Tag Archives: atrial fibrillation

Drug therapies include anticoagulants to reduce the risk of stroke and anti-arrhythmics to restore/maintain the normal heart rhythm or slow the heart rate in patients who remain in AF. Non-pharmacological management options include electrical cardioversion, which may be used to ‘shock’ the heart back to its normal rhythm. The high risk of stroke associated with electrical cardioversion can be reduced by oral anticoagulation. Although effective in reducing the risk of thromboembolism, the limitations of warfarin present considerable challenges for its use in clinical practice. The challenges of maintaining warfarin within an appropriate th

Understanding the mechanisms of AF lies at the heart of its treatment. AF occurs when structural and/or electrophysiological abnormalities alter atrial tissue to promote abnormal impulse formation and/or propagation (figure 1).3 Multiple clinical risk factors, electrocardiographic/echocardiographic features and biochemical markers are associated with an increased risk of AF (table 1), and, AF can be described in terms of the duration of episodes using a simplified scheme (table 2).3 Figure 1. Mechanisms of atrial fibrillation Table 1. Risk factors3 The aim of treatment is to prevent stroke and alleviate symptoms.4 Drug therapies include antic

American College of Cardiology The Annual Scientific Session of American College of Cardiology (ACC) took place in Chicago, USA, from April 2nd–4th 2016. FIRE AND ICE: to freeze or fry the atrium? Cryoballoon atrial ablation was found to be non-inferior to radiofrequency (RF) ablation with respect to efficacy for the treatment of patients with drug-refractory paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). There was also no significant difference between the two procedures in regard to patient safety, according to late-breaking clinical trial research presented at ACC and simultaneously published in the New England Journal of Medicine (doi: 10.1056/NE

(more…)

Dr Matthew Fay (Westcliffe Medical Practice, Shipley) Honarbakhsh et al. highlight an important point in their paper: when should this be done and who should take responsibility. Their review of patients who have been admitted acutely with AF or atrial flutter, looking at the outcome of anticoagulation if risk factors are present, seems to provide lamentable data, with only 57% being referred for oral anticoagulation. Of course, there may be a question as to whether, with patient-led decision-making, the acute hospital ward is the right environment for a considered and final decision as regards this important question. We need to consider the

Introduction Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia with a reported worldwide prevalence of 0.6% in men and 0.4% in women.1 AF is independently associated with a five-fold increased rate of stroke, which is comparable with the risk seen in patients with three or more other stroke risk factors.2,3 Furthermore, strokes related to AF are associated with higher rates of disability and mortality than other strokes.4-6 The cost of AF-related strokes in the UK is estimated to be around £750 million per year.7 AF-related stroke is thought to be secondary to thromboembolism from the left atrium to the cerebral circulation. Ora

Introduction Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia in the UK and is estimated to affect 2% of the general population, rising to affect 8% of individuals aged over 75 years.1 Without appropriate antithrombotic therapy, non-valvular AF confers a five-fold risk of stroke and thromboembolism.2 Oral anticoagulation effectively reduces stroke risk by two-thirds.3 Direct current (DC) cardioversion (DCCV) is one strategy to restore sinus rhythm in patients with AF (see figure 1), and has been used in clinical practice since the 1960s. This procedure has relatively high initial success rates, however, it has become increasingly evid

(more…)

We believe that the new guideline2 will be a major advance in stroke prevention in AF. We would suggest that Professor Brady and colleagues, in their focus on non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs), have overlooked the importance of a number of crucial aspects of the guideline. It represents a paradigm change in stroke management. The GDG were very keen to promote the concept that, whereas previously risk assessment was undertaken to define patients at high risk of stroke requiring anticoagulation, under the new guideline anticoagulation has become the norm for all but the lowest-risk patients. It represents a considerable simplification

Introduction People with atrial fibrillation (AF) are five times more likely to have a stroke.1 AF is an increasing problem as our population gets older.2 It is, therefore, important to be able to identify this condition as early as possible, when intervention with anticoagulation can prevent stroke, as is recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), in most cases.3 Several studies have attempted to identify the most effective way of screening for, or case-finding, AF.4-7 The gold standard for diagnosis of AF is a 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG). However, the 12-lead ECG is an impractical diagnostic tool for a