Previous Exercise Levels and Outcome in Patients with New Atrial Fibrillation: "Past Achievements Do Not Predict the Future".

INTRODUCTION: Long-term endurance exercise is suspect to elevate the risk of atrial fibrillation (AF), but little is known about cardiovascular outcome and disease progression in this subgroup of AF patients. We investigated whether previous exercise level determines cardiovascular outcome. METHODS: In this post hoc analysis of the RACE 4 randomized trial, we analyzed all patients with a completed questionnaire on sports participation. Three subgroups were made based on lifetime sports hours up to randomization and previous compliance to the international physical activity guidelines. High lifetime hours of high dynamic activity patients were defined as more than 150 min·wk -1 of high-intensity physical exercise. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular death and hospital admissions. RESULTS: A total of 879 patients were analyzed, divided in 203 high lifetime hours of high dynamic activity, 192 high lifetime hours of activity, and 484 low lifetime hours of activity patients. Over a mean follow-up of 36 months (±14), the primary endpoint occurred in 61 out of 203 (30%) high lifetime hours of high dynamic activity, 53 out of 192 (27%) high lifetime hours of activity, and 135 out of 484 (28%) low lifetime hours of activity patients ( P = 0.74). During follow-up, 42 high lifetime hours of high dynamic activity (35%), 43 high lifetime hours of activity (32%), and 104 low lifetime hours of activity patients (34%) with paroxysmal AF received electrical or chemical cardioversion or atrial ablation ( P = 0.90). CONCLUSIONS: In patients included in the RACE 4, there seems to be no relation between previous activity levels and cardiovascular outcome and the need for electrical or chemical cardioversion or atrial ablation. Cardiovascular outcome was driven by AF-related arrhythmic events.

Trimetazidine in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a randomized controlled cross-over trial.

AIMS: Impaired myocardial energy homeostasis plays an import role in the pathophysiology of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Left ventricular relaxation has a high energy demand, and left ventricular diastolic dysfunction has been related to impaired energy homeostasis. This study investigated whether trimetazidine, a fatty acid oxidation inhibitor, could improve myocardial energy homeostasis and consequently improve exercise haemodynamics in patients with HFpEF. METHODS AND RESULTS: The DoPING-HFpEF trial was a phase II single-centre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized cross-over trial. Patients were randomized to trimetazidine treatment or placebo for 3 months and switched after a 2-week wash-out period. The primary endpoint was change in pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, measured with right heart catheterization at multiple stages of bicycling exercise. Secondary endpoint was change in myocardial phosphocreatine/adenosine triphosphate, an index of the myocardial energy status, measured with phosphorus-31 magnetic resonance spectroscopy. The study included 25 patients (10/15 males/females; mean (standard deviation) age, 66 (10) years; body mass index, 29.8 (4.5) kg/m2 ); with the diagnosis of HFpEF confirmed with (exercise) right heart catheterization either before or during the trial. There was no effect of trimetazidine on the primary outcome pulmonary capillary wedge pressure at multiple levels of exercise (mean change 0 [95% confidence interval, 95% CI -2, 2] mmHg over multiple levels of exercise, P = 0.60). Myocardial phosphocreatine/adenosine triphosphate in the trimetazidine arm was similar to placebo (1.08 [0.76, 1.76] vs. 1.30 [0.95, 1.86], P = 0.08). There was no change by trimetazidine compared with placebo in the exploratory parameters: 6-min walking distance (mean change of -6 [95% CI -18, 7] m vs. -5 [95% CI -22, 22] m, respectively, P = 0.93), N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (5 (-156, 166) ng/L vs. -13 (-172, 147) ng/L, P = 0.70), overall quality-of-life (KCCQ and EQ-5D-5L, P = 0.78 and P = 0.51, respectively), parameters for diastolic function measured with echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance, or metabolic parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Trimetazidine did not improve myocardial energy homeostasis and did not improve exercise haemodynamics in patients with HFpEF.

Rate control drugs differ in the prevention of progression of atrial fibrillation.

AIMS: We hypothesize that in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF), verapamil is associated with lower AF progression compared to beta blockers or no rate control. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this pre-specified post hoc analysis of the RACE 4 randomized trial, the effect of rate control medication on AF progression in paroxysmal AF was analysed. Patients using Vaughan-Williams Class I or III antiarrhythmic drugs were excluded. The primary outcome was a composite of first electrical cardioversion (ECV), chemical cardioversion (CCV), or atrial ablation. Event rates are displayed using Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariable Cox regression analyses are used to adjust for baseline differences. Out of 666 patients with paroxysmal AF, 47 used verapamil, 383 used beta blockers, and 236 did not use rate control drugs. The verapamil group was significantly younger than the beta blocker group and contained more men than the no rate control group. Over a mean follow-up of 37 months, the primary outcome occurred in 17% in the verapamil group, 33% in the beta blocker group, and 33% in the no rate control group (P = 0.038). After adjusting for baseline characteristics, patients using verapamil have a significantly lower chance of receiving ECV, CCV, or atrial ablation compared to patients using beta blockers [hazard ratio (HR) 0.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19-0.83] and no rate control (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.44-0.93). CONCLUSION: In patients with newly diagnosed paroxysmal AF, verapamil was associated with less AF progression, as compared to beta blockers and no rate control.

Nurse-led vs. usual-care for atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Nurse-led integrated care is expected to improve outcome of patients with atrial fibrillation compared with usual-care provided by a medical specialist. METHODS AND RESULTS: We randomized 1375 patients with atrial fibrillation (64 ± 10 years, 44% women, 57% had CHA2DS2-VASc ≥ 2) to receive nurse-led care or usual-care. Nurse-led care was provided by specialized nurses using a decision-support tool, in consultation with the cardiologist. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular death and cardiovascular hospital admissions. Of 671 nurse-led care patients, 543 (81%) received anticoagulation in full accordance with the guidelines against 559 of 683 (82%) usual-care patients. The cumulative adherence to guidelines-based recommendations was 61% under nurse-led care and 26% under usual-care. Over 37 months of follow-up, the primary endpoint occurred in 164 of 671 patients (9.7% per year) under nurse-led care and in 192 of 683 patients (11.6% per year) under usual-care [hazard ratio (HR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 to 1.04, P = 0.12]. There were 124 vs. 161 hospitalizations for arrhythmia events (7.0% and 9.4% per year), and 14 vs. 22 for heart failure (0.7% and 1.1% per year), respectively. Results were not consistent in a pre-specified subgroup analysis by centre experience, with a HR of 0.52 (95% CI 0.37-to 0.71) in four experienced centres and of 1.24 (95% CI 0.94-1.63) in four less experienced centres (P for interaction <0.001). CONCLUSION: Our trial failed to show that nurse-led care was superior to usual-care. The data suggest that nurse-led care by an experienced team could be clinically beneficial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01740037). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01740037).

The BRIGHT study: bifocal right ventricular resynchronization therapy: a randomized study.

AIMS: The BRIGHT study evaluated bifocal right ventricular (RV) (apex and outflow tract) pacing in a single, blind, randomized crossover study in patients eligible for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Forty-two patients were enrolled with the following characteristics: chronic drug refractory heart failure New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III-IV; ejection fraction (EF)<35%; QRS width >or= 120 ms; and a left bundle branch block. The aim of the study was to assess an improvement in left ventricular (LV) EF, 6 min walk test, Minnesota quality-of-life score, and NYHA classification. Methods and result Patients were randomized to receive either bifocal pacing or the control mode, each for a period of 3 months. Parameters were measured prior to randomization and after 3 months of control or bifocal pacing. Eight patients failed to make the 7 month follow-up, three patients died (one prior to randomization at the first month), five patients dropped out, and three patients refused further participation. One patient had a persistent lead problem, which was subsequently replaced with an LV lead, and one patient suffered with persistent atrial fibrillation. Compared with baseline, bifocal pacing improved EF from 26 +/- 12% to 36 +/- 11% (P < 0.0008), NYHA classification decreased from 2.8 +/- 0.4 to 2.3 +/- 0.7 (P < 0.007). Furthermore, the 6 min walk test improved from 372 +/- 129 m to 453 +/- 122 m (P < 0.05), and the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure scores decreased from 33 +/- 20 to 24 +/- 21 (P < 0.006). In the control group, no significant changes in any parameters were observed. Eight patients did not tolerate reprogramming from DDD BRIGHT to control pacing, with symptoms disappearing in all patients after reprogramming to bifocal pacing. CONCLUSION: Bifocal RV pacing in patients with a classic indication for CRT shows improvement in all parameters.