette A, et al. Early International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IDPAS). 10. Li Y, Pastori D, Guo Y, et al. Risk factors for new-
rhythm-control therapy in patients with atrial fibrilla- Med Decis Making. 2021;41:870–896. onset atrial fibrillation: a focus on Asian populations.
tion. N Engl J Med. 2020;383:1305–1316. Int J Cardiol. 2018;261:92–98.
7. Noseworthy PA, Branda ME, Kunneman M, et al.
20. Thomas KL, Al-Khalidi HR, Silverstein AP, et al. Effect of shared decision-making for stroke pre-
4.2.1. Basic Clinical Evaluation
Ablation versus drug therapy for atrial fibrillation in vention on treatment adherence and safety out-
racial and ethnic minorities. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021;78: comes in patients with atrial fibrillation: a 1. Koyama J, Ray-Sequin PA, Falk RH. Longitudinal
126–138. randomized clinical trial. J Am Heart Assoc. myocardial function assessed by tissue velocity, strain,
2022;11:e023048. and strain rate tissue Doppler echocardiography in
21. Abdel-Qadir H, Akioyamen LE, Fang J, et al. Asso-
patients with AL (primary) cardiac amyloidosis. Circu-
ciation of neighborhood-level material deprivation 8. Aronis KN, Edgar B, Lin W, et al. Health literacy and
lation. 2003;107:2446–2452.
with atrial fibrillation care in a single-payer health care atrial fibrillation: relevance and future directions for
system: a population-based cohort study. Circulation. patient-centred care. Eur Cardiol. 2017;12:52–57. 2. Reddy YNV, Obokata M, Verbrugge FH, et al. Atrial
2022;146:159–171. dysfunction in patients with heart failure with pre-
9. Jones AE, McCarty MM, Brito JP, et al. Randomized
served ejection fraction and atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll
22. Teppo K, Jaakkola J, Biancari F, et al. Association of evaluation of decision support interventions for atrial
Cardiol. 2020;76:1051–1064.
income and educational levels with adherence to direct fibrillation: rationale and design of the RED-AF study.
oral anticoagulant therapy in patients with incident Am Heart J. 2022;248:42–52. 3. Ma XX, Boldt LH, Zhang YL, et al. Clinical relevance
atrial fibrillation: a Finnish nationwide cohort study. of left atrial strain to predict recurrence of atrial
10. Mark DB, Anstrom KJ, Sheng S, et al. Effect of
Pharmacol Res Perspect. 2022;10:e00961. fibrillation after catheter ablation: a meta-analysis.
catheter ablation vs medical therapy on quality of life
Echocardiography. 2016;33:724–733.
23. O’Neal WT, Sandesara PB, Claxton JS, et al. Influ- among patients with atrial fibrillation: the CABANA
ence of sociodemographic factors and provider spe- randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2019;321:1275–1285. 4. Costa FM, Ferreira AM, Oliveira S, et al. Left atrial
cialty on anticoagulation prescription fill patterns and 11. Kunneman M, Branda ME, Hargraves IG, et al.
volume is more important than the type of atrial
outcomes in atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol. 2018;122: fibrillation in predicting the long-term success of
Assessment of shared decision-making for stroke
388–394. catheter ablation. Int J Cardiol. 2015;184:56–61.
prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation: a ran-
24. Eberly LA, Garg L, Yang L, et al. Racial/ethnic and domized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2020;180: 5. Shang W, Li L, Huang S, et al. Chronic kidney disease
socioeconomic disparities in management of incident 1215–1224. and the risk of new-onset atrial fibrillation: a meta-
paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. JAMA Netw Open. analysis of prospective cohort studies. PLoS One.
2021;4:e210247. 4.1. Risk Stratification and Population Screening 2016;11:e0155581.
25. Tertulien T, Chen Y, Althouse AD, et al. Association 6. Minhas AM, Usman MS, Khan MS, et al. Link be-
1. Himmelreich JCL, Veelers L, Lucassen WAM, et al.
of income and educational attainment in hospitaliza- tween non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and atrial
Prediction models for atrial fibrillation applicable in
tion events in atrial fibrillation. Am J Prev Cardiol. fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
the community: a systematic review and meta-anal-
2021;7:100201. Cureus. 2017;9:e1142.
ysis. Europace. 2020;22:684–694.
26. LaRosa AR, Claxton J, O’Neal WT, et al. Association 7. Frost L, Vestergaard P, Mosekilde L. Hyperthyroid-
2. Alonso A, Krijthe BP, Aspelund T, et al. Simple risk
of household income and adverse outcomes in patients ism and risk of atrial fibrillation or flutter: a
model predicts incidence of atrial fibrillation in a
with atrial fibrillation. Heart. 2020;106:1679–1685. population-based study. Arch Intern Med. 2004;164:
racially and geographically diverse population: the
1675–1678.
27. Doshi R, Al-Khafaji JF, Dave M, et al. Comparison CHARGE-AF consortium. J Am Heart Assoc. 2013;2:
of baseline characteristics and in-hospital outcomes in e000102. 8. Askew JW, Miller TD, Hodge DO, et al. The value of
medicaid versus private insurance hospitalizations for myocardial perfusion single-photon emission
3. Li YG, Pastori D, Farcomeni A, et al. A simple clinical
atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol. 2019;123:776–781. computed tomography in screening asymptomatic
risk score (C2HEST) for predicting incident atrial
patients with atrial fibrillation for coronary artery
fibrillation in asian subjects: derivation in 471,446
3. Shared Decision-Making (SDM) in AF disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50:1080–1085.
Chinese subjects, with internal validation and external
Management
application in 451,199 Korean subjects. Chest. 9. Cremer PC, Mentias A, Newton D, et al. Low yield of
2019;155:510–518. myocardial perfusion imaging in asymptomatic pa-
1. Kunneman M, Branda ME, Hargraves IG, et al.
tients with atrial fibrillation. JAMA Intern Med.
Assessment of shared decision-making for stroke 4. Hu WS, Lin CL. Prediction of new-onset atrial
2015;175:1854–1855.
prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation: a ran- fibrillation for general population in Asia: a comparison
domized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2020;180: of C2HEST and HATCH scores. Int J Cardiol. 2020;313: 10. Gex G, Gerstel E, Righini M, et al. Is atrial fibrilla-
1215–1224. 60–63. tion associated with pulmonary embolism? J Thromb
Haemost. 2012;10:347–351.
2. Wang PJ, Lu Y, Mahaffey KW, et al. A randomized 5. Biersteker TE, Schalij MJ, Treskes RW. Impact of
clinical trial to evaluate an atrial fibrillation stroke mobile health devices for the detection of atrial 11. Delgado V, Di Biase L, Leung M, et al. Structure and
prevention shared decision-making pathway. J Am fibrillation: systematic review. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. function of the left atrium and left atrial appendage:
Heart Assoc. 2022;12:e8009. 2021;9:e26161. AF and stroke implications. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70:
3157–3172.
3. Torres Roldan VD, Brand-McCarthy SR, Ponce OJ, 6. Lin JY, Larson J, Schoenberg J, et al. Serial 7-day
et al. Shared decision making tools for people facing electrocardiogram patch screening for AF in high-risk 12. Klein I, Danzi S. Thyroid disease and the heart.
stroke prevention strategies in atrial fibrillation: a older women by the CHARGE-AF score. J Am Coll Circulation. 2007;116:1725–1735.
systematic review and environmental scan. Med Decis Cardiol EP. 2022;8:1523–1534.
Making. 2021;41:540–549. 4.2.2. Rhythm Monitoring Tools and Methods
7. Noseworthy PA, Attia ZI, Behnken EM, et al. Artifi-
4. Song D, Zhou J, Fan T, et al. Decision aids for shared cial intelligence-guided screening for atrial fibrillation 1. Yang TY, Huang L, Malwade S, et al. Diagnostic ac-
decision-making and appropriate anticoagulation using electrocardiogram during sinus rhythm: a pro- curacy of ambulatory devices in detecting atrial
therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation: a systematic spective non-randomised interventional trial. Lancet. fibrillation: systematic review and meta-analysis. JMIR
review and meta-analysis. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2022;400:1206–1212. Mhealth Uhealth. 2021;9:e26167.
2022;21:97–106. 8. Perez MV, Mahaffey KW, Hedlin H, et al. Large-scale 2. Prasitlumkum N, Cheungpasitporn W,
5. Chung MK, Fagerlin A, Wang PJ, et al. Shared de- assessment of a smartwatch to identify atrial fibrilla- Chokesuwattanaskul A, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of
cision making in cardiac electrophysiology procedures tion. N Engl J Med. 2019;381:1909–1917. smart gadgets/wearable devices in detecting atrial
and arrhythmia management. Circ Arrhythm Electro- 9. Hlatky MA, Greenland P, Arnett DK, et al. fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
physiol. 2021;14:e007958. Criteria for evaluation of novel markers of cardio- Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2021;114:4–16.
6. Yen RW, Smith J, Engel J, et al. A systematic review vascular risk: a scientific statement from the 3. Wong KC, Klimis H, Lowres N, et al. Diagnostic ac-
and meta-analysis of patient decision aids for socially American Heart Association. Circulation. 2009;119: curacy of handheld electrocardiogram devices in
disadvantaged populations: update from the 2408–2416. detecting atrial fibrillation in adults in community
134 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
versus hospital settings: a systematic review and 18. Avram R, Ramsis M, Cristal AD, et al. Validation of 13. Arnett DK, Blumenthal RS, Albert MA, et al. 2019
meta-analysis. Heart. 2020;106:1211–1217. an algorithm for continuous monitoring of atrial ACC/AHA guideline on the primary prevention of car-
fibrillation using a consumer smartwatch. Heart diovascular disease: a report of the American College
4. Kapa S, Epstein AE, Callans DJ, et al. Assessing
Rhythm. 2021;18:1482–1490. of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force
arrhythmia burden after catheter ablation of atrial
on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2019;140:
fibrillation using an implantable loop recorder: the 19. Dussault C, Toeg H, Nathan M, et al. Electrocar-
e596–e646.
ABACUS study. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2013;24: diographic monitoring for detecting atrial fibrillation
875–881. after ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack: 14. Lin AL, Nah G, Tang JJ, et al. Cannabis, cocaine,
systematic review and meta-analysis. Circ Arrhythm methamphetamine, and opiates increase the risk of
5. Podd SJ, Sugihara C, Furniss SS, et al. Are implant-
Electrophysiol. 2015;8:263–269. incident atrial fibrillation. Eur Heart J. 2022;43:4933–
able cardiac monitors the ’gold standard’ for atrial
4942.
fibrillation detection? A prospective randomized trial 20. Caceres BA, Hickey KT, Bakken SB, et al. Mobile
comparing atrial fibrillation monitoring using electrocardiogram monitoring and health-related 15. Mishima RS, Verdicchio CV, Noubiap JJ, et al. Self-
implantable cardiac monitors and DDDRP permanent quality of life in patients with atrial fibrillation: find- reported physical activity and atrial fibrillation risk: a
pacemakers in post atrial fibrillation ablation patients. ings from the iPhone Helping Evaluate Atrial Fibrilla- systematic review and meta-analysis. Heart Rhythm.
Europace. 2016;18:1000–1005. tion Rhythm Through Technology (iHEART) study. 2021;18:520–528.
J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2020;35:327–336.
6. de Voogt WG, van Hemel NM, van de Bos AA, et al. 16. Jin MN, Yang PS, Song C, et al. Physical activity and
Verification of pacemaker automatic mode switching risk of atrial fibrillation: a nationwide cohort study in
5.1. Primary Prevention
for the detection of atrial fibrillation and atrial tachy- general population. Sci Rep. 2019;9:13270.
cardia with Holter recording. Europace. 2006;8:950– 1. Tedrow UB, Conen D, Ridker PM, et al. The long- and
17. Khurshid S, Weng LC, Al-Alusi MA, et al. Acceler-
961. short-term impact of elevated body mass index on the
ometer-derived physical activity and risk of atrial
risk of new atrial fibrillation the WHS (women’s health
7. Eysenck W, Freemantle N, Sulke N. A randomized fibrillation. Eur Heart J. 2021;42:2472–2483.
study). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55:2319–2327.
trial evaluating the accuracy of AF detection by four
18. Tikkanen E, Gustafsson S, Ingelsson E. Associations
external ambulatory ECG monitors compared to per- 2. Elliott AD, Linz D, Mishima R, et al. Association
of fitness, physical activity, strength, and genetic risk
manent pacemaker AF detection. J Interv Card Elec- between physical activity and risk of incident ar-
with cardiovascular disease: longitudinal analyses in
trophysiol. 2020;57:361–369. rhythmias in 402 406 individuals: evidence from the
the UK Biobank study. Circulation. 2018;137:2583–
UK Biobank cohort. Eur Heart J. 2020;41:1479–1486.
8. Vitolo M, Imberti JF, Maisano A, et al. Device- 2591.
detected atrial high rate episodes and the risk of 3. Gallagher C, Hendriks JML, Elliott AD, et al. Alcohol
19. Qureshi WT, Alirhayim Z, Blaha MJ, et al. Cardio-
stroke/thrombo-embolism and atrial fibrillation inci- and incident atrial fibrillation - a systematic review and
respiratory fitness and risk of incident atrial fibrillation
dence: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol. 2017;246:46–52.
results from the Henry Ford exercise testing (FIT)
Intern Med. 2021;92:100–106.
4. Aune D, Schlesinger S, Norat T, et al. Tobacco project. Circulation. 2015;131:1827–1834.
9. Healey JS, Connolly SJ, Gold MR, et al. Subclinical smoking and the risk of atrial fibrillation: a systematic
20. Khan H, Kella D, Rauramaa R, et al. Cardiore-
atrial fibrillation and the risk of stroke. N Engl J Med. review and meta-analysis of prospective studies. Eur J
spiratory fitness and atrial fibrillation: a population-
2012;366:120–129. Prev Cardiol. 2018;25:1437–1451.
based follow-up study. Heart Rhythm. 2015;12:
10. Buck BH, Hill MD, Quinn FR, et al. Effect of 5. Aune D, Feng T, Schlesinger S, et al. Diabetes mel- 1424–1430.
implantable vs prolonged external electrocardio- litus, blood glucose and the risk of atrial fibrillation: a
21. Andersen K, Farahmand B, Ahlbom A, et al. Risk
graphic monitoring on atrial fibrillation detection in systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies.
of arrhythmias in 52 755 long-distance cross-country
patients with ischemic stroke: the PER DIEM random- J Diabetes Complications. 2018;32:501–511.
skiers: a cohort study. Eur Heart J. 2013;34:3624–
ized clinical trial. JAMA. 2021;325:2160–2168.
6. Soliman EZ, Rahman AF, Zhang ZM, et al. Effect of 3631.
11. Bernstein RA, Kamel H, Granger CB, et al. Effect of intensive blood pressure lowering on the risk of atrial
22. Baldesberger S, Bauersfeld U, Candinas R, et al.
long-term continuous cardiac monitoring vs usual care fibrillation. Hypertension. 2020;75:1491–1496.
Sinus node disease and arrhythmias in the long-term
on detection of atrial fibrillation in patients with stroke
7. Alonso A, Krijthe BP, Aspelund T, et al. Simple risk follow-up of former professional cyclists. Eur Heart J.
attributed to large- or small-vessel disease: the
model predicts incidence of atrial fibrillation in a 2008;29:71–78.
STROKE-AF randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2021;325:
racially and geographically diverse population: the
2169–2177. 23. Newman W, Parry-Williams G, Wiles J, et al. Risk of
CHARGE-AF consortium. J Am Heart Assoc. 2013;2:
atrial fibrillation in athletes: a systematic review and
12. Hannun AY, Rajpurkar P, Haghpanahi M, et al. e000102.
meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2021;55:1233–1238.
Cardiologist-level arrhythmia detection and classifica-
8. Himmelreich JCL, Veelers L, Lucassen WAM, et al.
tion in ambulatory electrocardiograms using a deep 24. Morseth B, Graff-Iversen S, Jacobsen BK, et al.
Prediction models for atrial fibrillation applicable in
neural network. Nat Med. 2019;25:65–69. Physical activity, resting heart rate, and atrial fibrilla-
the community: a systematic review and meta-anal-
tion: the Tromsø study. Eur Heart J. 2016;37:2307–
13. Goldenthal IL, Sciacca RR, Riga T, et al. Recurrent ysis. Europace. 2020;22:684–694.
2313.
atrial fibrillation/flutter detection after ablation or
9. Roselli C, Chaffin MD, Weng LC, et al. Multi-ethnic
cardioversion using the AliveCor KardiaMobile device: 25. Marcus GM, Vittinghoff E, Whitman IR, et al. Acute
genome-wide association study for atrial fibrillation.
iHEART results. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2019;30: consumption of alcohol and discrete atrial fibrillation
Nat Genet. 2018;50:1225–1233.
2220–2228. events. Ann Intern Med. 2021;174:1503–1509.
10. Huxley RR, Lopez FL, Folsom AR, et al. Absolute
14. Gill S, Bunting KV, Sartini C, et al. Smartphone 26. Voskoboinik A, McDonald C, Chieng D, et al. Acute
and attributable risks of atrial fibrillation in relation to
detection of atrial fibrillation using photo- electrical, autonomic and structural effects of binge
optimal and borderline risk factors: the Atherosclerosis
plethysmography: a systematic review and meta- drinking: insights into the ’holiday heart syndrome. Int
Risk in Communities (ARIC) study. Circulation.
analysis. Heart. 2022;108:1600–1607. J Cardiol. 2021;331:100–105.
2011;123:1501–1508.
15. Tison GH, Sanchez JM, Ballinger B, et al. Passive 27. Whitman IR, Agarwal V, Nah G, et al. Alcohol abuse
11. Garg PK, O’Neal WT, Ogunsua A, et al. Usefulness
detection of atrial fibrillation using a commercially and cardiac disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;69:13–24.
of the American Heart Association’s Life Simple 7 to
available smartwatch. JAMA Cardiol. 2018;3:409– 28. Csengeri D, Sprunker NA, Di Castelnuovo A, et al.
predict the risk of atrial fibrillation (from the REasons
416. Alcohol consumption, cardiac biomarkers, and risk of
for Geographic And Racial Differences in Stroke
16. Perez MV, Mahaffey KW, Hedlin H, et al. Large- [REGARDS] study). Am J Cardiol. 2018;121:199–204. atrial fibrillation and adverse outcomes. Eur Heart J.
scale assessment of a smartwatch to identify atrial 2021;42:1170–1177.
12. Di Benedetto L, Michels G, Luben R, et al. Indi-
fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2019;381:1909–1917. 29. Tu SJ, Gallagher C, Elliott AD, et al. Risk Thresh-
vidual and combined impact of lifestyle factors on
17. Guo Y, Wang H, Zhang H, et al. Mobile Photo- atrial fibrillation in apparently healthy men and olds for total and beverage-specific alcohol con-
plethysmographic technology to detect atrial fibrilla- women: the EPIC-Norfolk prospective population sumption and incident atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll
tion. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;74:2365–2375. study. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2018;25:1374–1383. Cardiol EP. 2021;7:1561–1569.
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 135
-, 2023:-–- ---
30. Zuo H, Nygard O, Vollset SE, et al. Smoking, 12. Glover BM, Hong KL, Dagres N, et al. Impact of 10. Andersen K, Farahmand B, Ahlbom A, et al. Risk of
plasma cotinine and risk of atrial fibrillation: the Hor- body mass index on the outcome of catheter ablation arrhythmias in 52 755 long-distance cross-country
daland Health Study. J Intern Med. 2018;283:73–82. of atrial fibrillation. Heart. 2019;105:244–250. skiers: a cohort study. Eur Heart J. 2013;34:3624–3631.
31. Lu Y, Guo Y, Lin H, et al. Genetically determined 13. Donnellan E, Wazni O, Kanj M, et al. Outcomes of 11. Smart NA, King N, Lambert JD, et al. Exercise-
tobacco and alcohol use and risk of atrial fibrillation. atrial fibrillation ablation in morbidly obese patients based cardiac rehabilitation improves exercise capacity
BMC Med Genomics. 2021;14:73. following bariatric surgery compared with a nonobese and health-related quality of life in people with atrial
cohort. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2019;12: fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of
32. Larsson SC, Wallin A, Hakansson N, et al. Type 1
e007598. randomised and non-randomised trials. Open Heart.
and type 2 diabetes mellitus and incidence of seven
2018;5:e000880.
cardiovascular diseases. Int J Cardiol. 2018;262:66–70. 14. Donnellan E, Wazni OM, Kanj M, et al. Association
between pre-ablation bariatric surgery and atrial 12. Risom SS, Zwisler AD, Rasmussen TB, et al. Cardiac
33. Qi W, Zhang N, Korantzopoulos P, et al. Serum
fibrillation recurrence in morbidly obese patients un- rehabilitation versus usual care for patients treated
glycated hemoglobin level as a predictor of atrial
dergoing atrial fibrillation ablation. Europace. 2019;21: with catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: results of
fibrillation: a systematic review with meta-analysis and
1476–1483. the randomized CopenHeartRFA trial. Am Heart J.
meta-regression. PLoS One. 2017;12:e0170955.
2016;181:120–129.
15. Donnellan E, Wazni OM, Elshazly M, et al. Impact of
5.2.1. Weight Loss in Individuals Who Are bariatric surgery on atrial fibrillation type. Circ 13. Kato M, Ogano M, Mori Y, et al. Exercise-based
Overweight or Obese Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2020;13:e007626. cardiac rehabilitation for patients with catheter abla-
tion for persistent atrial fibrillation: a randomized
1. Abed HS, Wittert GA, Leong DP, et al. Effect of 16. Donnellan E, Wazni OM, Kanj M, et al. Impact of
controlled clinical trial. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2019;26:
weight reduction and cardiometabolic risk factor risk-factor modification on arrhythmia recurrence
1931–1940.
management on symptom burden and severity in pa- among morbidly obese patients undergoing atrial
tients with atrial fibrillation: a randomized clinical trial. fibrillation ablation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 14. Luo N, Merrill P, Parikh KS, et al. Exercise Training
JAMA. 2013;310:2050–2060. 2020;31:1979–1986. in patients with chronic heart failure and atrial fibril-
lation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;69:1683–1691.
2. Pathak RK, Middeldorp ME, Meredith M, et al. Long- 17. Mohanty S, Mohanty P, Natale V, et al. Impact of
term effect of goal-directed weight management in an weight loss on ablation outcome in obese patients with 15. Buckley BJR, Harrison SL, Fazio-Eynullayeva E,
atrial fibrillation cohort: a long-term follow-up study longstanding persistent atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc et al. Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation and all-
(LEGACY). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65:2159–2169. Electrophysiol. 2018;29:246–253. cause mortality among patients with atrial fibrilla-
tion. J Am Heart Assoc. 2021;10:e020804.
3. Pathak RK, Middeldorp ME, Lau DH, et al. Aggres-
5.2.2. Physical Fitness
sive risk factor reduction study for atrial fibrillation and
5.2.3. Smoking Cessation
implications for the outcome of ablation: the ARREST- 1. Hegbom F, Stavem K, Sire S, et al. Effects of short-
AF cohort study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:2222– term exercise training on symptoms and quality of life 1. Arnett DK, Blumenthal RS, Albert MA, et al. 2019
2231. in patients with chronic atrial fibrillation. Int J Cardiol. ACC/AHA guideline on the primary prevention of car-
2007;116:86–92. diovascular disease: a report of the American College
4. Middeldorp ME, Pathak RK, Meredith M, et al.
of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force
PREVEntion and regReSsive Effect of weight-loss 2. Malmo V, Nes BM, Amundsen BH, et al. Aerobic
on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol.
and risk factor modification on Atrial Fibrillation: interval training reduces the burden of atrial fibrilla-
2019;74:e177–e232.
the REVERSE-AF study. Europace. 2018;20:1929– tion in the short term: a randomized trial. Circulation.
1935. 2016;133:466–473. 2. Patnode CD, Henderson JT, Thompson JH, et al.
Behavioral counseling and pharmacotherapy in-
5. Wong CX, Sullivan T, Sun MT, et al. Obesity and the 3. Elliott AD, Verdicchio CV, Mahajan R, et al. An
terventions for tobacco cessation in adults, including
risk of incident, post-operative, and post-ablation exercise and physical activity program in patients
pregnant women: a review of reviews for the U.S.
atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of 626,603 in- with atrial fibrillation: the ACTIVE-AF randomized
Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med.
dividuals in 51 studies. J Am Coll Cardiol EP. 2015;1: controlled trial. J Am Coll Cardiol EP. 2023;9:455–
2015;163:608–621.
139–152. 465.
3. Choi S, Chang J, Kim K, et al. Association of smoking
6. Abed HS, Samuel CS, Lau DH, et al. Obesity results 4. Pathak RK, Elliott A, Middeldorp ME, et al. Impact
cessation after atrial fibrillation diagnosis on the risk of
in progressive atrial structural and electrical remod- of CARDIOrespiratory FITness on arrhythmia recur-
cardiovascular disease: a cohort study of South Korean
eling: implications for atrial fibrillation. Heart Rhythm. rence in obese individuals with atrial fibrillation: the
men. BMC Public Health. 2020;20:168.
2013;10:90–100. CARDIO-FIT study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66:985–
996. 4. Benz AP, Healey JS, Chin A, et al. Stroke risk pre-
7. Mahajan R, Lau DH, Brooks AG, et al. Electrophysi-
diction in patients with atrial fibrillation with and
ological, electroanatomical, and structural remodeling 5. Oesterle A, Giancaterino S, Van Noord MG, et al.
without rheumatic heart disease. Cardiovasc Res.
of the atria as consequences of sustained obesity. J Am Effects of supervised exercise training on atrial fibril-
2022;118:295–304.
Coll Cardiol. 2015;66:1–11. lation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev. 2022;42:258–265. 5. Chatterjee NA, Chae CU, Kim E, et al. Modifiable risk
8. Mahajan R, Lau DH, Brooks AG, et al. Atrial fibril-
factors for incident heart failure in atrial fibrillation. J
lation and obesity: reverse remodeling of atrial sub- 6. Osbak PS, Mourier M, Kjaer A, et al. A randomized
Am Coll Cardiol HF. 2017;5:552–560.
strate with weight reduction. J Am Coll Cardiol EP. study of the effects of exercise training on patients
2021;7:630–641. with atrial fibrillation. Am Heart J. 2011;162:1080– 6. Chamberlain AM, Alonso A, Gersh BJ, et al. Multi-
1087. morbidity and the risk of hospitalization and death in
9. Grundvold I, Bodegard J, Nilsson PM, et al. Body
atrial fibrillation: a population-based study. Am Heart
weight and risk of atrial fibrillation in 7,169 patients 7. Ahn HJ, Lee SR, Choi EK, et al. Association between
J. 2017;185:74–84.
with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes; an observa- exercise habits and stroke, heart failure, and mortality
tional study. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2015;14:5. in Korean patients with incident atrial fibrillation: a 7. Sardana M, Tang Y, Magnani JW, et al. Provider-
nationwide population-based cohort study. PLoS Med. level variation in smoking cessation assistance pro-
10. Di Benedetto L, Michels G, Luben R, et al. Indi-
2021;18:e1003659. vided in the cardiology clinics: insights from the NCDR
vidual and combined impact of lifestyle factors on
PINNACLE registry. J Am Heart Assoc. 2019;8:e011412.
atrial fibrillation in apparently healthy men and 8. Skielboe AK, Bandholm TQ, Hakmann S, et al. Car-
women: the EPIC-Norfolk prospective population diovascular exercise and burden of arrhythmia in pa- 8. Huang Y, Britton J, Hubbard R, et al. Who receives
study. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2018;25:1374–1383. tients with atrial fibrillation - a randomized controlled prescriptions for smoking cessation medications? An
trial. PLoS One. 2017;12:e0170060. association rule mining analysis using a large primary
11. Providência R, Adragão P, de Asmundis C, et al.
care database. Tob Control. 2013;22:274–279.
Impact of body mass index on the outcomes of cath- 9. Abdulla J, Nielsen JR. Is the risk of atrial fibrillation
eter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a European obser- higher in athletes than in the general population? A 9. Stead LF, Buitrago D, Preciado N, et al. Physician
vational multicenter study. J Am Heart Assoc. 2019;8: systematic review and meta-analysis. Europace. advice for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst
e012253. 2009;11:1156–1159. Rev. 2013;5:CD000165.
136 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
10. Hartmann-Boyce J, Livingstone-Banks J, Ordonez- fibrillation after heart valve surgery with cardiopul- systematic review and meta-analysis. Circulation.
Mena JM, et al. Behavioural interventions for smoking monary bypass: a randomised controlled clinical trial. 2021;144:1981–1990.
cessation: an overview and network meta-analysis. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2018;35:911–918.
4. Darghosian L, Free M, Li J, et al. Effect of omega-
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021;1:CD013229.
2. Marcus GM, Modrow MF, Schmid CH, et al. Indi- three polyunsaturated fatty acids on inflammation,
11. Suissa K, Lariviere J, Eisenberg MJ, et al. Efficacy vidualized Studies of triggers of paroxysmal atrial oxidative stress, and recurrence of atrial fibrillation.
and safety of smoking cessation interventions in fibrillation: the I-STOP-AFib randomized clinical trial. Am J Cardiol. 2015;115:196–201.
patients with cardiovascular disease: a network meta- JAMA Cardiol. 2022;7:167–174. 5. Kowey PR, Reiffel JA, Ellenbogen KA, et al. Efficacy
analysis of randomized controlled trials. Circ Car-
3. Caldeira D, Martins C, Alves LB, et al. Caffeine does and safety of prescription omega-3 fatty acids for the
diovasc Qual Outcomes. 2017;10:e002458.
not increase the risk of atrial fibrillation: a systematic prevention of recurrent symptomatic atrial fibrillation:
12. Buiatti A, Kaess B, Reents T, et al. Catheter ablation review and meta-analysis of observational studies. a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2010;304:2363–
for "lone" atrial fibrillation: efficacy and predictors of Heart. 2013;99:1383–1389. 2372.
recurrence. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2016;27:536–541.
4. Conen D, Chiuve SE, Everett BM, et al. Caffeine 6. Nigam A, Talajic M, Roy D, et al. Fish oil for the
13. Cheng WH, Lo LW, Lin YJ, et al. Cigarette smoking consumption and incident atrial fibrillation in women. reduction of atrial fibrillation recurrence, inflamma-
causes a worse long-term outcome in persistent atrial Am J Clin Nutr. 2010;92:509–514. tion, and oxidative stress. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:
fibrillation following catheter ablation. J Cardiovasc 1441–1448.
Electrophysiol. 2018;29:699–706. 5. Bazal P, Gea A, Navarro AM, et al. Caffeinated coffee
7. Kumar S, Sutherland F, Stevenson I, et al. Effects of
consumption and risk of atrial fibrillation in two
14. Apostolakis S, Sullivan RM, Olshansky B, et al. long-term u-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid supple-
Spanish cohorts. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2021;28:648–657.
Factors affecting quality of anticoagulation control mentation on paroxysmal atrial tachyarrhythmia
among patients with atrial fibrillation on warfarin: the 6. Larsson SC, Drca N, Jensen-Urstad M, et al. Coffee burden in patients with implanted pacemakers: results
SAMe-TT(2)R(2) score. Chest. 2013;144:1555–1563. consumption is not associated with increased risk of from a prospective randomised study. Int J Cardiol.
atrial fibrillation: results from two prospective cohorts 2013;168:3812–3817.
15. Albertsen IE, Rasmussen LH, Lane DA, et al. The
and a meta-analysis. BMC Med. 2015;13:207.
impact of smoking on thromboembolism and mortality 8. Albert CM, Cook NR, Pester J, et al. Effect of marine
in patients with incident atrial fibrillation: insights 7. Cheng M, Hu Z, Lu X, et al. Caffeine intake and atrial omega-3 fatty acid and vitamin D supplementation on
from the Danish Diet, Cancer, and Health study. Chest. fibrillation incidence: dose response meta-analysis of incident atrial fibrillation: a randomized clinical trial.
2014;145:559–566. prospective cohort studies. Can J Cardiol. 2014;30: JAMA. 2021;325:1061–1073.
448–454.
16. Lee SR, Choi EK, Jung JH, et al. Smoking cessation 9. Huang WL, Yang J, Yang J, et al. Vitamin D and new-
after diagnosis of new-onset atrial fibrillation and the 8. Kim EJ, Hoffmann TJ, Nah G, et al. Coffee con- onset atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomized
risk of stroke and death. J Clin Med. 2021;10:2238. sumption and incident tachyarrhythmias: reported controlled trials. Hellenic J Cardiol. 2018;59:72–77.
behavior, Mendelian randomization, and their in- 10. Kara H, Yasim A. Effects of high-dose vitamin D
5.2.4. Alcohol Consumption
teractions. JAMA Intern Med. 2021;181:1185–1193. supplementation on the occurrence of post-operative
1. Voskoboinik A, Kalman JM, De Silva A, et al. Alcohol 9. Bodar V, Chen J, Gaziano JM, et al. Coffee con- atrial fibrillation after coronary artery bypass graft-
abstinence in drinkers with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J sumption and risk of atrial fibrillation in the physicians’ ing: randomized controlled trial. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc
Med. 2020;382:20–28. health study. J Am Heart Assoc. 2019;8:e011346. Surg. 2020;68:477–484.
2. Marcus GM, Dukes JW, Vittinghoff E, et al. 11. Shi R, Li ZH, Chen D, et al. Sole and combined
10. Groh CA, Faulkner M, Getabecha S, et al. Patient-
A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial vitamin C supplementation can prevent postoperative
reported triggers of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.
of intravenous alcohol to assess changes in atrial atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery: a systematic
Heart Rhythm. 2019;16:996–1002.
electrophysiology. J Am Coll Cardiol EP. 2021;7:662– review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled
670. 11. Yuan S, Larsson SC. No association between coffee trials. Clin Cardiol. 2018;41:871–878.
consumption and risk of atrial fibrillation: a Mendelian
3. Marcus GM, Modrow MF, Schmid CH, et al. Indi- 12. Abed HS, Wittert GA, Leong DP, et al. Effect of
randomization study. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis.
vidualized studies of triggers of paroxysmal atrial weight reduction and cardiometabolic risk factor
2019;29:1185–1188.
fibrillation: the I-STOP-AFib randomized clinical trial. management on symptom burden and severity in pa-
JAMA Cardiol. 2022;7:167–174. 12. Mattioli AV, Pennella S, Farinetti A, et al. Energy tients with atrial fibrillation: a randomized clinical trial.
drinks and atrial fibrillation in young adults. Clin Nutr. JAMA. 2013;310:2050–2060.
4. Marcus GM, Vittinghoff E, Whitman IR, et al. Acute
2018;37:1073–1074.
consumption of alcohol and discrete atrial fibrillation 13. Pathak RK, Middeldorp ME, Meredith M, et al.
events. Ann Intern Med. 2021;174:1503–1509. 13. Di Rocco JR, During A, Morelli PJ, et al. Atrial Long-term effect of goal-directed weight manage-
fibrillation in healthy adolescents after highly ment in an atrial fibrillation cohort: a long-term
5. Abed HS, Wittert GA, Leong DP, et al. Effect of
caffeinated beverage consumption: two case reports. follow-up study (LEGACY). J Am Coll Cardiol.
weight reduction and cardiometabolic risk factor
J Med Case Rep. 2011;5:18. 2015;65:2159–2169.
management on symptom burden and severity in pa-
tients with atrial fibrillation: a randomized clinical trial. 14. Mattioli AV, Bonatti S, Zennaro M, et al. Effect of 14. Zhang S, Zhuang X, Lin X, et al. Low-carbohydrate
JAMA. 2013;310:2050–2060. coffee consumption, lifestyle and acute life stress in diets and risk of incident atrial fibrillation: a prospec-
the development of acute lone atrial fibrillation. tive cohort study. J Am Heart Assoc. 2019;8:e011955.
6. Pathak RK, Middeldorp ME, Lau DH, et al. Aggressive
risk factor reduction study for atrial fibrillation and im- J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 2008;9:794–798.
5.2.7. Diabetes
plications for the outcome of ablation: the ARREST-AF
5.2.6. Diet and Dietary Supplementation
cohort study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:2222–2231. 1. Echouffo-Tcheugui JB, Shrader P, Thomas L, et al.
1. Aleksova A, Masson S, Maggioni AP, et al. n-3 Care patterns and outcomes in atrial fibrillation pa-
7. Pathak RK, Middeldorp ME, Meredith M, et al. Long-
polyunsaturated fatty acids and atrial fibrillation in tients with and without diabetes: ORBIT-AF registry.
term effect of goal-directed weight management in an
patients with chronic heart failure: the GISSI-HF trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70:1325–1335.
atrial fibrillation cohort: a long-term follow-up study
(LEGACY). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65:2159–2169. Eur J Heart Fail. 2013;15:1289–1295. 2. Patti G, Di Gioia G, Cavallari I, et al. Safety and ef-
8. Middeldorp ME, Pathak RK, Meredith M, et al. 2. Metcalf RG, Skuladottir GV, Indridason OS, et al. U- ficacy of nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants
PREVEntion and regReSsive Effect of weight-loss and shaped relationship between tissue docosahexaenoic versus warfarin in diabetic patients with atrial fibrilla-
risk factor modification on Atrial Fibrillation: the acid and atrial fibrillation following cardiac surgery. tion: a study-level meta-analysis of phase III random-
REVERSE-AF study. Europace. 2018;20:1929–1935. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2014;68:114–118. ized trials. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2017;33:e2876.
3. Gencer B, Djousse L, Al-Ramady OT, et al. Effect of 3. Donnellan E, Aagaard P, Kanj M, et al. Association
5.2.5. Caffeine Consumption
long-term marine omega-3 fatty acids supplementa- between pre-ablation glycemic control and outcomes
1. Lagier D, Nee L, Guieu R, et al. Peri-operative oral tion on the risk of atrial fibrillation in randomized among patients with diabetes undergoing atrial fibril-
caffeine does not prevent postoperative atrial controlled trials of cardiovascular outcomes: a lation ablation. J Am Coll Cardiol EP. 2019;5:897–903.
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 137
-, 2023:-–- ---
5.2.8. Treatment of Hypertension 2. Mohammadieh AM, Sutherland K, Kanagaratnam LB, 17. May AM, Blackwell T, Stone PH, et al. Central
et al. Clinical screening tools for obstructive sleep sleep-disordered breathing predicts incident atrial
1. Neefs J, van den Berg NW, Limpens J, et al. Aldo- apnea in a population with atrial fibrillation: a diag- fibrillation in older men. Am J Respir Crit Care Med.
sterone pathway blockade to prevent atrial fibrillation: nostic accuracy trial. J Clin Sleep Med. 2021;17:1015– 2016;193:783–791.
a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol. 1024.
18. Chao TF, Liu CJ, Chen SJ, et al. Incidence and risk
2017;231:155–161.
3. Linz D, Brooks AG, Elliott AD, et al. Variability of of atrial fibrillation in sleep-disordered breathing
2. Steinberg JS, Shabanov V, Ponomarev D, et al. sleep apnea severity and risk of atrial fibrillation: the without coexistent systemic disease. Circ J. 2014;78:
Effect of renal denervation and catheter ablation VARIOSA-AF study. J Am Coll Cardiol EP. 2019;5:692– 2182–2187.
vs catheter ablation alone on atrial fibrillation 701.
19. Christensen MA, Dixit S, Dewland TA, et al. Sleep
recurrence among patients with paroxysmal atrial
4. Abumuamar AM, Dorian P, Newman D, et al. The characteristics that predict atrial fibrillation. Heart
fibrillation and hypertension: the ERADICATE-AF
prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea in patients with Rhythm. 2018;15:1289–1295.
randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2020;323:248–
atrial fibrillation. Clin Cardiol. 2018;41:601–607.
255. 20. Genuardi MV, Ogilvie RP, Saand AR, et al. Associ-
5. Platek AE, Szymanski FM, Filipiak KJ, et al. Stratifi- ation of short sleep duration and atrial fibrillation.
3. Pathak RK, Middeldorp ME, Lau DH, et al. Aggres-
cation of cardiovascular risk in patients with atrial Chest. 2019;156:544–552.
sive risk factor reduction study for atrial fibrillation and
fibrillation and obstructive sleep apnea-validity of the
implications for the outcome of ablation: the ARREST- 21. Itoh H, Kaneko H, Fujiu K, et al. Risk factors and
2MACE score. Sleep Breath. 2017;21:601–606.
AF cohort study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:2222– lifestyles in the development of atrial fibrillation
2231. 6. Li X, Zhou X, Xu X, et al. Effects of continuous among individuals aged 20-39 years. Am J Cardiol.
positive airway pressure treatment in obstructive sleep 2021;155:40–44.
4. Rienstra M, Hobbelt AH, Alings M, et al. Targeted
apnea patients with atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis.
therapy of underlying conditions improves sinus 22. Hunt TE, Traaen GM, Aakeroy L, et al. Effect of
Medicine (Baltimore). 2021;100:e25438.
rhythm maintenance in patients with persistent atrial continuous positive airway pressure therapy on recur-
fibrillation: results of the RACE 3 trial. Eur Heart J. 7. Yang Y, Ning Y, Wen W, et al. CPAP is associated rence of atrial fibrillation after pulmonary vein isola-
2018;39:2987–2996. with decreased risk of AF recurrence in patients with tion in patients with obstructive sleep apnea: a
OSA, especially those younger and slimmer: a meta- randomized controlled trial. Heart Rhythm. 2022;19:
5. Pinho-Gomes AC, Azevedo L, Copland E, et al. Blood
analysis. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2020;58:369– 1433–1441.
pressure-lowering treatment for the prevention of
379.
cardiovascular events in patients with atrial fibrillation: 5.2.10. Comprehensive Care
an individual participant data meta-analysis. PLoS Med. 8. Congrete S, Bintvihok M, Thongprayoon C, et al.
2021;18:e1003599. Effect of obstructive sleep apnea and its treatment of 1. Voskoboinik A, Kalman JM, De Silva A, et al. Alcohol
atrial fibrillation recurrence after radiofrequency abstinence in drinkers with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J
6. Pokorney SD, Piccini JP, Stevens SR, et al. Cause of
catheter ablation: a meta-analysis. J Evid Based Med. Med. 2020;382:20–28.
death and predictors of all-cause mortality in anti-
2018;11:145–151.
coagulated patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: 2. Abed HS, Wittert GA, Leong DP, et al. Effect of
data from ROCKET AF. J Am Heart Assoc. 2016;5: 9. Deng F, Raza A, Guo J. Treating obstructive sleep weight reduction and cardiometabolic risk factor
e002197. apnea with continuous positive airway pressure re- management on symptom burden and severity in pa-
duces risk of recurrent atrial fibrillation after catheter tients with atrial fibrillation: a randomized clinical trial.
7. Rao MP, Halvorsen S, Wojdyla D, et al. Blood
ablation: a meta-analysis. Sleep Med. 2018;46:5–11. JAMA. 2013;310:2050–2060.
pressure control and risk of stroke or systemic
embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation: results 10. Qureshi WT, Nasir UB, Alqalyoobi S, et al. Meta- 3. Rienstra M, Hobbelt AH, Alings M, et al. Targeted
from the Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and analysis of continuous positive airway pressure as a therapy of underlying conditions improves sinus
Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation therapy of atrial fibrillation in obstructive sleep apnea. rhythm maintenance in patients with persistent atrial
(ARISTOTLE) trial. J Am Heart Assoc. 2015;4: Am J Cardiol. 2015;116:1767–1773. fibrillation: results of the RACE 3 trial. Eur Heart J.
e002015. 2018;39:2987–2996.
11. Szymanski FM, Filipiak KJ, Platek AE, et al. Pres-
8. Parkash R, Wells GA, Sapp JL, et al. Effect of ence and severity of obstructive sleep apnea and 4. Hendriks JM, de Wit R, Crijns HJ, et al. Nurse-led
aggressive blood pressure control on the recurrence of remote outcomes of atrial fibrillation ablations - a care vs. usual care for patients with atrial fibrillation:
atrial fibrillation after catheter ablation: a randomized, long-term prospective, cross-sectional cohort study. results of a randomized trial of integrated chronic
open-label clinical trial (SMAC-AF [Substrate Modifi- Sleep Breath. 2015;19:849–856. care vs. routine clinical care in ambulatory patients
cation With Aggressive Blood Pressure Control]). Cir- with atrial fibrillation. Eur Heart J. 2012;33:2692–
12. Caples SM, Mansukhani MP, Friedman PA, et al. The
culation. 2017;135:1788–1798. 2699.
impact of continuous positive airway pressure treat-
9. Soliman EZ, Rahman AF, Zhang ZM, et al. Ef- ment on the recurrence of atrial fibrillation post car- 5. Guo Y, Lane DA, Wang L, et al. Mobile health
fect of intensive blood pressure lowering on the dioversion: a randomized controlled trial. Int J Cardiol. technology to improve care for patients with
risk of atrial fibrillation. Hypertension. 2020;75: 2019;278:133–136. atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;75:
1491–1496. 1523–1534.
13. Traaen GM, Aakeroy L, Hunt TE, et al. Effect of
10. Kim TH, Yang PS, Yu HT, et al. Effect of hyper- continuous positive airway pressure on arrhythmia in 6. Karlsson LO, Nilsson S, Bång M, et al. A clinical
tension duration and blood pressure level on ischaemic atrial fibrillation and sleep apnea: a randomized decision support tool for improving adherence to
stroke risk in atrial fibrillation: nationwide data controlled trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2021;204: guidelines on anticoagulant therapy in patients with
covering the entire Korean population. Eur Heart J. 573–582. atrial fibrillation at risk of stroke: a cluster-randomized
2019;40:809–819. trial in a Swedish primary care setting (the CDS-AF
14. Marti-Almor J, Marques P, Jesel L, et al. Incidence
study). PLoS Med. 2018;15:e1002528.
11. Pathak RK, Middeldorp ME, Meredith M, et al. of sleep apnea and association with atrial fibrillation in
Long-term effect of goal-directed weight manage- an unselected pacemaker population: results of the 7. Piccini JP Sr, Allred J, Bunch TJ, et al. Rationale,
ment in an atrial fibrillation cohort: a long-term observational RESPIRE study. Heart Rhythm. 2020;17: considerations, and goals for atrial fibrillation centers
follow-up study (LEGACY). J Am Coll Cardiol. 195–202. of excellence: a Heart Rhythm Society perspective.
2015;65:2159–2169. Heart Rhythm. 2020;17:1804–1832.
15. Yeung C, Drew D, Hammond S, et al. Extended
cardiac monitoring in patients with severe sleep apnea 8. Younis A, Shaviv E, Nof E, et al. The role and
5.2.9. Sleep and no history of atrial fibrillation (the Reveal XT-SA outcome of cardiac rehabilitation program in patients
study). Am J Cardiol. 2018;122:1885–1889. with atrial fibrillation. Clin Cardiol. 2018;41:1170–1176.
1. Kadhim K, Middeldorp ME, Elliott AD, et al.
Prevalence and assessment of sleep-disordered 16. Zhao E, Chen S, Du Y, et al. Association between 9. Angaran P, Mariano Z, Dragan V, et al. The Atrial
breathing in patients with atrial fibrillation: a sys- sleep apnea hypopnea syndrome and the risk of atrial Fibrillation Therapies after ER visit: Outpatient Care for
tematic review and meta-analysis. Can J Cardiol. fibrillation: a meta-analysis of cohort study. Biomed Patients with Acute AF - the AFTER3 study. J Atr
2021;37:1846–1856. Res Int. 2018;2018:5215868. Fibrillation. 2015;7:1187.
138 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
10. Wijtvliet E, Tieleman RG, van Gelder IC, et al. from the Swedish atrial fibrillation cohort study. Cir- benefit of anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation. Ann
Nurse-led vs. usual-care for atrial fibrillation. Eur Heart culation. 2012;125:2298–2307. Intern Med. 2018;169:517–527.
J. 2020;41:634–641.
9. Steinberg BA, Ballew NG, Greiner MA, et al. 23. Go AS, Reynolds K, Yang J, et al. Association of
11. van den Dries CJ, van Doorn S, Rutten FH, et al. Ischemic and bleeding outcomes in patients with burden of atrial fibrillation with risk of ischemic stroke
Integrated management of atrial fibrillation in primary atrial fibrillation and contraindications to oral anti- in adults with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: the KP-
care: results of the ALL-IN cluster randomized trial. Eur coagulation. J Am Coll Cardiol EP. 2019;5:1384– RHYTHM study. JAMA Cardiol. 2018;3:601–608.
Heart J. 2020;41:2836–2844. 1392. 24. Rao MP, Halvorsen S, Wojdyla D, et al. Blood
12. Stewart S, Ball J, Horowitz JD, et al. Standard 10. Chao TF, Lip GYH, Lin YJ, et al. Incident risk factors pressure control and risk of stroke or systemic embo-
versus atrial fibrillation-specific management strategy and major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation lism in patients with atrial fibrillation: results from the
(SAFETY) to reduce recurrent admission and prolong treated with oral anticoagulants: a comparison of Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Throm-
survival: pragmatic, multicentre, randomised baseline, follow-up and delta HAS-BLED scores with boembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (ARISTOTLE)
controlled trial. Lancet. 2015;385:775–784. an approach focused on modifiable bleeding risk fac- trial. J Am Heart Assoc. 2015;4:e002015.
13. Willis TA, Collinson M, Glidewell L, et al. An tors. Thromb Haemost. 2018;118:768–777. 25. Gage BF, Waterman AD, Shannon W, et al. Vali-
adaptable implementation package targeting 11. Hlatky MA, Greenland P, Arnett DK, et al. Criteria dation of clinical classification schemes for predicting
evidence-based indicators in primary care: a pragmatic for evaluation of novel markers of cardiovascular risk: stroke: results from the National Registry of Atrial
cluster-randomised evaluation. PLoS Med. 2020;17: a scientific statement from the American Heart Asso- Fibrillation. JAMA. 2001;285:2864–2870.
e1003045. ciation. Circulation. 2009;119:2408–2416. 26. Chao TF, Lip GY, Liu CJ, et al. Validation of a
14. Cox JL, Parkash R, Foster GA, et al. Integrated modified CHA2DS2-VASc score for stroke risk strati-
12. Alkhouli M, Friedman PA. Ischemic stroke risk in
Management Program Advancing Community Treat- fication in Asian patients with atrial fibrillation: a
patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: JACC re-
ment of Atrial Fibrillation (IMPACT-AF): a cluster ran- nationwide cohort study. Stroke. 2016;47:2462–
view topic of the week. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;74:
domized trial of a computerized clinical decision 2469.
3050–3065.
support tool. Am Heart J. 2020;224:35–46.
13. Takabayashi K, Hamatani Y, Yamashita Y, et al. 6.2. Risk-Based Selection of Oral Anticoagulation:
15. Arts DL, Abu-Hanna A, Medlock SK, et al. Effec- Balancing Risks and Benefits
Incidence of stroke or systemic embolism in parox-
tiveness and usage of a decision support system to
ysmal versus sustained atrial fibrillation: the Fushimi
improve stroke prevention in general practice: a clus- 1. Al-Khatib SM, Thomas L, Wallentin L, et al. Out-
Atrial Fibrillation Registry. Stroke. 2015;46:3354–3361.
ter randomized controlled trial. PLoS One. 2017;12: comes of apixaban vs. warfarin by type and duration of
e0170974. 14. Steinberg BA, Hellkamp AS, Lokhnygina Y, et al. atrial fibrillation: results from the ARISTOTLE trial. Eur
Higher risk of death and stroke in patients with Heart J. 2013;34:2464–2471.
16. Vinereanu D, Lopes RD, Bahit MC, et al.
persistent vs. paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: results
A multifaceted intervention to improve treatment with 2. Link MS, Giugliano RP, Ruff CT, et al. Stroke and
from the ROCKET-AF Trial. Eur Heart J. 2015;36:288–
oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation (IMPACT-AF): mortality risk in patients with various patterns of atrial
296.
an international, cluster-randomised trial. Lancet. fibrillation: results from the ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 Trial
2017;390:1737–1746. 15. Gao X, Cai X, Yang Y, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of (Effective Anticoagulation With Factor Xa Next Gen-
the HAS-BLED bleeding score in VKA- or DOAC- eration in Atrial Fibrillation-Thrombolysis in Myocar-
6.1. Risk Stratification Schemes treated patients with atrial fibrillation: a systematic dial Infarction 48). Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol.
review and meta-analysis. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2017;10:e004267.
1. Singer DE, Chang Y, Borowsky LH, et al. A new risk
2021;8:757087.
scheme to predict ischemic stroke and other throm- 3. Steinberg BA, Hellkamp AS, Lokhnygina Y, et al.
boembolism in atrial fibrillation: the ATRIA study 16. Zhu W, Fu L, Ding Y, et al. Meta-analysis of ATRIA Higher risk of death and stroke in patients with
stroke risk score. J Am Heart Assoc. 2013;2:e000250. versus CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc for predicting stroke and persistent vs. paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: results
thromboembolism in patients with atrial fibrillation. from the ROCKET-AF Trial. Eur Heart J. 2015;36:288–
2. Lip GY, Nieuwlaat R, Pisters R, et al. Refining clinical
Int J Cardiol. 2017;227:436–442. 296.
risk stratification for predicting stroke and thrombo-
embolism in atrial fibrillation using a novel risk factor- 17. van den Ham HA, Klungel OH, Singer DE, et al. 4. Chao TF, Lip GYH, Lin YJ, et al. Incident risk factors
based approach: the euro heart survey on atrial fibril- Comparative performance of ATRIA, CHADS2, and and major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation
lation. Chest. 2010;137:263–272. CHA2DS2-VASc risk scores predicting stroke in pa- treated with oral anticoagulants: a comparison of
tients with atrial fibrillation: results from a national baseline, follow-up and delta HAS-BLED scores with
3. Fox KAA, Lucas JE, Pieper KS, et al. Improved risk
primary care database. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66: an approach focused on modifiable bleeding risk fac-
stratification of patients with atrial fibrillation: an in-
1851–1859. tors. Thromb Haemost. 2018;118:768–777.
tegrated GARFIELD-AF tool for the prediction of
mortality, stroke and bleed in patients with and 18. Dalgaard F, Pieper K, Verheugt F, et al. GARFIELD- 5. Minhas AS, Jiang Q, Gu X, et al. Renal function in
without anticoagulation. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e017157. AF model for prediction of stroke and major bleeding atrial fibrillation patients switched from warfarin to a
in atrial fibrillation: a Danish nationwide validation direct oral anticoagulant. J Thromb Thrombolysis.
4. Quinn GR, Severdija ON, Chang Y, et al. Wide vari-
study. BMJ Open. 2019;9:e033283. 2016;42:566–572.
ation in reported rates of stroke across cohorts of
patients with atrial fibrillation. Circulation. 2017;135: 19. van der Endt VHW, Milders J, Penning de 6. Yoon M, Yang PS, Jang E, et al. Dynamic changes of
208–219. Vries BBL, et al. Comprehensive comparison of stroke CHA2DS2-VASc score and the risk of ischaemic stroke
risk score performance: a systematic review and meta- in Asian patients with atrial fibrillation: a nationwide
5. Pisters R, Lane DA, Nieuwlaat R, et al. A novel user-
analysis among 6 267 728 patients with atrial fibril- cohort study. Thromb Haemost. 2018;118:1296–1304.
friendly score (HAS-BLED) to assess 1-year risk of
major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation: the lation. Europace. 2022;24:1739–1753.
Euro Heart Survey. Chest. 2010;138:1093–1100. 6.3. Oral Anticoagulants
20. Chang G, Xie Q, Ma L, et al. Accuracy of HAS-BLED
6. Gage BF, Yan Y, Milligan PE, et al. Clinical classifi- and other bleeding risk assessment tools in predicting 1. Zhu J, Alexander GC, Nazarian S, et al. Trends and
cation schemes for predicting hemorrhage: results major bleeding events in atrial fibrillation: a network variation in oral anticoagulant choice in patients with
from the National Registry of Atrial Fibrillation (NRAF). meta-analysis. J Thromb Haemost. 2020;18:791–801. atrial fibrillation, 2010-2017. Pharmacotherapy.
Am Heart J. 2006;151:713–719. 2018;38:907–920.
21. Fauchier L, Chaize G, Gaudin AF, et al. Predictive
7. Fang MC, Go AS, Chang Y, et al. A new risk scheme ability of HAS-BLED, HEMORR2HAGES, and ATRIA 2. Granger CB, Alexander JH, McMurray JJ, et al.
to predict warfarin-associated hemorrhage: the ATRIA bleeding risk scores in patients with atrial fibrillation. A Apixaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibril-
(Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation) French nationwide cross-sectional study. Int J Cardiol. lation. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:981–992.
Study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58:395–401. 2016;217:85–91.
3. Connolly SJ, Ezekowitz MD, Yusuf S, et al. Dabiga-
8. Friberg L, Rosenqvist M, Lip GY. Net clinical benefit 22. Shah SJ, Eckman MH, Aspberg S, et al. Effect of tran versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation.
of warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation: a report variation in published stroke rates on the net clinical N Engl J Med. 2009;361:1139–1151.
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 139
-, 2023:-–- ---
4. Giugliano RP, Ruff CT, Braunwald E, et al. Edoxaban 15. Gage BF, Waterman AD, Shannon W, et al. Valida- strategy: a randomized controlled trial. Circulation.
versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. tion of clinical classification schemes for predicting 2009;120:1115–1122.
N Engl J Med. 2013;369:2093–2104. stroke: results from the National Registry of Atrial
10. Wang M, Zeraatkar D, Obeda M, et al. Drug–drug
Fibrillation. JAMA. 2001;285:2864–2870.
5. Patel MR, Mahaffey KW, Garg J, et al. Rivaroxaban interactions with warfarin: a systematic review and
versus warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. N Engl 16. Eckman MH, Singer DE, Rosand J, et al. Moving the meta-analysis. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2021;87:4051–
J Med. 2011;365:883–891. tipping point: the decision to anticoagulate patients 4100.
with atrial fibrillation. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 11. Kido K, Shimizu M, Shiga T, et al. Meta-analysis
6.3.1. Antithrombotic Therapy
2011;4:14–21. comparing inappropriately low dose versus standard
1. Connolly SJ, Ezekowitz MD, Yusuf S, et al. Dabiga- 17. Ommen SR, Mital S, Burke MA, et al. 2020 AHA/ dose of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with
tran versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. ACC guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of pa- atrial fibrillation. J Am Pharm Assoc (2003). 2022;62:
N Engl J Med. 2009;361:1139–1151. tients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: executive 487–495.e482.
2. Patel MR, Mahaffey KW, Garg J, et al. Rivaroxaban summary: a report of the American College of Cardi- 12. Zhang XL, Zhang XW, Wang TY, et al. Off-label
versus warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. N Engl ology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on under- and overdosing of direct oral anticoagulants in
J Med. 2011;365:883–891. Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. patients with atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis. Circ
2020;76:3022–3055. Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2021;14:e007971.
3. Granger CB, Alexander JH, McMurray JJ, et al.
Apixaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibril- 18. Brokmeier H, Kido K. Off-label use for direct oral 13. Eliquis [package insert]. Princeton, NJ: Bristol-
lation. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:981–992. anticoagulants: valvular atrial fibrillation, heart failure, Myers Squibb; 2021.
4. Giugliano RP, Ruff CT, Braunwald E, et al. Edoxaban left ventricular thrombus, superficial vein thrombosis, 14. Pradaxa [package insert]. Ridgefield, CT: Boeh-
versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. pulmonary hypertension-a systematic review. Ann ringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc; 2021.
N Engl J Med. 2013;369:2093–2104. Pharmacother. 2021;55:995–1009.
15. Sugrue A, Sanborn D, Amin M, et al. Inappropriate
5. López-López JA, Sterne JAC, Thom HHZ, et al. Oral 19. Hart RG, Pearce LA, Miller VT, et al. Cardioembolic dosing of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with
anticoagulants for prevention of stroke in atrial fibril- vs. noncardioembolic strokes in atrial fibrillation: fre- atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol. 2021;144:52–59.
lation: systematic review, network meta-analysis, and quency and effect of antithrombotic agents in the
16. Sato T, Aizawa Y, Fuse K, et al. The comparison of
cost effectiveness analysis. Bmj. 2017;359:j5058. stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation studies. Cere-
inappropriate-low-doses use among 4 direct oral an-
brovasc Dis. 2000;10:39–43.
6. Ruff CT, Giugliano RP, Braunwald E, et al. Com- ticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation: from the
parison of the efficacy and safety of new oral antico- 6.3.1.1. Considerations in Managing Anticoagulants database of a single-center registry. J Stroke Cere-
agulants with warfarin in patients with atrial brovasc Dis. 2018;27:3280–3288.
fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomised trials. Lan- 1. Mueck W, Kubitza D, Becka M. Co-administration of
17. Yu HT, Yang PS, Jang E, et al. Label adherence of
cet. 2014;383:955–962. rivaroxaban with drugs that share its elimination
direct oral anticoagulants dosing and clinical outcomes
pathways: pharmacokinetic effects in healthy subjects.
7. Carnicelli AP, Hong H, Connolly SJ, et al. Direct oral in patients with atrial fibrillation. J Am Heart Assoc.
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2013;76:455–466.
anticoagulants versus warfarin in patients with atrial 2020;9:e014177.
fibrillation: patient-level network meta-analyses of 2. Frost CE, Byon W, Song Y, et al. Effect of ketoco- 18. Camm AJ, Cools F, Virdone S, et al. Mortality in
randomized clinical trials with interaction testing by nazole and diltiazem on the pharmacokinetics of patients with atrial fibrillation receiving non-
age and sex. Circulation. 2022;145:242–255. apixaban, an oral direct factor Xa inhibitor. Br J Clin recommended doses of direct oral anticoagulants.
8. Investigators AWGotA, Connolly S, Pogue J, et al. Pharmacol. 2015;79:838–846. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;76:1425–1436.
Clopidogrel plus aspirin versus oral anticoagulation for 3. Parasrampuria DA, Mendell J, Shi M, et al. Edoxaban 19. Stampfuss J, Kubitza D, Becka M, et al. The effect
atrial fibrillation in the Atrial fibrillation Clopidogrel drug-drug interactions with ketoconazole, erythro- of food on the absorption and pharmacokinetics of
Trial with Irbesartan for prevention of Vascular Events mycin, and cyclosporine. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2016;82: rivaroxaban. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2013;51:549–
(ACTIVE W): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 1591–1600. 561.
2006;367:1903–1912.
4. Perlman A, Goldstein R, Choshen Cohen L, et al. 20. Xarelto [package insert]. Titusville, NJ: Janssen
9. Connolly SJ, Camm AJ, Halperin JL, et al. Drone-
Effect of enzyme-inducing antiseizure medications on Pharmaceuticals, Inc; 2023.
darone in high-risk permanent atrial fibrillation. N Engl
the risk of sub-therapeutic concentrations of direct
J Med. 2011;365:2268–2276. 21. Savaysa [package insert]. Basking Ridge, NJ: Daiichi
oral anticoagulants: a retrospective cohort study. CNS
Sankyo, Inc; 2021.
10. Sato H, Ishikawa K, Kitabatake A, et al. Low-dose Drugs. 2021;35:305–316.
aspirin for prevention of stroke in low-risk patients 22. Coumadin [package insert]. Princeton, NJ: Bristol-
5. Vakkalagadda B, Frost C, Byon W, et al. Effect of Myers Squibb; 2012.
with atrial fibrillation: Japan Atrial Fibrillation Stroke
rifampin on the pharmacokinetics of apixaban, an oral
Trial. Stroke. 2006;37:447–451. 23. Kido K. Atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter: stroke pre-
direct inhibitor of factor Xa. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs.
11. Hart RG, Pearce LA, Aguilar MI. Meta-analysis: vention. In: CardSAP 2021; Book 2. Arrhythmias and
2016;16:119–127.
antithrombotic therapy to prevent stroke in patients Thrombosis. American College of Clinical Pharmacy;
who have nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Ann Intern 6. Perlman A, Wanounou M, Goldstein R, et al. 2021:32–33.
Med. 2007;146:857–867. Ischemic and thrombotic events associated with
concomitant Xa-inhibiting direct oral anticoagulants 6.4. Silent AF and Stroke of Undetermined
12. Nielsen PB, Skjoth F, Overvad TF, et al. Female sex and antiepileptic drugs: analysis of the FDA Adverse Cause
is a risk modifier rather than a risk factor for stroke in Event Reporting System (FAERS). CNS Drugs. 2019;33:
atrial fibrillation: should we use a CHA2DS2-VA score 1223–1228. 1. Gladstone DJ, Spring M, Dorian P, et al. Atrial
rather than CHA2DS2-VASc? Circulation. 2018;137:
7. Giustozzi M, Mazzetti M, Paciaroni M, et al. fibrillation in patients with cryptogenic stroke. N Engl J
832–840.
Concomitant use of direct oral anticoagulants and Med. 2014;370:2467–2477.
13. Aspberg S, Chang Y, Atterman A, et al. Comparison
antiepileptic drugs: a prospective cohort study in pa- 2. Saver JL. CLINICAL PRACTICE. Cryptogenic stroke.
of the ATRIA, CHADS2, and CHA2DS2-VASc stroke risk
tients with atrial fibrillation. Clin Drug Investig. N Engl J Med. 2016;374:2065–2074.
scores in predicting ischaemic stroke in a large Swedish
2021;41:43–51.
cohort of patients with atrial fibrillation. Eur Heart J. 3. Ibeh C, Elkind MSV. Stroke prevention after cryp-
2016;37:3203–3210. 8. Wan Y, Heneghan C, Perera R, et al. Anticoagulation togenic stroke. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2021;23:174.
control and prediction of adverse events in patients 4. Melis F, Guido M, Amellone C, et al. Prevalence and
14. Singer DE, Chang Y, Borowsky LH, et al. A new
with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review. Circ Car- predictors of atrial fibrillation in patients with embolic
risk scheme to predict ischemic stroke and other
diovasc Qual Outcomes. 2008;1:84–91.
thromboembolism in atrial fibrillation: the ATRIA stroke of undetermined source: a real-life single-cen-
study stroke risk score. J Am Heart Assoc. 2013;2: 9. De Assis MC, Rabelo ER, Ávila CW, et al. Improved ter retrospective study. Neurol Sci. 2021;42:3707–
e000250. oral anticoagulation after a dietary vitamin K-guided 3714.
140 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
5. Victor CU, Carolina PE, Jorge TR, et al. Incidence and 7. Park YJ, Kim JS, Park KM, et al. Subclinical atrial contraindication to oral anticoagulation: 1-year follow-
predictive factors of hidden atrial fibrillation detected fibrillation burden and adverse clinical outcomes in up outcome data of the EWOLUTION trial. Heart
by implantable loop recorder after an embolic stroke patients with permanent pacemakers. Stroke. 2021;52: Rhythm. 2017;14:1302–1308.
of undetermined source. J Atr Fibrillation. 2018;11: 1299–1308.
7. Kar S, Doshi SK, Sadhu A, et al. Primary outcome
2078.
8. Eckman MH, Singer DE, Rosand J, et al. Moving the evaluation of a next-generation left atrial appendage
6. Hart RG, Connolly SJ, Mundl H. Rivaroxaban for tipping point: the decision to anticoagulate patients closure device: results from the PINNACLE FLX trial.
stroke prevention after embolic stroke of undeter- with atrial fibrillation. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. Circulation. 2021;143:1754–1762.
mined source. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:987. 2011;4:14–21.
8. Freeman JV, Higgins AY, Wang Y, et al. Antith-
7. Diener HC, Sacco RL, Easton JD, et al. Dabigatran 9. Pollak WM, Simmons JD, Interian A Jr, et al. Clinical rombotic therapy after left atrial appendage occlusion
for prevention of stroke after embolic stroke of utility of intraatrial pacemaker stored electrograms to in patients with atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol.
undetermined source. N Engl J Med. 2019;380:1906– diagnose atrial fibrillation and flutter. Pacing Clin 2022;79:1785–1798.
1917. Electrophysiol. 2001;24:424–429.
9. Holmes DR, Reddy VY, Buchbinder M, et al. The
8. Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation Study. Final 10. Glotzer TV, Hellkamp AS, Zimmerman J, et al. assessment of the Watchman device in patients un-
results. Circulation. 1991;84:527–539. Atrial high rate episodes detected by pacemaker di- suitable for oral anticoagulation (ASAP-TOO) trial. Am
9. Sanna T, Diener HC, Passman RS, et al. Cryptogenic agnostics predict death and stroke: report of the Atrial Heart J. 2017;189:68–74.
stroke and underlying atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. Diagnostics Ancillary Study of the MOde Selection Trial
(MOST). Circulation. 2003;107:1614–1619. 6.5.2. Cardiac Surgery—LAA Exclusion/Excision
2014;370:2478–2486.
10. Wachter R, Gröschel K, Gelbrich G, et al. Holter- 11. Capucci A, Santini M, Padeletti L, et al. Monitored 1. Whitlock RP, Belley-Cote EP, Paparella D, et al. Left
electrocardiogram-monitoring in patients with acute atrial fibrillation duration predicts arterial embolic atrial appendage occlusion during cardiac surgery to
ischaemic stroke (Find-AF(RANDOMISED)): an open- events in patients suffering from bradycardia and atrial prevent stroke. N Engl J Med. 2021;384:2081–2091.
label randomised controlled trial. Lancet Neurol. fibrillation implanted with antitachycardia pacemakers.
2. Friedman DJ, Piccini JP, Wang T, et al. Association
2017;16:282–290. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46:1913–1920.
between left atrial appendage occlusion and read-
11. Sposato LA, Cipriano LE, Saposnik G, et al. Diag- 12. Botto GL, Padeletti L, Santini M, et al. Presence and mission for thromboembolism among patients with
nosis of atrial fibrillation after stroke and transient duration of atrial fibrillation detected by continuous atrial fibrillation undergoing concomitant cardiac sur-
ischaemic attack: a systematic review and meta-anal- monitoring: crucial implications for the risk of throm- gery. JAMA. 2018;319:365–374.
ysis. Lancet Neurol. 2015;14:377–387. boembolic events. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol.
3. Martín Gutiérrez E, Castaño M, Gualis J, et al.
2009;20:241–248.
12. Brambatti M, Connolly SJ, Gold MR, et al. Temporal Beneficial effect of left atrial appendage closure dur-
relationship between subclinical atrial fibrillation and 13. Noseworthy PA, Kaufman ES, Chen LY, et al. Sub- ing cardiac surgery: a meta-analysis of 280 585 pa-
embolic events. Circulation. 2014;129:2094–2099. clinical and device-detected atrial fibrillation: tients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2020;57:252–262.
pondering the knowledge gap: a scientific statement
13. Buck BH, Hill MD, Quinn FR, et al. Effect of 4. Healey JS, Crystal E, Lamy A, et al. Left Atrial
from the American Heart Association. Circulation.
implantable vs prolonged external electrocardio- Appendage Occlusion Study (LAAOS): results of a
2019;140:e944–e963.
graphic monitoring on atrial fibrillation detection in randomized controlled pilot study of left atrial
patients with ischemic stroke: the per diem random- 14. Freedman B, Boriani G, Glotzer TV, et al. Man- appendage occlusion during coronary bypass surgery
ized clinical trial. JAMA. 2021;325:2160–2168. agement of atrial high-rate episodes detected by car- in patients at risk for stroke. Am Heart J. 2005;150:
diac implanted electronic devices. Nat Rev Cardiol. 288–293.
6.4.1. Oral Anticoagulation for Device-Detected 2017;14:701–714.
Atrial High-Rate Episodes Among Patients 5. Aryana A, Singh SK, Singh SM, et al. Association
Without a Previous Diagnosis of AF 6.5.1. Percutaneous Approaches to Occlude the between incomplete surgical ligation of left atrial
LAA appendage and stroke and systemic embolization.
1. Van Gelder IC, Healey JS, Crijns H, et al. Duration of Heart Rhythm. 2015;12:1431–1437.
device-detected subclinical atrial fibrillation and 1. Reddy VY, Sievert H, Halperin J, et al. Percutaneous
occurrence of stroke in ASSERT. Eur Heart J. 2017;38: left atrial appendage closure vs warfarin for atrial 6. Madden JL. Resection of the left auricular appendix;
1339–1344. fibrillation: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2014;312: a prophylaxis for recurrent arterial emboli. JAMA.
1988–1998. 1949;140:769–772.
2. Kaplan RM, Koehler J, Ziegler PD, et al. Stroke risk
as a function of atrial fibrillation duration and 2. Holmes DR Jr, Kar S, Price MJ, et al. Prospective 7. Melduni RM, Schaff HV, Lee HC, et al. Impact of
CHA2DS2-VASc score. Circulation. 2019;140:1639– randomized evaluation of the Watchman left atrial left atrial appendage closure during cardiac surgery
1646. appendage closure device in patients with atrial on the occurrence of early postoperative atrial
fibrillation versus long-term warfarin therapy: the fibrillation, stroke, and mortality. Circulation.
3. Perino AC, Fan J, Askari M, et al. Practice variation in
PREVAIL trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:1–12. 2017;135:366–378.
anticoagulation prescription and outcomes after
device-detected atrial fibrillation. Circulation. 3. Reddy VY, Doshi SK, Kar S, et al. 5-Year outcomes 8. Elbadawi A, Ogunbayo GO, Elgendy IY, et al. Impact
2019;139:2502–2512. after left atrial appendage closure: from the PREVAIL of left atrial appendage exclusion on cardiovascular
and PROTECT AF trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70: outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing
4. Swiryn S, Orlov MV, Benditt DG, et al. Clinical im-
2964–2975. coronary artery bypass grafting (from the National
plications of brief device-detected atrial tachyar-
Inpatient Sample Database). Am J Cardiol. 2017;120:
rhythmias in a cardiac rhythm management device 4. Osmancik P, Herman D, Neuzil P, et al. Left atrial
953–958.
population: results from the registry of atrial tachy- appendage closure versus direct oral anticoagulants in
cardia and atrial fibrillation episodes. Circulation. high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll 9. Gutiérrez EM, Castaño M, Gualis J, et al. Beneficial
2016;134:1130–1140. Cardiol. 2020;75:3122–3135. effect of left atrial appendage closure during cardiac
surgery: a meta-analysis of 280 585 patients. Eur J
5. Boriani G, Glotzer TV, Santini M, et al. Device- 5. Reddy VY, Möbius-Winkler S, Miller MA, et al.
Cardiothorac Surg. 2020;57:252–262.
detected atrial fibrillation and risk for stroke: an Left atrial appendage closure with the Watchman
analysis of >10,000 patients from the SOS AF project device in patients with a contraindication for oral 10. Elbadawi A, Olorunfemi O, Ogunbayo GO, et al.
(Stroke preventiOn Strategies based on Atrial Fibrilla- anticoagulation: the ASAP study (ASA Plavix Feasi- Cardiovascular outcomes with surgical left atrial
tion information from implanted devices). Eur Heart J. bility Study With Watchman Left Atrial Appendage appendage exclusion in patients with atrial fibrillation
2014;35:508–516. Closure Technology). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61: who underwent valvular heart surgery (from the Na-
6. Mahajan R, Perera T, Elliott AD, et al. Subclinical 2551–2556. tional Inpatient Sample Database). Am J Cardiol.
device-detected atrial fibrillation and stroke risk: a 2017;119:2056–2060.
6. Boersma LV, Ince H, Kische S, et al. Efficacy and
systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Heart J. safety of left atrial appendage closure with 11. Prasad RM, Saleh Y, Al-Abcha A, et al. Left atrial
2018;39:1407–1415. WATCHMAN in patients with or without appendage closure during cardiac surgery for atrial
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 141
-, 2023:-–- ---
fibrillation: a meta-analysis. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. interventions: a phase 3b, open-label, non-inferiority, in patients with atrial fibrillation and the impact on
2022;40:26–36. randomised trial. Lancet. 2015;385:2077–2087. recurrent stroke, mortality, and bleeding: a nationwide
cohort study. Circulation. 2015;132:517–525.
12. Rashid HN, Layland J. Modification of the left atrial 11. Tapaskar N, Pang A, Werner DA, et al. Resuming
appendage and its role in stroke risk reduction with anticoagulation following hospitalization for gastro- 5. Murthy SB, Gupta A, Merkler AE, et al. Restarting
non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc. intestinal bleeding is associated with reduced throm- anticoagulant therapy after intracranial hemorrhage: a
2021;32:100688. boembolic events and improved mortality: results systematic review and meta-analysis. Stroke. 2017;48:
from a systematic review and meta-analysis. Dig Dis 1594–1600.
13. Toale C, Fitzmaurice GJ, Eaton D, et al. Outcomes
Sci. 2021;66:554–566. 6. Holmes DR, Reddy VY, Turi ZG, et al. Percutaneous
of left atrial appendage occlusion using the AtriClip
device: a systematic review. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac 12. Proietti M, Romiti GF, Romanazzi I, et al. Restarting closure of the left atrial appendage versus warfarin
Surg. 2019;29:655–662. oral anticoagulant therapy after major bleeding in therapy for prevention of stroke in patients with atrial
atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-anal- fibrillation: a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet.
14. Nso N, Nassar M, Zirkiyeva M, et al. Outcomes of
ysis. Int J Cardiol. 2018;261:84–91. 2009;374:534–542.
cardiac surgery with left atrial appendage occlusion
versus no occlusion, direct oral anticoagulants, and 13. Siegal DM. What we have learned about direct oral 7. Holmes DR Jr, Kar S, Price MJ, et al. Prospective
vitamin K antagonists: a systematic review with meta- anticoagulant reversal. Hematology Am Soc Hematol randomized evaluation of the Watchman Left Atrial
analysis. Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc. 2022;40:100998. Educ Program. 2019;2019:198–203. Appendage Closure device in patients with atrial
fibrillation versus long-term warfarin therapy: the
15. Park-Hansen J, Holme SJV, Irmukhamedov A, et al. 14. Wang X, Mondal S, Wang J, et al. Effect of acti-
PREVAIL trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:1–12.
Adding left atrial appendage closure to open heart vated charcoal on apixaban pharmacokinetics in
healthy subjects. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs. 2014;14:147– 8. Szekely P. Systemic embolism and anticoagulant
surgery provides protection from ischemic brain injury
154. prophylaxis in rheumatic heart disease. Br Med J.
six years after surgery independently of atrial fibrilla-
1964;1:1209–1212.
tion history: the LAACS randomized study. 15. Ollier E, Hodin S, Lanoiselee J, et al. Effect of
J Cardiothorac Surg. 2018;13:53. activated charcoal on rivaroxaban complex absorption. 9. Cannegieter SC, Rosendaal FR, Briet E. Thrombo-
Clin Pharmacokinet. 2017;56:793–801. embolic and bleeding complications in patients with
6.6. Active Bleeding on Anticoagulant Therapy mechanical heart valve prostheses. Circulation.
and Reversal Drugs 16. Chai-Adisaksopha C, Hillis C, Lim W, et al. Hemo-
1994;89:635–641.
dialysis for the treatment of dabigatran-associated
bleeding: a case report and systematic review. 10. Baudet EM, Puel V, McBride JT, et al. Long-term
1. Pollack CV Jr, Reilly PA, van Ryn J, et al. Idar-
J Thromb Haemost. 2015;13:1790–1798. results of valve replacement with the St. Jude Medical
ucizumab for dabigatran reversal - full cohort analysis.
prosthesis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1995;109:858–
N Engl J Med. 2017;377:431–441.
17. Geller AI, Shehab N, Lovegrove MC, et al. Emer- 870.
2. Van der Wall SJ, Lopes RD, Aisenberg J, et al. gency visits for oral anticoagulant bleeding. J Gen
11. Salem DN, Stein PD, Al-Ahmad A, et al. Antith-
Idarucizumab for dabigatran reversal in the manage- Intern Med. 2020;35:371–373.
rombotic therapy in valvular heart disease–native and
ment of patients with gastrointestinal bleeding. Cir- 18. Gómez-Outes A, Alcubilla P, Calvo-Rojas G, et al. prosthetic: the Seventh ACCP Conference on Antith-
culation. 2019;139:748–756. Meta-analysis of reversal agents for severe bleeding rombotic and Thrombolytic Therapy. Chest. 2004;126:
3. Eikelboom JW, van Ryn J, Reilly P, et al. Dabigatran associated with direct oral anticoagulants. J Am Coll 457S–482S.
reversal with idarucizumab in patients with renal Cardiol. 2021;77:2987–3001.
12. Schols AM, Schreuder FH, van Raak EP, et al. Inci-
impairment. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;74:1760–1768. 19. Majeed A, Wallvik N, Eriksson J, et al. Optimal dence of oral anticoagulant-associated intracerebral
4. Schulman S, Ritchie B, Nahirniak S, et al. Reversal of timing of vitamin K antagonist resumption after upper hemorrhage in the Netherlands. Stroke. 2014;45:268–
dabigatran-associated major bleeding with activated gastrointestinal bleeding. A risk modelling analysis. 270.
prothrombin concentrate: A prospective cohort study. Thromb Haemost. 2017;117:491–499.
13. Seiffge DJ, Goeldlin MB, Tatlisumak T, et al. Meta-
Thromb Res. 2017;152:44–48. 20. Qureshi W, Mittal C, Patsias I, et al. Restarting analysis of haematoma volume, haematoma expansion
5. Eerenberg ES, Kamphuisen PW, Sijpkens MK, et al. anticoagulation and outcomes after major gastroin- and mortality in intracerebral haemorrhage associated
Reversal of rivaroxaban and dabigatran by prothrom- testinal bleeding in atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol. with oral anticoagulant use. J Neurol. 2019;266:3126–
bin complex concentrate: a randomized, placebo- 2014;113:662–668. 3135.
controlled, crossover study in healthy subjects. Circu- 21. Witt DM, Delate T, Garcia DA, et al. Risk of 14. Flaherty ML, Haverbusch M, Sekar P, et al. Loca-
lation. 2011;124:1573–1579. thromboembolism, recurrent hemorrhage, and death tion and outcome of anticoagulant-associated intra-
6. Connolly SJ, Crowther M, Eikelboom JW, et al. Full after warfarin therapy interruption for gastrointestinal cerebral hemorrhage. Neurocrit Care. 2006;5:197–201.
study report of andexanet alfa for bleeding associated tract bleeding. Arch Intern Med. 2012;172:1484–1491.
15. Flibotte JJ, Hagan N, O’Donnell J, et al. Warfarin,
with factor Xa inhibitors. N Engl J Med. 2019;380: 22. Kido K. Atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter: stroke pre- hematoma expansion, and outcome of intracerebral
1326–1335. vention. In: CardSAP 2021; Book 2. Arrhythmias and hemorrhage. Neurology. 2004;63:1059–1064.
7. Nederpelt CJ, Naar L, Krijnen P, et al. Andexanet alfa Thrombosis. American College of Clinical Pharmacy;
16. Poli L, Grassi M, Zedde M, et al. Anticoagulants
or prothrombin complex concentrate for factor Xa in- 2021:32–33.
resumption after warfarin-related intracerebral hae-
hibitor reversal in acute major bleeding: a systematic morrhage: the Multicenter Study on Cerebral Hemor-
6.6.1. Management of Patients With AF and ICH
review and meta-analysis. Crit Care Med. 2021;49: rhage in Italy (MUCH-Italy). Thromb Haemost.
e1025–e1036. 1. Kuramatsu JB, Sembill JA, Gerner ST, et al. Man- 2018;118:572–580.
agement of therapeutic anticoagulation in patients
8. Chai-Adisaksopha C, Hillis C, Siegal DM, et al. Pro- 17. Nielsen-Kudsk JE, Johnsen SP, Wester P, et al. Left
with intracerebral haemorrhage and mechanical heart
thrombin complex concentrates versus fresh frozen atrial appendage occlusion versus standard medical
valves. Eur Heart J. 2018;39:1709–1723.
plasma for warfarin reversal. A systematic review and care in patients with atrial fibrillation and intracerebral
meta-analysis. Thromb Haemost. 2016;116:879–890. 2. Korompoki E, Filippidis FT, Nielsen PB, et al. Long- haemorrhage: a propensity score-matched follow-up
term antithrombotic treatment in intracranial hemor- study. EuroIntervention. 2017;13:371–378.
9. Sarode R, Milling TJ Jr, Refaai MA, et al. Efficacy and
rhage survivors with atrial fibrillation. Neurology. 18. Ottosen TP, Grijota M, Hansen ML, et al. Use of
safety of a 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate
2017;89:687–696. antithrombotic therapy and long-term clinical
in patients on vitamin K antagonists presenting with
major bleeding: a randomized, plasma-controlled, 3. Pennlert J, Overholser R, Asplund K, et al. Optimal outcome among patients surviving intracerebral hem-
phase IIIb study. Circulation. 2013;128:1234–1243. timing of anticoagulant treatment after intracerebral orrhage. Stroke. 2016;47:1837–1843.
hemorrhage in patients with atrial fibrillation. Stroke.
10. Goldstein JN, Refaai MA, Milling TJ Jr, et al. Four- 19. Chao TF, Liu CJ, Liao JN, et al. Use of Oral anti-
2017;48:314–320.
factor prothrombin complex concentrate versus coagulants for stroke prevention in patients with atrial
plasma for rapid vitamin K antagonist reversal in pa- 4. Nielsen PB, Larsen TB, Skjoth F, et al. Restarting fibrillation who have a history of intracranial hemor-
tients needing urgent surgical or invasive anticoagulant treatment after intracranial hemorrhage rhage. Circulation. 2016;133:1540–1547.
142 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
20. Park YA, Uhm JS, Pak HN, et al. Anticoagulation 7. Tolosana JM, Berne P, Mont L, et al. Preparation for Dresden NOAC registry. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:1888–
therapy in atrial fibrillation after intracranial hemor- pacemaker or implantable cardiac defibrillator im- 1896.
rhage. Heart Rhythm. 2016;13:1794–1802. plants in patients with high risk of thrombo-embolic
21. Nazha B, Pandya B, Cohen J, et al. Periprocedural
events: oral anticoagulation or bridging with intrave-
21. Kuramatsu JB, Gerner ST, Schellinger PD, et al. outcomes of direct oral anticoagulants versus warfarin
nous heparin? A prospective randomized trial. Eur
Anticoagulant reversal, blood pressure levels, and in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Circulation. 2018;138:
Heart J. 2009;30:1880–1884.
anticoagulant resumption in patients with 1402–1411.
anticoagulation-related intracerebral hemorrhage. 8. Mendoza PA, Narula S, McIntyre WF, et al.
22. Colonna P, von Heymann C, Santamaria A, et al.
JAMA. 2015;313:824–836. Continued versus interrupted direct oral anti-
Routine clinical practice in the periprocedural man-
22. Biffi A, Kuramatsu JB, Leasure A, et al. Oral anti- coagulation for cardiac electronic device implantation:
agement of edoxaban therapy is associated with low
coagulation and functional outcome after intracerebral a systematic review. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol.
risk of bleeding and thromboembolic complications:
hemorrhage. Ann Neurol. 2017;82:755–765. 2020;43:1373–1381.
the prospective, observational, and multinational
23. Guo Y, Lip GY, Apostolakis S. Bleeding risk 9. Birnie DH, Healey JS, Wells GA, et al. Continued vs. EMIT-AF/VTE study. Clin Cardiol. 2020;43:769–780.
assessment and management in atrial fibrillation pa- interrupted direct oral anticoagulants at the time of
23. Otto CM, Nishimura RA, Bonow RO, et al. 2020
tients. Key messages for clinical practice from the device surgery, in patients with moderate to high risk
ACC/AHA guideline for the management of patients
European Heart Rhythm Association position state- of arterial thrombo-embolic events (BRUISE CON-
with valvular heart disease: a report of the American
ment. Pol Arch Med Wewn. 2012;122:235–242. TROL-2). Eur Heart J. 2018;39:3973–3979.
College of Cardiology/American Heart Association
24. Charidimou A, Boulouis G, Xiong L, et al. Cortical 10. Ricciardi D, Creta A, Colaiori I, et al. Interrupted Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am
superficial siderosis and first-ever cerebral hemorrhage versus uninterrupted novel oral anticoagulant peri- Coll Cardiol. 2021;77:e25–e197.
in cerebral amyloid angiopathy. Neurology. 2017;88: implantation of cardiac device: a single-center ran-
domized prospective pilot trial. Pacing Clin Electro- 6.8.1. AF Complicating ACS or PCI
1607–1614.
physiol. 2018;41:1476–1480.
25. Stoddard MF, Dawkins PR, Prince CR, et al. Left 1. Lopes RD, Heizer G, Aronson R, et al. Antithrombotic
atrial appendage thrombus is not uncommon in pa- 11. Godier A, Martin AC, Leblanc I, et al. Peri-proce- therapy after acute coronary syndrome or PCI in atrial
tients with acute atrial fibrillation and a recent embolic dural management of dabigatran and rivaroxaban: fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2019;380:1509–1524.
event: a transesophageal echocardiographic study. duration of anticoagulant discontinuation and drug
2. Cannon CP, Bhatt DL, Oldgren J, et al. Dual antith-
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995;25:452–459. concentrations. Thromb Res. 2015;136:763–768.
rombotic therapy with dabigatran after PCI in atrial
26. Blackshear JL, Odell JA. Appendage obliteration to 12. Merli GJ, Kraft WK, Eraso LH, et al. Apixaban fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:1513–1524.
reduce stroke in cardiac surgical patients with atrial Discontinuation for Invasive Or major Surgical pro-
3. Vranckx P, Valgimigli M, Eckardt L, et al. Edoxaban-
fibrillation. Ann Thorac Surg. 1996;61:755–759. cedures (ADIOS): a prospective cohort study. Vasc
based versus vitamin K antagonist-based antith-
Med. 2022;27:269–276.
27. Reddy VY, Doshi SK, Kar S, et al. 5-Year outcomes rombotic regimen after successful coronary stenting in
after left atrial appendage closure: from the PREVAIL 13. Kovacs MJ, Wells PS, Anderson DR, et al. Post- patients with atrial fibrillation (ENTRUST-AF PCI): a
and PROTECT AF trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70: operative low molecular weight heparin bridging randomised, open-label, phase 3b trial. Lancet.
2964–2975. treatment for patients at high risk of arterial throm- 2019;394:1335–1343.
boembolism (PERIOP2): double blind randomised
28. Branzoli S, Marini M, Guarracini F, et al. Epicardial 4. Gibson CM, Mehran R, Bode C, et al. Prevention of
controlled trial. Bmj. 2021;373:n1205.
standalone left atrial appendage clipping for preven- bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing
tion of ischemic stroke in patients with atrial fibrilla- 14. Bajkin BV, Popovic SL, Selakovic SD. Randomized, PCI. N Engl J Med. 2016;375:2423–2434.
tion contraindicated for oral anticaogulation. prospective trial comparing bridging therapy using
5. Potpara TS, Mujovic N, Proietti M, et al. Revisiting
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2020;31:2187–2191. low-molecular-weight heparin with maintenance of
the effects of omitting aspirin in combined antith-
29. Antaki T, Michaelman J, McGroarty J. Robotics- oral anticoagulation during extraction of teeth. J Oral
rombotic therapies for atrial fibrillation and acute
assisted epicardial left atrial appendage clip exclusion. Maxillofac Surg. 2009;67:990–995.
coronary syndromes or percutaneous coronary in-
JTCVS Tech. 2021;9:59–68. 15. Steinberg BA, Peterson ED, Kim S, et al. Use and terventions: meta-analysis of pooled data from the
outcomes associated with bridging during anti- PIONEER AF-PCI, RE-DUAL PCI, and AUGUSTUS trials.
6.7. Periprocedural Management
coagulation interruptions in patients with atrial fibril- Europace. 2020;22:33–46.
1. Douketis JD, Spyropoulos AC, Kaatz S, et al. Peri- lation: findings from the Outcomes Registry for Better
6. Dewilde WJ, Oirbans T, Verheugt FW, et al. Use of
operative bridging anticoagulation in patients with Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF).
clopidogrel with or without aspirin in patients taking
atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:823–833. Circulation. 2015;131:488–494.
oral anticoagulant therapy and undergoing percuta-
2. Becerra AF, Cornavaca MT, Revigliono JI, et al. 16. Doherty JU, Gluckman TJ, Hucker WJ, et al. 2017 neous coronary intervention: an open-label, rando-
Perioperative management of vitamin K antagonists in ACC expert consensus decision pathway for peri- mised, controlled trial. Lancet. 2013;381:1107–1115.
patients with low thromboembolic risk undergoing procedural management of anticoagulation in patients
with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: a report of the 6.8.2. Chronic Coronary Disease (CCD)
elective surgery: a prospective experience. Med Clin
(Barc). 2017;149:281–286. American College of Cardiology Clinical Expert
1. Yasuda S, Kaikita K, Akao M, et al. Antithrombotic
Consensus Document Task Force. J Am Coll Cardiol.
3. Siegal D, Yudin J, Kaatz S, et al. Periprocedural therapy for atrial fibrillation with stable coronary dis-
2017;69:871–898.
heparin bridging in patients receiving vitamin K an- ease. N Engl J Med. 2019;381:1103–1113.
tagonists: systematic review and meta-analysis of 17. Rosencher N, Llau JV, Mueck W, et al. Incidence of
2. Matsumura-Nakano Y, Shizuta S, Komasa A, et al.
bleeding and thromboembolic rates. Circulation. neuraxial haematoma after total hip or knee surgery:
Open-label randomized trial comparing oral anti-
2012;126:1630–1639. RECORD programme (rivaroxaban vs. enoxaparin).
coagulation with and without single antiplatelet
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2013;57:565–572.
4. Douketis JD, Spyropoulos AC, Duncan J, et al. therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation and stable
Perioperative management of patients with atrial 18. Garcia DA, Regan S, Henault LE, et al. Risk of coronary artery disease beyond 1 year after coronary
fibrillation receiving a direct oral anticoagulant. JAMA thromboembolism with short-term interruption of stent implantation. Circulation. 2019;139:604–616.
Intern Med. 2019;179:1469–1478. warfarin therapy. Arch Intern Med. 2008;168:63–69.
3. Matoba T, Yasuda S, Kaikita K, et al. Rivaroxaban
5. Birnie DH, Healey JS, Wells GA, et al. Pacemaker or 19. Michaud GF, Pelosi F Jr, Noble MD, et al. monotherapy in patients with atrial fibrillation after
defibrillator surgery without interruption of anti- A randomized trial comparing heparin initiation 6 h or coronary stenting: insights from the AFIRE trial. J Am
coagulation. N Engl J Med. 2013;368:2084–2093. 24 h after pacemaker or defibrillator implantation. Coll Cardiol Intv. 2021;14:2330–2340.
6. Cheng A, Nazarian S, Brinker JA, et al. Continuation J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;35:1915–1918.
6.8.3. Peripheral Artery Disease (PAD)
of warfarin during pacemaker or implantable 20. Beyer-Westendorf J, Gelbricht V, Forster K, et al.
cardioverter-defibrillator implantation: a randomized Peri-interventional management of novel oral antico- 1. Zhang H, Xue Z, Yi D, et al. Non-vitamin K antagonist
clinical trial. Heart Rhythm. 2011;8:536–540. agulants in daily care: results from the prospective oral anticoagulants versus warfarin in patients with
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 143
-, 2023:-–- ---
atrial fibrillation with coronary or peripheral artery 7. Randhawa MS, Vishwanath R, Rai MP, et al. Asso- 22. Welander F, Renlund H, Dimeny E, et al. Efficacy
disease. Int Heart J. 2020;61:231–238. ciation between use of warfarin for atrial fibrillation and safety of warfarin in patients with non-valvular
and outcomes among patients with end-stage renal atrial fibrillation and CKD G3-G5D. Clin Kidney J.
2. Jones WS, Hellkamp AS, Halperin J, et al. Efficacy
disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA 2022;15:1169–1178.
and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in
Netw Open. 2020;3:e202175.
patients with peripheral artery disease and non- 23. Connolly SJ, Eikelboom J, Joyner C, et al. Apixaban
valvular atrial fibrillation: insights from ROCKET AF. 8. Go AS, Fang MC, Udaltsova N, et al. Impact of in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med.
Eur Heart J. 2014;35:242–249. proteinuria and glomerular filtration rate on risk of 2011;364:806–817.
thromboembolism in atrial fibrillation: the anti-
3. Hu PT, Lopes RD, Stevens SR, et al. Efficacy and 24. Granger CB, Alexander JH, McMurray JJ, et al.
coagulation and risk factors in atrial fibrillation (ATRIA)
safety of apixaban compared with warfarin in patients Apixaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibril-
study. Circulation. 2009;119:1363–1369.
with atrial fibrillation and peripheral artery disease: lation. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:981–992.
insights from the ARISTOTLE trial. J Am Heart Assoc. 9. Roberts PR, Stromberg K, Johnson LC, et al.
25. Wang X, Tirucherai G, Marbury TC, et al. Pharma-
2017;6:e004699. A systematic review of the incidence of arrhythmias in
cokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and safety of apixaban
hemodialysis patients undergoing long-term moni-
4. Bonaca MP, Antman EM, Cunningham JW, et al. in subjects with end-stage renal disease on hemodi-
toring with implantable loop recorders. Kidney Int Rep.
Ischaemic and bleeding risk in atrial fibrillation with alysis. J Clin Pharmacol. 2016;56:628–636.
2021;6:56–65.
and without peripheral artery disease and efficacy and
26. Mavrakanas TA, Samer CF, Nessim SJ, et al. Apix-
safety of full- and half-dose edoxaban vs. warfarin: 10. Zimmerman D, Sood MM, Rigatto C, et al. Sys-
aban pharmacokinetics at steady state in hemodialysis
insights from ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48. Eur Heart J Car- tematic review and meta-analysis of incidence, prev-
patients. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2017;28:2241–2248.
diovasc Pharmacother. 2022;8:695–706. alence and outcomes of atrial fibrillation in patients on
dialysis. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2012;27:3816–3822. 27. Siontis KC, Zhang X, Eckard A, et al. Outcomes
5. Inohara T, Shrader P, Pieper K, et al. Treatment of
associated with apixaban use in patients with end-
atrial fibrillation with concomitant coronary or pe- 11. Murray AM, Seliger S, Lakshminarayan K, et al.
stage kidney disease and atrial fibrillation in the
ripheral artery disease: results from the outcomes Incidence of stroke before and after dialysis initiation
United States. Circulation. 2018;138:1519–1529.
registry for better informed treatment of atrial fibril- in older patients. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2013;24:1166–
lation II. Am Heart J. 2019;213:81–90. 1173. 28. Mavrakanas TA, Garlo K, Charytan DM. Apixaban
versus no anticoagulation in patients undergoing long-
6. Gerhard-Herman MD, Gornik HL, Barrett C, et al. 12. De Vriese AS, Heine G. Anticoagulation manage-
term dialysis with incident atrial fibrillation. Clin J Am
2016 AHA/ACC guideline on the management of pa- ment in haemodialysis patients with atrial fibrillation:
Soc Nephrol. 2020;15:1146–1154.
tients with lower extremity peripheral artery disease: a evidence and opinion. Nephrol Dial Transplant.
report of the American College of Cardiology/Amer- 2022;37:2072–2079. 29. Reinecke H, Engelbertz C, Bauersachs R, et al.
ican Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice A randomized controlled trial comparing apixaban to
13. Yang F, Hellyer JA, Than C, et al. Warfarin uti-
Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;69:e71–e126. the vitamin K-antagonist phenprocoumon in patients
lisation and anticoagulation control in patients with
on chronic hemodialysis: the AXADIA-AFNET 8 study.
7. The Warfarin Antiplatelet Vascular Evaluation Trial atrial fibrillation and chronic kidney disease. Heart.
Circulation. 2022;147:296–309.
Investigators, Anand S, Yusuf S, et al. Oral anticoagu- 2017;103:818–826.
lant and antiplatelet therapy and peripheral arterial 30. Pokorney SD, Chertow GM, Al-Khalidi HR, et al.
14. Hayashi M, Takamatsu I, Kanno Y, et al. A case-
disease. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:217–227. Apixaban for patients with atrial fibrillation on hemo-
control study of calciphylaxis in Japanese end-stage
dialysis: a multicenter randomized controlled trial.
8. Lamberts M, Lip GY, Ruwald MH, et al. Antith- renal disease patients. Nephrol Dial Transplant.
Circulation. 2022;146:1735–1745.
rombotic treatment in patients with heart failure and 2012;27:1580–1584.
associated atrial fibrillation and vascular disease: a 6.8.5. AF in VHD
15. Chan KE, Edelman ER, Wenger JB, et al. Dabigatran
nationwide cohort study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:
and rivaroxaban use in atrial fibrillation patients on
2689–2698. 1. Connolly SJ, Karthikeyan G, Ntsekhe M, et al.
hemodialysis. Circulation. 2015;131:972–979.
Rivaroxaban in rheumatic heart disease-associated
6.8.4. Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD)/Kidney 16. Stangier J, Rathgen K, Stahle H, et al. Influence of atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2022;387:978–988.
Failure renal impairment on the pharmacokinetics and phar-
2. Connolly SJ, Ezekowitz MD, Yusuf S, et al. Dabiga-
macodynamics of oral dabigatran etexilate: an open-
1. Kimachi M, Furukawa TA, Kimachi K, et al. Direct oral tran versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation.
label, parallel-group, single-centre study. Clin Phar-
anticoagulants versus warfarin for preventing stroke N Engl J Med. 2009;361:1139–1151.
macokinet. 2010;49:259–268.
and systemic embolic events among atrial fibrillation
3. Patel MR, Mahaffey KW, Garg J, et al. Rivaroxaban
patients with chronic kidney disease. Cochrane Data- 17. De Vriese AS, Caluwé R, Van Der Meersch H, et al.
versus warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. N Engl
base Syst Rev. 2017;11:Cd011373. Safety and efficacy of vitamin K antagonists versus
J Med. 2011;365:883–891.
rivaroxaban in hemodialysis patients with atrial fibril-
2. Ha JT, Neuen BL, Cheng LP, et al. Benefits and
lation: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. J Am 4. Granger CB, Alexander JH, McMurray JJ, et al.
harms of oral anticoagulant therapy in chronic kidney
Soc Nephrol. 2021;32:1474–1483. Apixaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibril-
disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann
lation. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:981–992.
Intern Med. 2019;171:181–189. 18. Lin YC, Chen BL, Shih CM, et al. Effectiveness
and safety of rivaroxaban versus warfarin in 5. Giugliano RP, Ruff CT, Braunwald E, et al. Edoxaban
3. Hart RG, Pearce LA, Asinger RW, et al. Warfarin in
Taiwanese patients with end-stage renal disease versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation.
atrial fibrillation patients with moderate chronic kidney
and nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: a real-world N Engl J Med. 2013;369:2093–2104.
disease. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2011;6:2599–2604.
nationwide cohort study. PLoS One. 2021;16:
6. López-López JA, Sterne JAC, Thom HHZ, et al. Oral
4. Stanifer JW, Pokorney SD, Chertow GM, et al. e0249940.
anticoagulants for prevention of stroke in atrial fibril-
Apixaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibril-
19. Genovesi S, Porcu L, Slaviero G, et al. Outcomes on lation: systematic review, network meta-analysis, and
lation and advanced chronic kidney disease. Circula-
safety and efficacy of left atrial appendage occlusion in cost effectiveness analysis. BMJ. 2017;359:j5058.
tion. 2020;141:1384–1392.
end stage renal disease patients undergoing dialysis.
7. Carnicelli AP, Hong H, Connolly SJ, et al. Direct oral
5. Carrero JJ, Evans M, Szummer K, et al. Warfarin, J Nephrol. 2021;34:63–73.
anticoagulants versus warfarin in patients with atrial
kidney dysfunction, and outcomes following acute 20. Eikelboom JW, Connolly SJ, Gao P, et al. Stroke fibrillation: patient-level network meta-analyses of
myocardial infarction in patients with atrial fibrillation. risk and efficacy of apixaban in atrial fibrillation pa- randomized clinical trials with interaction testing by
JAMA. 2014;311:919–928. tients with moderate chronic kidney disease. J Stroke age and sex. Circulation. 2022;145:242–255.
6. Bonde AN, Lip GY, Kamper AL, et al. Net clinical Cerebrovasc Dis. 2012;21:429–435.
8. Ruff CT, Giugliano RP, Braunwald E, et al. Com-
benefit of antithrombotic therapy in patients with 21. Winkelmayer WC, Liu J, Setoguchi S, et al. Effec- parison of the efficacy and safety of new oral antico-
atrial fibrillation and chronic kidney disease: a nation- tiveness and safety of warfarin initiation in older he- agulants with warfarin in patients with atrial
wide observational cohort study. J Am Coll Cardiol. modialysis patients with incident atrial fibrillation. Clin fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomised trials. Lan-
2014;64:2471–2482. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2011;6:2662–2668. cet. 2014;383:955–962.
144 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
9. Lip GYH, Jensen M, Melgaard L, et al. Stroke and 9. Andrade JG, Wells GA, Deyell MW, et al. Cryoa- flutter. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2016;27:1293–
bleeding risk scores in patients with atrial fibrillation blation or drug therapy for initial treatment of atrial 1297.
and valvular heart disease: evaluating ’valvular heart fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2021;384:305–315.
25. Valles E, Marti-Almor J, Grau N, et al. Influence of
disease’ in a nationwide cohort study. Europace.
10. Haghjoo M, Salem N, Rafati M, et al. Predictors of PACE score and conduction disturbances in the inci-
2019;21:33–40.
the atrial fibrillation following catheter ablation of dence of early new onset atrial fibrillation after typical
10. Eikelboom JW, Connolly SJ, Brueckmann M, et al. typical atrial flutter. Res Cardiovasc Med. 2013;2:90– atrial flutter ablation. J Cardiol. 2022;79:417–422.
Dabigatran versus warfarin in patients with me- 94. 26. Seara JG, Roubin SR, Gude Sampedro F, et al. Risk
chanical heart valves. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:1206–
11. Ellis K, Wazni O, Marrouche N, et al. Incidence of of atrial fibrillation, stroke, and death after radio-
1214.
atrial fibrillation post-cavotricuspid isthmus ablation in frequency catheter ablation of typical atrial flutter.
11. Wolf PA, Dawber TR, Thomas HE Jr, et al. Epide- patients with typical atrial flutter: left-atrial size as an Clin Res Cardiol. 2014;103:543–552.
miologic assessment of chronic atrial fibrillation and independent predictor of atrial fibrillation recurrence.
risk of stroke: the Framingham study. Neurology. 7.1. Broad Considerations for Rate Control
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2007;18:799–802.
1978;28:973–977.
12. Exposito V, Rodriguez-Entem F, Gonzalez- 1. Wyse DG, Waldo AL, DiMarco JP, et al. A comparison
12. Kim JY, Kim SH, Myong JP, et al. Outcomes of Enriquez S, et al. Stroke and systemic embolism after of rate control and rhythm control in patients with
direct oral anticoagulants in patients with mitral ste- successful ablation of typical atrial flutter. Clin Cardiol. atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:1825–1833.
nosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;73:1123–1131. 2016;39:347–351. 2. Van Gelder IC, Groenveld HF, Crijns HJ, et al.
13. Brokmeier H, Kido K. Off-label use for direct oral 13. Giehm-Reese M, Johansen MN, Kronborg MB, et al. Lenient versus strict rate control in patients with atrial
anticoagulants: valvular atrial fibrillation, heart failure, Discontinuation of oral anticoagulation and risk of fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:1363–1373.
left ventricular thrombus, superficial vein thrombosis, stroke and death after ablation for typical atrial flutter: 3. Al-Khatib SM, Allen LaPointe NM, Chatterjee R,
pulmonary hypertension-a systematic review. Ann a nation-wide Danish cohort study. Int J Cardiol. et al. Rate- and rhythm-control therapies in patients
Pharmacother. 2021;55:995–1009. 2021;333:110–116. with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review. Ann Intern
14. Siontis KC, Yao X, Gersh BJ, et al. Direct oral an- Med. 2014;160:760–773.
14. Granada J, Uribe W, Chyou PH, et al. Incidence and
ticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation and
predictors of atrial flutter in the general population. 4. Moschovitis G, Johnson LSB, Blum S, et al. Heart
valvular heart disease other than significant mitral
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;36:2242–2246. rate and adverse outcomes in patients with prevalent
stenosis and mechanical valves: a meta-analysis. Cir-
atrial fibrillation. Open Heart. 2021;8:e001606.
culation. 2017;135:714–716. 15. Ammar AS, Elsherbiny I, El-Dosouky II, et al. Left
atrial and left atrial appendage functional recovery 5. Song S, Ko JS, Lee HA, et al. Clinical implications of
15. Jawitz OK, Wang TY, Lopes RD, et al. Rationale and
after cardioversion in patients with recent atrial heart rate control in heart failure with atrial fibrillation:
design of PROACT Xa: a randomized, multicenter,
fibrillation: serial echocardiographic study. Cardiol J. Multi-Center Prospective Observation Registry (CODE-
open-label, clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and
2015;22:699–707. AF Registry). Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022;9:787869.
safety of apixaban versus warfarin in patients with a
mechanical On-X Aortic Heart Valve. Am Heart J. 16. Grimm RA, Stewart WJ, Arheart K, et al. Left atrial 6. Opolski G, Torbicki A, Kosior DA, et al. Rate control
2020;227:91–99. appendage "stunning" after electrical cardioversion of vs rhythm control in patients with nonvalvular
atrial flutter: an attenuated response compared with persistent atrial fibrillation: the results of the Polish
6.8.6. Anticoagulation of Typical AFL atrial fibrillation as the mechanism for lower suscep- How to Treat Chronic Atrial Fibrillation (HOT CAFE)
tibility to thromboembolic events. J Am Coll Cardiol. Study. Chest. 2004;126:476–486.
1. Gula LJ, Redfearn DP, Jenkyn KB, et al. Elevated 1997;29:582–589. 7. Groenveld HF, Crijns HJ, Van den Berg MP, et al. The
incidence of atrial fibrillation and stroke in patients
17. Takami M, Suzuki M, Sugi K, et al. Time course for effect of rate control on quality of life in patients with
with atrial flutter-a population-based study. Can J
resolution of left atrial appendage stunning after permanent atrial fibrillation: data from the RACE II
Cardiol. 2018;34:774–783.
catheter ablation of chronic atrial flutter. J Am Coll (Rate Control Efficacy in Permanent Atrial Fibrillation
2. Gronefeld GC, Wegener F, Israel CW, et al. Throm- Cardiol. 2003;41:2207–2211. II) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58:1795–1803.
boembolic risk of patients referred for radiofrequency
18. Spector P, Reynolds MR, Calkins H, et al. Meta- 8. Groenveld HF, Tijssen JG, Crijns HJ, et al. Rate
catheter ablation of typical atrial flutter without prior
analysis of ablation of atrial flutter and supraventric- control efficacy in permanent atrial fibrillation: suc-
appropriate anticoagulation therapy. Pacing Clin Elec-
ular tachycardia. Am J Cardiol. 2009;104:671–677. cessful and failed strict rate control against a back-
trophysiol. 2003;26:323–327.
ground of lenient rate control: data from RACE II (Rate
3. Vadmann H, Nielsen PB, Hjortshøj SP, et al. Atrial 19. Celikyurt U, Knecht S, Kuehne M, et al. Incidence of
Control Efficacy in Permanent Atrial Fibrillation). J Am
flutter and thromboembolic risk: a systematic review. new-onset atrial fibrillation after cavotricuspid isthmus
Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:741–748.
Heart. 2015;101:1446–1455. ablation for atrial flutter. Europace. 2017;19:1776–
1780. 9. Steinberg BA, Kim S, Thomas L, et al. Increased
4. Gallagher MM, Hennessy BJ, Edvardsson N, et al. heart rate is associated with higher mortality in pa-
Embolic complications of direct current cardioversion 20. Voight J, Akkaya M, Somasundaram P, et al. Risk of tients with atrial fibrillation (AF): results from the
of atrial arrhythmias: association with low intensity of new-onset atrial fibrillation and stroke after radio- Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of
anticoagulation at the time of cardioversion. J Am Coll frequency ablation of isolated, typical atrial flutter. AF (ORBIT-AF). J Am Heart Assoc. 2015;4:e002031.
Cardiol. 2002;40:926–933. Heart Rhythm. 2014;11:1884–1889.
10. Pandey A, Kim S, Moore C, et al. Predictors and
5. Pérez FJ, Schubert CM, Parvez B, et al. Long- 21. Chen K, Bai R, Deng W, et al. HATCH score in the prognostic implications of incident heart failure in
term outcomes after catheter ablation of cavo- prediction of new-onset atrial fibrillation after cath- patients with prevalent atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll
tricuspid isthmus dependent atrial flutter: a meta- eter ablation of typical atrial flutter. Heart Rhythm. Cardiol HF. 2017;5:44–52.
analysis. Circ Arrhyth Electrophysiol. 2009;2:393– 2015;12:1483–1489.
11. Cullington D, Goode KM, Zhang J, et al. Is heart
401.
22. Romero J, Diaz JC, Di Biase L, et al. Atrial fibrilla- rate important for patients with heart failure in atrial
6. Hart RG, Pearce LA, Aguilar MI. Meta-analysis: tion inducibility during cavotricuspid isthmus- fibrillation? J Am Coll Cardiol HF. 2014;2:213–220.
antithrombotic therapy to prevent stroke in patients dependent atrial flutter ablation as a predictor of
12. Li SJ, Sartipy U, Lund LH, et al. Prognostic signifi-
who have nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Ann Intern clinical atrial fibrillation. A meta-analysis. J Interv Card
cance of resting heart rate and use of beta-blockers in
Med. 2007;146:857–867. Electrophysiol. 2017;48:307–315.
atrial fibrillation and sinus rhythm in patients with
7. Maskoun W, Pino MI, Ayoub K, et al. Incidence of 23. Joza J, Filion KB, Eberg M, et al. Prognostic value heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: findings
atrial fibrillation after atrial flutter ablation. J Am Coll of atrial fibrillation inducibility after right atrial flutter from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry. Circ Heart
Cardiol EP. 2016;2:682–690. ablation. Heart Rhythm. 2014;11:1870–1876. Fail. 2015;8:871–879.
8. Sanna T, Diener HC, Passman RS, et al. Cryptogenic 24. Henmi R, Ejima K, Shoda M, et al. Interatrial con- 13. Mulder BA, Damman K, Van Veldhuisen DJ, et al.
stroke and underlying atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. duction time can predict new-onset atrial fibrillation Heart rate and outcome in heart failure with reduced
2014;370:2478–2486. after radiofrequency ablation of isolated, typical atrial ejection fraction: differences between atrial fibrillation
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 145
-, 2023:-–- ---
and sinus rhythm-a CIBIS II analysis. Clin Cardiol. emergency department. J Emerg Med. 2015;49: 4. Rathore SS, Curtis JP, Wang Y, et al. Association of
2017;40:740–745. 175–182. serum digoxin concentration and outcomes in patients
with heart failure. JAMA. 2003;289:871–878.
14. Sartipy U, Savarese G, Dahlstrom U, et al. As- 5. Intravenous digoxin in acute atrial fibrillation. Re-
sociation of heart rate with mortality in sinus sults of a randomized, placebo-controlled multicentre 5. Adams KF Jr, Patterson JH, Gattis WA, et al. Rela-
rhythm and atrial fibrillation in heart failure with trial in 239 patients. The Digitalis in Acute Atrial tionship of serum digoxin concentration to mortality
preserved ejection fraction. Eur J Heart Fail. Fibrillation (DAAF) Trial Group. Eur Heart J. 1997;18: and morbidity in women in the digitalis investigation
2019;21:471–479. 649–654. group trial: a retrospective analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol.
6. Siu CW, Lau CP, Lee WL, et al. Intravenous diltiazem 2005;46:497–504.
15. Hess PL, Sheng S, Matsouaka R, et al. Strict versus
lenient versus poor rate control among patients with is superior to intravenous amiodarone or digoxin for 6. Ahmed A, Gambassi G, Weaver MT, et al. Effects of
atrial fibrillation and heart failure (from the Get With achieving ventricular rate control in patients with discontinuation of digoxin versus continuation at low
The Guidelines - Heart Failure Program). Am J Cardiol. acute uncomplicated atrial fibrillation. Crit Care Med. serum digoxin concentrations in chronic heart failure.
2020;125:894–900. 2009;37:2174–2179. quiz 2180. Am J Cardiol. 2007;100:280–284.
16. Docherty KF, Shen L, Castagno D, et al. Relation- 7. Schreck DM, Rivera AR, Tricarico VJ. Emergency 7. Khand AU, Rankin AC, Martin W, et al. Carvedilol
ship between heart rate and outcomes in patients in management of atrial fibrillation and flutter: intrave- alone or in combination with digoxin for the manage-
sinus rhythm or atrial fibrillation with heart failure and nous diltiazem versus intravenous digoxin. Ann Emerg ment of atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure?
reduced ejection fraction. Eur J Heart Fail. 2020;22: Med. 1997;29:135–140. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;42:1944–1951.
528–538. 8. Shojaee M, Feizi B, Miri R, et al. Intravenous amio- 8. Kotecha D, Bunting KV, Gill SK, et al. Effect of
17. Kirchhof P, Camm AJ, Goette A, et al. Early rhythm- darone versus digoxin in atrial fibrillation rate control; digoxin vs bisoprolol for heart rate control in atrial
control therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation. a clinical trial. Emergency. 2017;5:e29. fibrillation on patient-reported quality of life: the
N Engl J Med. 2020;383:1305–1316. 9. Wattanasuwan N, Khan IA, Mehta NJ, et al. Acute RATE-AF randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2020;324:
ventricular rate control in atrial fibrillation: IV combi- 2497–2508.
18. Van Gelder IC, Groenveld HF, Crijns HJGM, et al.
Lenient versus strict rate control in patients with atrial nation of diltiazem and digoxin vs. IV diltiazem alone. 9. Ziff OJ, Lane DA, Samra M, et al. Safety and efficacy
fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:1363–1373. Chest. 2001;119:502–506. of digoxin: systematic review and meta-analysis of
10. Ramesh T, Lee PYK, Mitta M, et al. Intravenous observational and controlled trial data. BMJ. 2015;351:
19. Nerheim P, Birger-Botkin S, Piracha L, et al. Heart
magnesium in the management of rapid atrial fibrilla- h4451.
failure and sudden death in patients with tachycardia-
induced cardiomyopathy and recurrent tachycardia. tion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Cardiol. 10. Goldstein RE, Boccuzzi SJ, Cruess D, et al. Diltia-
Circulation. 2004;110:247–252. 2021;78:375–381. zem increases late-onset congestive heart failure in
11. Ho KM, Sheridan DJ, Paterson T. Use of postinfarction patients with early reduction in ejection
20. van Gelder IC, Phan HM, Wilkoff BL, et al. Prog-
intravenous magnesium to treat acute onset atrial fraction. The Adverse Experience Committee; and the
nostic significance of atrial arrhythmias in a primary
fibrillation: a meta-analysis. Heart. 2007;93:1433– Multicenter Diltiazem Postinfarction Research Group.
prevention ICD population. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol.
1440. Circulation. 1991;83:52–60.
2011;34:1070–1079.
12. Clemo HF, Wood MA, Gilligan DM, et al. Intrave- 11. Multicenter Diltiazem Postinfarction Trial Research
21. Boriani G, Gasparini M, Landolina M, et al. Inci-
nous amiodarone for acute heart rate control in the Group. The effect of diltiazem on mortality and rein-
dence and clinical relevance of uncontrolled ventric-
critically ill patient with atrial tachyarrhythmias. Am J farction after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med.
ular rate during atrial fibrillation in heart failure
Cardiol. 1998;81:594–598. 1988;319:385–392.
patients treated with cardiac resynchronization ther-
apy. Eur J Heart Fail. 2011;13:868–876. 13. Delle Karth G, Geppert A, Neunteufl T, et al. 12. Connolly SJ, Camm AJ, Halperin JL, et al. Drone-
Amiodarone versus diltiazem for rate control in criti- darone in high-risk permanent atrial fibrillation. N Engl
22. Boriani G, Padeletti L, Santini M, et al. Rate control
cally ill patients with atrial tachyarrhythmias. Crit Care J Med. 2011;365:2268–2276.
in patients with pacemaker affected by brady-tachy
Med. 2001;29:1149–1153.
form of sick sinus syndrome. Am Heart J. 2007;154: 13. Ulimoen SR, Enger S, Carlson J, et al. Comparison
193–200. 14. Jandali MB. Safety of intravenous diltiazem in of four single-drug regimens on ventricular rate and
reduced ejection fraction heart failure with rapid arrhythmia-related symptoms in patients with perma-
7.2. Specific Pharmacological Agents for Rate atrial fibrillation. Clin Drug Investig. 2018;38:503– nent atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol. 2013;111:225–230.
Control 508.
14. Nikolaidou T, Channer KS. Chronic atrial fibrillation:
15. Hasbrouck M, Nguyen TT. Acute management of a systematic review of medical heart rate control
1. Ulimoen SR, Enger S, Carlson J, et al. Comparison of
atrial fibrillation in congestive heart failure with management. Postgrad Med J. 2009;85:303–312.
four single-drug regimens on ventricular rate and
reduced ejection fraction in the emergency depart-
arrhythmia-related symptoms in patients with perma- 15. Smith TW, Butler VP Jr, Haber E. Determination of
ment. Am J Emerg Med. 2022;58:39–42.
nent atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol. 2013;111:225–230. therapeutic and toxic serum digoxin concentrations by
16. DiCarlo LA Jr, Morady F, de Buitleir M, et al. Effects radioimmunoassay. N Engl J Med. 1969;281:1212–1216.
2. Nikolaidou T, Channer KS. Chronic atrial fibrillation:
of magnesium sulfate on cardiac conduction and
a systematic review of medical heart rate control 16. Hauptman PJ, McCann P, Romero JM, et al.
refractoriness in humans. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1986;7:
management. Postgrad Med J. 2009;85:303–312. Reference laboratory values for digoxin following
1356–1362.
publication of Digitalis Investigation Group (DIG) trial
7.2.1. Acute Rate Control data. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173:1552–1554.
7.2.2. Long-Term Rate Control
1. Platia EV, Michelson EL, Porterfield JK, et al. 17. Goldberger ZD, Goldberger AL. Therapeutic ranges
1. Scheuermeyer FX, Grafstein E, Stenstrom R, et al.
Esmolol versus verapamil in the acute treatment of of serum digoxin concentrations in patients with heart
Safety and efficiency of calcium channel blockers
atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter. Am J Cardiol. failure. Am J Cardiol. 2012;109:1818–1821.
versus beta-blockers for rate control in patients with
1989;63:925–929.
atrial fibrillation and no acute underlying medical 18. Kober L, Torp-Pedersen C, McMurray JJ, et al.
2. Elkayam U. Calcium channel blockers in heart fail- illness. Acad Emerg Med. 2013;20:222–230. Increased mortality after dronedarone therapy for se-
ure. Cardiology. 1998;89(suppl 1):38–46. vere heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:2678–
2. Zaman N, Naccarelli G, Foy A. A comparison of
rate control agents for the treatment of atrial 2687.
3. Lan Q, Wu F, Han B, et al. Intravenous diltiazem
versus metoprolol for atrial fibrillation with rapid fibrillation: follow-up investigation of the AFFIRM 19. Hohnloser S, Crijns H, van Eickels M, et al. Effect of
ventricular rate: a meta-analysis. Am J Emerg Med. study. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol Ther. 2021;26:328– dronedarone on cardiovascular events in atrial fibril-
2022;51:248–256. 334. lation. Revista Portuguesa de Cardiologia. 2009;28:
3. Lopes RD, Rordorf R, De Ferrari GM, et al. Digoxin 345–347.
4. Fromm C, Suau SJ, Cohen V, et al. Diltiazem vs.
metoprolol in the management of atrial fibrilla- and mortality in patients with atrial fibrillation. J Am 20. Davy JM, Herold M, Hoglund C, et al. Dronedarone
tion or flutter with rapid ventricular rate in the Coll Cardiol. 2018;71:1063–1074. for the control of ventricular rate in permanent atrial
146 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
fibrillation: the Efficacy and safety of dRonedArone for 14. Brignole M, Gianfranchi L, Menozzi C, et al. Atrio- ablation evaluation (the PAVE study). J Cardiovasc
the cOntrol of ventricular rate during atrial fibrillation ventricular junction ablation and pacemaker therapy Electrophysiol. 2005;16:1160–1165.
(ERATO) study. Am Heart J. 2008;156:527.e521–527. versus drug treatment in atrial fibrillation. Cardiol Rev.
28. Chen L, Hodge D, Jahangir A, et al. Preserved
e529. 1998;15:49–53.
left ventricular ejection fraction following atrio-
15. Gillis AM, Connolly SJ, Lacombe P, et al. Ran- ventricular junction ablation and pacing for atrial
7.3. Atrioventricular Nodal Ablation (AVNA) domized crossover comparison of DDDR versus VDD fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2008;19:19–
pacing after atrioventricular junction ablation for pre- 27.
1. Geelen P, Brugada J, Andries E, et al. Ventric-
vention of atrial fibrillation. Circulation. 2000;102:
ular fibrillation and sudden death after radio- 8.1. Goals of Therapy With Rhythm Control
736–741.
frequency catheter ablation of the atrioventricular
junction. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1997;20:343– 16. D H, Novak P, O S. Survival of dual chamber pacing 1. Santhanakrishnan R, Wang N, Larson MG, et al.
348. post atrioventricular nodal ablation in patients with Atrial fibrillation begets heart failure and vice versa:
atrial fibrillation. Heart Rhythm. 2009;6:S406–S407. temporal associations and differences in preserved
2. Wang RX, Lee HC, Hodge DO, et al. Effect of pacing
versus reduced ejection fraction. Circulation. 2016;133:
method on risk of sudden death after atrioventricular 17. Brignole M, Menozzi C, Gasparini M, et al. An 484–492.
node ablation and pacemaker implantation in patients evaluation of the strategy of maintenance of sinus
with atrial fibrillation. Heart Rhythm. 2013;10:696– 2. Hsu LF, Jais P, Sanders P, et al. Catheter ablation for
rhythm by antiarrhythmic drug therapy after ablation
701. atrial fibrillation in congestive heart failure. N Engl J
and pacing therapy in patients with paroxysmal atrial
Med. 2004;351:2373–2383.
3. Brignole M, Menozzi C, Gianfranchi L, et al. fibrillation. Eur Heart J. 2002;23:892–900.
Assessment of atrioventricular junction ablation and 3. Prabhu S, Costello BT, Taylor AJ, et al. Regression of
18. Nowinski K, Gadler F, Jensen-Urstad M, et al.
VVIR pacemaker versus pharmacological treatment in diffuse ventricular fibrosis following restoration of si-
Transient proarrhythmic state following atrioventric-
patients with heart failure and chronic atrial fibrilla- nus rhythm with catheter ablation in patients with
ular junctional radiofrequency ablation. Pacing Clin
tion: a randomized, controlled study. Circulation. atrial fibrillation and systolic dysfunction: a substudy
Electrophysiol. 2002;25:291–299.
1998;98:953–960. of the CAMERA MRI trial. J Am Coll Cardiol EP. 2018;4:
19. Slotwiner DJ, Raitt MH, Del-Carpio Munoz F, et al. 999–1007.
4. Lim KT, Davis MJ, Powell A, et al. Ablate and
Impact of physiologic pacing versus right ventricular 4. Stronati G, Guerra F, Urbinati A, et al. Tachy-
pace strategy for atrial fibrillation: long-term
pacing among patients with left ventricular ejection cardiomyopathy in patients without underlying struc-
outcome of AIRCRAFT trial. Europace. 2007;9:498–
fraction greater than 35%: a systematic review for the tural heart disease. J Clin Med. 2019;8:1411.
505.
2018 ACC/AHA/HRS guideline on the evaluation and
5. Wood MA, Brown-Mahoney C, Kay GN, et al. Clinical 5. Jeong YH, Choi KJ, Song JM, et al. Diagnostic
management of patients with bradycardia and cardiac
outcomes after ablation and pacing therapy for atrial approach and treatment strategy in tachycardia-
conduction delay: a report of the American College of
fibrillation: a meta-analysis. Circulation. 2000;101: induced cardiomyopathy. Clin Cardiol. 2008;31:172–
Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on
1138–1144. 178.
Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Heart Rhythm So-
6. Bradley DJ, Shen WK. Atrioventricular junction ciety. Circulation. 2019;140:e483–e503. 6. Marcusohn E, Postnikov M, Kobo O, et al. Factors
ablation combined with either right ventricular pacing associated with left ventricular function recovery in
20. Olgin JE, Scheinman MM. Comparison of high en-
or cardiac resynchronization therapy for atrial fibrilla- patients with atrial fibrillation related cardiomyopathy.
ergy direct current and radiofrequency catheter abla-
tion: the need for large-scale randomized trials. Heart Isr Med Assoc J. 2022;24:101–106.
tion of the atrioventricular junction. J Am Coll Cardiol.
Rhythm. 2007;4:224–232. 1993;21:557–564. 7. Cooper HA, Bloomfield DA, Bush DE, et al. Relation
7. Udo EO, Zuithoff NP, van Hemel NM, et al. Incidence between achieved heart rate and outcomes in pa-
21. Kay GN, Ellenbogen KA, Giudici M, et al. The Ablate
and predictors of short- and long-term complications tients with atrial fibrillation (from the Atrial Fibril-
and Pace Trial: a prospective study of catheter ablation
in pacemaker therapy: the FOLLOWPACE study. Heart lation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm
of the AV conduction system and permanent pace-
Rhythm. 2012;9:728–735. Management [AFFIRM] Study). Am J Cardiol.
maker implantation for treatment of atrial fibrillation.
2004;93:1247–1253.
8. Armaganijan LV, Toff WD, Nielsen JC, et al. Are APT Investigators. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 1998;2:
elderly patients at increased risk of complications 121–135. 8. Miura K, Ikemura N, Kimura T, et al. Treatment
following pacemaker implantation? A meta-analysis of strategies and subsequent changes in the patient-
22. Weerasooriya R, Davis M, Powell A, et al. The reported quality-of-life among elderly patients with
randomized trials. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2012;35:
Australian Intervention Randomized Control of Rate in atrial fibrillation. Am Heart J. 2020;222:83–92.
131–134.
Atrial Fibrillation Trial (AIRCRAFT). J Am Coll Cardiol.
9. Baudo M, D’Ancona G, Trinca F, et al. Atrioventric- 9. Kosior DA, Szulc M, Rosiak M, et al. Functional
2003;41:1697–1702.
ular node ablation and pacing for atrial tachyarrhyth- status with rhythm- versus rate-control strategy for
mias: a meta-analysis of postoperative outcomes. Int J
23. Redfield MM, Kay GN, Jenkins LS, et al. Tachy- persistent atrial fibrillation. Pol Arch Intern Med.
cardia-related cardiomyopathy: a common cause of 2018;128:658–666.
Cardiol. 2022;363:80–86.
ventricular dysfunction in patients with atrial fibrilla-
10. Vijayaraman P, Subzposh FA, Naperkowski A. 10. Van Gelder IC, Groenveld HF, Crijns HJ, et al.
tion referred for atrioventricular ablation. Mayo Clin
Atrioventricular node ablation and His bundle pacing. Lenient versus strict rate control in patients with atrial
Proc. 2000;75:790–795.
Europace. 2017;19:iv10–iv16. fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:1363–1373.
24. Vijayaraman P, Hashimova N, Mathew AJ, et al. 11. Andrade JG, Wells GA, Deyell MW, et al. Cryoa-
11. Moriña-Vázquez P, Moraleda-Salas MT, Arce-
Simultaneous conduction system pacing and atrio- blation or drug therapy for initial treatment of atrial
León Á, et al. Effectiveness and safety of AV node
ventricular node ablation via axillary vs femoral access. fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2021;384:305–315.
ablation after His bundle pacing in patients with un-
Heart Rhythm. 2022;19:1019–1021.
controlled atrial arrhythmias. Pacing Clin Electro- 12. Kirchhof P, Camm AJ, Goette A, et al. Early rhythm-
physiol. 2021;44:1004–1009. 25. Bongiorni MG, Proclemer A, Dobreanu D, et al. control therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation.
Preferred tools and techniques for implantation of N Engl J Med. 2020;383:1305–1316.
12. Pillai A, Kolominsky J, Koneru JN, et al. Atrioven-
cardiac electronic devices in Europe: results of the
tricular junction ablation in patients with conduction 13. Kim D, Yang PS, You SC, et al. Treatment timing
European Heart Rhythm Association survey. Europace.
system pacing leads: a comparison of His-bundle vs and the effects of rhythm control strategy in patients
2013;15:1664–1668.
left bundle branch area pacing leads. Heart Rhythm. with atrial fibrillation: nationwide cohort study. BMJ.
2022;19:1116–1123. 26. Vernooy K, Dijkman B, Cheriex EC, et al. Ventric- 2021;373:n991.
ular remodeling during long-term right ventricular
13. Vijayaraman P, Mathew AJ, Naperkowski A, et al. 14. Dickow J, Kirchhof P, Van Houten HK, et al.
pacing following His bundle ablation. Am J Cardiol.
Conduction system pacing versus conventional pacing Generalizability of the EAST-AFNET 4 Trial: assessing
2006;97:1223–1227.
in patients undergoing atrioventricular node ablation: outcomes of early rhythm-control therapy in patients
nonrandomized, on-treatment comparison. Heart 27. Doshi RN, Daoud EG, Fellows C, et al. Left with atrial fibrillation. J Am Heart Assoc. 2022;11:1–
Rhythm O2. 2022;3:368–376. ventricular-based cardiac stimulation post AV nodal 11.
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 147
-, 2023:-–- ---
15. Roy D, Talajic M, Nattel S, et al. Rhythm control 31. Ganapathy AV, Monjazeb S, Ganapathy KS, et al. 46. Lin PL, Huang CC, Wu YJ, et al. Relations between
versus rate control for atrial fibrillation and heart Asymptomatic" persistent or permanent atrial fibrilla- baseline burden, maximum duration, and relative
failure. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:2667–2677. tion: a misnomer in selected patients. Int J Cardiol. reduction of atrial fibrillation: insights from continuous
2015;185:112–113. monitoring in rhythm control. J Cardiovasc Electro-
16. Rillig A, Magnussen C, Ozga AK, et al. Early rhythm
physiol. 2019;30:178–182.
control therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation and 32. Hermans ANL, Pluymaekers N, Lankveld TAR, et al.
heart failure. Circulation. 2021;144:845–858. Clinical utility of rhythm control by electrical cardio- 47. Chew DS, Jones KA, Loring Z, et al. Diagnosis-to-
version to assess the association between self- ablation time predicts recurrent atrial fibrillation and
17. Marrouche NF, Brachmann J, Andresen D, et al.
reported symptoms and rhythm status in patients rehospitalization following catheter ablation. Heart
Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation with heart fail-
with persistent atrial fibrillation. Int J Cardiol Heart Rhythm O2. 2022;3:23–31.
ure. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:417–427.
Vasc. 2021;36:100870.
18. Di Biase L, Mohanty P, Mohanty S, et al. Ablation 48. Chung MK, Eckhardt LL, Chen LY, et al. Lifestyle
33. Senoo K, Suzuki S, Otsuka T, et al. Progression to and risk factor modification for reduction of atrial
versus amiodarone for treatment of persistent atrial
the persistent form in asymptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: a scientific statement from the American
fibrillation in patients with congestive heart failure and
fibrillation. Circ J. 2014;78:1121–1126. Heart Association. Circulation. 2020;141:e750–e772.
an implanted device: results from the AATAC multi-
center randomized trial. Circulation. 2016;133:1637– 34. Disertori M, Lombardi F, Barlera S, et al. Clinical
49. Gopinathannair R, Chen LY, Chung MK, et al.
1644. characteristics of patients with asymptomatic re-
Managing atrial fibrillation in patients with heart fail-
currences of atrial fibrillation in the Gruppo Italiano
19. Packer DL, Piccini JP, Monahan KH, et al. Ablation ure and reduced ejection fraction: a scientific state-
per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nell’Infarto
versus drug therapy for atrial fibrillation in heart fail- ment from the American Heart Association. Circ
Miocardico-Atrial Fibrillation (GISSI-AF) trial. Am Heart
ure: results from the CABANA trial. Circulation. Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2021;14:e000078.
J. 2011;162:382–389.
2021;143:1377–1390.
50. Hagens VE, Ranchor AV, Van Sonderen E, et al.
35. Bodagh N, Yap R, Kotadia I, et al. Impact of cath-
20. Veasey RA, Sugihara C, Sandhu K, et al. The natural Effect of rate or rhythm control on quality of life in
eter ablation versus medical therapy on cognitive
history of atrial fibrillation in patients with permanent persistent atrial fibrillation. Results from the Rate
function in atrial fibrillation: a systematic review.
pacemakers: is atrial fibrillation a progressive disease? Control Versus Electrical Cardioversion (RACE) Study.
J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2022;65:271–296.
J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2015;44:23–30. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;43:241–247.
36. Kim D, Yang PS, You SC, et al. Association of
21. Holmqvist F, Kim S, Steinberg BA, et al. Heart rate
rhythm control with incident dementia among patients 51. Ha AC, Breithardt G, Camm AJ, et al. Health-
is associated with progression of atrial fibrillation, in-
with atrial fibrillation: a nationwide population-based related quality of life in patients with atrial fibrillation
dependent of rhythm. Heart. 2015;101:894–899.
cohort study. Age Ageing. 2022;51:1–9. treated with rhythm control versus rate control: in-
22. Zhang YY, Qiu C, Davis PJ, et al. Predictors of sights from a prospective international registry (Reg-
37. Bunch TJ, Crandall BG, Weiss JP, et al. Patients
progression of recently diagnosed atrial fibrillation in istry on Cardiac Rhythm Disorders Assessing the
treated with catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation
REgistry on Cardiac Rhythm DisORDers Assessing the Control of Atrial Fibrillation: RECORD-AF). Circ Car-
have long-term rates of death, stroke, and dementia
Control of Atrial Fibrillation (RecordAF)-United States diovasc Qual Outcomes. 2014;7:896–904.
similar to patients without atrial fibrillation.
cohort. Am J Cardiol. 2013;112:79–84.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2011;22:839–845. 52. Govindapillai A, Cox JL, Thabane L, et al. Rhythm
23. De Vos CB, Breithardt G, Camm AJ, et al. Pro- control vs rate control in a contemporary ambulatory
38. Slee A, Saksena S. Impact of initial heart failure
gression of atrial fibrillation in the REgistry on Cardiac atrial fibrillation cohort: post hoc analysis of the
emergence on clinical outcomes of atrial fibrillation
rhythm disORDers assessing the control of Atrial IMPACT-AF trial. CJC Open. 2022;4:551–557.
patients in the AFFIRM trial. Am Heart J. 2020;220:1–
Fibrillation cohort: clinical correlates and the effect of
11. 53. Wu L, Lu Y, Zheng L, et al. Comparison of radio-
rhythm-control therapy. Am Heart J. 2012;163:887–
frequency catheter ablation between asymptomatic
893. 39. Gertz ZM, Raina A, Saghy L, et al. Evidence of atrial
and symptomatic persistent atrial fibrillation: a pro-
functional mitral regurgitation due to atrial fibrillation:
24. Blum S, Aeschbacher S, Meyre P, et al. Incidence pensity score matched analysis. J Cardiovasc Electro-
reversal with arrhythmia control. J Am Coll Cardiol.
and predictors of atrial fibrillation progression. J Am physiol. 2016;27:531–535.
2011;58:1474–1481.
Heart Assoc. 2019;8:e012554.
40. Reddy ST, Belden W, Doyle M, et al. Mitral 54. Mohanty S, Santangeli P, Mohanty P, et al. Cath-
25. Pathak RK, Middeldorp ME, Meredith M, et al.
regurgitation recovery and atrial reverse remodeling eter ablation of asymptomatic longstanding persistent
Long-term effect of goal-directed weight manage-
following pulmonary vein isolation procedure in pa- atrial fibrillation: impact on quality of life, exercise
ment in an atrial fibrillation cohort: a long-term
tients with atrial fibrillation: a clinical observation performance, arrhythmia perception, and arrhythmia-
follow-up study (LEGACY). J Am Coll Cardiol.
proof-of-concept cardiac MRI study. J Interv Card free survival. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2014;25:
2015;65:2159–2169.
Electrophysiol. 2013;37:307–315. 1057–1064.
26. Koldenhof T, Wijtvliet PEPJ, Pluymaekers NAHA,
41. Abe Y, Takahashi Y, Shibata T. Looking into the 55. Suman-Horduna I, Roy D, Frasure-Smith N, et al.
et al. Rate control drugs differ in the prevention of
mechanistic link between mitral regurgitation and Quality of life and functional capacity in patients with
progression of atrial fibrillation. EP: Europace.
atrial fibrillation. Cardiol Clin. 2021;39:281–288. atrial fibrillation and congestive heart failure. J Am Coll
2022;24:384–389.
Cardiol. 2013;61:455–460.
42. Soulat-Dufour L, Lang S, Addetia K, et al.
27. Yang WY, Du X, Fawzy AM, et al. Associations of
Restoring sinus rhythm reverses cardiac remodeling 56. Hsu LF, Jaïs P, Sanders P, et al. Catheter ablation
atrial fibrillation progression with clinical risk factors
and clinical prognosis: a report from the Chinese Atrial
and reduces valvular regurgitation in patients with for atrial fibrillation in congestive heart failure. N Engl
atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022;79:951–961. J Med. 2004;351:2373–2383.
Fibrillation Registry study. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol.
2021;32:333–341. 43. Markman TM, Plappert T, De Feria Alsina A, et al. 57. Parkash R, Wells GA, Rouleau J, et al. Randomized
Improvement in tricuspid regurgitation following ablation-based rhythm-control versus rate-control
28. Kalman JM, Sanders P, Rosso R, et al. Should we
catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc trial in patients with heart failure and atrial fibrilla-
perform catheter ablation for asymptomatic atrial
Electrophysiol. 2020;31:2883–2888. tion: results from the RAFT-AF trial. Circulation.
fibrillation? Circulation. 2017;136:490–499.
2022;145:1693–1704.
29. Sgreccia D, Manicardi M, Malavasi VL, et al. 44. Pype L, Embrechts L, Cornez B, et al. Long-term
Comparing outcomes in asymptomatic and symp- effect of atrial fibrillation on the evolution of mitral 58. Chiou WR, Lin PL, Huang CC, et al. Rhythm control
tomatic atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and and tricuspid valve regurgitation. Acta Cardiol. without catheter ablation may have benefits beyond
meta-analysis of 81,462 patients. J Clin Med. 2020;75:639–647. stroke prevention in rivaroxaban-treated non-perma-
2021;10:3979. nent atrial fibrillation. Sci Rep. 2022;12:3745.
45. Wang J, Han J, Li Y, et al. Impact of Surgical
30. Willems S, Borof K, Brandes A, et al. Systematic, ablation of atrial fibrillation on the progression of 59. January CT, Wann LS, Alpert JS, et al. 2014 AHA/
early rhythm control strategy for atrial fibrillation in tricuspid regurgitation and right-sided heart remod- ACC/HRS guideline for the management of patients
patients with or without symptoms: the EAST-AFNET eling after mitral-valve surgery: a propensity-score with atrial fibrillation: a report of the American College
4 trial. Eur Heart J. 2022;43:1219–1230. matching analysis. J Am Heart Assoc. 2016;5:e004213. of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force
148 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
on Practice Guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society. 6. Berger M, Schweitzer P. Timing of thromboembolic appendage occlusion device implantation in atrial
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:e1–e76. events after electrical cardioversion of atrial fibrillation fibrillation patients. J Am Coll Cardiol EP. 2017;3:
or flutter: a retrospective analysis. Am J Cardiol. 1380–1386.
8.2. Electrical and Pharmacologic Cardioversion 1998;82:1545–1547. A1548.
20. Sharma SP, Turagam MK, Gopinathannair R, et al.
1. Crijns HJ, Weijs B, Fairley AM, et al. Contemporary 7. McIntyre WF, Connolly SJ, Wang J, et al. Throm- Direct current cardioversion of atrial fibrillation in pa-
real life cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: Results from boembolic events around the time of cardioversion for tients with left atrial appendage occlusion devices.
the multinational RHYTHM-AF study. Int J Cardiol. atrial fibrillation in patients receiving antiplatelet J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;74:2267–2274.
2014;172:588–594. treatment in the ACTIVE trials. Eur Heart J. 2019;40:
21. Nuotio I, Hartikainen JE, Gronberg T, et al. Time to
2. Hernández-Madrid A, Svendsen JH, Lip GY, et al. 3026–3032.
cardioversion for acute atrial fibrillation and throm-
Cardioversion for atrial fibrillation in current Euro- 8. Lip GY, Hammerstingl C, Marin F, et al. Left atrial boembolic complications. JAMA. 2014;312:647–649.
pean practice: results of the European Heart thrombus resolution in atrial fibrillation or flutter: re-
Rhythm Association survey. Europace. 2013;15:915– 22. Grönberg T, Hartikainen JE, Nuotio I, et al. Anti-
sults of a prospective study with rivaroxaban (X-TRA)
918. coagulation, CHA2DS2VASc score, and thromboem-
and a retrospective observational registry providing
bolic risk of cardioversion of acute atrial fibrillation
3. Pisters R, Nieuwlaat R, Prins MH, et al. Clinical baseline data (CLOT-AF). Am Heart J. 2016;178:126–
(from the FinCV study). Am J Cardiol. 2016;117:1294–
correlates of immediate success and outcome at 1-year 134.
1298.
follow-up of real-world cardioversion of atrial fibril- 9. Aryana A, Singh SK, Singh SM, et al. Association
lation: the Euro Heart Survey. Europace. 2012;14:666– 23. Lip GY, Gitt AK, Le Heuzey JY, et al. Overtreatment
between incomplete surgical ligation of left atrial
674. and undertreatment with anticoagulation in relation to
appendage and stroke and systemic embolization.
cardioversion of atrial fibrillation (the RHYTHM-AF
4. Stiell IG, Clement CM, Brison RJ, et al. Variation in Heart Rhythm. 2015;12:1431–1437.
study). Am J Cardiol. 2014;113:480–484.
management of recent-onset atrial fibrillation and 10. Mohanty S, Gianni C, Trivedi C, et al. Risk of
flutter among academic hospital emergency de- thromboembolic events after percutaneous left atrial
24. Airaksinen KE, Grönberg T, Nuotio I, et al.
partments. Ann Emerg Med. 2011;57:13–21. Thromboembolic complications after cardioversion of
appendage ligation in patients with atrial fibrillation:
acute atrial fibrillation: the FinCV (Finnish CardioVer-
5. Dankner R, Shahar A, Novikov I, et al. Treatment of long-term results of a multicenter study. Heart
sion) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62:1187–1192.
stable atrial fibrillation in the emergency department: Rhythm. 2020;17:175–181.
a population-based comparison of electrical direct-
11. Alkhouli M, Du C, Killu A, et al. Clinical impact of 25. Lip GY. Cardioversion of atrial fibrillation. Postgrad
current versus pharmacological cardioversion or con- Med J. 1995;71:457–465.
residual leaks following left atrial appendage occlu-
servative management. Cardiology. 2009;112:270–
sion: insights from the NCDR LAAO registry. J Am Coll 26. Cappato R, Ezekowitz MD, Klein AL, et al. Rivar-
278.
Cardiol EP. 2022;8:766–778. oxaban vs. vitamin K antagonists for cardioversion in
6. Brandes A, Crijns H, Rienstra M, et al. Cardioversion atrial fibrillation. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:3346–3355.
12. Viles-Gonzalez JF, Kar S, Douglas P, et al. The
of atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter revisited: current
clinical impact of incomplete left atrial appendage 27. Ezekowitz MD, Pollack CV Jr, Halperin JL, et al.
evidence and practical guidance for a common pro-
closure with the Watchman Device in patients with Apixaban compared to heparin/vitamin K antagonist in
cedure. Europace. 2020;22:1149–1161.
atrial fibrillation: a PROTECT AF (Percutaneous patients with atrial fibrillation scheduled for cardio-
7. Lip GY, Gitt AK, Le Heuzey JY, et al. Overtreatment Closure of the Left Atrial Appendage Versus version: the EMANATE trial. Eur Heart J. 2018;39:
and undertreatment with anticoagulation in relation to Warfarin Therapy for Prevention of Stroke in Pa- 2959–2971.
cardioversion of atrial fibrillation (the RHYTHM-AF tients With Atrial Fibrillation) substudy. J Am Coll
study). Am J Cardiol. 2014;113:480–484. Cardiol. 2012;59:923–929. 28. Goette A, Merino JL, Ezekowitz MD, et al. Edox-
aban versus enoxaparin-warfarin in patients undergo-
8. Airaksinen KE, Grönberg T, Nuotio I, et al. Throm- 13. Boersma LV, Ince H, Kische S, et al. Efficacy and ing cardioversion of atrial fibrillation (ENSURE-AF): a
boembolic complications after cardioversion of acute safety of left atrial appendage closure with randomised, open-label, phase 3b trial. Lancet.
atrial fibrillation: the FinCV (Finnish CardioVersion) WATCHMAN in patients with or without contraindica- 2016;388:1995–2003.
study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62:1187–1192. tion to oral anticoagulation: 1-Year follow-up outcome
data of the EWOLUTION trial. Heart Rhythm. 2017;14: 29. Kotecha D, Pollack CV Jr, De Caterina R, et al.
1302–1308. Direct oral anticoagulants halve thromboembolic
8.2.1. Prevention of Thromboembolism in the
events after cardioversion of AF compared with
Setting of Cardioversion 14. Afzal MR, Gabriels JK, Jackson GG, et al. Temporal warfarin. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;72:1984–1986.
changes and clinical implications of delayed peridevice
1. Klein AL, Grimm RA, Murray RD, et al. Use of 30. Lown B. Electrical reversion of cardiac arrhyth-
leak following left atrial appendage closure. J Am Coll
transesophageal echocardiography to guide cardio- mias. Br Heart J. 1967;29:469–489.
Cardiol EP. 2022;8:15–25.
version in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med.
2001;344:1411–1420. 15. Fauchier L, Cinaud A, Brigadeau F, et al. Device- 31. DeSilva RA, Graboys TB, Podrid PJ, et al. Cardio-
related thrombosis after percutaneous left atrial version and defibrillation. Am Heart J. 1980;100:881–
2. Fatkin D, Kuchar DL, Thorburn CW, et al. Trans-
appendage occlusion for atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll 895.
esophageal echocardiography before and during direct
Cardiol. 2018;71:1528–1536.
current cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: evidence for 32. Spagnolo P, Giglio M, Di Marco D, et al. Diagnosis
"atrial stunning" as a mechanism of thromboembolic 16. Alkhouli M, Busu T, Shah K, et al. Incidence of left atrial appendage thrombus in patients with
complications. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1994;23:307–316. and clinical impact of device-related thrombus atrial fibrillation: delayed contrast-enhanced cardiac
following percutaneous left atrial appendage oc- CT. Eur Radiol. 2021;31:1236–1244.
3. Grimm RA, Stewart WJ, Maloney JD, et al. Impact of
clusion: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol EP.
electrical cardioversion for atrial fibrillation on left 33. Romero J, Husain SA, Kelesidis I, et al. Detection of
2018;4:1629–1637.
atrial appendage function and spontaneous echo left atrial appendage thrombus by cardiac computed
contrast: characterization by simultaneous trans- 17. Dukkipati SR, Kar S, Holmes DR, et al. Device- tomography in patients with atrial fibrillation: a meta-
esophageal echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. related thrombus after left atrial appendage closure: analysis. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013;6:185–194.
1993;22:1359–1366. incidence, predictors, and outcomes. Circulation.
34. Pathan F, Hecht H, Narula J, et al. Roles of
4. Manning WJ, Leeman DE, Gotch PJ, et al. Pulsed 2018;138:874–885.
transesophageal echocardiography and cardiac
Doppler evaluation of atrial mechanical function after 18. Simard T, Jung RG, Lehenbauer K, et al. Predictors computed tomography for evaluation of left atrial
electrical cardioversion of atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll of device-related thrombus following percutaneous thrombus and associated pathology: a review and
Cardiol. 1989;13:617–623. left atrial appendage occlusion. J Am Coll Cardiol. critical analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol Img. 2018;11:
5. Manning WJ, Silverman DI, Katz SE, et al. Impaired 2021;78:297–313. 616–627.
left atrial mechanical function after cardioversion: 19. Kubo S, Mizutani Y, Meemook K, et al. Inci- 35. Black IW, Fatkin D, Sagar KB, et al. Exclusion of
relation to the duration of atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll dence, characteristics, and clinical course of atrial thrombus by transesophageal echocardiography
Cardiol. 1994;23:1535–1540. device-related thrombus after Watchman left atrial does not preclude embolism after cardioversion of
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 149
-, 2023:-–- ---
atrial fibrillation. A multicenter study. Circulation. 7. Kirchhof P, Eckardt L, Loh P, et al. Anterior-poste- 22. Lewis SR, Nicholson A, Reed SS, et al. Anaesthetic
1994;89:2509–2513. rior versus anterior-lateral electrode positions for and sedative agents used for electrical cardioversion.
external cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: a rando- Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;3:CD010824.
36. Tieleman RG, Van Gelder IC, Crijns HJ, et al. Early
mised trial. Lancet. 2002;360:1275–1279.
recurrences of atrial fibrillation after electrical cardio- 23. Ebrahimi R, Rubin SA. Electrical cardioversion
version: a result of fibrillation-induced electrical 8. Um KJ, McIntyre WF, Healey JS, et al. Pre- and resulting in death from synchronization failure. Am J
remodeling of the atria? J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;31: post-treatment with amiodarone for elective electrical Cardiol. 1994;74:100–102.
167–173. cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review
24. Ikeda S, An Y, Yanagisawa M, et al. Iatrogenic
and meta-analysis. Europace. 2019;21:856–863.
37. Harjai KJ, Mobarek SK, Cheirif J, et al. Clinical ventricular fibrillation caused by inappropriately syn-
variables affecting recovery of left atrial mechanical 9. Oral H, Souza JJ, Michaud GF, et al. Facilitating chronized cardioversion in a patient with pre-excited
function after cardioversion from atrial fibrillation. transthoracic cardioversion of atrial fibrillation with atrial fibrillation: a case report. J Cardiol Cases.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1997;30:481–486. ibutilide pretreatment. N Engl J Med. 1999;340:1849– 2021;23:31–34.
1854.
38. Spartera M, Stracquadanio A, Pessoa-Amorim G, 25. Kaufmann MR, McKillop MS, Burkart TA, et al.
et al. The impact of atrial fibrillation and stroke risk 10. Voskoboinik A, Moskovitch J, Plunkett G, et al. Iatrogenic ventricular fibrillation after direct-current
factors on left atrial blood flow characteristics. Eur Cardioversion of atrial fibrillation in obese patients: cardioversion of preexcited atrial fibrillation caused
Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2021;23:115–123. results from the Cardioversion-BMI randomized by inadvertent T-wave synchronization. Tex Heart Inst
controlled trial. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2019;30: J. 2018;45:39–41.
39. Korsholm K, Jensen JM, Nørgaard BL, et al.
155–161.
Detection of device-related thrombosis following left 26. Squara F, Elbaum C, Garret G, et al. Active
atrial appendage occlusion: a comparison between 11. Stiell IG, Clement CM, Brison RJ, et al. Variation in compression versus standard anterior-posterior defi-
cardiac computed tomography and transesophageal management of recent-onset atrial fibrillation and brillation for external cardioversion of atrial fibrilla-
echocardiography. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;12: flutter among academic hospital emergency de- tion: a prospective randomized study. Heart Rhythm.
e008112. partments. Ann Emerg Med. 2011;57:13–21. 2021;18:360–365.
40. Berte B, Jost CA, Maurer D, et al. Long-term 12. Hindricks G, Potpara T, Dagres N, et al. 2020 ESC 27. Lévy S, Lauribe P, Dolla E, et al. A randomized
follow-up after left atrial appendage occlusion with guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial comparison of external and internal cardioversion of
comparison of transesophageal echocardiography fibrillation. Developed in collaboration with the Euro- chronic atrial fibrillation. Circulation. 1992;86:1415–
versus computed tomography to guide medical ther- pean Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS): 1420.
apy and data about postclosure cardioversion. the Task Force for the diagnosis and management of
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2017;28:1140–1150. atrial fibrillation of the European Society of Cardiology 8.2.3. Pharmacological Cardioversion
(ESC). Developed with the special contribution of the
41. Saw J, Fahmy P, DeJong P, et al. Cardiac CT angi-
European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) of the 1. Dankner R, Shahar A, Novikov I, et al. Treatment of
ography for device surveillance after endovascular left stable atrial fibrillation in the emergency department:
ESC. Eur Heart J. 2021;42:373–498.
atrial appendage closure. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Im-
a population-based comparison of electrical direct-
aging. 2015;16:1198–1206. 13. Hernandez-Madrid A, Svendsen JH, Lip GY, et al.
current versus pharmacological cardioversion or con-
Cardioversion for atrial fibrillation in current European
42. Garg A, Khunger M, Seicean S, et al. Incidence of servative management. Cardiology. 2009;112:270–
practice: results of the European Heart Rhythm Asso-
thromboembolic complications within 30 days of 278.
ciation survey. Europace. 2013;15:915–918.
electrical cardioversion performed within 48 hours of
2. Stambler BS, Wood MA, Ellenbogen KA, et al. Effi-
atrial fibrillation onset. J Am Coll Cardiol EP. 2016;2: 14. Pisters R, Nieuwlaat R, Prins MH, et al. Clinical
cacy and safety of repeated intravenous doses of
487–494. correlates of immediate success and outcome at 1-year
ibutilide for rapid conversion of atrial flutter or fibril-
follow-up of real-world cardioversion of atrial fibril- lation. Ibutilide Repeat Dose Study Investigators. Cir-
43. Wong BM, Perry JJ, Cheng W, et al. Thromboem-
lation: the Euro Heart Survey. Europace. 2012;14:666–
bolic events following cardioversion of acute atrial culation. 1996;94:1613–1621.
674.
fibrillation and flutter: a systematic review and meta- 3. Ellenbogen KA, Stambler BS, Wood MA, et al. Effi-
analysis. CJEM. 2021;23:500–511. 15. Burton JH, Vinson DR, Drummond K, et al. Elec-
cacy of intravenous ibutilide for rapid termination of
trical cardioversion of emergency department patients
atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter: a dose-response
8.2.2. Electrical Cardioversion with atrial fibrillation. Ann Emerg Med. 2004;44:20–
study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996;28:130–136.
30.
1. Dankner R, Shahar A, Novikov I, et al. Treatment of
4. Hou ZY, Chang MS, Chen CY, et al. Acute treatment
stable atrial fibrillation in the emergency department: 16. Cristoni L, Tampieri A, Mucci F, et al. Cardioversion
of recent-onset atrial fibrillation and flutter with a
a population-based comparison of electrical direct- of acute atrial fibrillation in the short observation unit:
tailored dosing regimen of intravenous amiodarone. A
current versus pharmacological cardioversion or con- comparison of a protocol focused on electrical car- randomized, digoxin-controlled study. Eur Heart J.
servative management. Cardiology. 2009;112:270– dioversion with simple antiarrhythmic treatment. 1995;16:521–528.
278. Emerg Med J. 2011;28:932–937.
5. Kochiadakis GE, Igoumenidis NE, Simantirakis EN,
2. Stiell IG, Sivilotti MLA, Taljaard M, et al. Electrical 17. Jacoby JL, Cesta M, Heller MB, et al. Synchronized et al. Intravenous propafenone versus intravenous
versus pharmacological cardioversion for emergency emergency department cardioversion of atrial dys-
amiodarone in the management of atrial fibrillation of
department patients with acute atrial fibrillation rhythmias saves time, money and resources. J Emerg
recent onset: a placebo-controlled study. Pacing Clin
(RAFF2): a partial factorial randomised trial. Lancet. Med. 2005;28:27–30.
Electrophysiol. 1998;21:2475–2479.
2020;395:339–349.
18. Lo GK, Fatovich DM, Haig AD. Biphasic cardiover-
6. Cotter G, Blatt A, Kaluski E, et al. Conversion of
3. Lown B. Electrical reversion of cardiac arrhythmias. sion of acute atrial fibrillation in the emergency
recent onset paroxysmal atrial fibrillation to normal
Br Heart J. 1967;29:469–489. department. Emerg Med J. 2006;23:51–53.
sinus rhythm: the effect of no treatment and high-
4. Mittal S, Ayati S, Stein KM, et al. Transthoracic 19. Brandes A, Crijns H, Rienstra M, et al. Cardioversion dose amiodarone. A randomized, placebo-controlled
cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: comparison of of atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter revisited: current study. Eur Heart J. 1999;20:1833–1842.
rectilinear biphasic versus damped sine wave mono- evidence and practical guidance for a common pro- 7. Vardas PE, Kochiadakis GE, Igoumenidis NE,
phasic shocks. Circulation. 2000;101:1282–1287. cedure. Europace. 2020;22:1149–1161.
et al. Amiodarone as a first-choice drug for
5. Schmidt AS, Lauridsen KG, Torp P, et al. Maximum- 20. Gronberg T, Nuotio I, Nikkinen M, et al. Arrhythmic restoring sinus rhythm in patients with atrial
fixed energy shocks for cardioverting atrial fibrillation. complications after electrical cardioversion of acute fibrillation: a randomized, controlled study. Chest.
Eur Heart J. 2020;41:626–631. atrial fibrillation: the FinCV study. Europace. 2013;15: 2000;117:1538–1545.
1432–1435.
6. Crijns HJ, Weijs B, Fairley AM, et al. Contemporary 8. Chevalier P, Durand-Dubief A, Burri H, et al. Amio-
real life cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: results from 21. Botkin SB, Dhanekula LS, Olshansky B. Outpatient darone versus placebo and class Ic drugs for cardio-
the multinational RHYTHM-AF study. Int J Cardiol. cardioversion of atrial arrhythmias: efficacy, safety, version of recent-onset atrial fibrillation: a meta-
2014;172:588–594. and costs. Am Heart J. 2003;145:233–238. analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;41:255–262.
150 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
9. Capucci A, Lenzi T, Boriani G, et al. Effectiveness of fibrillation: electrophysiological determinants of Dofetilide (DIAMOND) substudy. Circulation.
loading oral flecainide for converting recent-onset enhanced conversion efficacy. Circulation. 1997;96: 2001;104:292–296.
atrial fibrillation to sinus rhythm in patients without 4298–4306.
2. Deedwania PC, Singh BN, Ellenbogen K, et al.
organic heart disease or with only systemic hyperten-
24. Singh S, Zoble RG, Yellen L, et al. Efficacy and Spontaneous conversion and maintenance of sinus
sion. Am J Cardiol. 1992;70:69–72.
safety of oral dofetilide in converting to and main- rhythm by amiodarone in patients with heart failure
10. Capucci A, Boriani G, Botto GL, et al. Conversion of taining sinus rhythm in patients with chronic atrial and atrial fibrillation: observations from the Veterans
recent-onset atrial fibrillation by a single oral loading fibrillation or atrial flutter: the Symptomatic Atrial Affairs Congestive Heart Failure Survival Trial of
dose of propafenone or flecainide. Am J Cardiol. Fibrillation Investigative Research on Dofetilide Antiarrhythmic Therapy (CHF-STAT). The Department
1994;74:503–505. (SAFIRE-D) study. Circulation. 2000;102:2385– of Veterans Affairs CHF-STAT Investigators. Circula-
2390. tion. 1998;98:2574–2579.
11. Ibrahim OA, Belley-Côté EP, Um KJ, et al. Single-
dose oral anti-arrhythmic drugs for cardioversion of 25. Pedersen OD, Bagger H, Keller N, et al. Efficacy of 3. Anderson JL, Gilbert EM, Alpert BL, et al. Prevention
recent-onset atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and dofetilide in the treatment of atrial fibrillation-flutter of symptomatic recurrences of paroxysmal atrial
network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. in patients with reduced left ventricular function: a fibrillation in patients initially tolerating antiar-
Europace. 2021;23:1200–1210. Danish investigations of arrhythmia and mortality on rhythmic therapy. A multicenter, double-blind, cross-
12. Botto GL, Capucci A, Bonini W, et al. Conversion dofetilide (diamond) substudy. Circulation. 2001;104: over study of flecainide and placebo with
of recent onset atrial fibrillation to sinus rhythm 292–296. transtelephonic monitoring. Flecainide Supraventricu-
using a single oral loading dose of propafenone: lar Tachycardia Study Group. Circulation. 1989;80:
26. Deedwania PC, Singh BN, Ellenbogen K, et al.
comparison of two regimens. Int J Cardiol. 1997;58: 1557–1570.
Spontaneous conversion and maintenance of sinus
55–61. rhythm by amiodarone in patients with heart failure 4. Kirchhof P, Andresen D, Bosch R, et al. Short-term
13. Boriani G, Biffi M, Capucci A, et al. Oral prop- and atrial fibrillation: observations from the veterans versus long-term antiarrhythmic drug treatment after
afenone to convert recent-onset atrial fibrillation in affairs congestive heart failure survival trial of antiar- cardioversion of atrial fibrillation (Flec-SL): a pro-
patients with and without underlying heart disease: a rhythmic therapy (CHF-STAT). The Department of spective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint
randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. Veterans Affairs CHF-STAT Investigators. Circulation. assessment trial. Lancet. 2012;380:238–246.
1997;126:621–625. 1998;98:2574–2579.
5. Valembois L, Audureau E, Takeda A, et al. Antiar-
14. Azpitarte J, Alvarez M, Baún O, et al. Value of 27. Singh BN, Singh SN, Reda DJ, et al. Amiodarone rhythmics for maintaining sinus rhythm after cardio-
single oral loading dose of propafenone in converting versus sotalol for atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. version of atrial fibrillation. Cochrane Database Syst
recent-onset atrial fibrillation. Results of a random- 2005;352:1861–1872. Rev. 2019;9:Cd005049.
ized, double-blind, controlled study. Eur Heart J.
28. Vijayalakshmi K, Whittaker VJ, Sutton A, et al. 6. Reimold SC, Cantillon CO, Friedman PL, et al.
1997;18:1649–1654.
A randomized trial of prophylactic antiarrhythmic Propafenone versus sotalol for suppression of recur-
15. Brembilla-Perrot B, Houriez P, Beurrier D, et al. agents (amiodarone and sotalol) in patients with rent symptomatic atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol.
Predictors of atrial flutter with 1:1 conduction in pa- atrial fibrillation for whom direct current cardiover- 1993;71:558–563.
tients treated with class I antiarrhythmic drugs for sion is planned. Am Heart J. 2006;151:863.e861–
863.e866. 7. Bellandi F, Simonetti I, Leoncini M, et al. Long-term
atrial tachyarrhythmias. Int J Cardiol. 2001;80:7–15.
efficacy and safety of propafenone and sotalol for the
16. Alboni P, Botto GL, Baldi N, et al. Outpatient 29. Sung RJ, Tan HL, Karagounis L, et al. Intravenous maintenance of sinus rhythm after conversion of
treatment of recent-onset atrial fibrillation with the sotalol for the termination of supraventricular tachy- recurrent symptomatic atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol.
"pill-in-the-pocket" approach. N Engl J Med. cardia and atrial fibrillation and flutter: a multicenter, 2001;88:640–645.
2004;351:2384–2391. randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.
Sotalol Multicenter Study Group. Am Heart J. 8. Pritchett EL, Page RL, Carlson M, et al. Efficacy and
17. Alboni P, Botto GL, Boriani G, et al. Intravenous
1995;129:739–748. safety of sustained-release propafenone (propafenone
administration of flecainide or propafenone in patients
SR) for patients with atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol.
with recent-onset atrial fibrillation does not predict 30. Vos MA, Golitsyn SR, Stangl K, et al. Superiority of 2003;92:941–946.
adverse effects during ’pill-in-the-pocket’ treatment. ibutilide (a new class III agent) over DL-sotalol in
Heart. 2010;96:546–549. converting atrial flutter and atrial fibrillation. Heart. 9. Dogan A, Ergene O, Nazli C, et al. Efficacy of
1998;79:568–575. propafenone for maintaining sinus rhythm in patients
18. Andrade JG, MacGillivray J, Macle L, et al. Clinical
with recent onset or persistent atrial fibrillation after
effectiveness of a systematic "pill-in-the-pocket" 31. Van Gelder IC, Tuinenburg AE, Schoonderwoerd BS, conversion: a randomized, placebo-controlled study.
approach for the management of paroxysmal atrial et al. Pharmacologic versus direct-current electrical Acta Cardiol. 2004;59:255–261.
fibrillation. Heart Rhythm. 2018;15:9–16. cardioversion of atrial flutter and fibrillation. Am J
Cardiol. 1999;84:147r–151r. 10. Kochiadakis GE, Igoumenidis NE, Hamilos ME, et al.
19. Kochiadakis GE, Igoumenidis NE, Solomou MC,
Sotalol versus propafenone for long-term mainte-
et al. Conversion of atrial fibrillation to sinus rhythm 32. Caron MF, Kluger J, Tsikouris JP, et al. Effects of
nance of normal sinus rhythm in patients with recur-
using acute intravenous procainamide infusion. Car- intravenous magnesium sulfate on the QT interval in
rent symptomatic atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol.
diovasc Drugs Ther. 1998;12:75–81. patients receiving ibutilide. Pharmacotherapy.
2004;94:1563–1566.
20. Oral H, Souza JJ, Michaud GF, et al. Facilitating 2003;23:296–300.
transthoracic cardioversion of atrial fibrillation with 11. Meinertz T, Lip GY, Lombardi F, et al. Efficacy and
33. Kalus JS, Spencer AP, Tsikouris JP, et al. Impact of
ibutilide pretreatment. N Engl J Med. 1999;340:1849– safety of propafenone sustained release in the pro-
prophylactic i.v. magnesium on the efficacy of ibutilide
1854. phylaxis of symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation
for conversion of atrial fibrillation or flutter. Am J
(The European Rythmol/Rytmonorm Atrial Fibrillation
21. Kowey PR, VanderLugt JT, Luderer JR. Safety and Health Syst Pharm. 2003;60:2308–2312.
Trial [ERAFT] Study). Am J Cardiol. 2002;90:1300–
risk/benefit analysis of ibutilide for acute conversion 1306.
34. Markman TM, Jarrah AA, Tian Y, et al. Safety of
of atrial fibrillation/flutter. Am J Cardiol. 1996;78:
pill-in-the-pocket class 1C antiarrhythmic drugs for
46–52. 12. Brembilla-Perrot B, Houriez P, Beurrier D, et al.
atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol EP. 2022;8:
Predictors of atrial flutter with 1:1 conduction in pa-
22. Volgman AS, Carberry PA, Stambler B, et al. Con- 1515–1520.
tients treated with class I antiarrhythmic drugs for
version efficacy and safety of intravenous ibutilide
8.3.1. Specific Drug Therapy for Long-Term atrial tachyarrhythmias. Int J Cardiol. 2001;80:7–15.
compared with intravenous procainamide in patients
Maintenance of Sinus Rhythm
with atrial flutter or fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 13. Touboul P, Brugada J, Capucci A, et al. Dronedar-
1998;31:1414–1419. one for prevention of atrial fibrillation: a dose-ranging
1. Pedersen OD, Bagger H, Keller N, et al. Efficacy of
study. Eur Heart J. 2003;24:1481–1487.
23. Stambler BS, Wood MA, Ellenbogen KA. Antiar- dofetilide in the treatment of atrial fibrillation-flutter
rhythmic actions of intravenous ibutilide compared in patients with reduced left ventricular function: a 14. Singh BN, Connolly SJ, Crijns HJ, et al. Drone-
with procainamide during human atrial flutter and Danish Investigations of Arrhythmia and Mortality on darone for maintenance of sinus rhythm in atrial
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 151
-, 2023:-–- ---
fibrillation or flutter. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:987– and atrial flutter. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2015;8: 10. Andrade JG, MacGillivray J, Macle L, et al. Clinical
999. 772–776. effectiveness of a systematic "pill-in-the-pocket"
approach for the management of paroxysmal atrial
15. Hohnloser SH, Crijns HJ, van Eickels M, et al. Effect 30. Cho JH, Youn SJ, Moore JC, et al. Safety of oral
fibrillation. Heart Rhythm. 2018;15:9–16.
of dronedarone on cardiovascular events in atrial dofetilide reloading for treatment of atrial arrhyth-
fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:668–678. mias. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2017;10:e005333. 11. Boriani G, Biffi M, Capucci A, et al. Conversion of
31. Mar PL, Horbal P, Chung MK, et al. Drug in- recent-onset atrial fibrillation to sinus rhythm: effects
16. Singh S, Zoble RG, Yellen L, et al. Efficacy and
teractions affecting antiarrhythmic drug use. Circ of different drug protocols. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol.
safety of oral dofetilide in converting to and main-
Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2022;15:e007955. 1998;21:2470–2474.
taining sinus rhythm in patients with chronic atrial
fibrillation or atrial flutter: the Symptomatic Atrial 32. Lakkireddy D, Ahmed A, Atkins D, et al. Feasibility 12. Azpitarte J, Alvarez M, Baún O, et al. Value of
Fibrillation Investigative Research on Dofetilide and safety of intravenous sotalol loading in adult pa- single oral loading dose of propafenone in converting
(SAFIRE-D) study. Circulation. 2000;102:2385–2390. tients with atrial fibrillation (DASH-AF). J Am Coll recent-onset atrial fibrillation. Results of a random-
Cardiol EP. 2023;9:555–564. ized, double-blind, controlled study. Eur Heart J.
17. Singh BN, Singh SN, Reda DJ, et al. Amiodarone
1997;18:1649–1654.
versus sotalol for atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 33. Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial III. Effect of
2005;352:1861–1872. the antiarrhythmic agent moricizine on survival after 13. Markman TM, Jarrah AA, Tian Y, et al. Safety of
myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 1992;327:227– pill-in-the-pocket class 1C antiarrhythmic drugs for
18. Kochiadakis GE, Igoumenidis NE, Marketou ME,
233. atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol EP. 2022;8:
et al. Low dose amiodarone and sotalol in the treat-
1515–1520.
ment of recurrent, symptomatic atrial fibrillation: a 34. Siebels J, Cappato R, Rüppel R, et al. Preliminary
comparative, placebo controlled study. Heart. results of the Cardiac Arrest Study Hamburg (CASH). 14. Tisdale JE, Chung MK, Campbell KB, et al. Drug-
2000;84:251–257. CASH Investigators. Am J Cardiol. 1993;72:109f–113f. induced arrhythmias: a scientific statement from the
19. Roy D, Talajic M, Dorian P, et al. Amiodarone to American Heart Association. Circulation. 2020;142:
8.3.2. Inpatient Initiation of Antiarrhythmic
prevent recurrence of atrial fibrillation. Canadian Trial e214–e233.
Agents
of Atrial Fibrillation Investigators. N Engl J Med. 15. Singh BN, Singh SN, Reda DJ, et al. Amiodarone
2000;342:913–920. 1. Singh S, Zoble RG, Yellen L, et al. Efficacy and safety versus sotalol for atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med.
of oral dofetilide in converting to and maintaining si- 2005;352:1861–1872.
20. Galperin J, Elizari MV, Chiale PA, et al. Efficacy of
nus rhythm in patients with chronic atrial fibrillation or
amiodarone for the termination of chronic atrial 16. Batul SA, Gopinathannair R. Intravenous sotalol -
atrial flutter: the Symptomatic Atrial Fibrillation
fibrillation and maintenance of normal sinus rhythm: a reintroducing a forgotten agent to the electrophysi-
Investigative Research on Dofetilide (SAFIRE-D) study.
prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled, ology therapeutic arsenal. J Atr Fibrillation. 2017;9:
Circulation. 2000;102:2385–2390.
double blind trial. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol Ther. 1499.
2001;6:341–350. 2. Abraham JM, Saliba WI, Vekstein C, et al. Safety of
oral dofetilide for rhythm control of atrial fibrillation 8.3.3. Antiarrhythmic Drug Follow-Up
21. Greene HL, Waldo AL, Corley SD, et al. Mainte-
and atrial flutter. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2015;8:
nance of sinus rhythm in patients with atrial fibrilla- 1. Ylli D, Wartofsky L, Burman KD. Evaluation and
772–776.
tion: an AFFIRM substudy of the first antiarrhythmic treatment of amiodarone-induced thyroid disorders.
drug. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;42:20–29. 3. Kaufman ES, Zimmermann PA, Wang T, et al. Risk of
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2021;106:226–236.
proarrhythmic events in the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-
22. Le Heuzey JY, De Ferrari GM, Radzik D, et al. 2. Kinoshita S, Hosomi K, Yokoyama S, et al. Time-to-
up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM)
A short-term, randomized, double-blind, parallel- onset analysis of amiodarone-associated thyroid
study: a multivariate analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol.
group study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dysfunction. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2020;45:65–71.
2004;44:1276–1282.
dronedarone versus amiodarone in patients with
persistent atrial fibrillation: the DIONYSOS study. 4. Yarlagadda B, Vuddanda V, Dar T, et al. Safety and 3. Flaharty KK, Chase SL, Yaghsezian HM, et al. Hep-
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2010;21:597–605. efficacy of inpatient initiation of dofetilide versus atotoxicity associated with amiodarone therapy.
sotalol for atrial fibrillation. J Atr Fibrillation. 2017;10: Pharmacotherapy. 1989;9:39–44.
23. Epstein AE, Olshansky B, Naccarelli GV, et al. 1805.
Practical management guide for clinicians who treat 4. Hamilton D Sr, Nandkeolyar S, Lan H, et al. Amio-
patients with amiodarone. Am J Med. 2016;129:468– 5. Torp-Pedersen C, Møller M, Bloch-Thomsen PE, darone: a comprehensive guide for clinicians. Am J
475. et al. Dofetilide in patients with congestive heart Cardiovasc Drugs. 2020;20:549–558.
failure and left ventricular dysfunction. Danish In-
24. Hamilton D Sr, Nandkeolyar S, Lan H, et al. 5. Goldschlager N, Epstein AE, Naccarelli GV, et al.
vestigations of Arrhythmia and Mortality on Dofetilide
Amiodarone: a comprehensive guide for clinicians. Am A practical guide for clinicians who treat patients
Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1999;341:857–865.
J Cardiovasc Drugs. 2020;20:549–558. with amiodarone: 2007. Heart Rhythm. 2007;4:1250–
6. Pedersen OD, Bagger H, Keller N, et al. Efficacy of 1259.
25. Kuck KH, Cappato R, Siebels J, et al. Randomized dofetilide in the treatment of atrial fibrillation-flutter
comparison of antiarrhythmic drug therapy with 6. Gleadhill IC, Wise RA, Schonfeld SA, et al. Serial
in patients with reduced left ventricular function: a
implantable defibrillators in patients resuscitated from lung function testing in patients treated with amio-
Danish investigations of arrhythmia and mortality on
cardiac arrest: the Cardiac Arrest Study Hamburg darone: a prospective study. Am J Med. 1989;86:4–
dofetilide (diamond) substudy. Circulation. 2001;104:
(CASH). Circulation. 2000;102:748–754. 10.
292–296.
26. Preliminary report: effect of encainide and flecai- 7. Kober L, Bloch Thomsen PE, Moller M, et al. Effect
7. Bui A, Han S, Alexander M, et al. Pulmonary function
nide on mortality in a randomized trial of arrhythmia testing for the early detection of drug-induced lung
of dofetilide in patients with recent myocardial
suppression after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. disease: a systematic review in adults treated with
infarction and left-ventricular dysfunction: a rando-
1989;321:406–412. drugs associated with pulmonary toxicity. Intern Med J.
mised trial. Lancet. 2000;356:2052–2058.
2020;50:1311–1325.
27. Echt DS, Liebson PR, Mitchell LB, et al. Mortality
8. Chung MK, Schweikert RA, Wilkoff BL, et al. Is
and morbidity in patients receiving encainide, flecai- 8. Passman RS, Bennett CL, Purpura JM, et al. Amio-
hospital admission for initiation of antiarrhythmic
nide, or placebo. The Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression darone-associated optic neuropathy: a critical review.
therapy with sotalol for atrial arrhythmias required?
Trial. N Engl J Med. 1991;324:781–788. Am J Med. 2012;125:447–453.
Yield of in-hospital monitoring and prediction of risk
28. Kober L, Torp-Pedersen C, McMurray JJ, et al. for significant arrhythmia complications. J Am Coll 9. Tisdale JE, Chung MK, Campbell KB, et al. Drug-
Increased mortality after dronedarone therapy for se- Cardiol. 1998;32:169–176. induced arrhythmias: a scientific statement from the
vere heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:2678– American Heart Association. Circulation. 2020;142:
9. Alboni P, Botto GL, Baldi N, et al. Outpatient
2687. e214–e233.
treatment of recent-onset atrial fibrillation with the
29. Abraham JM, Saliba WI, Vekstein C, et al. Safety of "pill-in-the-pocket" approach. N Engl J Med. 10. Hohnloser SH, Klingenheben T, Singh BN. Amio-
oral dofetilide for rhythm control of atrial fibrillation 2004;351:2384–2391. darone-associated proarrhythmic effects. A review
152 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
with special reference to torsade de pointes tachy- 26. Zeltser D, Justo D, Halkin A, et al. Torsade de 6. Wachtell K, Lehto M, Gerdts E, et al. Angiotensin II
cardia. Ann Intern Med. 1994;121:529–535. pointes due to noncardiac drugs: most patients have receptor blockade reduces new-onset atrial fibrillation
easily identifiable risk factors. Medicine (Baltimore). and subsequent stroke compared to atenolol: the
11. Singh S, Zoble RG, Yellen L, et al. Efficacy and
2003;82:282–290. Losartan Intervention For End Point Reduction in Hy-
safety of oral dofetilide in converting to and
pertension (LIFE) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;45:
maintaining sinus rhythm in patients with chronic 27. Marsepoil T, Blin F, Hardy F, et al. [Torsades de
712–719.
atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter: the Symptomatic pointes and hypomagnesemia]. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim.
Atrial Fibrillation Investigative Research on Dofeti- 1985;4:524–526. 7. Anand K, Mooss AN, Hee TT, et al. Meta-analysis:
lide (SAFIRE-D) study. Circulation. 2000;102:2385– inhibition of renin-angiotensin system prevents new-
28. Gysel M, Vieweg WV, Hasnain M, et al. Torsades de
2390. onset atrial fibrillation. Am Heart J. 2006;152:217–222.
pointes following clarithromycin treatment. Expert Rev
12. Torp-Pedersen C, Møller M, Bloch-Thomsen PE, Cardiovasc Ther. 2013;11:1485–1493. 8. Okin PM, Wachtell K, Devereux RB, et al. Regression
et al. Dofetilide in patients with congestive heart of electrocardiographic left ventricular hypertrophy
29. Overbey AN, Austin A, Seidensticker DF, et al.
failure and left ventricular dysfunction. Danish In- and decreased incidence of new-onset atrial fibrillation
Overdrive pacing in a patient with incessant torsades
vestigations of Arrhythmia and Mortality on Dofetilide in patients with hypertension. JAMA. 2006;296:1242–
de pointes. BMJ Case Rep. 2013;2013:bcr2013200146.
Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1999;341:857–865. 1248.
30. Kochiadakis GE, Igoumenidis NE, Solomou MC,
13. Rizkallah J, Kuriachan V, Brent Mitchell L. The use 9. Olsson LG, Swedberg K, Ducharme A, et al. Atrial
et al. Conversion of atrial fibrillation to sinus rhythm
of dronedarone for recurrent ventricular tachycardia: a fibrillation and risk of clinical events in chronic heart
using acute intravenous procainamide infusion. Car-
case report and review of the literature. BMC Res failure with and without left ventricular systolic
diovasc Drugs Ther. 1998;12:75–81.
Notes. 2016;9:370. dysfunction. results from the candesartan in heart
31. Stambler BS, Wood MA, Ellenbogen KA. Antiar- failure-assessment of reduction in mortality and
14. Jahn S, Zollner G, Lackner C, et al. Severe toxic
rhythmic actions of intravenous ibutilide compared morbidity (CHARM) program. J Am Coll Cardiol.
hepatitis associated with dronedarone. Curr Drug Saf.
with procainamide during human atrial flutter and 2006;47:1997–2004.
2013;8:201–202.
fibrillation: electrophysiological determinants of
10. Liakopoulos OJ, Choi YH, Kuhn EW, et al. Statins
15. VanderLugt JT, Mattioni T, Denker S, et al. Efficacy enhanced conversion efficacy. Circulation. 1997;96:
for prevention of atrial fibrillation after cardiac sur-
and safety of ibutilide fumarate for the conversion of 4298–4306.
gery: a systematic literature review. J Thorac Car-
atrial arrhythmias after cardiac surgery. Circulation.
32. Bhandari AK, Au PK, Rahimtoola SH. Procainamide diovasc Surg. 2009;138:678–686 e671.
1999;100:369–375.
induced sustained monomorphic ventricular tachy-
16. Ellenbogen KA, Stambler BS, Wood MA, et al. Ef- cardia in a patient with benign premature ventricular 11. Kuhn EW, Liakopoulos OJ, Stange S, et al. Preop-
ficacy of intravenous ibutilide for rapid termination of complexes. Can J Cardiol. 1986;2:6–9. erative statin therapy in cardiac surgery: a meta-
atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter: a dose-response analysis of 90,000 patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg.
33. Singh BN, Kehoe R, Woosley RL, et al. Multi- 2014;45:17–26; discussion 26.
study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996;28:130–136.
center trial of sotalol compared with procainamide in
17. Stambler BS, Beckman KJ, Kadish AH, et al. Acute the suppression of inducible ventricular tachycardia: 12. Patti G, Chello M, Candura D, et al. Randomized
hemodynamic effects of intravenous ibutilide in pa- a double-blind, randomized parallel evaluation. trial of atorvastatin for reduction of postoperative
tients with or without reduced left ventricular func- Sotalol Multicenter Study Group. Am Heart J. atrial fibrillation in patients undergoing cardiac sur-
tion. Am J Cardiol. 1997;80:458–463. 1995;129:87–97. gery: results of the ARMYDA-3 (Atorvastatin for
Reduction of MYocardial Dysrhythmia After cardiac
18. Wood MA, Stambler BS, Ellenbogen KA, et al. 34. Singh BN, Singh SN, Reda DJ, et al. Amiodarone surgery) study. Circulation. 2006;114:1455–1461.
Suppression of inducible ventricular tachycardia by versus sotalol for atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med.
ibutilide in patients with coronary artery disease. 2005;352:1861–1872. 13. Kourliouros A, De Souza A, Roberts N, et al. Dose-
Ibutilide Investigators. Am Heart J. 1998;135:1048– related effect of statins on atrial fibrillation after car-
35. Fetsch T, Bauer P, Engberding R, et al. Prevention diac surgery. Ann Thorac Surg. 2008;85:1515–1520.
1054.
of atrial fibrillation after cardioversion: results of the
19. Abi-Mansour P, Carberry PA, McCowan RJ, et al. PAFAC trial. Eur Heart J. 2004;25:1385–1394. 14. Saso S, Vecht JA, Rao C, et al. Statin therapy may
Conversion efficacy and safety of repeated doses of influence the incidence of postoperative atrial fibril-
ibutilide in patients with atrial flutter and atrial fibril- lation: what is the evidence? Tex Heart Inst J. 2009;36:
8.3.4. Upstream Therapy
lation. Am Heart J. 1998;136:632–642. 521–529.
1. Dernellis J, Panaretou M. Relationship between C-
20. Gowda RM, Punukollu G, Khan IA, et al. Ibutilide 15. Zheng Z, Jayaram R, Jiang L, et al. Perioperative
reactive protein concentrations during glucocorticoid
for pharmacological cardioversion of atrial fibrillation rosuvastatin in cardiac surgery. N Engl J Med.
therapy and recurrent atrial fibrillation. Eur Heart J.
and flutter: impact of race on efficacy and safety. Am J 2016;374:1744–1753.
2004;25:1100–1107.
Ther. 2003;10:259–263. 16. Rahimi K, Emberson J, McGale P, et al. Effect of
2. Schneider MP, Hua TA, Böhm M, et al. Prevention of
21. Stambler BS, Wood MA, Ellenbogen KA, et al. Ef- statins on atrial fibrillation: collaborative meta-
atrial fibrillation by renin-angiotensin system inhibition
ficacy and safety of repeated intravenous doses of analysis of published and unpublished evidence from
a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55:2299–
ibutilide for rapid conversion of atrial flutter or fibril- randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 2011;342:d1250.
2307.
lation. Ibutilide Repeat Dose Study Investigators. Cir- 17. Hemilä H, Suonsyrjä T. Vitamin C for preventing
3. Healey JS, Baranchuk A, Crystal E, et al. Prevention
culation. 1996;94:1613–1621. atrial fibrillation in high risk patients: a systematic re-
of atrial fibrillation with angiotensin-converting
22. Kay GN, Plumb VJ, Arciniegas JG, et al. Torsade de view and meta-analysis. BMC Cardiovasc Disord.
enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers:
pointes: the long-short initiating sequence and other 2017;17:49.
a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;45:1832–
clinical features: observations in 32 patients. J Am Coll 18. Delise P, Bertocchi F, Maiocchi G, et al. Valsartan
1839.
Cardiol. 1983;2:806–817. for prevention of recurrent atrial fibrillation. N Engl J
4. Ducharme A, Swedberg K, Pfeffer MA, et al. Pre-
23. Vardas PE, Kochiadakis GE, Igoumenidis NE, et al. Med. 2009;360:1606–1617.
vention of atrial fibrillation in patients with symp-
Amiodarone as a first-choice drug for restoring sinus 19. Yusuf S, Healey JS, Pogue J, et al. Irbesartan in
tomatic chronic heart failure by candesartan in the
rhythm in patients with atrial fibrillation: a random- patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:
Candesartan in Heart failure: assessment of Reduction
ized, controlled study. Chest. 2000;117:1538–1545. in Mortality and morbidity (CHARM) program. Am 928–938.
24. McKibbin JK, Pocock WA, Barlow JB, et al. Sotalol, Heart J. 2006;151:985–991. 20. Goette A, Schön N, Kirchhof P, et al. Angiotensin
hypokalaemia, syncope, and torsade de pointes. Br 5. McMurray JJ, Young JB, Dunlap ME, et al. Rela- II-antagonist in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (ANTIPAF)
Heart J. 1984;51:157–162. tionship of dose of background angiotensin-converting trial. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2012;5:43–51.
25. Roden DM, Woosley RL, Primm RK. Incidence and enzyme inhibitor to the benefits of candesartan in the 21. Swedberg K, Zannad F, McMurray JJ, et al. Epler-
clinical features of the quinidine-associated long QT Candesartan in Heart failure: Assessment of Reduction enone and atrial fibrillation in mild systolic heart fail-
syndrome: implications for patient care. Am Heart J. in Mortality and morbidity (CHARM)-Added trial. Am ure: results from the EMPHASIS-HF (Eplerenone in
1986;111:1088–1093. Heart J. 2006;151:985–991. Mild Patients Hospitalization And SurvIval Study in
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 153
-, 2023:-–- ---
Heart Failure) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59:1598– 3. Pappone C, Augello G, Sala S, et al. A randomized 18. Pérez FJ, Schubert CM, Parvez B, et al. Long-term
1603. trial of circumferential pulmonary vein ablation versus outcomes after catheter ablation of cavo-tricuspid
antiarrhythmic drug therapy in paroxysmal atrial isthmus dependent atrial flutter: a meta-analysis. Circ
22. Neefs J, van den Berg NW, Limpens J, et al.
fibrillation: the APAF Study. J Am Coll Cardiol. Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2009;2:393–401.
Aldosterone pathway blockade to prevent atrial
2006;48:2340–2347.
fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int 19. Patel NJ, Deshmukh A, Pau D, et al. Contemporary
J Cardiol. 2017;231:155–161. 4. Packer DL, Mark DB, Robb RA, et al. Effect of utilization and safety outcomes of catheter ablation of
23. Zheng RJ, Wang Y, Tang JN, et al. Association of
catheter ablation vs antiarrhythmic drug therapy on atrial flutter in the United States: analysis of 89,638
mortality, stroke, bleeding, and cardiac arrest among procedures. Heart Rhythm. 2016;13:1317–1325.
SGLT2 inhibitors with risk of atrial fibrillation and
patients with atrial fibrillation: the CABANA random-
stroke in patients with and without type 2 diabetes: a 20. Waldo AL, Feld GK. Inter-relationships of atrial
ized clinical trial. JAMA. 2019;321:1261–1274.
systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized fibrillation and atrial flutter mechanisms and clinical
controlled trials. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 2022;79: 5. Oral H, Pappone C, Chugh A, et al. Circumferential implications. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;51:779–786.
e145–e152. pulmonary-vein ablation for chronic atrial fibrillation.
21. Lee SH, Tai CT, Hsieh MH, et al. Predictors of non-
N Engl J Med. 2006;354:934–941.
24. Okunrintemi V, Mishriky BM, Powell JR, et al. So- pulmonary vein ectopic beats initiating paroxysmal
dium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors and atrial 6. Jaïs P, Cauchemez B, Macle L, et al. Catheter abla- atrial fibrillation: implication for catheter ablation.
fibrillation in the cardiovascular and renal outcome tion versus antiarrhythmic drugs for atrial fibrillation: J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46:1054–1059.
trials. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2021;23:276–280. the A4 study. Circulation. 2008;118:2498–2505.
22. Di Biase L, Burkhardt JD, Mohanty P, et al. Left
25. Li WJ, Chen XQ, Xu LL, et al. SGLT2 inhibitors and 7. Forleo GB, Mantica M, De Luca L, et al. Catheter atrial appendage: an underrecognized trigger site of
atrial fibrillation in type 2 diabetes: a systematic re- ablation of atrial fibrillation in patients with diabetes atrial fibrillation. Circulation. 2010;122:109–118.
view with meta-analysis of 16 randomized controlled mellitus type 2: results from a randomized study
trials. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2020;19:130. comparing pulmonary vein isolation versus antiar- 23. Katritsis DG, Giazitzoglou E, Wood MA, et al.
rhythmic drug therapy. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. Inducible supraventricular tachycardias in patients
26. Bianconi L, Cal L, Mennuni M, et al. N-3 Poly-
2009;20:22–28. referred for catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation.
unsaturated fatty acids for the prevention of
Europace. 2007;9:785–789.
arrhythmia recurrence after electrical cardioversion of 8. Wilber DJ, Pappone C, Neuzil P, et al. Comparison of
chronic persistent atrial fibrillation: a randomized, antiarrhythmic drug therapy and radiofrequency 24. Miyamoto KJ, Tsuchihashi K, Uno K, et al. Studies
double-blind, multicentre study. Europace. 2011;13: catheter ablation in patients with paroxysmal atrial on the prevalence of complicated atrial arrhythmias,
174–181. fibrillation: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. flutter, and fibrillation in patients with reciprocating
2010;303:333–340. supraventricular tachycardia before and after suc-
27. Kowey PR, Reiffel JA, Ellenbogen KA, et al. Effi-
cessful catheter ablation. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol.
cacy and safety of prescription omega-3 fatty acids for 9. MacDonald MR, Connelly DT, Hawkins NM, et al.
2001;24:969–978.
the prevention of recurrent symptomatic atrial fibril- Radiofrequency ablation for persistent atrial fibrilla-
lation: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2010;304: tion in patients with advanced heart failure and severe 25. Calkins H, Hindricks G, Cappato R, et al. 2017 HRS/
2363–2372. left ventricular systolic dysfunction: a randomised EHRA/ECAS/APHRS/SOLAECE expert consensus
controlled trial. Heart. 2011;97:740–747. statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial
28. Mozaffarian D, Marchioli R, Macchia A, et al. Fish
fibrillation. Heart Rhythm. 2017;14:e275–e444.
oil and postoperative atrial fibrillation: the Omega-3 10. Packer DL, Kowal RC, Wheelan KR, et al. Cry-
Fatty Acids for Prevention of Post-operative Atrial oballoon ablation of pulmonary veins for paroxysmal 26. Yalin K, Ikitimur B, Aksu T, et al. Catheter ablation
Fibrillation (OPERA) randomized trial. JAMA. atrial fibrillation: first results of the North American for atrial fibrillation in patients </¼30 years of age.
2012;308:2001–2011. Arctic Front (STOP AF) pivotal trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. Am J Cardiol. 2022;166:53–57.
2013;61:1713–1723.
29. Macchia A, Grancelli H, Varini S, et al. Omega-3 27. El Assaad I, Hammond BH, Kost LD, et al. Man-
fatty acids for the prevention of recurrent symp- 11. Cosedis Nielsen J, Johannessen A, Raatikainen P, agement and outcomes of atrial fibrillation in 241
tomatic atrial fibrillation: results of the FORWARD et al. Radiofrequency ablation as initial therapy in healthy children and young adults: revisiting "lone"
(Randomized Trial to Assess Efficacy of PUFA for the paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2012;367: atrial fibrillation-a multi-institutional PACES collabo-
Maintenance of Sinus Rhythm in Persistent Atrial 1587–1595. rative study. Heart Rhythm. 2021;18:1815–1822.
Fibrillation) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:463–
12. Andrade JG, Wells GA, Deyell MW, et al. Cryoa- 28. Mont L, Bisbal F, Hernández-Madrid A, et al.
468.
blation or drug therapy for initial treatment of atrial Catheter ablation vs. antiarrhythmic drug treatment of
30. Gencer B, Djousse L, Al-Ramady OT, et al. Effect of fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2021;384:305–315. persistent atrial fibrillation: a multicentre, randomized,
long-term marine -3 fatty acids supplementation on controlled trial (SARA study). Eur Heart J. 2014;35:
13. Wazni OM, Dandamudi G, Sood N, et al. Cry-
the risk of atrial fibrillation in randomized controlled 501–507.
oballoon ablation as initial therapy for atrial fibrilla-
trials of cardiovascular outcomes: a systematic review
tion. N Engl J Med. 2021;384:316–324. 29. Chew DS, Li Y, Cowper PA, et al. Cost-effective-
and meta-analysis. Circulation. 2021;144:1981–1990.
14. Andrade JG, Deyell MW, Macle L, et al. Progression ness of catheter ablation versus antiarrhythmic drug
31. Savelieva I, Kourliouros A, Camm J. Primary and therapy in atrial fibrillation: the CABANA randomized
of atrial fibrillation after cryoablation or drug therapy.
secondary prevention of atrial fibrillation with statins clinical trial. Circulation. 2022;146:535–547.
N Engl J Med. 2023;388:105–116.
and polyunsaturated fatty acids: Review of evidence
and clinical relevance. Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch 15. Morillo CA, Verma A, Connolly SJ, et al. Radio- 30. Aronsson M, Walfridsson H, Janzon M, et al. The
Pharmacol. 2010;381:207–219. frequency ablation vs antiarrhythmic drugs as first-line cost-effectiveness of radiofrequency catheter ablation
treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (RAAFT-2): a as first-line treatment for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation:
8.4. AF Catheter Ablation randomized trial. JAMA. 2014;311:692–700. results from a MANTRA-PAF substudy. Europace.
2015;17:48–55.
1. Krittayaphong R, Raungrattanaamporn O, 16. Wazni OM, Marrouche NF, Martin DO, et al.
Bhuripanyo K, et al. A randomized clinical trial of the Radiofrequency ablation vs antiarrhythmic drugs as 31. Disertori M, Lombardi F, Barlera S, et al. Clinical
efficacy of radiofrequency catheter ablation and first-line treatment of symptomatic atrial fibrilla- characteristics of patients with asymptomatic re-
amiodarone in the treatment of symptomatic atrial tion: a randomized trial. JAMA. 2005;293:2634– currences of atrial fibrillation in the Gruppo Italiano
fibrillation. J Med Assoc Thai. 2003;86(suppl 1):S8– 2640. per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nell’Infarto
S16. Miocardico-Atrial Fibrillation (GISSI-AF) trial. Am Heart
17. Wazni O, Marrouche NF, Martin DO, et al. Ran-
J. 2011;162:382–389.
2. Stabile G, Bertaglia E, Senatore G, et al. Catheter domized study comparing combined pulmonary vein-
ablation treatment in patients with drug-refractory left atrial junction disconnection and cavotricuspid 32. Senoo K, Suzuki S, Otsuka T, et al. Progression to
atrial fibrillation: a prospective, multi-centre, ran- isthmus ablation versus pulmonary vein-left atrial the persistent form in asymptomatic paroxysmal atrial
domized, controlled study (Catheter Ablation for the junction disconnection alone in patients presenting fibrillation. Circ J. 2014;78:1121–1126.
Cure of Atrial Fibrillation Study). Eur Heart J. 2006;27: with typical atrial flutter and atrial fibrillation. Circu-
33. Padfield GJ, Steinberg C, Swampillai J, et al. Pro-
216–221. lation. 2003;108:2479–2483.
gression of paroxysmal to persistent atrial fibrillation:
154 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
10-year follow-up in the Canadian Registry of Atrial tachycardia and atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol. and meta-analyses. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol.
Fibrillation. Heart Rhythm. 2017;14:801–807. 1997;79:1421–1423. 2009;2:349–361.
34. Ogawa H, An Y, Ikeda S, et al. Progression From 49. Weiss R, Knight BP, Bahu M, et al. Long-term 4. Blomström-Lundqvist C, Gizurarson S, Schwieler J,
paroxysmal to sustained atrial fibrillation is associated follow-up after radiofrequency ablation of paroxysmal et al. Effect of catheter ablation vs antiarrhythmic
with increased adverse events. Stroke. 2018;49:2301– supraventricular tachycardia in patients with medication on quality of life in patients with atrial
2308. tachycardia-induced atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol. fibrillation: the CAPTAF randomized clinical trial.
1997;80:1609–1610. JAMA. 2019;321:1059–1068.
35. Yang WY, Du X, Fawzy AM, et al. Associations of
atrial fibrillation progression with clinical risk factors 50. Waranugraha Y, Rizal A, Rohman MS, et al. Pro- 5. Kirchhof P, Camm AJ, Goette A, et al. Early rhythm-
and clinical prognosis: a report from the Chinese Atrial phylactic cavotricuspid isthmus ablation in atrial control therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation.
Fibrillation Registry study. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. fibrillation without documented typical atrial flutter: a N Engl J Med. 2020;383:1305–1316.
2021;32:333–341. systematic review and meta-analysis. Arrhythm Elec-
6. Njoku A, Kannabhiran M, Arora R, et al. Left atrial
trophysiol Rev. 2022;11:e10.
36. R BS, Pecen L, Engler D, et al. Atrial fibrillation volume predicts atrial fibrillation recurrence after
patterns are associated with arrhythmia progression 51. Gupta D, Ding WY, Calvert P, et al. Cryoballoon radiofrequency ablation: a meta-analysis. Europace.
and clinical outcomes. Heart. 2018;104:1608–1614. pulmonary vein isolation as first-line treatment for 2018;20:33–42.
typical atrial flutter. Heart. 2023;109:364–371.
37. Liao YC, Liao JN, Lo LW, et al. Left atrial size and 7. McLellan AJ, Ling LH, Azzopardi S, et al. Diffuse
left ventricular end-systolic dimension predict the 52. Anderson JL, Heidenreich PA, Barnett PG, et al. ventricular fibrosis measured by T(1) mapping on car-
progression of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation after ACC/AHA statement on cost/value methodology in diac MRI predicts success of catheter ablation for atrial
catheter ablation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2017;28: clinical practice guidelines and performance measures: fibrillation. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2014;7:834–
23–30. a report of the American College of Cardiology/ 840.
American Heart Association Task Force on Perfor-
38. Walters TE, Nisbet A, Morris GM, et al. Progression 8. Marrouche NF, Wilber D, Hindricks G, et al. Associ-
mance Measures and Task Force on Practice Guide-
of atrial remodeling in patients with high-burden atrial ation of atrial tissue fibrosis identified by delayed
lines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:2304–2322.
fibrillation: implications for early ablative intervention. enhancement MRI and atrial fibrillation catheter abla-
Heart Rhythm. 2016;13:331–339. 53. Gao L, Moodie M. Modelling the lifetime cost- tion: the DECAAF study. JAMA. 2014;311:498–506.
effectiveness of catheter ablation for atrial fibrilla-
39. Holmqvist F, Kim S, Steinberg BA, et al. Heart rate 9. Chew DS, Jones KA, Loring Z, et al. Diagnosis-to-
tion with heart failure. BMJ Open. 2019;9:e031033.
is associated with progression of atrial fibrillation, in- ablation time predicts recurrent atrial fibrillation and
dependent of rhythm. Heart. 2015;101:894–899. 54. Chew DS, Loring Z, Anand J, et al. Economic rehospitalization following catheter ablation. Heart
evaluation of catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation in Rhythm O2. 2022;3:23–31.
40. January CT, Wann LS, Alpert JS, et al. 2014 AHA/ patients with heart failure with reduced ejection frac-
ACC/HRS guideline for the management of patients 10. Chew DS, Black-Maier E, Loring Z, et al. Diagnosis-
tion. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2020;13:
with atrial fibrillation: a report of the American College to-ablation time and recurrence of atrial fibrillation
E007094.
of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force following catheter ablation: a systematic review and
on Practice Guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society. 55. Lau D, Sandhu RK, Andrade JG, et al. Cost-utility of meta-analysis of observational studies. Circ Arrhythm
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:e1–e76. catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with Electrophysiol. 2020;13:e008128.
heart failure: an economic evaluation. J Am Heart
41. Kuck K-H, Lebedev DS, Mikhaylov EN, et al. Cath- 11. Black-Maier E, Parish A, Steinberg BA, et al. Pre-
Assoc. 2021;10:e019599.
eter ablation or medical therapy to delay progression dicting atrial fibrillation recurrence after ablation in
of atrial fibrillation: the randomized controlled atrial 56. Wong JA, Conen D, Van Gelder IC, et al. Progres- patients with heart failure: validity of the APPLE and
fibrillation progression trial (ATTEST). EP: Europace. sion of device-detected subclinical atrial fibrillation CAAP-AF risk scoring systems. Pacing Clin Electro-
2021;23:362–369. and the risk of heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;71: physiol. 2019;42:1440–1447.
2603–2611.
12. Di Biase L, Mohanty P, Mohanty S, et al. Ablation
42. Monahan KH, Bunch TJ, Mark DB, et al. Influence
57. Navarrete A, Conte F, Moran M, et al. Ablation of versus amiodarone for treatment of persistent atrial
of atrial fibrillation type on outcomes of ablation vs.
atrial fibrillation at the time of cavotricuspid isthmus fibrillation in patients with congestive heart failure and
drug therapy: results from CABANA. Europace.
ablation in patients with atrial flutter without docu- an implanted device: results from the AATAC multi-
2022;24:1430–1440.
mented atrial fibrillation derives a better long-term center randomized trial. Circulation. 2016;133:1637–
43. Nyong J, Amit G, Adler AJ, et al. Efficacy and benefit. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2011;22:34–38. 1644.
safety of ablation for people with non-paroxysmal
58. Kim JY, Park HS, Park HW, et al. Clinical outcomes 13. Marrouche NF, Brachmann J, Andresen D, et al.
atrial fibrillation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev.
of rhythm control strategies for asymptomatic atrial Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation with heart fail-
2016;11:Cd012088.
fibrillation according to the quality-of-life score: the ure. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:417–427.
44. Friedman DJ, Field ME, Rahman M, et al. Catheter CODE-AF (Comparison Study of Drugs for Symptom
14. Turagam MK, Garg J, Whang W, et al. Catheter
ablation and healthcare utilization and cost among Control and Complication Prevention of Atrial Fibril-
ablation of atrial fibrillation in patients with heart
patients with paroxysmal versus persistent atrial lation) registry. J Am Heart Assoc. 2022;11:e025956.
failure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled tri-
fibrillation. Heart Rhythm O2. 2021;2:28–36.
59. Willems S, Borof K, Brandes A, et al. Systematic, als. Ann Intern Med. 2019;170:41–50.
45. Bahnson TD, Giczewska A, Mark DB, et al. Associ- early rhythm control strategy for atrial fibrillation in
ation between age and outcomes of catheter ablation patients with or without symptoms: the EAST-AFNET 8.4.2. Techniques and Technologies for AF
versus medical therapy for atrial fibrillation: results 4 trial. Eur Heart J. 2022;43:1219–1230. Catheter Ablation
from the CABANA trial. Circulation. 2022;145:796–
8.4.1. Patient Selection 1. Atienza F, Almendral J, Ormaetxe JM, et al. Com-
804.
parison of radiofrequency catheter ablation of drivers
46. Mark DB, Anstrom KJ, Sheng S, et al. Effect of 1. Packer DL, Mark DB, Robb RA, et al. Effect of and circumferential pulmonary vein isolation in atrial
catheter ablation vs medical therapy on quality of life catheter ablation vs antiarrhythmic drug therapy on fibrillation: a noninferiority randomized multicenter
among patients with atrial fibrillation: the CABANA mortality, stroke, bleeding, and cardiac arrest among RADAR-AF trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:2455–
randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2019;321:1275–1285. patients with atrial fibrillation: the CABANA random- 2467.
ized clinical trial. JAMA. 2019;321:1261–1274.
47. Miura K, Ikemura N, Kimura T, et al. Treatment 2. Chen M, Yang B, Chen H, et al. Randomized com-
strategies and subsequent changes in the patient- 2. Andrade JG, Turgeon RD, Macle L, et al. Cryoa- parison between pulmonary vein antral isolation
reported quality-of-life among elderly patients with blation or drug therapy for initial treatment of atrial versus complex fractionated electrogram ablation for
atrial fibrillation. Am Heart J. 2020;222:83–92. fibrillation. Eur Cardiol. 2022;17:e10. paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electro-
physiol. 2011;22:973–981.
48. Delise P, Gianfranchi L, Paparella N, et al. Clinical 3. Calkins H, Reynolds MR, Spector P, et al. Treatment
usefulness of slow pathway ablation in patients with of atrial fibrillation with antiarrhythmic drugs or radi- 3. Di Biase L, Elayi CS, Fahmy TS, et al. Atrial fibrilla-
both paroxysmal atrioventricular nodal reentrant ofrequency ablation: two systematic literature reviews tion ablation strategies for paroxysmal patients:
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 155
-, 2023:-–- ---
randomized comparison between different techniques. statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial and the Heart Rhythm Society. J Am Coll Cardiol.
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2009;2:113–119. fibrillation. Heart Rhythm. 2017;14:e275–e444. 2016;67:e27–e115.
4. Katritsis DG, Pokushalov E, Romanov A, et al. 17. Kuo L, Frankel DS, Lin A, et al. PRECAF randomized 30. Di Biase L, Mohanty S, Trivedi C, et al. Stroke risk in
Autonomic denervation added to pulmonary vein controlled trial. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2021;14: patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing electrical
isolation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: a random- e008993. isolation of the left atrial appendage. J Am Coll Cardiol.
ized clinical trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62:2318– 2019;74:1019–1028.
18. Wang XH, Liu X, Sun YM, et al. Pulmonary vein
2325.
isolation combined with superior vena cava isolation 31. Park JW, Yu HT, Kim TH, et al. Atrial fibrillation
5. Mamchur SE, Mamchur IN, Khomenko EA, et al. for atrial fibrillation ablation: a prospective random- catheter ablation increases the left atrial pressure. Circ
Electrical exclusion’ of a critical myocardial mass by ized study. Europace. 2008;10:600–605. Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2019;12:e007073.
extended pulmonary vein antrum isolation for persis- 32. Gibson DN, Di Biase L, Mohanty P, et al. Stiff left
19. Darma A, Daneschnejad SS, Gaspar T, et al. Role of
tent atrial fibrillation treatment. Interv Med Appl Sci. atrial syndrome after catheter ablation for atrial
inducibility and its dynamic change in the outcome of
2014;6:31–39. fibrillation: clinical characterization, prevalence, and
catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a single center
6. Verma A, Mantovan R, Macle L, et al. prospective study. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. predictors. Heart Rhythm. 2011;8:1364–1371.
Substrate and Trigger Ablation for Reduction of 2020;31:705–711. 33. Kim YG, Shim J, Kim DH, et al. Characteristics of
Atrial Fibrillation (STAR AF): a randomized, multi- atrial fibrillation patients suffering atrioesophageal
20. Fiala M, Bulkova V, Sknouril L, et al. Sinus
centre, international trial. Eur Heart J. 2010;31:1344– fistula after radiofrequency catheter ablation.
rhythm restoration and arrhythmia noninducibility
1356. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2018;29:1343–1351.
are major predictors of arrhythmia-free outcome af-
7. Sau A, Howard JP, Al-Aidarous S, et al. Meta-anal- ter ablation for long-standing persistent atrial 34. Muller P, Dietrich JW, Halbfass P, et al. Higher
ysis of randomized controlled trials of atrial fibrillation fibrillation: a prospective study. Heart Rhythm. incidence of esophageal lesions after ablation of atrial
ablation with pulmonary vein isolation versus without. 2015;12:687–698. fibrillation related to the use of esophageal tempera-
J Am Coll Cardiol EP. 2019;5:968–976. ture probes. Heart Rhythm. 2015;12:1464–1469.
21. Santangeli P, Zado ES, Garcia FC, et al. Lack of
8. Marrouche NF, Wazni O, McGann C, et al. Effect prognostic value of atrial arrhythmia inducibility 35. Mohanty S, Trivedi C, Della Rocca DG, et al.
of MRI-guided fibrosis ablation vs conventional and change in inducibility status after catheter Thromboembolic risk in atrial fibrillation patients with
catheter ablation on atrial arrhythmia recurrence in ablation of atrial fibrillation. Heart Rhythm. left atrial scar post-extensive ablation: a single-center
patients with persistent atrial fibrillation: the DEC- 2018;15:660–665. experience. J Am Coll Cardiol EP. 2021;7:308–318.
AAF II randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2022;327:
22. Richter B, Gwechenberger M, Filzmoser P, et al. Is 8.4.3. Management of Recurrent AF After
2296–2305.
inducibility of atrial fibrillation after radio frequency Catheter Ablation
9. Gianni C, Mohanty S, Di Biase L, et al. Acute and ablation really a relevant prognostic factor? Eur Heart
early outcomes of focal impulse and rotor modulation J. 2006;27:2553–2559. 1. Packer DL, Mark DB, Robb RA, et al. Effect of
(FIRM)-guided rotors-only ablation in patients with catheter ablation vs antiarrhythmic drug therapy on
23. Tohoku S, Fukunaga M, Nagashima M, et al. Clinical
nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation. Heart Rhythm. mortality, stroke, bleeding, and cardiac arrest among
impact of eliminating nonpulmonary vein triggers of
2016;13:830–835. patients with atrial fibrillation: the CABANA random-
atrial fibrillation and nonpulmonary vein premature
ized clinical trial. JAMA. 2019;321:1261–1274.
10. Narayan SM, Baykaner T, Clopton P, et al. Ablation atrial contractions at initial ablation for persistent
of rotor and focal sources reduces late recurrence of atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2021;32: 2. Kuck KH, Fürnkranz A, Chun KR, et al. Cryoballoon
atrial fibrillation compared with trigger ablation alone: 224–234. or radiofrequency ablation for symptomatic parox-
extended follow-up of the CONFIRM trial (Conven- ysmal atrial fibrillation: reintervention, rehospitaliza-
24. Jiang R, Chen M, Fan J, et al. Efficacy of ablation
tional Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation With or Without tion, and quality-of-life outcomes in the FIRE AND ICE
index-guided pulmonary vein isolation in patients with
Focal Impulse and Rotor Modulation). J Am Coll Car- trial. Eur Heart J. 2016;37:2858–2865.
paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Pacing Clin Electro-
diol. 2014;63:1761–1768.
physiol. 2022;45:1186–1193. 3. Piccini JP, Sinner MF, Greiner MA, et al. Outcomes of
11. Tilz RR, Lenz C, Sommer P, et al. Focal impulse and Medicare beneficiaries undergoing catheter ablation
25. Kawai S, Mukai Y, Inoue S, et al. Predictive value of
rotor modulation ablation vs. pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation. Circulation. 2012;126:2200–2207.
the induction test with atrial burst pacing with regard
for the treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: re-
to long-term recurrence after ablation in persistent 4. Wokhlu A, Monahan KH, Hodge DO, et al. Long-
sults from the FIRMAP AF study. Europace. 2021;23:
atrial fibrillation. J Arrhythm. 2019;35:223–229. term quality of life after ablation of atrial fibrillation
722–730.
the impact of recurrence, symptom relief, and placebo
26. Zeng LJ, Shi L, Tian Y, et al. Pace capture and effect. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55:2308–2316.
12. Sandler B, Kim MY, Sikkel MB, et al. Targeting
adenosine triphosphate provocation are complemen-
the ectopy-triggering ganglionated plexuses 5. Calkins H, Reynolds MR, Spector P, et al. Treatment
tary rather than mutually exclusive methods to ensure
without pulmonary vein isolation prevents atrial of atrial fibrillation with antiarrhythmic drugs or radi-
durable pulmonary vein isolation. J Cardiovasc Elec-
fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2021;32: ofrequency ablation: two systematic literature reviews
trophysiol. 2019;30:815–823.
235–244. and meta-analyses. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol.
27. Choi Y, Kim SH, Kim JY, et al. Utility of acute 2009;2:349–361.
13. Kircher S, Arya A, Altmann D, et al. Individually
arrhythmia termination as an ablation endpoint for
tailored vs. standardized substrate modification during 6. Ganesan AN, Shipp NJ, Brooks AG, et al. Long-term
induced atrial tachyarrhythmia after complete pulmo-
radiofrequency catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: outcomes of catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a
nary vein isolation during catheter ablation for
a randomized study. EP: Europace. 2018;20:1766– systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Heart
persistent atrial fibrillation. J Interv Card Electro-
1775. Assoc. 2013;2:e004549.
physiol. 2019;54:25–34.
14. Lee KN, Roh SY, Baek YS, et al. Long-term clinical 7. Bhargava M, Di Biase L, Mohanty P, et al. Impact of
28. McLellan AJA, Prabhu S, Voskoboinik A, et al.
comparison of procedural end points after pulmonary type of atrial fibrillation and repeat catheter ablation
Isolation of the posterior left atrium for patients with
vein isolation in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: elimi- on long-term freedom from atrial fibrillation: results
persistent atrial fibrillation: routine adenosine chal-
nation of nonpulmonary vein triggers versus non- from a multicenter study. Heart Rhythm. 2009;6:
lenge for dormant posterior left atrial conduction im-
inducibility. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2018;11: 1403–1412.
proves long-term outcome. Europace. 2017;19:1958–
e005019.
1966. 8. Reddy YNV, El Sabbagh A, Packer D, et al. Evalua-
15. Di Biase L, Burkhardt JD, Mohanty P, et al. Left tion of shortness of breath after atrial fibrillation
29. Page RL, Joglar JA, Caldwell MA, et al. 2015 ACC/
atrial appendage: an underrecognized trigger site of ablation-is there a stiff left atrium? Heart Rhythm.
AHA/HRS guideline for the management of adult pa-
atrial fibrillation. Circulation. 2010;122:109–118. 2018;15:930–935.
tients with supraventricular tachycardia: a report of
16. Calkins H, Hindricks G, Cappato R, et al. 2017 HRS/ the American College of Cardiology/American Heart 9. Szegedi N, Szeplaki G, Herczeg S, et al. Repeat
EHRA/ECAS/APHRS/SOLAECE expert consensus Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines procedure is a new independent predictor of
156 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
complications of atrial fibrillation ablation. Europace. 24. Noseworthy PA, Van Houten HK, atrial fibrillation: results from the ARISTOTLE trial. Eur
2019;21:732–737. Sangaralingham LR, et al. Effect of antiarrhythmic Heart J. 2013;34:2464–2471.
drug initiation on readmission after catheter ablation
10. Blomström-Lundqvist C, Gizurarson S, Schwieler J, 14. Uittenbogaart SB, Lucassen WAM, van Etten-
for atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol EP. 2015;1:238–
et al. Effect of Catheter ablation vs antiarrhythmic Jamaludin FS, et al. Burden of atrial high-rate episodes
244.
medication on quality of life in patients with atrial and risk of stroke: a systematic review. Europace.
fibrillation: the CAPTAF randomized clinical trial. 2018;20:1420–1427.
8.4.4. Anticoagulation Therapy Before and After
JAMA. 2019;321:1059–1068.
Catheter Ablation 15. Reynolds MR, Gunnarsson CL, Hunter TD, et al.
11. Packer DL, Kowal RC, Wheelan KR, et al. Cry- Health outcomes with catheter ablation or antiar-
oballoon ablation of pulmonary veins for paroxysmal 1. Di Biase L, Gaita F, Toso E, et al. Does periprocedural
rhythmic drug therapy in atrial fibrillation: results of a
atrial fibrillation: first results of the North American anticoagulation management of atrial fibrillation
propensity-matched analysis. Circ Cardiovasc Qual
Arctic Front (STOP AF) pivotal trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. affect the prevalence of silent thromboembolic lesion
Outcomes. 2012;5:171–181.
2013;61:1713–1723. detected by diffusion cerebral magnetic resonance
imaging in patients undergoing radiofrequency atrial 16. Friberg L, Tabrizi F, Englund A. Catheter ablation
12. Pokushalov E, Romanov A, Artyomenko S, et al. fibrillation ablation with open irrigated catheters? for atrial fibrillation is associated with lower incidence
Cryoballoon versus radiofrequency for pulmonary vein Results from a prospective multicenter study. Heart of stroke and death: data from Swedish health regis-
re-isolation after a failed initial ablation procedure in Rhythm. 2014;11:791–798. tries. Eur Heart J. 2016;37:2478–2487.
patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2013;24:274–279. 2. Cardoso R, Knijnik L, Bhonsale A, et al. An updated 17. Marrouche NF, Brachmann J, Andresen D, et al.
meta-analysis of novel oral anticoagulants versus Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation with heart fail-
13. Kim D, Yu HT, Kim TH, et al. Electrical posterior box
vitamin K antagonists for uninterrupted anti- ure. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:417–427.
isolation in repeat ablation for atrial fibrillation: a
coagulation in atrial fibrillation catheter ablation.
prospective randomized clinical study. J Am Coll Car- 18. Piccini JP, Sinner MF, Greiner MA, et al. Outcomes
Heart Rhythm. 2018;15:107–115.
diol EP. 2022;8:582–592. of Medicare beneficiaries undergoing catheter abla-
3. Kirchhof P, Haeusler KG, Blank B, et al. Apixaban in tion for atrial fibrillation. Circulation. 2012;126:
14. Vamos M, Calkins H, Kowey PR, et al. Efficacy and
patients at risk of stroke undergoing atrial fibrillation 2200–2207.
safety of dronedarone in patients with a prior ablation
ablation. Eur Heart J. 2018;39:2942–2955.
for atrial fibrillation/flutter: insights from the ATHENA 19. Calkins H, Hindricks G, Cappato R, et al. 2017 HRS/
study. Clin Cardiol. 2020;43:291–297. 4. Kuwahara T, Abe M, Yamaki M, et al. Apixaban EHRA/ECAS/APHRS/SOLAECE expert consensus
versus warfarin for the prevention of periprocedural statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial
15. Duytschaever M, Demolder A, Phlips T, et al. Pul-
cerebral thromboembolism in atrial fibrillation abla- fibrillation. Heart Rhythm. 2017;14:e275–e444.
mOnary vein isolation With vs. without continued
tion: multicenter prospective randomized study.
antiarrhythmic Drug trEatment in subjects with 20. Karasoy D, Gislason GH, Hansen J, et al. Oral
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2016;27:549–554.
Recurrent Atrial Fibrillation (POWDER AF): results anticoagulation therapy after radiofrequency ablation
from a multicentre randomized trial. Eur Heart J. 5. Calkins H, Willems S, Gerstenfeld EP, et al. Unin- of atrial fibrillation and the risk of thromboembolism
2018;39:1429–1437. terrupted dabigatran versus warfarin for ablation in and serious bleeding: long-term follow-up in nation-
atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:1627–1636. wide cohort of Denmark. Eur Heart J. 2015;36:307–
16. Leong-Sit P, Roux JF, Zado E, et al. Antiarrhyth-
mics after ablation of atrial fibrillation (5A Study): six- 6. Hohnloser SH, Camm J, Cappato R, et al. Uninter- 314a.
month follow-up study. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. rupted edoxaban vs. vitamin K antagonists for ablation 21. Noseworthy PA, Yao X, Deshmukh AJ, et al. Pat-
2011;4:11–14. of atrial fibrillation: the ELIMINATE-AF trial. Eur Heart terns of anticoagulation use and cardioembolic risk
J. 2019;40:3013–3021. after catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation. J Am Heart
17. Schoene K, Sepehri Shamloo A, Sommer P, et al.
Natural course of acquired pulmonary vein stenosis 7. Cappato R, Marchlinski FE, Hohnloser SH, et al. Assoc. 2015;4:e002597.
after radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation-is Uninterrupted rivaroxaban vs. uninterrupted vitamin K 22. Wazni OM, Boersma L, Healey JS, et al. Comparison
routine follow-up imaging indicated or not? antagonists for catheter ablation in non-valvular atrial of anticoagulation with left atrial appendage closure
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2019;30:1786–1791. fibrillation. Eur Heart J. 2015;36:1805–1811. after atrial fibrillation ablation: rationale and design of
18. Jais P, Cauchemez B, Macle L, et al. Catheter 8. Reynolds MR, Allison JS, Natale A, et al. the OPTION randomized trial. Am Heart J. 2022;251:
ablation versus antiarrhythmic drugs for atrial fibril- A prospective randomized trial of apixaban dosing 35–42.
lation: the A4 study. Circulation. 2008;118:2498– during atrial fibrillation ablation: the AEIOU trial. J Am
2505. 8.4.5. Complications After AF Catheter Ablation
Coll Cardiol EP. 2018;4:580–588.
19. Pokushalov E, Romanov A, De Melis M, et al. Pro- 9. Nogami A, Harada T, Sekiguchi Y, et al. Safety and 1. Deshmukh A, Patel NJ, Pant S, et al. In-hospital
gression of atrial fibrillation after a failed initial abla- efficacy of minimally interrupted dabigatran vs unin- complications associated with catheter ablation of
tion procedure in patients with paroxysmal atrial terrupted warfarin therapy in adults undergoing atrial atrial fibrillation in the United States between 2000
fibrillation: a randomized comparison of drug therapy fibrillation catheter ablation: a randomized clinical and 2010: analysis of 93 801 procedures. Circulation.
versus reablation. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2:e191994. 2013;128:2104–2112.
2013;6:754–760.
10. van Vugt SPG, Westra SW, Volleberg R, et al. Meta- 2. Steinbeck G, Sinner MF, Lutz M, et al. Incidence of
20. Roux JF, Zado E, Callans DJ, et al. Antiarrhythmics analysis of controlled studies on minimally interrupted complications related to catheter ablation of atrial
after ablation of atrial fibrillation (5A study). Circula- vs. continuous use of non-vitamin K antagonist oral fibrillation and atrial flutter: a nationwide in-hospital
tion. 2009;120:1036–1040. anticoagulants in catheter ablation for atrial fibrilla- analysis of administrative data for Germany in 2014.
21. Kaitani K, Inoue K, Kobori A, et al. Efficacy of tion. Europace. 2021;23:1961–1969. Eur Heart J. 2018;39:4020–4029.
antiarrhythmic drugs short-term use after catheter 3. Loring Z, Holmes DN, Matsouaka RA, et al. Pro-
11. Packer DL, Mark DB, Robb RA, et al. Effect of
ablation for atrial fibrillation (EAST-AF) trial. Eur Heart cedural patterns and safety of atrial fibrillation
catheter ablation vs antiarrhythmic drug therapy on
J. 2016;37:610–618. ablation: findings from Get With The Guidelines-
mortality, stroke, bleeding, and cardiac arrest among
22. Chen W, Liu H, Ling Z, et al. Efficacy of short-term patients with atrial fibrillation: the CABANA random- Atrial Fibrillation. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol.
antiarrhythmic drugs use after catheter ablation of ized clinical trial. JAMA. 2019;321:1261–1274. 2020;13:e007944.
atrial fibrillation-a systematic review with meta- 12. Steinberg BA, Hellkamp AS, Lokhnygina Y, et al. 4. Campbell ML, Larson J, Farid T, et al. Sex-based
analyses and trial sequential analyses of randomized Higher risk of death and stroke in patients with differences in procedural complications associated
controlled trials. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0156121. persistent vs. paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: results with atrial fibrillation catheter ablation: a systematic
from the ROCKET-AF Trial. Eur Heart J. 2015;36:288– review and meta-analysis. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol.
23. Xu B, Peng F, Tang W, et al. Short-term antiar-
296. 2020;31:3176–3186.
rhythmic drugs after catheter ablation for atrial
fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled 13. Al-Khatib SM, Thomas L, Wallentin L, et al. Out- 5. Russo AM, Zeitler EP, Giczewska A, et al. Association
trials. Ann Pharmacother. 2016;50:697–705. comes of apixaban vs. warfarin by type and duration of between sex and treatment outcomes of atrial
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 157
-, 2023:-–- ---
fibrillation ablation versus drug therapy: results from electronic devices: history of catheter ablation of atrial to standard biventricular pacing: a real-world analysis
the CABANA trial. Circulation. 2021;143:661–672. fibrillation as a predictor of high treatment efficacy. of 37,450 patients followed by remote monitoring.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2022;33:1515–1528. Heart Rhythm. 2019;16:983–989.
8.5. Role of Pacemakers and ICDs for the
Prevention and Treatment of AF 14. Zhu H, Li X, Wang Z, et al. New-onset atrial 28. Gasparini M, Birnie D, Lemke B, et al. Adaptive
fibrillation following left bundle branch area pacing vs. cardiac resynchronization therapy reduces atrial fibril-
right ventricular pacing: a two-centre prospective lation incidence in heart failure patients with pro-
1. Stambler BS, Ellenbogen KA, Orav EJ, et al. Pre-
cohort study. Europace. 2022;25:121–125. longed AV conduction: the adaptive CRT randomized
dictors and clinical impact of atrial fibrillation after
pacemaker implantation in elderly patients treated trial. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2019;12:e007260.
15. Ravi V, Beer D, Pietrasik GM, et al. Development of
with dual chamber versus ventricular pacing. Pacing new-onset or progressive atrial fibrillation in patients
8.6. Surgical Ablation
Clin Electrophysiol. 2003;26:2000–2007. with permanent His bundle pacing versus right ven-
tricular pacing: results from the RUSH HBP registry. 1. Huffman MD, Malaisrie SC, Karmali KN. Concomitant
2. Skanes AC, Krahn AD, Yee R, et al. Progression to
chronic atrial fibrillation after pacing: the Canadian
J Am Heart Assoc. 2020;9:e018478. atrial fibrillation surgery for people undergoing cardiac
Trial of Physiologic Pacing. CTOPP Investigators. J Am surgery. JAMA Cardiol. 2017;2:334–335.
16. Carlson MD, Ip J, Messenger J, et al. A new pace-
Coll Cardiol. 2001;38:167–172. maker algorithm for the treatment of atrial fibrillation: 2. Huffman MD, Karmali KN, Berendsen MA, et al.
3. Hesselson AB, Parsonnet V, Bernstein AD, et al.
results of the Atrial Dynamic Overdrive Pacing Trial Concomitant atrial fibrillation surgery for people un-
(ADOPT). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;42:627–633. dergoing cardiac surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev.
Deleterious effects of long-term single-chamber ven-
tricular pacing in patients with sick sinus syndrome: 17. Hohnloser SH, Healey JS, Gold MR, et al. Atrial 2016;8:CD011814.
the hidden benefits of dual-chamber pacing. J Am Coll overdrive pacing to prevent atrial fibrillation: insights 3. Gillinov M, Moskowitz AJ, Argenziano M. Surgical
Cardiol. 1992;19:1542–1549. from ASSERT. Heart Rhythm. 2012;9:1667–1673. ablation for atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:
4. Andersen HR, Nielsen JC, Thomsen PE, et al. Long- 18. Camm AJ, Sulke N, Edvardsson N, et al. Conven- 484.
term follow-up of patients from a randomised trial of tional and dedicated atrial overdrive pacing for the 4. Noseworthy PA, Yao X, Deshmukh AJ, et al. Pat-
atrial versus ventricular pacing for sick-sinus syn- prevention of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: the terns of anticoagulation use and cardioembolic risk
drome. Lancet. 1997;350:1210–1216. AFTherapy study. Europace. 2007;9:1110–1118. after catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation. J Am Heart
5. Lamas GA, Lee KL, Sweeney MO, et al. Ventricular 19. Munawar DA, Mahajan R, Agbaedeng TA, et al. Assoc. 2015;4:e002597.
pacing or dual-chamber pacing for sinus node Implication of ventricular pacing burden and atrial 5. Kress DC, Erickson L, Choudhuri I, et al.
dysfunction. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:1854–1862. pacing therapies on the progression of atrial fibrilla- Comparative effectiveness of hybrid ablation versus
tion: a systematic review and meta-analysis of ran- endocardial catheter ablation alone in patients with
6. Elkayam LU, Koehler JL, Sheldon TJ, et al. The in-
domized controlled trials. Heart Rhythm. 2019;16: persistent atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol EP.
fluence of atrial and ventricular pacing on the inci-
1204–1214. 2017;3:341–349.
dence of atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis. Pacing Clin
Electrophysiol. 2011;34:1593–1599. 20. Sweeney MO, Hellkamp AS, Ellenbogen KA, et al. 6. Mannakkara NN, Porter B, Child N, et al. Convergent
Adverse effect of ventricular pacing on heart failure ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation: outcomes
7. Gillis AM, Unterberg-Buchwald C, Schmidinger H,
and atrial fibrillation among patients with normal from a single-centre real-world experience. Eur J
et al. Safety and efficacy of advanced atrial pacing
baseline QRS duration in a clinical trial of pacemaker Cardiothorac Surg. 2022;63:ezac515.
therapies for atrial tachyarrhythmias in patients with a
therapy for sinus node dysfunction. Circulation.
new implantable dual chamber cardioverter-defibril-
2003;107:2932–2937. 7. Gersak B, Zembala MO, Muller D, et al. European
lator. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;40:1653–1659.
experience of the convergent atrial fibrillation pro-
21. Sweeney MO, Bank AJ, Nsah E, et al. Minimizing cedure: multicenter outcomes in consecutive patients.
8. Lee MA, Weachter R, Pollak S, et al. The effect of
ventricular pacing to reduce atrial fibrillation in sinus- J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014;147:1411–1416.
atrial pacing therapies on atrial tachyarrhythmia
node disease. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:1000–1008.
burden and frequency: results of a randomized trial in
8. Cox JL, Schuessler RB, D’Agostino HJ Jr, et al. The
patients with bradycardia and atrial tachyarrhythmias. 22. Ricci RP, Botto GL, Bénézet JM, et al. Association
surgical treatment of atrial fibrillation. III. Develop-
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;41:1926–1932. between ventricular pacing and persistent atrial
ment of a definitive surgical procedure. J Thorac Car-
fibrillation in patients indicated to elective pacemaker
9. Israel CW, Hügl B, Unterberg C, et al. Pace-termi- diovasc Surg. 1991;101:569–583.
replacement: results of the Prefer for Elective
nation and pacing for prevention of atrial tachyar-
Replacement MVP (PreFER MVP) randomized study. 9. McCarthy PM, Davidson CJ, Kruse J, et al. Preva-
rhythmias: results from a multicenter study with an
Heart Rhythm. 2015;12:2239–2246. lence of atrial fibrillation before cardiac surgery and
implantable device for atrial therapy. J Cardiovasc
factors associated with concomitant ablation. J Thorac
Electrophysiol. 2001;12:1121–1128. 23. Shurrab M, Healey JS, Haj-Yahia S, et al. Reduction
Cardiovasc Surg. 2020;159:2245–2253 e2215.
in unnecessary ventricular pacing fails to affect hard
10. Gillis AM, Koehler J, Morck M, et al. High atrial
clinical outcomes in patients with preserved left ven- 10. Musharbash FN, Schill MR, Sinn LA, et al. Perfor-
antitachycardia pacing therapy efficacy is associated
tricular function: a meta-analysis. Europace. 2017;19: mance of the Cox-maze IV procedure is associated with
with a reduction in atrial tachyarrhythmia burden in a
282–288. improved long-term survival in patients with atrial
subset of patients with sinus node dysfunction and
fibrillation undergoing cardiac surgery. J Thorac Car-
paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Heart Rhythm. 2005;2: 24. Toff WD, Camm AJ, Skehan JD, et al. Single-
diovasc Surg. 2018;155:159–170.
791–796. chamber versus dual-chamber pacing for high-grade
atrioventricular block. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:145– 11. Iribarne A, DiScipio AW, McCullough JN, et al.
11. Padeletti L, Pürerfellner H, Mont L, et al. New-
155. Surgical atrial fibrillation ablation improves long-term
generation atrial antitachycardia pacing (Reactive ATP)
survival: a multicenter analysis. Ann Thorac Surg.
is associated with reduced risk of persistent or per- 25. Pastore G, Marcantoni L, Lanza D, et al. Occurrence
2019;107:135–142.
manent atrial fibrillation in patients with bradycardia: of persistent atrial fibrillation during pacing for sinus
results from the MINERVA randomized multicenter node disease: the influence of His bundle pacing versus 12. Suwalski P, Kowalewski M, Jasinski M, et al. Sur-
international trial. Heart Rhythm. 2015;12:1717–1725. managed ventricular pacing. J Cardiovasc Electro- vival after surgical ablation for atrial fibrillation in
physiol. 2021;32:110–116. mitral valve surgery: analysis from the Polish National
12. Boriani G, Tukkie R, Manolis AS, et al. Atrial anti-
Registry of Cardiac Surgery Procedures (KROK).
tachycardia pacing and managed ventricular pacing in 26. Singh JP, Cha YM, Lunati M, et al. Real-world
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2019;157:1007–1018.e1004.
bradycardia patients with paroxysmal or persistent behavior of CRT pacing using the AdaptivCRT algo-
atrial tachyarrhythmias: the MINERVA randomized rithm on patient outcomes: effect on mortality and 13. Malaisrie SC, McCarthy PM, Kruse J, et al. Ablation
multicentre international trial. Eur Heart J. 2014;35: atrial fibrillation incidence. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. of atrial fibrillation during coronary artery bypass
2352–2362. 2020;31:825–833. grafting: late outcomes in a Medicare population.
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2021;161:1251–1261 e1251.
13. Nakagomi T, Inden Y, Yanagisawa S, et al. Charac- 27. Hsu JC, Birnie D, Stadler RW, et al. Adaptive car-
teristics of successful reactive atrial-based anti- diac resynchronization therapy is associated with 14. Badhwar V, Rankin JS, Ad N, et al. Surgical ablation
tachycardia pacing in patients with cardiac implantable decreased risk of incident atrial fibrillation compared of atrial fibrillation in the United States: trends and
158 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
propensity matched outcomes. Ann Thorac Surg. ablation: a stratified pooled analysis of randomized 18. Clemo HF, Wood MA, Gilligan DM, et al. Intrave-
2017;104:493–500. data. Eur Heart J. 2020;41:2863–2873. nous amiodarone for acute heart rate control in the
critically ill patient with atrial tachyarrhythmias. Am J
15. Eitel C, Koch J, Sommer P, et al. Novel oral anti- 4. Di Biase L, Mohanty P, Mohanty S, et al. Ablation
Cardiol. 1998;81:594–598.
coagulants in a real-world cohort of patients under- versus amiodarone for treatment of persistent atrial
going catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation. Europace. fibrillation in patients with congestive heart failure and 19. Delle Karth G, Geppert A, Neunteufl T, et al.
2013;15:1587–1593. an implanted device: results from the AATAC multi- Amiodarone versus diltiazem for rate control in criti-
center randomized trial. Circulation. 2016;133:1637– cally ill patients with atrial tachyarrhythmias. Crit Care
16. DeLurgio DB, Crossen KJ, Gill J, et al. Hybrid
1644. Med. 2001;29:1149–1153.
convergent procedure for the treatment of persistent
and long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation: results 5. Hunter RJ, Berriman TJ, Diab I, et al. A randomized 20. Brignole M, Menozzi C, Gianfranchi L, et al.
of CONVERGE clinical trial. Circ Arrhythm Electro- controlled trial of catheter ablation versus medical Assessment of atrioventricular junction ablation and
physiol. 2020;13:e009288. treatment of atrial fibrillation in heart failure (the VVIR pacemaker versus pharmacological treatment in
CAMTAF trial). Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2014;7:31– patients with heart failure and chronic atrial fibrilla-
9.1. General Considerations for AF and HF 38. tion: a randomized, controlled study. Circulation.
6. Jones DG, Haldar SK, Hussain W, et al. 1998;98:953–960.
1. Melenovsky V, Hwang SJ, Redfield MM, et al. Left
atrial remodeling and function in advanced heart fail- A randomized trial to assess catheter ablation versus 21. Kay GN, Ellenbogen KA, Giudici M, et al. The Ablate
ure with preserved or reduced ejection fraction. Circ rate control in the management of persistent atrial and Pace Trial: a prospective study of catheter ablation
Heart Fail. 2015;8:295–303. fibrillation in heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol. of the AV conduction system and permanent pace-
2013;61:1894–1903. maker implantation for treatment of atrial fibrillation.
2. Tsang TS, Gersh BJ, Appleton CP, et al. Left ven-
7. Kuck KH, Merkely B, Zahn R, et al. Catheter ablation APT Investigators. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 1998;2:
tricular diastolic dysfunction as a predictor of the first
versus best medical therapy in patients with persistent 121–135.
diagnosed nonvalvular atrial fibrillation in 840 elderly
men and women. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;40:1636– atrial fibrillation and congestive heart failure: the 22. Weerasooriya R, Davis M, Powell A, et al. The
1644. randomized AMICA trial. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. Australian Intervention Randomized Control of Rate in
2019;12:e007731. Atrial Fibrillation Trial (AIRCRAFT). J Am Coll Cardiol.
3. Rosenberg MA, Gottdiener JS, Heckbert SR, et al.
8. MacDonald MR, Connelly DT, Hawkins NM, et al. 2003;41:1697–1702.
Echocardiographic diastolic parameters and risk of
atrial fibrillation: the Cardiovascular Health Study. Eur Radiofrequency ablation for persistent atrial fibrilla- 23. Brignole M, Pentimalli F, Palmisano P, et al. AV
Heart J. 2012;33:904–912. tion in patients with advanced heart failure and severe junction ablation and cardiac resynchronization for
left ventricular systolic dysfunction: a randomised patients with permanent atrial fibrillation and narrow
4. Ariyaratnam JP, Lau DH, Sanders P, et al. Atrial
controlled trial. Heart. 2011;97:740–747. QRS: the APAF-CRT mortality trial. Eur Heart J.
fibrillation and heart failure: epidemiology, patho-
9. Marrouche NF, Brachmann J, Andresen D, et al. 2021;42:4731–4739.
physiology, prognosis, and management. Card Elec-
trophysiol Clin. 2021;13:47–62. Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation with heart fail- 24. Ganesan AN, Brooks AG, Roberts-Thomson KC,
ure. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:417–427. et al. Role of AV nodal ablation in cardiac resynchro-
5. Santhanakrishnan R, Wang N, Larson MG, et al.
10. Pan KL, Wu YL, Lee M, et al. Catheter ablation nization in patients with coexistent atrial fibrillation
Atrial fibrillation begets heart failure and vice versa:
compared with medical therapy for atrial fibrillation and heart failure: a systematic review. J Am Coll Car-
temporal associations and differences in preserved
with heart failure: a systematic review and meta- diol. 2012;59:719–726.
versus reduced ejection fraction. Circulation. 2016;133:
484–492. analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int J Med 25. Mustafa U, Atkins J, Mina G, et al. Outcomes of
Sci. 2021;18:1325–1331. cardiac resynchronisation therapy in patients with
6. Mamas MA, Caldwell JC, Chacko S, et al. A meta-
11. Parkash R, Wells GA, Rouleau J, et al. Randomized heart failure with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review
analysis of the prognostic significance of atrial fibril-
ablation-based rhythm-control versus rate-control and meta-analysis of observational studies. Open
lation in chronic heart failure. Eur J Heart Fail.
2009;11:676–683. trial in patients with heart failure and atrial fibrilla- Heart. 2019;6:e000937.
tion: results from the RAFT-AF trial. Circulation. 26. Gasparini M, Kloppe A, Lunati M, et al. Atrioven-
7. Sartipy U, Dahlstrom U, Fu M, et al. Atrial fibrillation 2022;145:1693–1704. tricular junction ablation in patients with atrial fibril-
in heart failure with preserved, mid-range, and
12. Prabhu S, Taylor AJ, Costello BT, et al. Catheter lation treated with cardiac resynchronization therapy:
reduced ejection fraction. J Am Coll Cardiol HF. 2017;5:
ablation versus medical rate control in atrial fibrillation positive impact on ventricular arrhythmias, implant-
565–574.
and systolic dysfunction: the CAMERA-MRI study. J Am able cardioverter-defibrillator therapies and hospitali-
8. Kotecha D, Chudasama R, Lane DA, et al. Atrial Coll Cardiol. 2017;70:1949–1961. zations. Eur J Heart Fail. 2018;20:1472–1481.
fibrillation and heart failure due to reduced versus
13. Turagam MK, Garg J, Whang W, et al. Catheter 27. Nerheim P, Birger-Botkin S, Piracha L, et al. Heart
preserved ejection fraction: a systematic review and
ablation of atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure and sudden death in patients with tachycardia-
meta-analysis of death and adverse outcomes. Int J
failure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled tri- induced cardiomyopathy and recurrent tachycardia.
Cardiol. 2016;203:660–666.
als. Ann Intern Med. 2019;170:41–50. Circulation. 2004;110:247–252.
9. Zafrir B, Lund LH, Laroche C, et al. Prognostic im-
14. Packer DL, Piccini JP, Monahan KH, et al. Ablation 28. Nedios S, Sommer P, Dagres N, et al. Long-term
plications of atrial fibrillation in heart failure with
versus drug therapy for atrial fibrillation in heart fail- follow-up after atrial fibrillation ablation in patients
reduced, mid-range, and preserved ejection fraction: a
ure: results from the CABANA trial. Circulation. with impaired left ventricular systolic function: the
report from 14 964 patients in the European Society of
2021;143:1377–1390. importance of rhythm and rate control. Heart Rhythm.
Cardiology Heart Failure Long-Term Registry. Eur
15. Siddiqui MU, Junarta J, Riley JM, et al. Catheter 2014;11:344–351.
Heart J. 2018;39:4277–4284.
ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation and heart 29. Roy D, Talajic M, Nattel S, et al. Rhythm control
9.2. Management of AF in Patients With HF failure with preserved ejection fraction: a systematic versus rate control for atrial fibrillation and heart
review and meta-analysis. J Arrhythm. 2022;38:981– failure. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:2667–2677.
1. Rillig A, Magnussen C, Ozga AK, et al. Early rhythm 990.
control therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation and 30. Van Gelder IC, Groenveld HF, Crijns HJ, et al.
16. Khand AU, Rankin AC, Martin W, et al. Carvedilol
heart failure. Circulation. 2021;144:845–858. Lenient versus strict rate control in patients with atrial
alone or in combination with digoxin for the manage-
fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:1363–1373.
2. Brachmann J, Sohns C, Andresen D, et al. Atrial ment of atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure?
fibrillation burden and clinical outcomes in heart fail- J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;42:1944–1951. 31. Silvet H, Hawkins LA, Jacobson AK. Heart rate
ure: the CASTLE-AF trial. J Am Coll Cardiol EP. 2021;7: 17. Kotecha D, Bunting KV, Gill SK, et al. Effect of control in patients with chronic atrial fibrillation and
594–603. digoxin vs bisoprolol for heart rate control in atrial heart failure. Congest Heart Fail. 2013;19:25–28.
3. Chen S, Pürerfellner H, Meyer C, et al. Rhythm fibrillation on patient-reported quality of life: the 32. Moriña-Vázquez P, Moraleda-Salas MT, Á Arce-
control for patients with atrial fibrillation complicated RATE-AF randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2020;324: León, et al. Effectiveness and safety of AV node
with heart failure in the contemporary era of catheter 2497–2508. ablation after His bundle pacing in patients with
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 159
-, 2023:-–- ---
uncontrolled atrial arrhythmias. Pacing Clin Electro- insight into the mechanism of pulmonary vein firing. 3. Sauer WH, Alonso C, Zado E, et al. Atrioventricular
physiol. 2021;44:1004–1009. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2003;14:261–262. nodal reentrant tachycardia in patients referred for
atrial fibrillation ablation: response to ablation that
33. Pillai A, Kolominsky J, Koneru JN, et al. Atrioven- 48. Chatterjee NA, Upadhyay GA, Ellenbogen KA,
incorporates slow-pathway modification. Circulation.
tricular junction ablation in patients with conduction et al. Atrioventricular nodal ablation in atrial fibril-
2006;114:191–195.
system pacing leads: a comparison of His-bundle vs lation: a meta-analysis of biventricular vs. right
left bundle branch area pacing leads. Heart Rhythm. ventricular pacing mode. Eur J Heart Fail. 2012;14: 4. Yoneda ZT, Anderson KC, Quintana JA, et al. Early-
2022;19:1116–1123. 661–667. onset atrial fibrillation and the prevalence of rare
49. Baudo M, D’Ancona G, Trinca F, et al. Atrioven- variants in cardiomyopathy and arrhythmia genes.
34. Vijayaraman P, Mathew AJ, Naperkowski A, et al.
tricular node ablation and pacing for atrial tachyar- JAMA Cardiol. 2021;6:1371–1379.
Conduction system pacing versus conventional pacing
in patients undergoing atrioventricular node ablation: rhythmias: a meta-analysis of postoperative outcomes. 5. Goodyer WR, Dunn K, Caleshu C, et al. Broad genetic
nonrandomized, on-treatment comparison. Heart Int J Cardiol. 2022;363:80–86. testing in a clinical setting uncovers a high prevalence
Rhythm O2. 2022;3:368–376. 50. Linde C, Leclercq C, Rex S, et al. Long-term ben- of titin loss-of-function variants in very early onset
efits of biventricular pacing in congestive heart failure: atrial fibrillation. Circ Genom Precis Med. 2019;12:
35. Vijayaraman P, Subzposh FA, Naperkowski A.
results from the MUltisite STimulation in cardiomy- e002713.
Atrioventricular node ablation and His bundle pacing.
Europace. 2017;19:iv10–iv16. opathy (MUSTIC) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;40: 6. Perez MV, Mahaffey KW, Hedlin H, et al. Large-scale
111–118. assessment of a smartwatch to identify atrial fibrilla-
36. Goldstein RE, Boccuzzi SJ, Cruess D, et al. Diltia-
51. Upadhyay GA, Choudhry NK, Auricchio A, et al. tion. N Engl J Med. 2019;381:1909–1917.
zem increases late-onset congestive heart failure in
postinfarction patients with early reduction in ejection Cardiac resynchronization in patients with atrial fibril-
10.2. Athletes
fraction. The Adverse Experience Committee; and the lation: a meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies.
Multicenter Diltiazem Postinfarction Research Group. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52:1239–1246.
1. Mandsager KT, Phelan DM, Diab M, et al. Outcomes
Circulation. 1991;83:52–60. 52. Wilton SB, Leung AA, Ghali WA, et al. Outcomes of of pulmonary vein isolation in athletes. J Am Coll
cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with Cardiol EP. 2020;6:1265–1274.
37. Kober L, Torp-Pedersen C, McMurray JJ, et al.
versus those without atrial fibrillation: a systematic
Increased mortality after dronedarone therapy for se- 2. Toso E, Gagliardi M, Peyracchia M, et al. Long-term
review and meta-analysis. Heart Rhythm. 2011;8:
vere heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:2678– efficacy and impact on quality of life of atrial fibrilla-
1088–1094.
2687. tion catheter ablation in competitive athletes. J Sports
53. Hayes DL, Boehmer JP, Day JD, et al. Cardiac Med Phys Fitness. 2022;62:1266–1271.
38. Calo L, De Ruvo E, Sette A, et al. Tachycardia-
resynchronization therapy and the relationship of
induced cardiomyopathy: mechanisms of heart failure 3. Azarbal F, Stefanick ML, Salmoirago-Blotcher E,
percent biventricular pacing to symptoms and survival.
and clinical implications. J Cardiovasc Med (Hagers- et al. Obesity, physical activity, and their interaction in
Heart Rhythm. 2011;8:1469–1475.
town). 2007;8:138–143. incident atrial fibrillation in postmenopausal women.
54. Van Gelder IC, Groenveld HF, Crijns HJ, et al. J Am Heart Assoc. 2014;3:e001127.
39. Gopinathannair R, Etheridge SP, Marchlinski FE,
Lenient versus strict rate control in patients with
et al. Arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathies: mecha- 4. Mozaffarian D, Furberg CD, Psaty BM, et al. Physical
atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:1363–
nisms, recognition, and management. J Am Coll Car- activity and incidence of atrial fibrillation in older
1373.
diol. 2015;66:1714–1728. adults: the cardiovascular health study. Circulation.
55. van Gelder IC, Phan HM, Wilkoff BL, et al. Prog-
40. Shelton RJ, Clark AL, Goode K, et al. 2008;118:800–807.
nostic significance of atrial arrhythmias in a primary
A randomised, controlled study of rate versus rhythm 5. Newman W, Parry-Williams G, Wiles J, et al. Risk of
prevention ICD population. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol.
control in patients with chronic atrial fibrillation and atrial fibrillation in athletes: a systematic review and
2011;34:1070–1079.
heart failure: (CAFE-II Study). Heart. 2009;95:924– meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2021;55:1233–1238.
930. 56. Boriani G, Gasparini M, Landolina M, et al. Inci-
dence and clinical relevance of uncontrolled ventric- 6. Ayinde H, Schweizer ML, Crabb V, et al. Age mod-
41. Vernooy K, Dijkman B, Cheriex EC, et al. Ventricular ular rate during atrial fibrillation in heart failure ifies the risk of atrial fibrillation among athletes: a
remodeling during long-term right ventricular pacing patients treated with cardiac resynchronization ther- systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Int J
following His bundle ablation. Am J Cardiol. 2006;97: apy. Eur J Heart Fail. 2011;13:868–876. Cardiol Heart Vasc. 2018;18:25–29.
1223–1227.
57. Jandali MB. Safety of intravenous diltiazem in 7. Trivedi SJ, Claessen G, Stefani L, et al. Differing
42. Tops LF, Schalij MJ, Holman ER, et al. Right ven- reduced ejection fraction heart failure with rapid atrial mechanisms of atrial fibrillation in athletes and non-
tricular pacing can induce ventricular dyssynchrony in fibrillation. Clin Drug Investig. 2018;38:503–508. athletes: alterations in atrial structure and function.
patients with atrial fibrillation after atrioventricular Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020;21:1374–1383.
58. Hasbrouck M, Nguyen TT. Acute management of
node ablation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48:1642–1648.
atrial fibrillation in congestive heart failure with 8. La Gerche A, Inder WJ, Roberts TJ, et al. Relation-
43. Gopinathannair R, Chen LY, Chung MK, et al. reduced ejection fraction in the emergency depart- ship between inflammatory cytokines and indices of
Managing atrial fibrillation in patients with heart fail- ment. Am J Emerg Med. 2022;58:39–42. cardiac dysfunction following intense endurance ex-
ure and reduced ejection fraction: a scientific state- ercise. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0130031.
59. Figulla HR, Gietzen F, Zeymer U, et al. Diltiazem
ment from the American Heart Association. Circ
improves cardiac function and exercise capacity in 9. Estes NAM 3rd, Madias C. Atrial fibrillation in ath-
Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2021;14:e000078.
patients with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy. Re- letes: a lesson in the virtue of moderation. J Am Coll
44. Ziff OJ, Lane DA, Samra M, et al. Safety and effi- sults of the Diltiazem in Dilated Cardiomyopathy Trial. Cardiol EP. 2017;3:921–928.
cacy of digoxin: systematic review and meta-analysis Circulation. 1996;94:346–352.
of observational and controlled trial data. BMJ. 10.3. Management Considerations in Patients
60. Roy D, Talajic M, Nattel S, et al. Rhythm control
2015;351:h4451. With AF and Obesity
versus rate control for atrial fibrillation and heart
45. Rathore SS, Curtis JP, Wang Y, et al. Association of failure. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:2667–2677.
serum digoxin concentration and outcomes in patients 1. Chung MK, Eckhardt LL, Chen LY, et al. Lifestyle and
10.1. Management of Early Onset AF, Including
with heart failure. JAMA. 2003;289:871–878. risk factor modification for reduction of atrial fibrilla-
Genetic Testing
tion: a scientific statement from the American Heart
46. Hou ZY, Chang MS, Chen CY, et al. Acute treat- Association. Circulation. 2020;141:e750–e772.
ment of recent-onset atrial fibrillation and flutter with 1. Yalin K, Ikitimur B, Aksu T, et al. Catheter ablation
a tailored dosing regimen of intravenous amiodarone. for atrial fibrillation in patients </¼30 years of age. 2. Wang TJ, Parise H, Levy D, et al. Obesity and the risk
A randomized, digoxin-controlled study. Eur Heart J. Am J Cardiol. 2022;166:53–57. of new-onset atrial fibrillation. JAMA. 2004;292:2471–
1995;16:521–528. 2477.
2. Ceresnak SR, Liberman L, Silver ES, et al. Lone atrial
47. Nakagawa H, Jackman WM, Scherlag BJ, et al. fibrillation in the young - perhaps not so "lone”? 3. Wong CX, Sun MT, Odutayo A, et al. Associations of
Pulmonary vein isolation during atrial fibrillation: J Pediatr. 2013;162:827–831. Epicardial, abdominal, and overall adiposity with atrial
160 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
fibrillation. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2016;9: ablation: insights from a registry study of 2169 pa- in asymptomatic patients with the Wolff-Parkinson-
e004378. tients. Circulation. 2014;130:811–819. White syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:1803–1811.
4. Wong CX, Sullivan T, Sun MT, et al. Obesity and the 4. Kugler JD, Danford DA, Houston K, et al. Radio- 20. A randomized, placebo-controlled trial of prop-
risk of incident, post-operative, and post-ablation frequency catheter ablation for paroxysmal supraven- afenone in the prophylaxis of paroxysmal supraven-
atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of 626,603 in- tricular tachycardia in children and adolescents tricular tachycardia and paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.
dividuals in 51 studies. J Am Coll Cardiol EP. 2015;1: without structural heart disease. Pediatric EP Society, UK Propafenone PSVT Study Group. Circulation.
139–152. Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation Registry. Am J Car- 1995;92:2550–2557.
diol. 1997;80:1438–1443.
10.4. Anticoagulation Considerations in 21. Chimienti M, Cullen MT Jr, Casadei G. Safety of
Patients With Class III Obesity 5. Calkins H, Langberg J, Sousa J, et al. Radio- flecainide versus propafenone for the long-term
frequency catheter ablation of accessory atrioventric- management of symptomatic paroxysmal supraven-
ular connections in 250 patients. Abbreviated tricular tachyarrhythmias. Report from the Flecainide
1. Barakat AF, Jain S, Masri A, et al. Outcomes of direct
therapeutic approach to Wolff-Parkinson-White syn- and Propafenone Italian Study (FAPIS) Group. Eur
oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation patients across
drome. Circulation. 1992;85:1337–1346. Heart J. 1995;16:1943–1951.
different body mass index categories. J Am Coll Cardiol
EP. 2021;7:649–658. 6. Jackman WM, Wang XZ, Friday KJ, et al. Catheter 10.7. Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy (HCM)
ablation of accessory atrioventricular pathways
2. Malik AH, Yandrapalli S, Shetty S, et al. Impact of
(Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome) by radiofrequency 1. Ommen SR, Mital S, Burke MA, et al. 2020 AHA/ACC
weight on the efficacy and safety of direct-acting oral
current. N Engl J Med. 1991;324:1605–1611. guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of patients
anticoagulants in patients with non-valvular atrial
with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a report of the
fibrillation: a meta-analysis. Europace. 2020;22:361– 7. Belhassen B, Rogowski O, Glick A, et al. Radio-
American College of Cardiology/American Heart As-
367. frequency ablation of accessory pathways: a 14 year
sociation Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guide-
experience at the Tel Aviv Medical Center in 508 pa-
3. Hohnloser SH, Fudim M, Alexander JH, et al. Effi- lines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;76:e159–e240.
tients. Isr Med Assoc J. 2007;9:265–270.
cacy and safety of apixaban versus warfarin in patients
2. Guttmann OP, Rahman MS, O’Mahony C, et al. Atrial
with atrial fibrillation and extremes in body weight. 8. Sellers TD Jr, Campbell RW, Bashore TM, et al. Ef-
fibrillation and thromboembolism in patients with hy-
Circulation. 2019;139:2292–2300. fects of procainamide and quinidine sulfate in the
pertrophic cardiomyopathy: systematic review. Heart.
Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome. Circulation. 1977;55:
4. Boriani G, Ruff CT, Kuder JF, et al. Relationship 2014;100:465–472.
15–22.
between body mass index and outcomes in patients
3. Kubo T, Baba Y, Ochi Y, et al. Clinical significance of
with atrial fibrillation treated with edoxaban or 9. Glatter KA, Dorostkar PC, Yang Y, et al. Electro-
new-onset atrial fibrillation in patients with hypertro-
warfarin in the ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 trial. Eur Heart J. physiological effects of ibutilide in patients with
phic cardiomyopathy. ESC Heart Fail. 2021;8:5022–
2019;40:1541–1550. accessory pathways. Circulation. 2001;104:1933–1939.
5030.
5. Balla SR, Cyr DD, Lokhnygina Y, et al. Relation of 10. Boriani G, Biffi M, Frabetti L, et al. Ventricular
4. Fauchier L, Bisson A, Bodin A, et al. Ischemic stroke
risk of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation to body fibrillation after intravenous amiodarone in Wolff-
in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy accord-
mass index (from patients treated with rivaroxaban Parkinson-White syndrome with atrial fibrillation. Am
ing to presence or absence of atrial fibrillation. Stroke.
and warfarin in the rivaroxaban once daily oral direct Heart J. 1996;131:1214–1216.
2022;53:497–504.
factor Xa inhibition compared with vitamin K Antago- 11. Kim RJ, Gerling BR, Kono AT, et al. Precipitation of
nism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in 5. Alphonse P, Virk S, Collins J, et al. Prognostic impact
ventricular fibrillation by intravenous diltiazem and
Atrial Fibrillation Trial). Am J Cardiol. 2017;119:1989– of atrial fibrillation in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a
metoprolol in a young patient with occult Wolff-
1996. systematic review. Clin Res Cardiol. 2021;110:544–554.
Parkinson-White syndrome. Pacing Clin Electro-
6. Mahlmann A, Gehrisch S, Beyer-Westendorf J. physiol. 2008;31:776–779. 6. Hsu JC, Huang YT, Lin LY. Stroke risk in hypertro-
Pharmacokinetics of rivaroxaban after bariatric sur- phic cardiomyopathy patients with atrial fibrillation: a
12. Sellers TD Jr, Bashore TM, Gallagher JJ. Digitalis in
gery: a case report. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2013;36: nationwide database study. Aging (Albany NY).
the pre-excitation syndrome. Analysis during atrial
533–535. 2020;12:24219–24227.
fibrillation. Circulation. 1977;56:260–267.
7. Leong R, Chu DK, Crowther MA, et al. Direct oral 7. Rozen G, Elbaz-Greener G, Marai I, et al. Utilization
13. Simonian SM, Lotfipour S, Wall C, et al. Challenging
anticoagulants after bariatric surgery-what is the evi- and complications of catheter ablation for atrial
the superiority of amiodarone for rate control in Wolff-
dence? J Thromb Haemost. 2022;20:1988–2000. fibrillation in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyop-
Parkinson-White and atrial fibrillation. Intern Emerg
athy. J Am Heart Assoc. 2020;9:e015721.
Med. 2010;5:421–426.
10.5. AF and VHD
14. Gulamhusein S, Ko P, Carruthers SG, et al. Accel- 10.8. Adult Congenital Heart Disease (ACHD)
1. Petty GW, Khandheria BK, Whisnant JP, et al. Pre- eration of the ventricular response during atrial fibril-
dictors of cerebrovascular events and death among 1. Escudero C, Khairy P, Sanatani S. Electrophysiologic
lation in the Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome after
patients with valvular heart disease: a population- considerations in congenital heart disease and their
verapamil. Circulation. 1982;65:348–354.
based study. Stroke. 2000;31:2628–2635. relationship to heart failure. Can J Cardiol. 2013;29:
15. Munger TM, Packer DL, Hammill SC, et al. 821–829.
10.6. WPW and Preexcitation Syndromes A population study of the natural history of Wolff-
2. Miyazaki A, Negishi J, Hayama Y, et al. Etiology of
Parkinson-White syndrome in Olmsted County, Min-
atrial fibrillation in patients with complex congenital
1. Page RL, Joglar JA, Caldwell MA, et al. 2015 ACC/ nesota, 1953-1989. Circulation. 1993;87:866–873.
heart disease - for a better treatment strategy.
AHA/HRS guideline for the management of adult pa-
16. Fukatani M, Tanigawa M, Mori M, et al. Prediction J Cardiol. 2020;76:438–445.
tients with supraventricular tachycardia: a report of
of a fatal atrial fibrillation in patients with asymp-
the American College of Cardiology/American Heart 3. Mylotte D, Pilote L, Ionescu-Ittu R, et al. Specialized
tomatic Wolff-Parkinson-White pattern. Jpn Circ J.
Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines adult congenital heart disease care: the impact of
1990;54:1331–1339.
and the Heart Rhythm Society. J Am Coll Cardiol. policy on mortality. Circulation. 2014;129:1804–1812.
2016;67:e27–e115. 17. Pietersen AH, Andersen ED, Sandoe E. Atrial
4. Liang JJ, Frankel DS, Parikh V, et al. Safety and
fibrillation in the Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome.
2. Roth A, Elkayam I, Shapira I, et al. Effectiveness of outcomes of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in
Am J Cardiol. 1992;70:38A–43A.
prehospital synchronous direct-current cardioversion adults with congenital heart disease: a multicenter
for supraventricular tachyarrhythmias causing unsta- 18. Klein GJ, Bashore TM, Sellers TD, et al. Ventricular registry study. Heart Rhythm. 2019;16:846–852.
ble hemodynamic states. Am J Cardiol. 2003;91:489– fibrillation in the Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome.
5. Fischer AJ, Enders D, Wasmer K, et al. Impact of
491. N Engl J Med. 1979;301:1080–1085.
specialized electrophysiological care on the outcome
3. Pappone C, Vicedomini G, Manguso F, et al. Wolff- 19. Pappone C, Santinelli V, Manguso F, et al. of catheter ablation for supraventricular tachycardias
Parkinson-White syndrome in the era of catheter A randomized study of prophylactic catheter ablation in adults with congenital heart disease: independent
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 161
-, 2023:-–- ---
risk factors and gender aspects. Heart Rhythm. 20. Connolly SJ, Camm AJ, Halperin JL, et al. Drone- Postpericardiotomy Syndrome (COPPS) atrial fibrilla-
2021;18:1852–1859. darone in high-risk permanent atrial fibrillation. N Engl tion substudy. Circulation. 2011;124:2290–2295.
J Med. 2011;365:2268–2276.
6. Koyak Z, Kroon B, de Groot JR, et al. Efficacy of 10. Imazio M, Brucato A, Ferrazzi P, et al. Colchi-
antiarrhythmic drugs in adults with congenital heart 21. Kober L, Torp-Pedersen C, McMurray JJ, et al. cine for prevention of postpericardiotomy syn-
disease and supraventricular tachycardias. Am J Car- Increased mortality after dronedarone therapy for se- drome and postoperative atrial fibrillation: the
diol. 2013;112:1461–1467. vere heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:2678– COPPS-2 randomized clinical trial. JAMA.
2687. 2014;312:1016–1023.
7. Guarguagli S, Kempny A, Cazzoli I, et al. Efficacy of
catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with 22. Kottmaier M, Baur A, Lund S, et al. Atrial fibrilla- 11. Shvartz V, Le T, Kryukov Y, et al. Colchicine for
congenital heart disease. Europace. 2019;21:1334– tion ablation in adults with congenital heart disease on prevention of atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery in
1344. uninterrupted oral anticoagulation is safe and efficient. the early postoperative period. J Clin Med. 2022;11:
Clin Res Cardiol. 2020;109:904–910. 1387.
8. Philip F, Muhammad KI, Agarwal S, et al. Pulmonary
vein isolation for the treatment of drug-refractory 23. Abadir S, Waldmann V, Dyrda K, et al. Feasibility 10.9.2. Treatment of AF After Cardiac Surgery
atrial fibrillation in adults with congenital heart dis- and safety of cryoballoon ablation for atrial fibrillation
ease. Congenit Heart Dis. 2012;7:392–399. in patients with congenital heart disease. World J 1. Filardo G, da Graca B, Sass DM, et al. Preoperative b-
Cardiol. 2019;11:149–158. blockers as a coronary surgery quality metric: the lack
9. Refaat MM, Ballout J, Mansour M. Ablation of atrial
of evidence of efficacy. Ann Thorac Surg. 2020;109:
fibrillation in patients with congenital heart disease. 24. Bessiere F, Mondesert B, Chaix MA, et al. Ar- 1150–1158.
Arrhythm Electrophysiol Rev. 2017;6:191–194. rhythmias in adults with congenital heart disease and
heart failure. Heart Rhythm O2. 2021;2:744–753. 2. Arsenault KA, Yusuf AM, Crystal E, et al. In-
10. Khairy P, Aboulhosn J, Broberg CS, et al. Throm-
terventions for preventing post-operative atrial fibril-
boprophylaxis for atrial arrhythmias in congenital
25. Karsenty C, Zhao A, Marijon E, et al. Risk of lation in patients undergoing heart surgery. Cochrane
heart disease: a multicenter study. Int J Cardiol.
thromboembolic complications in adult congenital Database Syst Rev. 2013;2013:Cd003611.
2016;223:729–735.
heart disease: a literature review. Arch Cardiovasc Dis.
3. Brinkman W, Herbert MA, O’Brien S, et al. Preop-
11. Labombarda F, Hamilton R, Shohoudi A, et al. 2018;111:613–620.
erative beta-blocker use in coronary artery bypass
Increasing prevalence of atrial fibrillation and perma-
26. Yang H, Bouma BJ, Dimopoulos K, et al. Non- grafting surgery: national database analysis. JAMA
nent atrial arrhythmias in congenital heart disease.
vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) for Intern Med. 2014;174:1320–1327.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70:857–865.
thromboembolic prevention, are they safe in congen-
4. Kohsaka S, Miyata H, Motomura N, et al. Effects of
12. Stout KK, Daniels CJ, Aboulhosn JA, et al. 2018 ital heart disease? Results of a worldwide study. Int J
preoperative beta-blocker use on clinical outcomes
AHA/ACC guideline for the management of adults with Cardiol. 2020;299:123–130.
after coronary artery bypass grafting: a report from
congenital heart disease: a report of the American
10.9.1. Prevention of AF After Cardiac Surgery the Japanese Cardiovascular Surgery Database. Anes-
College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task
thesiology. 2016;124:45–55.
Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol.
1. Filardo G, da Graca B, Sass DM, et al. Preoperative b-
2019;73:e81–e192. 5. Gillinov AM, Bagiella E, Moskowitz AJ, et al. Rate
blockers as a coronary surgery quality metric: the lack
control versus rhythm control for atrial fibrillation
13. Sohns C, Nurnberg JH, Hebe J, et al. Catheter of evidence of efficacy. Ann Thorac Surg. 2020;109:
after cardiac surgery. N Engl J Med. 2016;374:1911–
ablation for atrial fibrillation in adults with congenital 1150–1158.
1921.
heart disease: lessons learned from more than 10 years
2. Gillinov AM, Bagiella E, Moskowitz AJ, et al. Rate
following a sequential ablation approach. J Am Coll 6. Rezk M, Taha A, Nielsen SJ, et al. Clinical course of
control versus rhythm control for atrial fibrillation af-
Cardiol EP. 2018;4:733–743. postoperative atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery
ter cardiac surgery. N Engl J Med. 2016;374:1911–1921.
and long-term outcome. Ann Thorac Surg. 2022;114:
14. Khairy P, Van Hare GF, Balaji S, et al. PACES/HRS
3. Mehaffey JH, Hawkins RB, Byler M, et al. Amiodar- 2209–2215.
expert consensus statement on the recognition and
management of arrhythmias in adult congenital heart one protocol provides cost-effective reduction in 7. Fragão-Marques M, Teixeira F, Mancio J, et al.
disease. Developed in partnership between the Pedi- postoperative atrial fibrillation. Ann Thorac Surg. Impact of oral anticoagulation therapy on post-
atric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society 2018;105:1697–1702. operative atrial fibrillation outcomes: a systematic re-
(PACES) and the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS). Heart 4. Guarnieri T. Intravenous antiarrhythmic regimens view and meta-analysis. Thromb J. 2021;19:89.
Rhythm. 2014;11:e102–e165. with focus on amiodarone for prophylaxis of atrial 8. Imazio M, Brucato A, Ferrazzi P, et al. Colchicine
15. Fish FA, Gillette PC, Benson DW Jr. Proarrhythmia, fibrillation after open heart surgery. Am J Cardiol. reduces postoperative atrial fibrillation: results of the
cardiac arrest and death in young patients receiving 1999;84:152r–155r. Colchicine for the Prevention of the Post-
encainide and flecainide. The Pediatric Electrophysi- 5. Mitchell LB, Exner DV, Wyse DG, et al. Prophylactic pericardiotomy Syndrome (COPPS) atrial fibrillation
ology Group. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1991;18:356–365. oral amiodarone for the prevention of arrhythmias that substudy. Circulation. 2011;124:2290–2295.
16. Epstein AE, Hallstrom AP, Rogers WJ, et al. Mor- begin early after revascularization, valve replacement, 9. Imazio M, Brucato A, Ferrazzi P, et al. Colchi-
tality following ventricular arrhythmia suppression by or repair: PAPABEAR: a randomized controlled trial. cine for prevention of postpericardiotomy syn-
encainide, flecainide, and moricizine after myocardial JAMA. 2005;294:3093–3100. drome and postoperative atrial fibrillation: the
infarction. The original design concept of the Cardiac 6. Arsenault KA, Yusuf AM, Crystal E, et al. In- COPPS-2 randomized clinical trial. JAMA.
Arrhythmia Suppression Trial (CAST). JAMA. 1993;270: terventions for preventing post-operative atrial fibril- 2014;312:1016–1023.
2451–2455. lation in patients undergoing heart surgery. Cochrane 10. Shvartz V, Le T, Kryukov Y, et al. Colchicine for
17. Thorne SA, Barnes I, Cullinan P, et al. Amiodarone- Database Syst Rev. 2013;2013:Cd003611. prevention of atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery in
associated thyroid dysfunction: risk factors in adults the early postoperative period. J Clin Med. 2022;11:
7. Gaudino M, Sanna T, Ballman KV, et al. Posterior left
with congenital heart disease. Circulation. 1999;100: 1387.
pericardiotomy for the prevention of atrial fibrillation
149–154.
after cardiac surgery: an adaptive, single-centre, sin-
10.10. Acute Medical Illness or Surgery
18. Stan MN, Ammash NM, Warnes CA, et al. Body gle-blind, randomised, controlled trial. Lancet. (Including AF in Critical Care)
mass index and the development of amiodarone- 2021;398:2075–2083.
induced thyrotoxicosis in adults with congenital heart 8. Eikelboom R, Sanjanwala R, Le ML, et al. Post- 1. McIntyre WF, Um KJ, Cheung CC, et al. Atrial fibril-
disease–a cohort study. Int J Cardiol. 2013;167:821– operative atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery: a lation detected initially during acute medical illness: a
826. systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Thorac Surg. systematic review. Eur Heart J. 2019;8:130–141.
2021;111:544–554.
19. El-Assaad I, Al-Kindi SG, Abraham J, et al. Use of 2. Lubitz SA, Yin X, Rienstra M, et al. Long-term out-
dofetilide in adult patients with atrial arrhythmias and 9. Imazio M, Brucato A, Ferrazzi P, et al. Colchicine comes of secondary atrial fibrillation in the commu-
congenital heart disease: a PACES collaborative study. reduces postoperative atrial fibrillation: results of the nity: the Framingham Heart Study. Circulation.
Heart Rhythm. 2016;13:2034–2039. Colchicine for the Prevention of the 2015;131:1648–1655.
162 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
3. Wang EY, Hulme OL, Khurshid S, et al. Initial pre- 10.11. Hyperthyroidism outcomes in atrial fibrillation. Am J Med. 2015;128:
cipitants and recurrence of atrial fibrillation. Circ 30–37.
Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2020;13:e007716. 1. Gundlund A, Kumler T, Bonde AN, et al.
Comparative thromboembolic risk in atrial fibrillation 10.12. Pulmonary Disease
4. Abdelmoneim SS, Rosenberg E, Meykler M, et al.
with and without a secondary precipitant-Danish
The incidence and natural progression of new-onset 1. Du Q, Sun Y, Ding N, et al. Beta-blockers reduced
nationwide cohort study. BMJ Open. 2019;9:
postoperative atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol EP. the risk of mortality and exacerbation in patients with
e028468.
2021;7:1134–1144. COPD: a meta-analysis of observational studies. PLoS
2. Tng EL, Tiong YS, Aung AT, et al. Efficacy and safety One. 2014;9:e113048.
5. Charitos EI, Herrmann FEM, Ziegler PD. Atrial
of anticoagulation in thyrotoxic atrial fibrillation: a
fibrillation recurrence and spontaneous conversion 2. Salpeter S, Ormiston T, Salpeter E. Cardioselective
systematic review and meta-analysis. Endocr Connect.
to sinus rhythm after cardiac surgery: insights beta-blockers for chronic obstructive pulmonary dis-
2022;11:e220166.
from 426 patients with continuous rhythm moni- ease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005;4:CD003566.
toring. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2021;32:2171– 3. Jabbar A, Pingitore A, Pearce SH, et al. Thyroid
3. Dransfield MT, Voelker H, Bhatt SP, et al. Meto-
2178. hormones and cardiovascular disease. Nat Rev Cardiol.
prolol for the prevention of acute exacerbations of
6. El-Chami MF, Merchant FM, Smith P, et al. Man- 2017;14:39–55.
COPD. N Engl J Med. 2019;381:2304–2314.
agement of new-onset postoperative atrial fibrillation 4. Hollowell JG, Staehling NW, Flanders WD, et al. 4. Tongers J, Schwerdtfeger B, Klein G, et al. Incidence
utilizing insertable cardiac monitor technology to Serum TSH, T(4), and thyroid antibodies in the United and clinical relevance of supraventricular tachyar-
observe recurrence of AF (MONITOR-AF). Pacing Clin States population (1988 to 1994): National Health and rhythmias in pulmonary hypertension. Am Heart J.
Electrophysiol. 2016;39:1083–1089. Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III). J Clin 2007;153:127–132.
7. Perino AC, Fan J, Schmitt SK, et al. Treating spe- Endocrinol Metab. 2002;87:489–499.
5. Showkathali R, Tayebjee MH, Grapsa J, et al. Right
cialty and outcomes in newly diagnosed atrial fibrilla-
5. Frost L, Vestergaard P, Mosekilde L. Hyperthyroid- atrial flutter isthmus ablation is feasible and results in
tion: from the TREAT-AF study. J Am Coll Cardiol.
ism and risk of atrial fibrillation or flutter: a acute clinical improvement in patients with persistent
2017;70:78–86.
population-based study. Arch Intern Med. 2004;164: atrial flutter and severe pulmonary arterial hyperten-
8. Sanna T, Diener HC, Passman RS, et al. Cryptogenic 1675–1678. sion. Int J Cardiol. 2011;149:279–280.
stroke and atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2014;371:
6. Nakazawa HK, Sakurai K, Hamada N, et al. Man- 6. Ruiz-Cano MJ, Gonzalez-Mansilla A, Escribano P,
1261.
agement of atrial fibrillation in the post-thyrotoxic et al. Clinical implications of supraventricular ar-
9. Ha ACT, Verma S, Mazer CD, et al. Effect of state. Am J Med. 1982;72:903–906. rhythmias in patients with severe pulmonary arterial
continuous electrocardiogram monitoring on detection hypertension. Int J Cardiol. 2011;146:105–106.
7. Shimizu T, Koide S, Noh JY, et al. Hyperthyroidism
of undiagnosed atrial fibrillation after hospitalization
and the management of atrial fibrillation. Thyroid. 7. Bradfield J, Shapiro S, Finch W, et al. Catheter
for cardiac surgery: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA
Netw Open. 2021;4:e2121867.
2002;12:489–493. ablation of typical atrial flutter in severe pulmonary
hypertension. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2012;23:
10. Walkey AJ, Quinn EK, Winter MR, et al. Practice 8. Klein I, Ojamaa K. Thyroid hormone and the car-
1185–1190.
patterns and outcomes associated with use of anti- diovascular system. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:501–
coagulation among patients with atrial fibrillation 509. 8. Olsson KM, Nickel NP, Tongers J, et al. Atrial flutter
during sepsis. JAMA Cardiol. 2016;1:682–690. and fibrillation in patients with pulmonary hyperten-
9. Tagami T, Yambe Y, Tanaka T, et al. Short-
sion. Int J Cardiol. 2013;167:2300–2305.
11. Quon MJ, Behlouli H, Pilote L. Anticoagulant term effects of beta-adrenergic antagonists and
use and risk of ischemic stroke and bleeding in methimazole in new-onset thyrotoxicosis caused by 9. Wen L, Sun ML, An P, et al. Frequency of supra-
patients with secondary atrial fibrillation associated Graves’ disease. Intern Med. 2012;51:2285–2290. ventricular arrhythmias in patients with idiopathic
with acute coronary syndromes, acute pulmonary pulmonary arterial hypertension. Am J Cardiol.
10. Nilsson OR, Karlberg BE, Kagedal B, et al. Non-
disease, or sepsis. J Am Coll Cardiol EP. 2018;4: 2014;114:1420–1425.
selective and selective beta-1-adrenoceptor blocking
386–393. 10. Cannillo M, Grosso Marra W, Gili S, et al. Supra-
agents in the treatment of hyperthyroidism. Acta Med
12. Massera D, Wang D, Vorchheimer DA, et al. Scand. 1979;206:21–25. ventricular arrhythmias in patients with pulmonary
Increased risk of stroke and mortality following new- arterial hypertension. Am J Cardiol. 2015;116:1883–
11. McDevitt DG, Nelson JK. Comparative trial of
onset atrial fibrillation during hospitalization. Euro- 1889.
atenolol and propranolol in hyperthyroidism. Br J Clin
pace. 2017;19:929–936. 11. Smith B, Genuardi MV, Koczo A, et al. Atrial ar-
Pharmacol. 1978;6:233–237.
13. Klein Klouwenberg PM, Frencken JF, Kuipers S, rhythmias are associated with increased mortality in
12. Jansson S, Lie-Karlsen K, Stenqvist O, et al. Oxygen
et al. Incidence, predictors, and outcomes of new- pulmonary arterial hypertension. Pulm Circ. 2018;8:
consumption in patients with hyperthyroidism before
onset atrial fibrillation in critically ill patients with 2045894018790316.
and after treatment with beta-blockade versus thyro-
sepsis. a cohort study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 12. Kamada H, Kaneyama J, Inoue YY, et al. Long term
static treatment: a prospective randomized study. Ann
2017;195:205–211. prognosis in patients with pulmonary hypertension
Surg. 2001;233:60–64.
14. Kuipers S, Klein Klouwenberg PM, Cremer OL. undergoing catheter ablation for supraventricular
Incidence, risk factors and outcomes of new-onset 13. Feely J, Peden N. Use of beta-adrenoceptor tachycardia. Sci Rep. 2021;11:16176.
atrial fibrillation in patients with sepsis: a systematic blocking drugs in hyperthyroidism. Drugs. 1984;27:
425–446. 13. Ye J, Yao P, Shi X, et al. A systematic literature
review. Crit Care. 2014;18:688.
review and meta-analysis on the impact of COPD on
15. Walkey AJ, Wiener RS, Ghobrial JM, et al. Incident 14. Goldstein SA, Green J, Huber K, et al. Character- atrial fibrillation patient outcome. Heart Lung.
stroke and mortality associated with new-onset atrial istics and outcomes of atrial fibrillation in patients with 2022;51:67–74.
fibrillation in patients hospitalized with severe sepsis. thyroid disease (from the ARISTOTLE trial). Am J Car-
14. Bikdeli B, Abou Ziki MD, Lip GYH. Pulmonary em-
JAMA. 2011;306:2248–2254. diol. 2019;124:1406–1412.
bolism and atrial fibrillation: two sides of the same
16. McIntyre WF, Vadakken ME, Rai AS, et al. Incidence 15. Ari H, Gürdogan M, Erdogan E, et al. Short-term coin? A systematic review. Semin Thromb Hemost.
and recurrence of new-onset atrial fibrillation detected outcome of early electrical cardioversion for atrial 2017;43:849–863.
during hospitalization for non-cardiac surgery: a sys- fibrillation in hyperthyroid versus euthyroid patients.
15. Noubiap JJ, Nyaga UF, Middeldorp ME, et al. Fre-
tematic review and meta-analysis. Can J Anaesth. Cardiol J. 2012;19:53–60.
quency and prognostic significance of atrial fibrillation
2021;68:1045–1056. 16. Razvi S, Jabbar A, Pingitore A, et al. Thyroid hor- in acute pulmonary embolism: a pooled analysis. Respir
mones and cardiovascular function and diseases. J Am Med. 2022;199:106862.
17. Chyou JY, Barkoudah E, Dukes JW, et al. Atrial
Coll Cardiol. 2018;71:1781–1796.
Fibrillation occurring during acute hospitalization: a 16. Proietti M, Laroche C, Drozd M, et al. Impact of
scientific statement from the American Heart Associ- 17. Bruere H, Fauchier L, Bernard Brunet A, et al. chronic obstructive pulmonary disease on prognosis in
ation. Circulation. 2023;147:e676–e698. History of thyroid disorders in relation to clinical atrial fibrillation: a report from the EURObservational
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 163
-, 2023:-–- ---
Research Programme Pilot Survey on Atrial Fibrillation 13. Yalaz M, Levent E, Olukman M, et al. Role of associated with atrial fibrillation after oesophagec-
(EORP-AF) General Registry. Am Heart J. 2016;181:83– digoxin-like immunoreactive substance in the patho- tomy. Br J Surg. 2019;106:534–547.
91. genesis of transient tachypnea of newborn. Biomed
13. Hu YF, Liu CJ, Chang PM, et al. Incident thrombo-
Res Int. 2013;2013:704763.
17. Baker JG, Wilcox RG. Beta-lockers, heart disease embolism and heart failure associated with new-onset
and COPD: current controversies and uncertainties. 14. Anugu VR, Nalluri N, Asti D, et al. New-onset lone atrial fibrillation in cancer patients. Int J Cardiol.
Thorax. 2017;72:271–276. atrial fibrillation in pregnancy. Ther Adv Cardiovasc Dis. 2013;165:355–357.
18. Sivak JA, Raina A, Forfia PR. Assessment of the 2016;10:274–276. 14. Murtaza M, Baig MMA, Ahmed J, et al. Higher
physiologic contribution of right atrial function to total 15. Otto CM, Nishimura RA, Bonow RO, et al. 2020 mortality associated with new-onset atrial fibrillation
right heart function in patients with and without pul- ACC/AHA guideline for the management of patients in cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-
monary arterial hypertension. Pulm Circ. 2016;6:322– with valvular heart disease: a report of the American analysis. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022;9:867002.
328. College of Cardiology/American Heart Association 15. Guha A, Fradley MG, Dent SF, et al. Incidence, risk
Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am factors, and mortality of atrial fibrillation in breast
10.13. Pregnancy Coll Cardiol. 2021;77:e25–e197. cancer: a SEER-Medicare analysis. Eur Heart J.
1. Georgiopoulos G, Tsiachris D, Kordalis A, et al. 16. Hoeltzenbein M, Beck E, Meixner K, et al. Preg- 2022;43:300–312.
Pharmacotherapeutic strategies for atrial fibrillation in nancy outcome after exposure to the novel oral anti- 16. Xiao L, Salem JE, Clauss S, et al. Ibrutinib-mediated
pregnancy. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2019;20:1625– coagulant rivaroxaban in women at suspected risk for atrial fibrillation attributable to inhibition of C-termi-
1636. thromboembolic events: a case series from the German nal Src kinase. Circulation. 2020;142:2443–2455.
Embryotox Pharmacovigilance Centre. Clin Res Cardiol.
2. Tamirisa KP, Elkayam U, Briller JE, et al. 17. Caldeira D, Alves D, Costa J, et al. Ibrutinib in-
2016;105:117–126.
Arrhythmias in pregnancy. J Am Coll Cardiol EP. creases the risk of hypertension and atrial fibrillation:
2022;8:120–135. systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One.
10.14. Cardio-Oncology and Anticoagulation
3. van Hagen IM, Roos-Hesselink JW, Ruys TP, et al. Considerations 2019;14:e0211228.
Pregnancy in women with a mechanical heart valve: 18. Melloni C, Shrader P, Carver J, et al. Management
data of the European Society of Cardiology Registry of 1. Beavers CJ, Rodgers JE, Bagnola AJ, et al. Cardio- and outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation and a
Pregnancy and Cardiac Disease (ROPAC). Circulation. oncology drug interactions: a scientific statement from history of cancer: the ORBIT-AF registry. Eur Heart J
2015;132:132–142. the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2022;145: Qual Care Clin Outcomes. 2017;3:192–197.
4. Vaidya VR, Arora S, Patel N, et al. Burden of e811–e838.
19. Peixoto de Miranda EJF, Takahashi T, Iwamoto F,
arrhythmia in pregnancy. Circulation. 2017;135:619– 2. van Leeuwen RWF, Jansman FGA, van den Bemt P, et al. Drug-drug interactions of 257 antineoplastic and
621. et al. Drug-drug interactions in patients treated for supportive care agents with 7 anticoagulants: a
5. Salam AM, Ertekin E, van Hagen IM, et al. Atrial cancer: a prospective study on clinical interventions. comprehensive review of interactions and mecha-
fibrillation or flutter during pregnancy in patients with Ann Oncol. 2015;26:992–997. nisms. Clin Appl Thromb Hemost. 2020;26:
structural heart disease: data from the ROPAC (Reg- 1076029620936325.
3. Kim PY, Irizarry-Caro JA, Ramesh T, et al. How to
istry on Pregnancy and Cardiac Disease). J Am Coll 20. Higuchi S, Kabeya Y, Matsushita K, et al. Incidence
diagnose and manage QT prolongation in cancer pa-
Cardiol EP. 2015;1:284–292. and complications of perioperative atrial fibrillation
tients. J Am Coll Cardiol CardioOnc. 2021;3:145–149.
6. Lee MS, Chen W, Zhang Z, et al. Atrial fibrillation after non-cardiac surgery for malignancy. PLoS One.
4. Ye JZ, Hansen FB, Mills RW, et al. Oncotherapeutic 2019;14:e0216239.
and atrial flutter in pregnant women-a population-
protein kinase inhibitors associated with pro-arrhythmic
based study. J Am Heart Assoc. 2016;5:e003182. 21. Al-Kindi SG, Oliveira GH. Prevalence of preexisting
liability. J Am Coll Cardiol CardioOnc. 2021;3:88–97.
7. Scantlebury DC, Kattah AG, Weissgerber TL, et al. cardiovascular disease in patients with different types
5. O’Neal WT, Lakoski SG, Qureshi W, et al. Relation of cancer: the unmet need for onco-cardiology. Mayo
Impact of a history of hypertension in pregnancy on
between cancer and atrial fibrillation (from the REa- Clin Proc. 2016;91:81–83.
later diagnosis of atrial fibrillation. J Am Heart Assoc.
sons for Geographic And Racial Differences in Stroke
2018;7:e007584. 22. Chung MK, Eckhardt LL, Chen LY, et al. Lifestyle
Study). Am J Cardiol. 2015;115:1090–1094.
8. Body C, Christie JA. Gastrointestinal diseases in and risk factor modification for reduction of atrial
pregnancy: nausea, vomiting, hyperemesis grav- 6. Jain P, Zhao S, Lee HJ, et al. Ibrutinib With rituximab fibrillation: a scientific statement from the American
idarum, gastroesophageal reflux disease, constipation, in first-line treatment of older patients with mantle Heart Association. Circulation. 2020;141:e750–e772.
and diarrhea. Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2016;45: cell lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40:202–212.
23. Rienstra M, Hobbelt AH, Alings M, et al. Targeted
267–283. 7. Atterman A, Friberg L, Asplund K, et al. Net benefit therapy of underlying conditions improves sinus
9. Hindricks G, Potpara T, Dagres N, et al. 2020 ESC of oral anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation rhythm maintenance in patients with persistent atrial
guidelines for the diagnosis and management of and active cancer: a nationwide cohort study. Euro- fibrillation: results of the RACE 3 trial. Eur Heart J.
atrial fibrillation. Developed in collaboration with the pace. 2020;22:58–65. 2018;39:2987–2996.
European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery 8. Mariani MV, Magnocavallo M, Straito M, et al. Direct 24. Verdecchia P, Staessen JA, Angeli F, et al. Usual
(EACTS): the Task Force for the diagnosis and oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonists in versus tight control of systolic blood pressure in non-
management of atrial fibrillation of the European patients with atrial fibrillation and cancer a meta- diabetic patients with hypertension (Cardio-Sis): an
Society of Cardiology (ESC). Developed with the analysis. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2021;51:419–429. open-label randomised trial. Lancet. 2009;374:525–
special contribution of the European Heart Rhythm 533.
Association (EHRA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J. 2021;42: 9. Jakobsen CB, Lamberts M, Carlson N, et al. Inci-
dence of atrial fibrillation in different major cancer 25. Rao MP, Halvorsen S, Wojdyla D, et al. Blood
373–498.
subtypes: a nationwide population-based 12 year pressure control and risk of stroke or systemic embo-
10. Halpern DG, Weinberg CR, Pinnelas R, et al. Use of lism in patients with atrial fibrillation: results from the
follow up study. BMC Cancer. 2019;19:1105.
medication for cardiovascular disease during preg- Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Throm-
nancy: JACC state-of-the-art review. J Am Coll Cardiol. 10. Yuan M, Zhang Z, Tse G, et al. Association of cancer boembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (ARISTOTLE)
2019;73:457–476. and the risk of developing atrial fibrillation: a sys- Trial. J Am Heart Assoc. 2015;4:e002015.
tematic review and meta-analysis. Cardiol Res Pract.
11. Enriquez AD, Economy KE, Tedrow UB. Contem- 26. Toufektzian L, Zisis C, Balaka C, et al. Effectiveness
2019;2019:8985273.
porary management of arrhythmias during pregnancy. of brain natriuretic peptide in predicting postoperative
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2014;7:961–967. 11. Farmakis D, Parissis J, Filippatos G. Insights into atrial fibrillation in patients undergoing non-cardiac
12. Regitz-Zagrosek V, Roos-Hesselink JW, onco-cardiology: atrial fibrillation in cancer. J Am Coll thoracic surgery. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg.
Bauersachs J, et al. 2018 ESC guidelines for the man- Cardiol. 2014;63:945–953. 2015;20:654–657.
agement of cardiovascular diseases during pregnancy. 12. Schizas D, Kosmopoulos M, Giannopoulos S, et al. 27. Amar D, Zhang H, Tan KS, et al. A brain natriuretic
Eur Heart J. 2018;39:3165–3241. Meta-analysis of risk factors and complications peptide-based prediction model for atrial fibrillation
164 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
after thoracic surgery: development and internal vali- 3. Proietti M, Marzona I, Vannini T, et al. Impact of liver impairment on edoxaban pharmacokinetics and
dation. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2019;157:2493–2499 disease on oral anticoagulant prescription and major pharmacodynamics. J Clin Pharmacol. 2015;55:1395–
e2491. adverse events in patients with atrial fibrillation: 1405.
analysis from a population-based cohort study. Eur
28. Chang EK, Chanson D, Teh JB, et al. Atrial fibril- 15. Frost CE, Ly V, Garonzik SM. Apixaban Pharmaco-
Heart J Cardiovasc Pharmacother. 2021;7:f84–f92.
lation in patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic kinetics and pharmacodynamics in subjects with mild
cell transplantation. J Clin Oncol. 2021;39:902–910. 4. Pastori D, Lip GYH, Farcomeni A, et al. Incidence of or moderate hepatic impairment. Drugs R D. 2021;21:
bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation and 375–384.
29. Hemu M, Zimmerman A, Kalra D, et al. Pretrans-
advanced liver fibrosis on treatment with vitamin K or
plant cardiac evaluation using novel technology. J Clin 16. Stangier J, Stähle H, Rathgen K, et al. Pharmaco-
non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants. Int J
Med. 2019;8:690. kinetics and pharmacodynamics of dabigatran etex-
Cardiol. 2018;264:58–63.
ilate, an oral direct thrombin inhibitor, with
30. Ganatra S, Sharma A, Shah S, et al. Ibrutinib-
5. Pastori D, Sciacqua A, Marcucci R, et al. Prevalence coadministration of digoxin. J Clin Pharmacol. 2012;52:
associated atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol EP.
and impact of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease in atrial 243–250.
2018;4:1491–1500.
fibrillation. Mayo Clin Proc. 2020;95:513–520.
31. Abushukair H, Syaj S, Ababneh O, et al. First- versus
second-generation Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors in 6. Kuo L, Chao TF, Liu CJ, et al. Liver cirrhosis in pa- 11. Future Research Needs
Waldenström’s macroglobulinemia: a systematic re- tients with atrial fibrillation: would oral anti-
coagulation have a net clinical benefit for stroke 1. Verma A, Ha ACT, Kirchhof P, et al. The Optimal
view and meta-analysis. Am J Hematol. 2022;97:942–
prevention? J Am Heart Assoc. 2017;6:e005307. Anti-Coagulation for Enhanced-Risk Patients Post-
950.
Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation (OCEAN) trial.
32. Buza V, Rajagopalan B, Curtis AB. Cancer 7. Chen S, Purerfellner H, Meyer C, et al. Anti-
Am Heart J. 2018;197:124–132.
treatment-induced arrhythmias: focus on chemo- coagulation in atrial fibrillation and liver disease: a
pooled-analysis of >20 000 patients. Eur Heart J 2. Schrickel JW, Linhart M, Bänsch D, et al. Rationale
therapy and targeted therapies. Circ Arrhythm Elec-
Cardiovasc Pharmacother. 2022;8:336–345. and design of the ODIn-AF Trial: randomized evalua-
trophysiol. 2017;10:e005443.
tion of the prevention of silent cerebral thromboem-
33. Fradley MG, Beckie TM, Brown SA, et al. Recogni- 8. Lee SR, Lee HJ, Choi EK, et al. Direct oral antico-
bolism by oral anticoagulation with dabigatran after
tion, prevention, and management of arrhythmias and agulants in patients with atrial fibrillation and liver
pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation. Clin Res
autonomic disorders in cardio-oncology: a scientific disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;73:3295–3308.
Cardiol. 2016;105:95–105.
statement from the American Heart Association. Cir- 9. Lee HF, Chan YH, Chang SH, et al. Effectiveness
3. Riley MP, Zado E, Hutchinson MD, et al. Risk of
culation. 2021;144:e41–e55. and safety of non-vitamin K antagonist oral antico-
stroke or transient ischemic attack after atrial fibrilla-
agulant and warfarin in cirrhotic patients with non-
10.15. CKD and Kidney Failure tion ablation with oral anticoagulant use guided by
valvular atrial fibrillation. J Am Heart Assoc. 2019;8:
ECG monitoring and pulse assessment. J Cardiovasc
1. Alonso A, Lopez FL, Matsushita K, et al. Chronic e011112.
Electrophysiol. 2014;25:591–596.
kidney disease is associated with the incidence of atrial 10. Wang CL, Wu VC, Kuo CF, et al. Efficacy and safety
4. Passman R, Leong-Sit P, Andrei AC, et al. Targeted
fibrillation: the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in
anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation guided by
(ARIC) study. Circulation. 2011;123:2946–2953. atrial fibrillation patients with impaired liver function:
continuous rhythm assessment with an insertable
2. Watanabe H, Watanabe T, Sasaki S, et al. Close a retrospective cohort study. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018;7:
cardiac monitor: the Rhythm Evaluation for
bidirectional relationship between chronic kidney dis- e009263.
Anticoagulation With Continuous Monitoring (REACT.
ease and atrial fibrillation: the Niigata preventive 11. Lee ZY, Suah BH, Teo YH, et al. Comparison of the COM) Pilot Study. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2016;27:
medicine study. Am Heart J. 2009;158:629–636. efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants and 264–270.
3. Bansal N, Fan D, Hsu CY, et al. Incident atrial vitamin k antagonists in patients with atrial fibrillation
fibrillation and risk of end-stage renal disease in adults and concomitant liver cirrhosis: a systematic review
with chronic kidney disease. Circulation. 2013;127:569– and meta-analysis. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs. 2022;22:
574. 157–165. KEY WORDS ACC/AHA Clinical Practice
12. Kubitza D, Roth A, Becka M, et al. Effect of hepatic Guidelines, acute coronary syndrome, alcohol,
10.16. Anticoagulation Use in Patients With
impairment on the pharmacokinetics and pharmaco- anticoagulants, anticoagulation agents,
Liver Disease
dynamics of a single dose of rivaroxaban, an oral, antiplatelet agents, apixaban, atrial fibrillation,
direct Factor Xa inhibitor. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2013;76: atrial flutter, cardioversion, catheter ablation,
1. Qamar A, Antman EM, Ruff CT, et al. Edoxaban
89–98. coronary artery disease, coronary heart disease,
versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation and
dabigatran, edoxaban, exercise, heart failure,
history of liver disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;74:179– 13. Menichelli D, Ronca V, Di Rocco A, et al. Direct oral
hypertension, idarucizumab, left atrial
189. anticoagulants and advanced liver disease: a system-
appendage occlusion, myocardial infarction,
2. Serper M, Weinberg EM, Cohen JB, et al. Mortality atic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Clin Invest.
obesity, percutaneous coronary intervention,
and hepatic decompensation in patients with cirrhosis 2021;51:e13397.
pulmonary vein isolation, risk factors,
and atrial fibrillation treated with anticoagulation. 14. Mendell J, Johnson L, Chen S. An open-label, rivaroxaban, sleep apnea, stents, stroke, surgical
Hepatology. 2021;73:219–232. phase 1 study to evaluate the effects of hepatic ablation, thromboembolism, warfarin
JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023 Joglar et al 165
-, 2023:-–- ---
Institutional,
Ownership/ Organizational,
Committee Speakers Partnership/ Personal or Other Expert
Member Employment Consultant Bureau Principal Research Financial Benefit Witness
José A. Joglar UT Southwestern Medical Center— None None None None None None
(Chair) Professor and Vice Chair for Clinical
Affairs at Parkland, Department of
Internal Medicine Elizabeth Thaxton and
Ellis Batten Page Professorship
in Cardiac Electrophysiology Research
Director of Cardiac Electrophysiology
Fellowship Program
Mina K. Chung (Vice Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland Clinic Lerner NOT RELEVANT None None NOT RELEVANT NOT RELEVANT None
Chair) College of Medicine of Case Western n ABIM* n AHA* n Abbott‡
Reserve University—Cardiac Pacing and n n n
Geisinger Health NIH* AHA*
Electrophysiology
Systems n Biosense Webster‡
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine,
Heart and Vascular Institute n Boston Scientific‡
Department of Cardiovascular & Metabolic n Elsevier
Sciences, Lerner Research Institute n FNRA
n Hamilton Health
Sciences/PHRI‡
n HRS†
n Medtronic‡
n Myocardial
Solutions‡
n UptoDate
Anastasia L. St. Louis College of Pharmacy AT UHSP— None RELEVANT None None None None
Armbruster Associate Professor, Pharmacy Practice n AstraZeneca
Emelia J. Benjamin Boston University Schools of Medicine None None None NOT RELEVANT NOT RELEVANT None
and Public Health, n AHA* n Circulation†
The Framingham Heart Study—Associate n n
Cardia European Heart
Provost for Faculty Development,
(DSMB)† Journal†
Boston University Medical Campus
n NIH* n Nature Reviews
Vice Chair, Faculty Development and
Diversity, Department of Medicine Cardiology†
Cardiologist, Boston Medical Center, Boston
University Medical Group
Janice Y. Chyou Icahn School of Medicine at Mount None None None None NOT RELEVANT None
Sinai—Assistant Clinical Professor, n AHA†
Cardiac Electrophysiology, Cardiology n HRS†
Heart and Heart Rhythm Care
n McGraw Hill
Edmond M. Cronin Temple University Hospital—Main RELEVANT None None None NOT RELEVANT None
Campus—Temple Heart & Vascular n Medtronic n Biosense Webster§
Institute n Janssen
Pharmaceuticals§
n Medtronic§
Anita Deswal The University of Texas MD Anderson None None None None NOT RELEVANT None
Cancer Center—Chair, Department of n ACC*
Cardiology n CPRIT*
Ting Tsung and Wei Fong Chao
n NIH
Distinguished Chair
Professor of Medicine
Lee Eckhardt University of Wisconsin-Madison— None None None None None None
Associate Professor of Medicine
Gary and Marie Weiner Professor in
Cardiovascular Medicine Research
Cellular and Molecular Arrhythmia Research
Program
Division of Cardiovascular Medicine
APPENDIX 1. CONTINUED
Institutional,
Ownership/ Organizational,
Committee Speakers Partnership/ Personal or Other Expert
Member Employment Consultant Bureau Principal Research Financial Benefit Witness
Zachary D. University of Wisconsin-Madison School None None None None None None
Goldberger of Medicine and Public Health
Division of Cardiovascular Medicine/
Electrophysiology—Associate
Professor of Medicine Program Director,
Cardiovascular Disease Fellowship
Associate Program Director, Clinical Cardiac
Electrophysiology Fellowship
Rakesh University of Louisville—Associate RELEVANT RELEVANT None None NOT RELEVANT None
Gopinathannair Professor of Medicine (Adjunct) n Abbott* n Pfizer† n AHA
University of Missouri-Columbia—Cardiac EP n n n
Biosense Webster Zoll† Atricure
Lab Director, Kansas City Heart Rhythm
n Biotronik n Geisinger Health
Institute
EP Medical Director, Research Medical n Boston Scientific* System
Center n HRS
n Johnson &
Professor of Medicine Johnson n Janssen
n Pfizer* Pharmaceuticals
n Kowa
n Sanofi-Aventis
Pharmaceuticals
n Zoll†
n Medtronic
NOT RELEVANT
n Methodist Health
n Academy for
Continued System
Healthcare n Novartis
Learning n Pacemate†
n Philips
Bulent Gorenek Eskisehir Osmangazi University School RELEVANT None None None None None
of Medicine—Cardiovascular Diseases, n AstraZeneca
Arrhythmias in Intensive Cardiac Care n Bayer
Unit.
n Daiichi Sankyo
Professor in Cardiology
Vice Director, Cardiology Department n Roche
NOT RELEVANT
n Sandoz
Paul L. Hess University of Colorado School of None None None None NOT RELEVANT None
Medicine n CPC Clinical
Seattle-Denver Center of Innovation Research*
Rocky Mountain Regional VA Medical n VA CSP
Center—Associate Professor of Medicine
Mark Hlatky Stanford University School of Medicine— RELEVANT None None None NOT RELEVANT None
Professor of Health Policy, and of n Boehringer n George Institute
Medicine (Cardiovascular Medicine), Ingelheim
and, by courtesy, of Epidemiology and NOT RELEVANT
Population Health n BCBS Center for
Effectiveness
Evaluation*
Gail Hogan Patient Representative None None None None NOT RELEVANT None
n Ohio State
University Wexner
Medical Center
Chinwe Ibeh Columbia University CUIMC/ None None None None None None
Neurological Institute of New York—
Assistant Professor of Neurology
Department of Neurology
Division of Stroke and Cerebrovascular
Disease
Julia H. Indik University of Arizona College of None None None None None None
Medicine—Professor of Medicine
Director, Cardiovascular Disease Fellowship
Program
Division of Cardiology/Sarver Heart Center
APPENDIX 1. CONTINUED
Institutional,
Ownership/ Organizational,
Committee Speakers Partnership/ Personal or Other Expert
Member Employment Consultant Bureau Principal Research Financial Benefit Witness
Kazuhiko Kido West Virginia University—Cardiology None None None None None None
Pharmacy Specialist, Advanced Heart
Failure and Pulmonary Hypertension
Clinical Assistant Professor of Clinical
Pharmacy
Fred Kusumoto Mayo Clinic Jacksonville None None None NOT RELEVANT NOT RELEVANT None
n EP n Biotronik§
Research
Founda-
tion (TAP-
CHF Trial)
Mark S. Link UT Southwestern Medical Center, None None None None NOT RELEVANT None
Dallas—Professor of Medicine. Director, n Circulation*
Cardiac Electrophysiology. Laurence and n Journal Watch
Susan Hirsch/Centex Distinguished Chair
Cardiology
in Heart Disease
n UpToDate*
Department of Internal Medicine, Division of
Cardiology
Kathleen T. Linta Patient Representative None None None None None None
Gregory M. Marcus University of California, San Francisco— NOT RELEVANT None None NOT RELEVANT NOT RELEVANT None
Professor of Medicine in Residence n InCarda* n Baylis* n InCarda*
Associate Chief of Cardiology for Research RELEVANT
Endowed Professor of Atrial Fibrillation n Johnson &
Research
Johnson
Patrick M. McCarthy Northwestern Medicine—Executive RELEVANT None None RELEVANT NOT RELEVANT None
Director, Bluhm Cardiovascular Institute n Abbott n Abbott† n Egnite
Vice President, Northwestern Medical Group n n Siemens
Atricure
Chief, Division of Cardiac Surgery
n Edwards RELEVANT
Heller-Sacks Professor of Surgery
Lifesciences* n Edwards
n Medtronic Lifesciences*
Nimesh Patel UT Southwestern Medical Center— None None None None NOT RELEVANT None
Assistant Professor of Medicine, Clinical n Abbvie§
Cardiac Electrophysiology n Novo Nordisk§
Kristen K. Patton University of Washington—Professor of None None None None NOT RELEVANT None
Medicine n ACGME†
n AHA†
n HRS†
n JAMA
n US FDA CDRH*
Marco V. Perez Stanford University—Associate RELEVANT None NOT NOT RELEVANT None NOT
Professor-University Med Line n Biotronik* RELEVANT n Apple* RELEVANT
Department of Medicine, Med/ n n Feather n
Defendant,
Boehringer NIH*
Cardiovascular Health* Digital
Ingelheim*
health tools
n Boston Scientific* case, 2021
n Bristol Myers
Squibb
n Johnson &
Johnson
APPENDIX 1. CONTINUED
Institutional,
Ownership/ Organizational,
Committee Speakers Partnership/ Personal or Other Expert
Member Employment Consultant Bureau Principal Research Financial Benefit Witness
Jonathan P. Piccini Duke University School of Medicine— RELEVANT None None RELEVANT NOT RELEVANT None
Department of Medicine n Abbott* n Abbott* n LivaNova (CEAC)*
n Abbvie n Bayer*
n ARCA Biopharma n Boston
n Biotronik Scientific*
n iRhythm*
n Bristol Myers
Squibb* n Philips*
n Electrophysiology NOT RELEVANT
Frontiers* n AAMI*
n Itamar Medical n Acutus
n Medtronic* Medical,
n
Inc. §
Milestone Medical
n AHA*
n Philips*
n Atricure§
n Recor
n Element
n Sanofi-Aventis*
Science
NOT RELEVANT
(DSMB)*
n UpToDate* n LivaNova
(CEAC)*
n LSI
Solutions§
Andrea M. Cooper University—Professor of RELEVANT None None None NOT RELEVANT None
Russo Medicine Director, Electrophysiology n Abbott n ABIM
and Arrhythmia Services n n
Atricure Boston Scientific‡
Director of Research, Cooper Heart Institute
n Biosense Webster n Kestra‡
Program Director, Clinical Cardiac
Electrophysiology Fellowship n Biotonik n MediLynx‡
n Boston Scientific n UpToDate
n Bristol Myers
Squibb
n Medtronic
n Pfizer
n Sanofi
NOT RELEVANT
n Medical Device
Business Services,
Inc.
n Pacemate
Prashanthan Sanders The University of Adelaide Royal None None None RELEVANT RELEVANT None
Adelaide Hospital—Director, Centre for n Abbott* n Abbott
Heart Rhythm Disorders n n
BD* Boston Scientific
Director, Cardiac Electrophysiology &
n Boston n CathRX
Pacing
NHMRC Practitioner Fellow Scientific* nMedtronic
n Medtronic* NOT RELEVANT
n Pacemate
Megan M. University of Washington—Assistant None None None NOT RELEVANT None None
Streur Professor and Endowed Faculty Fellow n NIH/NINR*
for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention
Department of Biobehavioral Nursing and
Health Informatics
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Cardiac
Electrophysiology
Department of Medicine
Kevin L. Duke University School of Medicine— RELEVANT None None None NOT RELEVANT None
Thomas Professor of Medicine n Biosense Webster n Community Health
Vice Dean for Diversity, Equity and Inclusion n Coalition†
Johnson &
Member in the Duke Clinical Research
Johnson
Institute
Sabrina Times§ American Heart Association/American TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
College of Cardiology Science and
Health Advisor, Guidelines
APPENDIX 1. CONTINUED
Institutional,
Ownership/ Organizational,
Committee Speakers Partnership/ Personal or Other Expert
Member Employment Consultant Bureau Principal Research Financial Benefit Witness
James E. Indiana University School of Medicine— None None None NOT RELEVANT NOT RELEVANT None
Tisdale Professor n AHRQ* n American Society
Department of Pharmacy Practice n for Health-
AHA*
College of Pharmacy Systems
n NIH*
Purdue University and Adjunct Professor Pharmacists
Division of Clinical Pharmacology n AZCert†
n Crediblemeds.org†
n Nova
Southeastern
University
n Pharmacotherapy
Journal
n Pharmacotherapy
Publications, Inc. †
Anne Marie Boston Children’s Hospital, Brigham and NOT RELEVANT None None None NOT RELEVANT None
Valente Women’s Hospital—Co-Director, n Elsevier* n Elsevier*
Pregnancy and Cardiovascular Disease n Journal of the
Program
ACC*
Brigham and Women’s Hospital
n United
Associate Professor, Medicine and Pediatrics
Harvard Medical School Therapeutics§
Section Chief, Boston Adult Congenital
Heart Disease (BACH) and Pulmonary
Hypertension Program
David R. Van Cleveland Clinic, ND-50—Department of None None None NOT RELEVANT None None
Wagoner Cardiovascular & Metabolic Sciences n AHA*
n NIH/
NHLBI*
This table represents all relationships of committee members with industry and other entities that were reported by authors, including those not deemed to be relevant to this document, at the
time this document was under development. The table does not necessarily reflect relationships with industry at the time of publication. A person is deemed to have a significant interest in a
business if the interest represents ownership of $5% of the voting stock or share of the business entity, or ownership of $$5,000 of the fair market value of the business entity; or if funds
received by the person from the business entity exceed 5% of the person’s gross income for the previous year. Relationships that exist with no financial benefit are also included for the purpose of
transparency. Relationships in this table are modest unless otherwise noted. Please refer to https://www.acc.org/guidelines/about-guidelines-and-clinical-documents/relationships-with-
industry-policy for definitions of disclosure categories or additional information about the ACC/AHA Disclosure Policy for Writing Committees.
*Significant relationship.
†No financial benefit.
‡This disclosure was entered under the Clinical Trial Enroller category in the ACC’s disclosure system. To appear in this category, the author acknowledges that there is no direct or institutional
relationship with the trial sponsor as defined in the (ACCF or AHA/ACC) Disclosure Policy for Writing Committees.
§Sabrina Times is an AHA/ACC joint staff member and acts as the Science and Health Advisor for the “2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation.”
No relevant relationships to report. Nonvoting author on measures and not included/counted in the RWI balance for this writing committee.
AAMI indicates Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation; ABIM, American Board of Internal Medicine; ACC, American College of Cardiology; ACGME, Accreditation Council for
Graduate Medical Education; AHA, American Heart Association; AHRQ, Agency for Health Research and Quality; BCBS, Blue Cross Blue Shield; BD, Becton Dickinson; CDRH, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health; CEAC, Clinical Event Adjudication Committee; CPRIT, Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas; CUIMC, Columbia University Irving Medical Center; DSMB, data and
safety monitoring board; EP, electrophysiology; FDA, US Food and Drug Administration; FNRA, French National Research Agency; HRS, Heart Rhythm Society; JAMA, Journal of the American
Medical Association; NIH, National Institutes of Health; NINR, National Institute of Nursing Research; NHLBI, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; NHMRC, National Health and Medical
Research Council; PHRI, Population Health Research Institute; UHSP, University of Health Science and Pharmacy in St. Louis; UT, University of Texas; and VA CSP, Veterans Affairs Cooperative
Studies Program.
170 Joglar et al JACC VOL. -, NO. -, 2023
--- -, 2023:-–-
Institutional,
Organizational,
Ownership/ or Other
Speakers Partnership/ Personal Financial Expert
Reviewer Representation Employment Consultant Bureau Principal Research Benefit Witness
Andrew D. AHA/ACC Atrial Fibrillation Peer University of British None None n CCS* None None None
Krahn Review Committee Chair Columbia n HRS*
Jason G. AHA/ACC Atrial Fibrillation Peer University of Montreal n Biosense n Bayer None n Medtronic† None None
Andrade Review Committee Webster n Bristol
n Medtronic Myers
Squibb/
Pfizer
Alliance
n Servier
Craig J. AHA/ACC Atrial Fibrillation Peer University of None None None None None None
Beavers Review Committee, representing Kentucky College of
ACCP Pharmacy
James M. AHA/ACC Atrial Fibrillation Peer Superintendent, None None None None None None
Bischoff Review Committee, Patient Retired
Representative
T. Jared AHA/ACC Atrial Fibrillation Peer University of Utah None None None n Altathera† n Abbott‡ None
Bunch Review Committee, representing School of Medicine n n
Boehringer Altathera‡
HRS
Ingelheim† n Cardiva‡
n St. Jude’s
Medical‡
Kristen Bova AHA/ACC Atrial Fibrillation Peer Duke University n Wolters Kluwer None None None None None
Campbell Review Committee
Lin Yee Chen AHA/ACC Atrial Fibrillation Peer University of None None None None n NIH† None
Review Committee Minnesota School of
Medicine
Robin Dharia AHA/ACC Atrial Fibrillation Peer Thomas Jefferson None None None None n NIH‡ None
Review Committee University
Michael P. AHA/ACC Atrial Fibrillation Peer University of Michigan None None None None None None
Dorsch Review Committee, representing
JCPM
Edward P. AHA/ACC Atrial Fibrillation Peer University of n Biosense None None n Abbott n Boston None
Gerstenfeld Review Committee California San Webster† (DSMB)† Scientific*
Francisco n Medtronic n Adagio*
n St. Jude Medical n Boston
Scientific*
n Thermedical
(DSMB)†
Aubrey E. Jones AHA/ACC Atrial Fibrillation Peer University of Utah None None None n AHRQ† None None
Review Committee College of Pharmacy n NIH-NHLBI†
Stephanie Dwyer AHA/ACC Atrial Fibrillation Peer University of Illinois None None None None None None
Kaluzna Review Committee Chicago College of
Pharmacy
Luke Masha AHA/ACC Atrial Fibrillation Peer Oregon Health & None None None None n Ancora‡ None
Review Committee Science University n Endotronix‡
Isabelle Nault AHA/ACC Atrial Fibrillation Peer Quebec Heart and n Bristol Myers n Bayer† None None None None
Review Committee Lung Institute Squibb n Biosense
n Pfizer Webster
n Medtronic
n Servier†
APPENDIX 2. CONTINUED
Institutional,
Organizational,
Ownership/ or Other
Speakers Partnership/ Personal Financial Expert
Reviewer Representation Employment Consultant Bureau Principal Research Benefit Witness
Peter A. AHA/ACC Atrial Fibrillation Peer Mayo Clinic None None None None n Anumana* None
Noseworthy Review Committee n Milestone‡
Cara N. Pellegrini AHA/ACC Atrial Fibrillation Peer University of n Abbott None None None None None
Review Committee California San n Biosense
Francisco
Webster
n Cook Medical
n Medtronic
Stylianos E. Tzeis AHA/ACC Atrial Fibrillation Peer Mitera Hospital n Pfizer None None None n Bayer‡ None
Review Committee
Annabelle Santos AHA/ACC Atrial Fibrillation Peer Rush University n Bristol Myers None None n NIH† n Apple* None
Volgman Review Committee Medical Center Squibb Founda- n Novartis‡
tion DCICDP
n Janssen
Pharmaceuticals
n Merck
n Pfizer
n Sanofi Aventis†
Emily P. Zeitler AHA/ACC Atrial Fibrillation Peer Dartmouth Hitchock n Abbott None None n Boston None None
Review Committee Medical Center n Scientific†
Biosense
Webster n Sanofi
n Medtronic Aventis*
This table represents all reviewers’ relationships with industry and other entities that were reported at the time of peer review, including those not deemed to be relevant to this document, at the
time this document was under review. The table does not necessarily reflect relationships with industry at the time of publication. A person is deemed to have a significant interest in a business if
the interest represents ownership of $5% of the voting stock or share of the business entity, or ownership of $5,000 of the fair market value of the business entity; or if funds received by the
person from the business entity exceed 5% of the person’s gross income for the previous year. Relationships that exist with no financial benefit are also included for the purpose of transparency.
Relationships in this table are modest unless otherwise noted. Please refer to http://www.acc.org/guidelines/about-guidelines-and-clinical-documents/relationships-with-industry-policy for
definitions of disclosure categories or additional information about the ACC/AHA Disclosure Policy for Writing Committees.
*No financial benefit.
†Significant relationship.
‡This disclosure was entered under the Clinical Trial Enroller category in the ACC’s disclosure system. To appear in this category, the author acknowledges that there is no direct or institutional
relationship with the trial sponsor as defined in the (ACCF or AHA/ACC) Disclosure Policy for Writing Committees.
ACC indicates American College of Cardiology; ACCF, American College of Cardiology Foundation; AACP, American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy; AHA, American Heart Association; AHRQ,
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; CCS, Canadian Cardiovascular Society; DCICDP, Diverse Clinical Investigator Career Development Program; DSMB; data and safety monitoring board;
HRS, Heart Rhythm Society; JCPM, ACC/AHA Joint Committee on Performance Measures, NHLBI, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; and NIH, National Institutes of Health.