Management of atrial arrhythmias identified by cardiac devices

Filippo Stazi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartjsupp/suae029

2024-04-01

European Heart Journal Supplements

Abstract:Abstract Implantable cardiac devices have shown that atrial fibrillation (AF) is more frequent than previously assumed, with subclinical, asymptomatic, self-limiting manifestations called atrial high-rate events (AHREs) or subclinical AF. The clinical significance and correct therapeutic management of these episodes of subclinical AF is less well defined than in the case of clinically manifest AF. Two important randomized studies on the topic have recently been published, NOAH-AFNET 6 and ARTESIA, which, however, have not definitively clarified the topic. In patients with AHRE or subclinical AF, the average thrombo-embolic risk is lower than that in patients with clinically manifest AF and is ∼1%. For this reason, in these patients, the possibility that the benefit of anticoagulant therapy is overshadowed by the risk of bleeding is very high. Therefore, while waiting for new tools that allow a better stratification of low-risk patients, we must rely on individual clinical evaluation and overcome the qualitative dichotomy (AHRE yes vs. AHRE no), preferring instead an approach that is as quantitative as possible and takes into account the number of episodes, their duration, and the patient’s CHADSVASC score, before deciding, in each individual case, whether or not to use anticoagulant therapy.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The problem that this paper attempts to solve is how to manage and evaluate the clinical significance of atrial arrhythmias (such as atrial high - frequency events, AHREs, or subclinical atrial fibrillation, subclinical AF) detected by cardiac devices in patients, and whether oral anticoagulant therapy should be used to prevent thromboembolic events, such as stroke.

Specifically, the paper discusses the following key points:

1. **Clinical significance**: The clinical significance of atrial arrhythmias (especially asymptomatic atrial fibrillation) detected by cardiac devices has not been fully clarified. Although these arrhythmias occur frequently, most of them are brief and asymptomatic, and their impact on the risk of thromboembolism still needs further study.

2. **Treatment management**: For patients with detected atrial arrhythmias, whether anticoagulant therapy is required to reduce the risk of thromboembolism has not been determined yet. The paper mentions two important randomized controlled trials (NOAH - AFNET 6 and ARTESIA), and the results of these trials have not fully clarified this issue.

3. **Risk assessment**: The balance between the thromboembolic risk and the bleeding risk of patients is a complex issue. The paper points out that the average thromboembolic risk of these patients is relatively low (about 1%), so when deciding whether to use anticoagulant therapy, multiple factors need to be comprehensively considered, such as the patient's age, past medical history, CHADSVASC score, the frequency and duration of arrhythmias, etc.

4. **Individualized treatment**: Due to the current lack of accurate risk assessment tools, doctors need to conduct individualized clinical evaluations according to the specific situation of each patient, rather than simply deciding the treatment plan based on whether atrial arrhythmias are detected.

In conclusion, this paper aims to explore how to better manage and evaluate the clinical significance of atrial arrhythmias, especially asymptomatic atrial fibrillation, detected by cardiac devices, and proposes a more quantitative and individualized approach when deciding whether to use anticoagulant therapy.