Atrial Fibrillation Occurring During Acute Hospitalization: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Acute atrial fibrillation is defined as atrial fibrillation detected in the setting of acute care or acute illness; atrial fibrillation may be detected or managed for the first time during acute hospitalization for another condition. Atrial fibrillation after cardiothoracic surgery is a distinct type of acute atrial fibrillation. Acute atrial fibrillation is associated with high risk of long-term atrial fibrillation recurrence, warranting clinical attention during acute hospitalization and over long-term follow-up. A framework of substrates and triggers can be useful for evaluating and managing acute atrial fibrillation. Acute management requires a multipronged approach with interdisciplinary care collaboration, tailoring treatments to the patient's underlying substrate and acute condition. Key components of acute management include identification and treatment of triggers, selection and implementation of rate/rhythm control, and management of anticoagulation. Acute rate or rhythm control strategy should be individualized with consideration of the patient's capacity to tolerate rapid rates or atrioventricular dyssynchrony, and the patient's ability to tolerate the risk of the therapeutic strategy. Given the high risks of atrial fibrillation recurrence in patients with acute atrial fibrillation, clinical follow-up and heart rhythm monitoring are warranted. Long-term management is guided by patient substrate, with implications for intensity of heart rhythm monitoring, anticoagulation, and considerations for rhythm management strategies. Overall management of acute atrial fibrillation addresses substrates and triggers. The 3As of acute management are acute triggers, atrial fibrillation rate/rhythm management, and anticoagulation. The 2As and 2Ms of long-term management include monitoring of heart rhythm and modification of lifestyle and risk factors, in addition to considerations for atrial fibrillation rate/rhythm management and anticoagulation. Several gaps in knowledge related to acute atrial fibrillation exist and warrant future research.

ReducinG stroke by screening for UndiAgnosed atRial fibrillation in elderly inDividuals (GUARD-AF): Rationale and design of the GUARD-AF randomized trial of screening for atrial fibrillation with a 14-day patch-based continuous ECG monitor.

BACKGROUND: Screening for atrial fibrillation (AF) is attractive because AF independently raises the risk of ischemic stroke, this risk is largely reversible by long-term oral anticoagulant therapy (OAC), and many patients with AF remain undiagnosed and untreated. Recent trials of one-time brief screening for AF have not produced a significant increase in the proportion of patients diagnosed with AF. Trials of longer-term screening have demonstrated an increase in AF diagnoses, primarily paroxysmal AF. To date, however, no trials have demonstrated that screening for AF results in lower rates of stroke. Clinical practice guidelines conflict in their level of support for screening for AF. METHODS: The GUARD-AF individually randomized trial is designed to test whether screening for AF in individuals age 70 years or greater using a 2-week single-lead electrocardiographic patch monitor can identify patients with undiagnosed AF and lead to treatment with OAC, resulting in a reduced rate of stroke in the screened population. The trial's efficacy end point is hospitalization for stroke (either ischemic or hemorrhagic) and the trial's safety end point is hospitalization for a bleeding event. End points will be ascertained via Medicare claims or electronic health records at 2.5 years after study start. Enrollment is based in primary care practices and the OAC decision for screen-detected cases is left to the patient and their physician. The initial planned target sample size was 52,000, with 26,000 allocated to either screening or to usual care. RESULTS: Trial enrollment was severely hampered by the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and stopped at a total enrollment of 11,931 participants. Of 5,965 randomized to the screening arm, 5,713 patients (96%) returned monitors with analyzable results. Incidence of screen-detected and clinically detected AF and associated stroke and bleeding outcomes will be ascertained. CONCLUSIONS: GUARD-AF is the largest AF screening randomized trial using a longer-term patch-based continuous electrocardiographic monitor. The results will contribute important information on the yield of patch-based AF screening, the "burden" of AF detected (percent time in AF, longest episode), and physicians' OAC decisions as a function of AF burden. GUARD-AF's stroke and bleed results will contribute to pooled trial analyses of AF screening, thereby informing future studies and guidelines.

NExUS-Heart: Novel examinations using smart technologies for heart health-Data sharing from commercial wearable devices and telehealth engagement in participants with or at risk of atrial fibrillation.

Background: Telemedicine and commercial wearable devices capable of detecting atrial fibrillation (AF) have revolutionized arrhythmia care during coronavirus disease 2019. However, not much is known about virtual patient-provider interactions or device sharing behaviors. Objective: The purpose of this study was to characterize how participants with or at risk of AF are engaging with their providers in the context of telemedicine and using commercially wearable devices to manage their health. Methods: We developed a survey to describe participant behaviors around telemedicine encounters and commercial wearable device use. The survey was distributed to participants diagnosed with AF or those at risk of AF (as determined by being at least 65 years old and having a CHA2DS2-VASc stroke risk score of >2) in the University of Massachusetts Memorial Health Care system. Results: The survey was distributed to 23,530 patients, and there were 1222 (5.19%) participant responses. Among the participants, 327 (26.8%) had AF and 895 (73.2%) were at risk of AF. Neither device ownership nor device type use differed by AF status. After adjusting for covariates that may influence surveyed participant communication patterns, we found that participants with AF were more likely to share their wearable device-derived data with providers (adjusted odds ratio 1.87; 95% confidence interval 1.02-3.41). Rates of sharing physical activity or sleep data were low for both groups and did not differ by AF status. Conclusion: Compared with participants at risk of developing AF, those with AF were more likely to share heart rate and rhythm data from their commercial wearable devices with providers. However, both groups had similar rates of sharing physical activity and sleep data, telemedicine engagement, and technology use and ownership.

Understanding the Link Between Obesity and Severe COVID-19 Outcomes: Causal Mediation by Systemic Inflammatory Response.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is an established risk factor for severe COVID-19 outcomes. The mechanistic underpinnings of this association are not well-understood. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the mediating role of systemic inflammation in obesity-associated COVID-19 outcomes. METHODS: This hospital-based, observational study included 3828 SARS-CoV-2-infected patients who were hospitalized February to May 2020 at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) or Columbia University Irving Medical Center/New York Presbyterian Hospital (CUIMC/NYP). We use mediation analysis to evaluate whether peak inflammatory biomarkers (C-reactive protein [CRP], erythrocyte sedimentation rate [ESR], D-dimer, ferritin, white blood cell count and interleukin-6) are in the causal pathway between obesity (BMI ≥ 30) and mechanical ventilation or death within 28 days of presentation to care. RESULTS: In the MGH cohort (n = 1202), obesity was associated with greater likelihood of ventilation or death (OR = 1.73; 95% CI = [1.25, 2.41]; P = 0.001) and higher peak CRP (P < 0.001) compared with nonobese patients. The estimated proportion of the association between obesity and ventilation or death mediated by CRP was 0.49 (P < 0.001). Evidence of mediation was more pronounced in patients < 65 years (proportion mediated = 0.52 [P < 0.001] vs 0.44 [P = 0.180]). Findings were more moderate but consistent for peak ESR. Mediation by other inflammatory markers was not supported. Results were replicated in CUIMC/NYP cohort (n = 2626). CONCLUSION: Findings support systemic inflammatory pathways in obesity-associated severe COVID-19 disease, particularly in patients < 65 years, captured by CRP and ESR. Contextualized in clinical trial findings, these results reveal therapeutic opportunity to target systemic inflammatory pathways and monitor interventions in high-risk subgroups and particularly obese patients.

Sex differences in inflammatory markers in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 infection: Insights from the MGH COVID-19 patient registry.

BACKGROUND: Men are at higher risk for serious complications related to COVID-19 infection than women. More robust immune activation in women has been proposed to contribute to decreased disease severity, although systemic inflammation has been associated with worse outcomes in COVID-19 infection. Whether systemic inflammation contributes to sex differences in COVID-19 infection is not known. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We examined sex differences in inflammatory markers among 453 men (mean age 61) and 328 women (mean age 62) hospitalized with COVID-19 infection at the Massachusetts General Hospital from March 8 to April 27, 2020. Multivariable linear regression models were used to examine the association of sex with initial and peak inflammatory markers. Exploratory analyses examined the association of sex and inflammatory markers with 28-day clinical outcomes using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Initial and peak CRP were higher in men compared with women after adjustment for baseline differences (initial CRP: ß 0.29, SE 0.07, p = 0.0001; peak CRP: ß 0.31, SE 0.07, p<0.0001) with similar findings for IL-6, PCT, and ferritin (p<0.05 for all). Men had greater than 1.5-greater odds of dying compared with women (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.04-2.80, p = 0.03). Sex modified the association of peak CRP with both death and ICU admission, with stronger associations observed in men compared with women (death: OR 9.19, 95% CI 4.29-19.7, p <0.0001 in men vs OR 2.81, 95% CI 1.52-5.18, p = 0.009 in women, Pinteraction = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In a sample of 781 men and women hospitalized with COVID-19 infection, men exhibited more robust inflammatory activation as evidenced by higher initial and peak inflammatory markers, as well as worse clinical outcomes. Better understanding of sex differences in immune responses to COVID-19 infection may shed light on the pathophysiology of COVID-19 infection.

Massachusetts general hospital Covid-19 registry reveals two distinct populations of hospitalized patients by race and ethnicity.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate differences by race/ethnicity in clinical characteristics and outcomes among hospitalized patients with Covid-19 at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH). METHODS: The MGH Covid-19 Registry includes confirmed SARS-CoV-2-infected patients hospitalized at MGH and is based on manual chart reviews and data extraction from electronic health records (EHRs). We evaluated differences between White/Non-Hispanic and Hispanic patients in demographics, complications and 14-day outcomes among the N = 866 patients hospitalized with Covid-19 from March 11, 2020-May 4, 2020. RESULTS: Overall, 43% of patients hospitalized with Covid-19 were women, median age was 60.4 [IQR = (48.2, 75)], 11.3% were Black/non-Hispanic and 35.2% were Hispanic. Hispanic patients, representing 35.2% of patients, were younger than White/non-Hispanic patients [median age 51y; IQR = (40.6, 61.6) versus 72y; (58.0, 81.7) (p<0.001)]. Hispanic patients were symptomatic longer before presenting to care (median 5 vs 3d, p = 0.039) but were more likely to be sent home with self-quarantine than be admitted to hospital (29% vs 16%, p<0.001). Hispanic patients had fewer comorbidities yet comparable rates of ICU or death (34% vs 36%). Nonetheless, a greater proportion of Hispanic patients recovered by 14 days after presentation (62% vs 45%, p<0.001; OR = 1.99, p = 0.011 in multivariable adjusted model) and fewer died (2% versus 18%, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized Hispanic patients were younger and had fewer comorbidities compared to White/non-Hispanic patients; despite comparable rates of ICU care or death, a greater proportion recovered. These results have implications for public health policy and the design and conduct of clinical trials.

The role of obesity in inflammatory markers in COVID-19 patients.

Obesity has emerged as a significant risk factor for severe COVID-19 worldwide. Given both COVID-19 infection and obesity have been associated with increased systemic inflammation, we evaluated inflammatory markers in obese and non-obese individuals hospitalized for COVID-19 at Massachusetts General Hospital. We hypothesized that obese patients would have a more exuberant inflammatory response as evidenced by higher initial and peak inflammatory markers along with worse clinical outcomes. Of the 781 patients, 349 were obese (45%). Obese individuals had higher initial and peak levels of CRP and ESR as well as higher peak d-dimer (P < 0.01 for all) in comparison to non-obese individuals, while. IL-6 and ferritin were similar. In addition, obese individuals had a higher odds of requiring vasopressor use (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.00-2.38, P = 0.05), developing hypoxemic respiratory failure (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.04-2.40, P = 0.03) and death (OR 2.20, 95% CI 1.31-3.70, P = 0.003) within 28 days of presentation to care. Finally, higher baseline levels of CRP and D-dimer were associated with worse clinical outcomes even after adjustment for BMI. Our findings suggest greater disease severity in obese individuals is characterized by more exuberant inflammation.