Heart rhythm · 2025
Increased atrial fibrillation risk in rheumatoid arthritis: Greater in seropositive than seronegative patients.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kang Seonyoung, Eun Yeonghee, Han Kyungdo, Jung Jinhyung, Lee Seulkee, Cha Hoon-Suk, Lee Jaejoon, Kim Seonghye, Kim Se Yun, Kim Sung Hea, Shin Dong Wook, Kim Hyungjin
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The link between rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and atrial fibrillation (AF) has received less attention.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the association between RA and incident AF in a nationwide cohort, with particular focus on differences according to serostatus-seropositive RA (SPRA) and seronegative RA (SNRA). We explored the potential influence of biologic or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (b/tsDMARDs) use as a secondary objective.
METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used the National Health Insurance Service database to include participants who were first diagnosed with RA between 2010 and 2017. Matched non-RA controls were selected by age and sex (1:3 ratio). Participants were followed from 1 year after the index date (to mitigate surveillance bias) until December 31, 2020.
RESULTS: A total of 48,885 patients with RA (34,699 SPRA, 14,186 SNRA) and 146,655 matched controls were included. Patients with RA had a significantly higher risk of AF than non-RA controls (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.55, 95% confidence interval 1.46-1.65). Both patients with SPRA and SNRA had a higher AF risk than non-RA controls (aHR 1.63 in SPRA, 1.37 in SNRA). Patients with SPRA had a higher risk compared with those with SNRA (aHR 1.19, 95% confidence interval 1.02-6.34). The use of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs was associated with a slightly higher risk of AF, while targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug use led to risk reduction, but was not statistically significant.
CONCLUSION: This study shows that both patients with SPRA and SNRA are at a significantly greater risk for AF compared with non-RA controls, with patients with SPRA at the highest risk.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the association between RA and incident AF in a nationwide cohort, with particular focus on differences according to serostatus-seropositive RA (SPRA) and seronegative RA (SNRA). We explored the potential influence of biologic or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (b/tsDMARDs) use as a secondary objective.
METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used the National Health Insurance Service database to include participants who were first diagnosed with RA between 2010 and 2017. Matched non-RA controls were selected by age and sex (1:3 ratio). Participants were followed from 1 year after the index date (to mitigate surveillance bias) until December 31, 2020.
RESULTS: A total of 48,885 patients with RA (34,699 SPRA, 14,186 SNRA) and 146,655 matched controls were included. Patients with RA had a significantly higher risk of AF than non-RA controls (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.55, 95% confidence interval 1.46-1.65). Both patients with SPRA and SNRA had a higher AF risk than non-RA controls (aHR 1.63 in SPRA, 1.37 in SNRA). Patients with SPRA had a higher risk compared with those with SNRA (aHR 1.19, 95% confidence interval 1.02-6.34). The use of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs was associated with a slightly higher risk of AF, while targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug use led to risk reduction, but was not statistically significant.
CONCLUSION: This study shows that both patients with SPRA and SNRA are at a significantly greater risk for AF compared with non-RA controls, with patients with SPRA at the highest risk.