Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Combination of CHARGE AF score and index of 24-hour electrocardiogram to predict incident atrial fibrillation and cardiovascular events

View through CrossRef
Abstract Background Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with increased risks of stroke and heart failure. AF risk prediction can facilitate the efficient deployment of diagnosis or interventions to prevent AF. Purpose We sought to assess the combination prediction value of Holter electrocardiogram (Holter ECG) and the CHARGE-AF score (Cohorts for Aging and Research in Genomic Epidemiology-AF) for the new-onset of AF in a single center study. We also investigated the association between clinical findings and the new-onset of cerebral cardiovascular events. Methods From January 2008 and May 2014, 1246 patients with aged≥20 undergoing Holter ECG for palpitations, dizziness, or syncope were recruited. Among them, 350 patients were enrolled in this study after exclusion of 1) AF history at the time of inspection or before, 2) post cardiac device implantation, 3) follow-up duration <1 year, and 4) no 12-lead ECG records within 6 months around Holter ECG. Results During the 5.9-year follow-up, 40 patients (11.4%) developed AF incidence. Multivariate cox regression analysis revealed that CHARGE-AF score (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.59, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.13–2.26, P<0.01), BMI (HR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.83–0.99, P=0.03), frequent supraventricular extrasystoles (SVEs) ≥1000 beats/day (HR: 4.87, 95% CI: 2.59–9.13, P<0.001) and first-degree AV block (HR: 3.52, 95% CI: 1.63–7.61, P<0.01) were significant independent predictors for newly AF. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) of the combination of the CHARGE-AF score and frequent SVEs (≥1000) was greater than the CHARGE-AF score alone (0.73, 95% CI: 0.64–0.82 vs 0.66, 95% CI: 0.56–0.75, respectively). On the ROC curve, the CHARGE-AF score of 12.9 was optimum cut-off value for newly AF. Patients with both the CHARGE-AF score≥12.9 and SVEs≥1000 developed AF at 129.0/1000 person-years, compared with those with the CHARGE-AF score<12.9 and SVEs≥1000 (48.9), the CHARGE-AF score≥12.9 and SVEs<1000 (40.0) and the CHARGE-AF score<12.9 and SVEs<1000 (7.4), respectively. In multivariate cox regression analysis, age, past history of congestive heart failure and myocardial infarction, and antihypertensive medication were significant predictors of cerebral cardiovascular events (n=43), all of which signifying the components of the CHARGE-AF score. The AUC of the combination of the CHARGE-AF score and frequent SVEs (≥1000) was not different from the CHARGE-AF score alone (0.73, 95% CI: 0.64–0.81 vs 0.73, 95% CI: 0.64–0.82, respectively). Conclusion CHARGE-AF score has higher predictive power of both the new incident AF and cerebral cardiovascular events. The combination of CHARGE-AF score and SVEs≥1000 beats/day in Holter ECG can demonstrate the additional effect of prediction ability for the new incident AF, but not for cerebral cardiovascular events. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.
Title: Combination of CHARGE AF score and index of 24-hour electrocardiogram to predict incident atrial fibrillation and cardiovascular events
Description:
Abstract Background Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with increased risks of stroke and heart failure.
AF risk prediction can facilitate the efficient deployment of diagnosis or interventions to prevent AF.
Purpose We sought to assess the combination prediction value of Holter electrocardiogram (Holter ECG) and the CHARGE-AF score (Cohorts for Aging and Research in Genomic Epidemiology-AF) for the new-onset of AF in a single center study.
We also investigated the association between clinical findings and the new-onset of cerebral cardiovascular events.
Methods From January 2008 and May 2014, 1246 patients with aged≥20 undergoing Holter ECG for palpitations, dizziness, or syncope were recruited.
Among them, 350 patients were enrolled in this study after exclusion of 1) AF history at the time of inspection or before, 2) post cardiac device implantation, 3) follow-up duration <1 year, and 4) no 12-lead ECG records within 6 months around Holter ECG.
Results During the 5.
9-year follow-up, 40 patients (11.
4%) developed AF incidence.
Multivariate cox regression analysis revealed that CHARGE-AF score (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.
59, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.
13–2.
26, P<0.
01), BMI (HR: 0.
91, 95% CI: 0.
83–0.
99, P=0.
03), frequent supraventricular extrasystoles (SVEs) ≥1000 beats/day (HR: 4.
87, 95% CI: 2.
59–9.
13, P<0.
001) and first-degree AV block (HR: 3.
52, 95% CI: 1.
63–7.
61, P<0.
01) were significant independent predictors for newly AF.
The area under the ROC curve (AUC) of the combination of the CHARGE-AF score and frequent SVEs (≥1000) was greater than the CHARGE-AF score alone (0.
73, 95% CI: 0.
64–0.
82 vs 0.
66, 95% CI: 0.
56–0.
75, respectively).
On the ROC curve, the CHARGE-AF score of 12.
9 was optimum cut-off value for newly AF.
Patients with both the CHARGE-AF score≥12.
9 and SVEs≥1000 developed AF at 129.
0/1000 person-years, compared with those with the CHARGE-AF score<12.
9 and SVEs≥1000 (48.
9), the CHARGE-AF score≥12.
9 and SVEs<1000 (40.
0) and the CHARGE-AF score<12.
9 and SVEs<1000 (7.
4), respectively.
In multivariate cox regression analysis, age, past history of congestive heart failure and myocardial infarction, and antihypertensive medication were significant predictors of cerebral cardiovascular events (n=43), all of which signifying the components of the CHARGE-AF score.
The AUC of the combination of the CHARGE-AF score and frequent SVEs (≥1000) was not different from the CHARGE-AF score alone (0.
73, 95% CI: 0.
64–0.
81 vs 0.
73, 95% CI: 0.
64–0.
82, respectively).
Conclusion CHARGE-AF score has higher predictive power of both the new incident AF and cerebral cardiovascular events.
The combination of CHARGE-AF score and SVEs≥1000 beats/day in Holter ECG can demonstrate the additional effect of prediction ability for the new incident AF, but not for cerebral cardiovascular events.
Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.

Related Results

Inter‐Relationships Between Atrial Flutter and Atrial Fibrillation
Inter‐Relationships Between Atrial Flutter and Atrial Fibrillation
It has been appreciated for a long time that atrial flutter and atrial fibrillation have a clinical relationship. Now, with the technological advances that permit more sophisticate...
Beyond Coronary Risk: Clinical Scores as Predictors of Atrial Fibrillation in Chronic Coronary Syndrome
Beyond Coronary Risk: Clinical Scores as Predictors of Atrial Fibrillation in Chronic Coronary Syndrome
Atrial fibrillation frequently coexists with chronic coronary syndrome, sharing common cardiovascular risk factors and pathophysiological mechanisms. Identifying patients with chro...
Adiponectin and Lone atrial fibrillation
Adiponectin and Lone atrial fibrillation
Objective: Lone atrial fibrillation is an idiopathic arrhythmia seen in younger individuals without any secondary disease. Adiponectin is an endogenous adipocytokine that increases...
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ATRIAL FIBRILLATION CARDIOVERSION AND F
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ATRIAL FIBRILLATION CARDIOVERSION AND F
Objectives To investigate the relationship between atrial fibrillation cardioversion and f wave in electrocardiogram, providing an ordinary and noninvasive method...
Left atrial appendage anatomy and function: short term response to sustained atrial fibrillation
Left atrial appendage anatomy and function: short term response to sustained atrial fibrillation
OBJECTIVE To determine whether there is significant atrial or atrial appendage enlargement or functional remodelling as a result of one to two months of sustained...
Pembrolizumab and Sarcoma: A meta-analysis
Pembrolizumab and Sarcoma: A meta-analysis
Abstract Introduction: Pembrolizumab is a monoclonal antibody that promotes antitumor immunity. This study presents a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety...

Back to Top