Percutaneous radiofrequency catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation prior to atrial septal defect closure.

Percutaneous Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation. Patients with an atrial septal defect (ASD) commonly have atrial fibrillation (AF) and closure of the ASD rarely controls the arrhythmia. We report on the management of 4 patients with recurrent medically refractory AF in the setting of an unrepaired ASD who underwent percutaneous RFA prior to ASD closure. In 3 of the 4 patients AF was controlled after ablation without antiarrhythmic drug therapy and in the fourth patient AF was controlled with antiarrhythmic therapy after ASD closure. Based on these limited results it seems reasonable to consider RFA of medically refractory AF in patients prior to planned percutaneous ASD closure.

Myocarditis with ST elevation and elevated cardiac enzymes misdiagnosed as an ST-elevation myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: Acute myocarditis can mimic ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Quickly determining the correct diagnosis is critical given the "time is muscle" implication with a STEMI and the potential adverse effects associated with use of fibrinolytic therapy. CASE REPORT: A 46-year-old man presented to a rural emergency department with chest pain, and an electrocardiogram (ECG) read as showing 0.1 mV of ST-segment elevation in leads III and aVF. His initial cardiac troponin T was 0.44 ng/mL. He received fibrinolytic therapy for presumed STEMI. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging was later performed and showed epicardial delayed enhancement consistent with myocarditis. Upon further questioning, he acknowledged 3 days of stuttering chest discomfort and a recent upper respiratory infection, as well as similar chest pain in his wife. CONCLUSIONS: A systematic evaluation is essential for acute chest pain, including a focused history, identification of cardiac risk factors, and ECG interpretation. A history of recent viral illness, absence of cardiac risk factors, or ECG findings inconsistent with a single anatomic lesion would suggest a potential alternate diagnosis to STEMI. This case emphasizes the importance of a focused history in the initial evaluation of chest pain.

Atrial fibrillation significantly increases total mortality and stroke risk beyond that conveyed by the CHADS2 risk factors.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with an increased risk of mortality and stroke. However, it is unclear if AF is independently associated with these poor outcomes or it is merely a risk marker of other processes that convey the risk. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent angiography for suspicion of coronary artery disease, but without a history of AF, were studied. Traditional CHADS2 (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age >75 years, diabetes, stroke/transient ischemic attack) risk factors for each patient were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 343 AF patients (age = 69 +/- 10 years, 215 [63%] male) and 2,945 non-AF patients (age = 63 +/- 12 years, 2,012 [67%] male) were studied. Among AF patients, 51 (15%) had a myocardial infarction (MI), 35 (10%) had a stroke, and 180 (52%) died. CHADS2 score incrementally increased risk of stroke (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] for 1:1.92, 2:2.30, 3:1.14, 4:3.83, 5:10.96; P-trend = 0.14), death (HR for 1:1.83, 2:2.34, 3:3.69, 4:2.27, 5:4.53; P-trend < 0.001), and major adverse cardiac event (MACE)(HR for 1:1.29, 2:1.54, 3:2.07, 4:2.41, 5:2.68; P-trend = 0.002). Among non-AF patients, CHADS2 score incrementally increased risk of stroke (HR for 1:1.18, 2:3.17, 3:5.08, 4:10.78, 5:7.50; P-trend < 0.001), MI (HR for 1:1.05, 2:1.46, 3:1.57, 4:0.53, 5:4.76; P-trend = 0.002), death (HR for 1:1.79, 2:3.22, 3:6.23, 4:9.09, 5:14.00; P-trend < 0.001), and MACE (HR for 1:1.47, 2:2.36, 3:4.16, 4:5.91, 5:7.56; P-trend < 0.001). Among all patients, both CHADS2 score (all P < or = 0.001) and AF were independent risk factors for stroke (AF: P = 0.002), MI (AF: P = 0.035), death (AF: P < 0.001), and MACE (AF: P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The CHADS2 score is a powerful predictor of stroke and death. AF increases the risk of these outcomes in an independent manner. These data support the concept that AF is a risk factor of future cardiovascular disease.

Contemporary management of atrial fibrillation: update on anticoagulation and invasive management strategies.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia encountered in clinical practice. Its increasing prevalence, particularly among the elderly, renders it one of the most serious current medical epidemics. Several management questions confront the clinician treating a patient with AF: Should the condition be treated? Is the patient at risk of death or serious morbidity as a result of this diagnosis? If treatment is necessary, is rate control or rhythm control superior? Which patients need anticoagulation therapy, and for how long? This review of articles obtained by a search of the PubMed and MEDLINE databases presents the available evidence that can guide the clinician in answering these questions. After discussing the merits of available therapy, including medications aimed at controlling rate, rhythm, or both, we focus on the present status of ablative therapy for AF. Catheter ablation, particularly targeting the pulmonary veins, is being increasingly performed, although the precise indications for this approach and its effectiveness and safety are being actively investigated. We briefly discuss other invasive options that are less frequently used, such as pacemakers, defibrillators, left atrial appendage closure devices, and the surgical maze procedure.

Atrial fibrillation and CHADS2 risk factors are associated with highly sensitive C-reactive protein incrementally and independently.

BACKGROUND: Inflammation has been shown to have a direct role in the initiation, maintenance, and recurrence of atrial fibrillation (AF) although the underlying mechanisms are unknown. Similarly, it is unclear if inflammatory markers are elevated due to the AF alone or the coexisting cardiovascular diseases that increase the risk of AF. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent angiography for suspicion of coronary artery disease, but without a myocardial infarction, were studied. Serum was analyzed to determine high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) level. Patients' AF status was determined through ICD-9 codes, review of hospital discharge summaries, clinical evaluations, and electrocardiograms. RESULTS: A total of 2,340 patients were studied (64+/-12 years). Comorbid diseases included 1,438 (61%) coronary artery disease, 1,309 (56%) hypertension, 433 (19%) diabetes, 345 (15%) congestive heart failure, and 43 (2%) a prior stroke. The hs-CRP level was significantly higher in patients with AF (n = 238) compared to those without (14.0 mg/L vs 9.1 mg/L, P < 0.001). Greater CHADS2 score was also significantly associated with higher hs-CRP in a linear fashion (medians [mg/L], 0: 1.99, 1: 2.91, 2: 3.49, 3: 3.89, 4-5: 4.82, P <0.001). The presence of AF was associated with higher hs-CRP level across all scores (medians [mg/L], 0: 2.22 vs 1.98, P = 0.83, 1: 3.85 vs 2.86, P = 0.057, 2: 4.96 vs 3.29, P = 0.021, 3: 6.29 vs 3.17, P = 0.09, 4-5: 4.82 vs 4.50, P = 0.87). CONCLUSION: Risks factors associated with AF were associated with higher hs-CRP in an incremental manner. The presence of AF increased hs-CRP across the CHADS2 score strata is supportive of the concept that AF is an inflammatory process and may convey independent risk.

Use of biomarkers to develop treatment strategies for atherosclerosis.

This review focuses on the recent progress in and future prospects for the widened use of biomarkers of inflammation to modify lipid treatment goals in individuals assessed according to traditional risk factors to be at moderate or higher risk for clinical cardiovascular disease events. Elevated blood levels of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein or lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A(2) independently predict increased risk after adjustment for an individual's clinical risk status. When elevated individually, each is associated with an approximate doubling of risk for primary or recurrent cardiovascular events. Fourteen major studies, encompassing healthy adults, patients with chronic coronary heart disease, and those with a recent coronary event or stroke, are reviewed, demonstrating the consistent predictive value of these biomarkers across the risk spectrum. When both inflammatory markers are increased, they provide an even greater predictive capability to identify especially high-risk individuals who would benefit most from aggressive lipid-modifying therapies.