Atrial fibrillation burden in clinical practice, research, and technology development: a clinical consensus statement of the European Society of Cardiology Council on Stroke and the European Heart Rhythm Association.

IF 7.4 1区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Europace Pub Date : 2025-03-05 DOI:10.1093/europace/euaf019
Wolfram Doehner, Giuseppe Boriani, Tatjana Potpara, Carina Blomstrom-Lundqvist, Rod Passman, Luciano A Sposato, Dobromir Dobrev, Ben Freedman, Isabelle C Van Gelder, Taya V Glotzer, Jeff S Healey, Theodore Karapanayiotides, Gregory Y H Lip, Jose Luis Merino, George Ntaios, Renate B Schnabel, Jesper H Svendsen, Emma Svennberg, Rolf Wachter, Karl Georg Haeusler, A John Camm
{"title":"Atrial fibrillation burden in clinical practice, research, and technology development: a clinical consensus statement of the European Society of Cardiology Council on Stroke and the European Heart Rhythm Association.","authors":"Wolfram Doehner, Giuseppe Boriani, Tatjana Potpara, Carina Blomstrom-Lundqvist, Rod Passman, Luciano A Sposato, Dobromir Dobrev, Ben Freedman, Isabelle C Van Gelder, Taya V Glotzer, Jeff S Healey, Theodore Karapanayiotides, Gregory Y H Lip, Jose Luis Merino, George Ntaios, Renate B Schnabel, Jesper H Svendsen, Emma Svennberg, Rolf Wachter, Karl Georg Haeusler, A John Camm","doi":"10.1093/europace/euaf019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Atrial fibrillation (AF) is one of the most common cardiac diseases and a complicating comorbidity for multiple associated diseases. Many clinical decisions regarding AF are currently based on the binary recognition of AF being present or absent with the categorical appraisal of AF as continued or intermittent. Assessment of AF in clinical trials is largely limited to the time to (first) detection of an AF episode. Substantial evidence shows, however, that the quantitative characteristic of intermittent AF has a relevant impact on symptoms, onset, and progression of AF and AF-related outcomes, including mortality. Atrial fibrillation burden is increasingly recognized as a suitable quantitative measure of intermittent AF that provides an estimate of risk attributable to AF, the efficacy of antiarrhythmic treatment, and the need for oral anticoagulation. However, the diversity of assessment methods and the lack of a consistent definition of AF burden prevent a wider clinical applicability and validation of actionable thresholds of AF burden. To facilitate progress in this field, the AF burden Consensus Group, an international and multidisciplinary collaboration, proposes a unified definition of AF burden. Based on current evidence and using a modified Delphi technique, consensus statements were attained on the four main areas describing AF burden: Defining the characteristics of AF burden, the recording principles, the clinical relevance in major clinical conditions, and implementation as an outcome in the clinic and in clinical trials. According to this consensus, AF burden is defined as the proportion of time spent in AF expressed as a percentage of the recording time, undertaken during a specified monitoring duration. A pivotal requirement for validity and comparability of AF burden assessment is a continuous or near-continuous duration of monitoring that needs to be reported together with the AF burden assessment. This proposed unified definition of AF burden applies independent of comorbidities and outcomes. However, the disease-specific actionable thresholds of AF burden need to be defined according to the targeted clinical outcomes in specific populations. The duration of the longest episode of uninterrupted AF expressed as a time duration should also be reported when appropriate. A unified definition of AF burden will allow for comparability of clinical study data to expand evidence and to establish actionable thresholds of AF burden in various clinical conditions. This proposed definition of AF burden will support risk evaluation and clinical treatment decisions in AF-related disease. It will further promote the development of clinical trials studying the clinical relevance of intermittent AF. A unified approach on AF burden will finally inform the technology development of heart rhythm monitoring towards validated technology to meet clinical needs.</p>","PeriodicalId":11981,"journal":{"name":"Europace","volume":"27 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11901050/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Europace","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euaf019","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is one of the most common cardiac diseases and a complicating comorbidity for multiple associated diseases. Many clinical decisions regarding AF are currently based on the binary recognition of AF being present or absent with the categorical appraisal of AF as continued or intermittent. Assessment of AF in clinical trials is largely limited to the time to (first) detection of an AF episode. Substantial evidence shows, however, that the quantitative characteristic of intermittent AF has a relevant impact on symptoms, onset, and progression of AF and AF-related outcomes, including mortality. Atrial fibrillation burden is increasingly recognized as a suitable quantitative measure of intermittent AF that provides an estimate of risk attributable to AF, the efficacy of antiarrhythmic treatment, and the need for oral anticoagulation. However, the diversity of assessment methods and the lack of a consistent definition of AF burden prevent a wider clinical applicability and validation of actionable thresholds of AF burden. To facilitate progress in this field, the AF burden Consensus Group, an international and multidisciplinary collaboration, proposes a unified definition of AF burden. Based on current evidence and using a modified Delphi technique, consensus statements were attained on the four main areas describing AF burden: Defining the characteristics of AF burden, the recording principles, the clinical relevance in major clinical conditions, and implementation as an outcome in the clinic and in clinical trials. According to this consensus, AF burden is defined as the proportion of time spent in AF expressed as a percentage of the recording time, undertaken during a specified monitoring duration. A pivotal requirement for validity and comparability of AF burden assessment is a continuous or near-continuous duration of monitoring that needs to be reported together with the AF burden assessment. This proposed unified definition of AF burden applies independent of comorbidities and outcomes. However, the disease-specific actionable thresholds of AF burden need to be defined according to the targeted clinical outcomes in specific populations. The duration of the longest episode of uninterrupted AF expressed as a time duration should also be reported when appropriate. A unified definition of AF burden will allow for comparability of clinical study data to expand evidence and to establish actionable thresholds of AF burden in various clinical conditions. This proposed definition of AF burden will support risk evaluation and clinical treatment decisions in AF-related disease. It will further promote the development of clinical trials studying the clinical relevance of intermittent AF. A unified approach on AF burden will finally inform the technology development of heart rhythm monitoring towards validated technology to meet clinical needs.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
房颤在临床实践、研究和技术发展中的负担:欧洲心脏病学会卒中理事会和欧洲心律协会的临床共识声明。
心房颤动(AF)是最常见的心脏疾病之一,也是多种相关疾病的并发症。目前,许多关于房颤的临床决策是基于对房颤存在或不存在的二元识别,并将房颤分类为持续或间歇性。临床试验中对房颤的评估主要限于(首次)发现房颤发作的时间。然而,大量证据表明,间歇性房颤的定量特征对房颤的症状、发病和进展以及房颤相关结局(包括死亡率)有相关影响。心房颤动负担越来越被认为是间歇性房颤的一种合适的定量测量方法,可以估计房颤的风险、抗心律失常治疗的疗效以及口服抗凝的必要性。然而,评估方法的多样性和房颤负担的缺乏一致的定义阻碍了房颤负担的更广泛的临床适用性和可操作阈值的验证。为了促进这一领域的进展,一个国际和多学科合作组织——AF负担协商一致小组提出了AF负担的统一定义。基于现有证据并使用改进的德尔菲技术,在描述心房颤动负担的四个主要领域达成共识:定义心房颤动负担的特征、记录原则、主要临床条件的临床相关性以及在临床和临床试验中作为结果的实施。根据这一共识,AF负担被定义为在指定的监测持续时间内,以记录时间的百分比表示的AF时间所占的比例。房颤负担评估的有效性和可比性的一个关键要求是需要与房颤负担评估一起报告连续或接近连续的监测持续时间。该建议的房颤负担的统一定义独立于合并症和结果。然而,房颤负担的疾病特异性可行动阈值需要根据特定人群的目标临床结果来确定。不间断房颤最长发作的持续时间也应在适当时报告。房颤负担的统一定义将允许临床研究数据的可比性,以扩大证据并建立各种临床条件下房颤负担的可操作阈值。拟议的房颤负担定义将支持房颤相关疾病的风险评估和临床治疗决策。这将进一步促进研究间歇性房颤临床相关性的临床试验的发展。统一的房颤负担方法将最终为心律监测技术的发展提供信息,以满足临床需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Europace
Europace 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
8.20%
发文量
851
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: EP - Europace - European Journal of Pacing, Arrhythmias and Cardiac Electrophysiology of the European Heart Rhythm Association of the European Society of Cardiology. The journal aims to provide an avenue of communication of top quality European and international original scientific work and reviews in the fields of Arrhythmias, Pacing and Cellular Electrophysiology. The Journal offers the reader a collection of contemporary original peer-reviewed papers, invited papers and editorial comments together with book reviews and correspondence.
期刊最新文献
CALM1, CALM2, and CALM3 expression and translation efficiency provide insight into the severity of calmodulinopathy. Key Stakeholder views on atrial fibrillation screening: a systematic mixed-studies review and interpretive analysis. Ventricular Tachycardia Ablation Associated Abnormalities on FDG PET/CT in Patients with Suspected Cardiac Sarcoidosis. Ca2+ Signaling in Cardiac Muscle: The Importance of Balances. Validation of an Imageless Electrocardiographic Imaging Technique for the Non-Invasive Mapping of Regular Atrial Tachyarrhythmias.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1