收缩压及长期连续监测对房颤筛查的影响

L. Xing, S. Diederichsen, S. Hoejberg, D. Krieger, C. Graff, M. Olesen, A. Brandes, L. Koeber, K. Haugan, J. Svendsen
{"title":"收缩压及长期连续监测对房颤筛查的影响","authors":"L. Xing, S. Diederichsen, S. Hoejberg, D. Krieger, C. Graff, M. Olesen, A. Brandes, L. Koeber, K. Haugan, J. Svendsen","doi":"10.1093/europace/euac053.281","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n Type of funding sources: Other. Main funding source(s): The LOOP Study was supported by Innovation Fund Denmark [grant number 12-1352259], The Research Foundation for the Capital Region of Denmark, The Danish Heart Foundation [grant number 11-04-R83-A3363-22625], Aalborg University Talent Management Program, Arvid Nilssons Fond, Skibsreder Per Henriksen, R og Hustrus Fond, the European Union’s Horizon 2020 program [grant number 847770 to the AFFECT-EU consortium], Læge Sophus Carl Emil Friis og hustru Olga Doris Friis’ Legat, and an unrestricted grant from Medtronic.\n \n \n \n The recently published LOOP Study was a randomized controlled clinical trial to evaluate systematic atrial fibrillation (AF) screening with long-term continuous monitoring in an elderly population at risk and found no significant reduction in stroke. However, the screening effects seemed to differ across levels of systolic blood pressure (SBP). It is well-known that hypertension constitutes a prominent risk factor for clinical AF and stroke alike, but data on the impacts of SBP on subclinical AF and hereby AF screening efficacy are lacking.\n \n \n \n With this post hoc analysis of the LOOP Study, we aimed to provide insights into the interaction between SBP and benefits of systematic AF screening.\n \n \n \n The LOOP Study randomized individuals aged 70-90 years with ≥1 stroke risk factor (hypertension, diabetes, heart failure, or previous stroke) and without prior AF to either monitoring with implantable loop recorder (ILR) and initiation of oral anticoagulation upon detection of new-onset AF episodes lasting ≥6 minutes, or usual care (control group). In total, 5997 participants with available SBP measurements at enrolment were included in the present analysis. The interaction between SBP and ILR screening efficacy on stroke or systemic arterial embolism (SAE), as indicated by hazard ratio (HR) for ILR versus control, was assessed with polynomial moving-average regression. The lowest SBP threshold with significant screening benefits was further determined and used to examine clinical outcomes and the occurrence of AF with respect to dichotomized SBP. Additionally, penalized spline models were employed to assess AF occurrence by SBP as a continuous variable.\n \n \n \n HR of stroke/SAE for ILR versus control decreased with increasing SBP and the lowest threshold for significant screening benefits was at SBP ≥150 mmHg. ILR screening of participants with SBP ≥150 mmHg yielded a 45% risk reduction of stroke/SAE (HR 0.55 [0.37-0.82]). Within the ILR group, SBP ≥150 mmHg was associated with an increased risk of AF episodes ≥24 hours as compared to lower SBP (HR 1.57 [1.01-2.45]), but not with the overall occurrence of AF (HR 1.14 [0.95-1.36]). No significant association between SBP and AF occurrence in the ILR group was reported in penalized spline models either (p-value: 0.73).\n \n \n \n The benefits of ILR screening for AF on stroke/SAE increased with increasing blood pressure. SBP ≥150 mmHg was associated with a 1.5-fold increased risk of AF episodes ≥24 hours, along with an almost 50% risk reduction of stroke/SAE by ILR screening.\n","PeriodicalId":11720,"journal":{"name":"EP Europace","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Systolic blood pressure and effects of screening for atrial fibrillation with long-term continuous monitoring\",\"authors\":\"L. Xing, S. Diederichsen, S. Hoejberg, D. Krieger, C. Graff, M. Olesen, A. Brandes, L. Koeber, K. Haugan, J. Svendsen\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/europace/euac053.281\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n \\n Type of funding sources: Other. Main funding source(s): The LOOP Study was supported by Innovation Fund Denmark [grant number 12-1352259], The Research Foundation for the Capital Region of Denmark, The Danish Heart Foundation [grant number 11-04-R83-A3363-22625], Aalborg University Talent Management Program, Arvid Nilssons Fond, Skibsreder Per Henriksen, R og Hustrus Fond, the European Union’s Horizon 2020 program [grant number 847770 to the AFFECT-EU consortium], Læge Sophus Carl Emil Friis og hustru Olga Doris Friis’ Legat, and an unrestricted grant from Medtronic.\\n \\n \\n \\n The recently published LOOP Study was a randomized controlled clinical trial to evaluate systematic atrial fibrillation (AF) screening with long-term continuous monitoring in an elderly population at risk and found no significant reduction in stroke. However, the screening effects seemed to differ across levels of systolic blood pressure (SBP). It is well-known that hypertension constitutes a prominent risk factor for clinical AF and stroke alike, but data on the impacts of SBP on subclinical AF and hereby AF screening efficacy are lacking.\\n \\n \\n \\n With this post hoc analysis of the LOOP Study, we aimed to provide insights into the interaction between SBP and benefits of systematic AF screening.\\n \\n \\n \\n The LOOP Study randomized individuals aged 70-90 years with ≥1 stroke risk factor (hypertension, diabetes, heart failure, or previous stroke) and without prior AF to either monitoring with implantable loop recorder (ILR) and initiation of oral anticoagulation upon detection of new-onset AF episodes lasting ≥6 minutes, or usual care (control group). In total, 5997 participants with available SBP measurements at enrolment were included in the present analysis. The interaction between SBP and ILR screening efficacy on stroke or systemic arterial embolism (SAE), as indicated by hazard ratio (HR) for ILR versus control, was assessed with polynomial moving-average regression. The lowest SBP threshold with significant screening benefits was further determined and used to examine clinical outcomes and the occurrence of AF with respect to dichotomized SBP. Additionally, penalized spline models were employed to assess AF occurrence by SBP as a continuous variable.\\n \\n \\n \\n HR of stroke/SAE for ILR versus control decreased with increasing SBP and the lowest threshold for significant screening benefits was at SBP ≥150 mmHg. ILR screening of participants with SBP ≥150 mmHg yielded a 45% risk reduction of stroke/SAE (HR 0.55 [0.37-0.82]). Within the ILR group, SBP ≥150 mmHg was associated with an increased risk of AF episodes ≥24 hours as compared to lower SBP (HR 1.57 [1.01-2.45]), but not with the overall occurrence of AF (HR 1.14 [0.95-1.36]). No significant association between SBP and AF occurrence in the ILR group was reported in penalized spline models either (p-value: 0.73).\\n \\n \\n \\n The benefits of ILR screening for AF on stroke/SAE increased with increasing blood pressure. SBP ≥150 mmHg was associated with a 1.5-fold increased risk of AF episodes ≥24 hours, along with an almost 50% risk reduction of stroke/SAE by ILR screening.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":11720,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"EP Europace\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"EP Europace\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euac053.281\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EP Europace","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euac053.281","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

资金来源类型:其他。主要资助来源:LOOP研究得到了丹麦创新基金(资助号12-1352259)、丹麦首都地区研究基金会、丹麦心脏基金会(资助号11-04-R83-A3363-22625)、奥尔堡大学人才管理计划、Arvid nilsson Fond、Skibsreder Per Henriksen、R og Hustrus Fond、欧盟地平线2020计划(资助号847770)、Læge Sophus Carl Emil Friis og hustru Olga Doris Friis’Legat的支持。以及美敦力公司的无限制拨款。最近发表的LOOP研究是一项随机对照临床试验,旨在评估系统房颤(AF)筛查和长期连续监测在老年高危人群中的作用,并没有发现卒中的显著减少。然而,筛选效果似乎在收缩压(SBP)水平上有所不同。众所周知,高血压是临床房颤和脑卒中的重要危险因素,但关于收缩压对亚临床房颤的影响,因此缺乏房颤筛查效果的数据。通过对LOOP研究的事后分析,我们旨在深入了解收缩压与系统房颤筛查的益处之间的相互作用。LOOP研究将年龄在70-90岁、卒中危险因素≥1项(高血压、糖尿病、心力衰竭或既往卒中)且无房颤病史的患者随机分组,采用植入式环路记录仪(ILR)监测并在发现新发房颤发作持续≥6分钟时开始口服抗凝治疗,或进行常规护理(对照组)。本分析共纳入5997名入组时收缩压测量值可用的参与者。采用多项式移动平均回归评估收缩压和ILR筛查对卒中或系统性动脉栓塞(SAE)的疗效之间的相互作用,即ILR与对照组的风险比(HR)。进一步确定具有显著筛查益处的最低收缩压阈值,并用于检查与收缩压二分法相关的临床结果和房颤发生情况。此外,惩罚样条模型采用收缩压作为一个连续变量来评估房颤的发生。与对照组相比,ILR组的卒中/SAE HR随着收缩压的增加而降低,而显著筛查获益的最低阈值为收缩压≥150 mmHg。对收缩压≥150 mmHg的参与者进行ILR筛查,卒中/SAE风险降低45% (HR 0.55[0.37-0.82])。在ILR组中,与低收缩压组相比,收缩压≥150 mmHg与房颤发作≥24小时的风险增加相关(HR 1.57[1.01-2.45]),但与房颤的总体发生率无关(HR 1.14[0.95-1.36])。在惩罚样条模型中,ILR组的收缩压和AF发生率之间也没有显著关联(p值:0.73)。ILR筛查AF对卒中/SAE的益处随着血压升高而增加。收缩压≥150mmhg与≥24小时AF发作风险增加1.5倍相关,同时通过ILR筛查卒中/SAE风险降低近50%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Systolic blood pressure and effects of screening for atrial fibrillation with long-term continuous monitoring
Type of funding sources: Other. Main funding source(s): The LOOP Study was supported by Innovation Fund Denmark [grant number 12-1352259], The Research Foundation for the Capital Region of Denmark, The Danish Heart Foundation [grant number 11-04-R83-A3363-22625], Aalborg University Talent Management Program, Arvid Nilssons Fond, Skibsreder Per Henriksen, R og Hustrus Fond, the European Union’s Horizon 2020 program [grant number 847770 to the AFFECT-EU consortium], Læge Sophus Carl Emil Friis og hustru Olga Doris Friis’ Legat, and an unrestricted grant from Medtronic. The recently published LOOP Study was a randomized controlled clinical trial to evaluate systematic atrial fibrillation (AF) screening with long-term continuous monitoring in an elderly population at risk and found no significant reduction in stroke. However, the screening effects seemed to differ across levels of systolic blood pressure (SBP). It is well-known that hypertension constitutes a prominent risk factor for clinical AF and stroke alike, but data on the impacts of SBP on subclinical AF and hereby AF screening efficacy are lacking. With this post hoc analysis of the LOOP Study, we aimed to provide insights into the interaction between SBP and benefits of systematic AF screening. The LOOP Study randomized individuals aged 70-90 years with ≥1 stroke risk factor (hypertension, diabetes, heart failure, or previous stroke) and without prior AF to either monitoring with implantable loop recorder (ILR) and initiation of oral anticoagulation upon detection of new-onset AF episodes lasting ≥6 minutes, or usual care (control group). In total, 5997 participants with available SBP measurements at enrolment were included in the present analysis. The interaction between SBP and ILR screening efficacy on stroke or systemic arterial embolism (SAE), as indicated by hazard ratio (HR) for ILR versus control, was assessed with polynomial moving-average regression. The lowest SBP threshold with significant screening benefits was further determined and used to examine clinical outcomes and the occurrence of AF with respect to dichotomized SBP. Additionally, penalized spline models were employed to assess AF occurrence by SBP as a continuous variable. HR of stroke/SAE for ILR versus control decreased with increasing SBP and the lowest threshold for significant screening benefits was at SBP ≥150 mmHg. ILR screening of participants with SBP ≥150 mmHg yielded a 45% risk reduction of stroke/SAE (HR 0.55 [0.37-0.82]). Within the ILR group, SBP ≥150 mmHg was associated with an increased risk of AF episodes ≥24 hours as compared to lower SBP (HR 1.57 [1.01-2.45]), but not with the overall occurrence of AF (HR 1.14 [0.95-1.36]). No significant association between SBP and AF occurrence in the ILR group was reported in penalized spline models either (p-value: 0.73). The benefits of ILR screening for AF on stroke/SAE increased with increasing blood pressure. SBP ≥150 mmHg was associated with a 1.5-fold increased risk of AF episodes ≥24 hours, along with an almost 50% risk reduction of stroke/SAE by ILR screening.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
High lead-related complication rate with MicroPort Vega active fixation pacing leads. Dual chamber versus single chamber pacemaker in patients in sinus rhythm with an atrioventricular block: a nationwide cohort study Ventricular Arrhythmias in Acute Heart Failure. A Clinical Consensus Statement of the Association for Acute CardioVascular Care Association (ACVC), the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) and the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC Enhancing Origin Prediction: Deep Learning Model for Diagnosing Premature Ventricular Contractions with Dual-Rhythm Analysis Focused on Cardiac Rotation A computational study on the influence of antegrade accessory pathway location on the 12-lead electrocardiogram in Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome
×
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:481959085
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