Advanced interatrial block: A well-defined electrocardiographic pattern with clinical arrhythmological implications

3.050 JCR (2013) Q2, 44/125 Cardiac & cardiovascular systems

Reply to the Editor—Prevalence of interatrial block during lifetime

SIN FINANCIACIÓN

Interatrial block and atrial arrhythmias in centenarians: Prevalence, associations, and clinical implications

Data are lacking on the characteristics of atrial activity in centenarians, including interatrial block (IAB). The aim of this study was to describe the prevalence of IAB and auricular arrhythmias in subjects older than 100 years and to elucidate their clinical implications. We studied 80 centenarians (mean age 101.4 ± 1.5 years; 21 men) with follow-ups of 6–34 months. Of these 80 centenarians, 71 subjects (88.8%) underwent echocardiography. The control group comprised 269 septuagenarians. A total of 23 subjects (28.8%) had normal P wave, 16 (20%) had partial IAB, 21 (26%) had advanced IAB, and 20 (25.0%) had atrial fibrillation/flutter. The IAB groups exhibited premature atrial beats more frequently than did the normal P wave group (35.1% vs 17.4%; P < .001); also, other measurements in the IAB groups frequently fell between values observed in the normal P wave and the atrial fibrillation/flutter groups. These measurements included sex preponderance, mental status and dementia, perceived health status, significant mitral regurgitation, and mortality. The IAB group had a higher previous stroke rate (24.3%) than did other groups. Compared with septuagenarians, centenarians less frequently presented a normal P wave (28.8% vs 53.5%) and more frequently presented advanced IAB (26.3% vs 8.2%), atrial fibrillation/flutter (25.0% vs 10.0%), and premature atrial beats (28.3 vs 7.0%) (P < .01). Relatively few centenarians (<30%) had a normal P wave, and nearly half had IAB. Our data suggested that IAB, particularly advanced IAB, is a pre–atrial fibrillation condition associated with premature atrial beats. Atrial arrhythmias and IAB occurred more frequently in centenarians than in septuagenarians.

¿Debemos anticoagular a pacientes en alto riesgo de sufrir fibrilación auricular?

SIN FINANCIACIÓN

Conservative management in very elderly patients with severe aortic stenosis: Time to change?

Despite current recommendations, a high percentage of patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis are managed conservatively. The aim of this study was to study symptomatic patients undergoing conservative management from the IDEAS registry, describing their baseline clinical characteristics, mortality, and the causes according to the reason for conservative management. Consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis diagnosed at 48 centers during January 2014 were included. Baseline clinical characteristics, echocardiographic data, Charlson index, and EuroSCORE-II were registered, including vital status and performance of valve intervention during one-year follow-up. For the purpose of this substudy we assessed symptomatic patients undergoing conservative management, including them in 5 groups according to the reason for performing conservative management [I: comorbidity/frailty (128, 43.8%); II: dementia 18 (6.2%); III: advanced age 34 (11.6%); IV: patients’ refusal 62 (21.2%); and V: other reasons 50 (17.1%)]. We included 292 patients aged 81.5 ± 9 years. Patients from group I had higher Charlson index (4 ± 2.3), higher EuroSCORE-II (7.5 ± 6), and a higher overall (42.2%) and non-cardiac mortality (16.4%) than the other groups. In contrast, patients from group III had fewer comorbidities, lower EuroSCORE-II (4 ± 2.5), and low overall (20.6%) and non-cardiac mortality (5.9%). Patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis managed conservatively have different baseline characteristics and clinical course according to the reason for performing conservative management. A prospective assessment of comorbidity and other geriatric syndromes might contribute to improve therapeutic strategy in this clinical setting.