European journal of clinical investigation · 2022
Prognostic implications of traditional and non-traditional cardiovascular risk factor profiles in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Bhat Aditya, Gan Gary C H, Chen Henry H L, Nawaz Sumreen, Khanna Shaun, Dobbins Timothy, Tan Timothy C
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a prevalent disease with associated mortality risk, mediated in large part through its associated cardiovascular risk factors. Standard modifiable cardiovascular risk factors (SMuRFs; hypercholesterolaemia, hypertension, diabetes and smoking) are established drivers of cardiovascular disease; however, the importance of non-traditional mediators of cardiovascular risk (NTRFs) such as chronic renal impairment, obstructive sleep apnoea and obesity is emerging. The differential impact of these risk factors on outcomes in patients with AF is not well studied.
METHODS: Consecutive patients admitted to our service between January 2013 and January 2018 with a primary diagnosis of non-valvular AF were assessed. Assessment of demographic, anthropometric, risk factor profile and pharmacotherapeutics was performed. The clinical course of these patients was followed for up to five years for the composite outcome of all-cause death and major adverse cardiovascular events.
RESULTS: Of the 1010 patients (62.29 ± 16.81 years, 51% men) included, 154 (15%) had no risk factors, 478 (47%) had only SMuRFs, 59 (6%) had only NTRFs and 319 (32%) had both SMuRFs and NTRFs. Over a mean follow-up period of 33.18 ± 21.27 months, a total of 288 patients met the composite outcome. On Cox regression, the coexistence of SMuRFs and NTRFs was an independent predictor of the composite outcome (HR 1.40; 95%CI 1.09-1.82, p = .01). Other independent predictors included age, heart failure, CHA2 DS2 VASc score, persistent AF and anaemia.
CONCLUSIONS: The presence of both SMuRFs and NTRFs has prognostic implications in patients with non-valvular AF.
METHODS: Consecutive patients admitted to our service between January 2013 and January 2018 with a primary diagnosis of non-valvular AF were assessed. Assessment of demographic, anthropometric, risk factor profile and pharmacotherapeutics was performed. The clinical course of these patients was followed for up to five years for the composite outcome of all-cause death and major adverse cardiovascular events.
RESULTS: Of the 1010 patients (62.29 ± 16.81 years, 51% men) included, 154 (15%) had no risk factors, 478 (47%) had only SMuRFs, 59 (6%) had only NTRFs and 319 (32%) had both SMuRFs and NTRFs. Over a mean follow-up period of 33.18 ± 21.27 months, a total of 288 patients met the composite outcome. On Cox regression, the coexistence of SMuRFs and NTRFs was an independent predictor of the composite outcome (HR 1.40; 95%CI 1.09-1.82, p = .01). Other independent predictors included age, heart failure, CHA2 DS2 VASc score, persistent AF and anaemia.
CONCLUSIONS: The presence of both SMuRFs and NTRFs has prognostic implications in patients with non-valvular AF.