Clinical Differences between Subtypes of Atrial Fibrillation and Flutter: Cross-Sectional Registry of 407 Patients

Introduction:Atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter account for one third of hospitalizations due to arrhythmias, determining great social and economic impacts. In Brazil, data on hospital care of these patients is scarce.Objective:To investigate the arrhythmia subtype of atrial fibrillation and flutter patients in the emergency setting and compare the clinical profile, thromboembolic risk and anticoagulants use.Methods:Cross-sectional retrospective study, with data collection from medical records of every patient treated for atrial fibrillation and flutter in the emergency department of Instituto de Cardiologia do Rio Grande do Sul during the first trimester of 2012.Results:We included 407 patients (356 had atrial fibrillation and 51 had flutter). Patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation were in average 5 years younger than those with persistent atrial fibrillation. Compared to paroxysmal atrial fibrillation patients, those with persistent atrial fibrillation and flutter had larger atrial diameter (48.6 ± 7.2 vs. 47.2 ± 6.2 vs. 42.3 ± 6.4; p < 0.01) and lower left ventricular ejection fraction (66.8 ± 11 vs. 53.9 ± 17 vs. 57.4 ± 16; p < 0.01). The prevalence of stroke and heart failure was higher in persistent atrial fibrillation and flutter patients. Those with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and flutter had higher prevalence of CHADS2 score of zero when compared to those with persistent atrial fibrillation (27.8% vs. 18% vs. 4.9%; p < 0.01). The prevalence of anticoagulation in patients with CHA2DS2-Vasc ≤ 2 was 40%.Conclusions:The population in our registry was similar in its comorbidities and demographic profile to those of North American and European registries. Despite the high thromboembolic risk, the use of anticoagulants was low, revealing difficulties for incorporating guideline recommendations. Public health strategies should be adopted in order to improve these rates.

One-year Mortality after an Acute Coronary Event and its Clinical Predictors: The ERICO Study

Background:Information about post-acute coronary syndrome (ACS) survival have been mostly short-term findings or based on specialized, cardiology referral centers.Objectives:To describe one-year case-fatality rates in the Strategy of Registry of Acute Coronary Syndrome (ERICO) cohort, and to study baseline characteristics as predictors.Methods:We analyzed data from 964 ERICO participants enrolled from February 2009 to December 2012. We assessed vital status by telephone contact and official death certificate searches. The cause of death was determined according to the official death certificates. We used log-rank tests to compare the probabilities of survival across subgroups. We built crude and adjusted (for age, sex and ACS subtype) Cox regression models to study if the ACS subtype or baseline characteristics were independent predictors of all-cause or cardiovascular mortality.Results:We identified 110 deaths in the cohort (case-fatality rate, 12.0%). Age [Hazard ratio (HR) = 2.04 per 10 year increase; 95% confidence interval (95%CI) = 1.75–2.38], non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (HR = 3.82 ; 95%CI = 2.21–6.60) or ST elevation myocardial infarction (HR = 2.59; 95%CI = 1.38–4.89) diagnoses, and diabetes (HR = 1.78; 95%CI = 1.20‑2.63) were significant risk factors for all-cause mortality in the adjusted models. We found similar results for cardiovascular mortality. A previous coronary artery disease diagnosis was also an independent predictor of all-cause mortality (HR = 1.61; 95%CI = 1.04–2.50), but not for cardiovascular mortality.Conclusion:We found an overall one-year mortality rate of 12.0% in a sample of post-ACS patients in a community, non-specialized hospital in São Paulo, Brazil. Age, ACS subtype, and diabetes were independent predictors of poor one‑year survival for overall and cardiovascular-related causes.

Cardiac Remodeling: Concepts, Clinical Impact, Pathophysiological Mechanisms and Pharmacologic Treatment

Abstract Cardiac remodeling is defined as a group of molecular, cellular and interstitial changes that manifest clinically as changes in size, mass, geometry and function of the heart after injury. The process results in poor prognosis because of its association with ventricular dysfunction and malignant arrhythmias. Here, we discuss the concepts and clinical implications of cardiac remodeling, and the pathophysiological role of different factors, including cell death, energy metabolism, oxidative stress, inflammation, collagen, contractile proteins, calcium transport, geometry and neurohormonal activation. Finally, the article describes the pharmacological treatment of cardiac remodeling, which can be divided into three different stages of strategies: consolidated, promising and potential strategies.

Analysis Treatment Guideline versus Clinical Practice Protocol in Patients Hospitalized due to Heart Failure

Background: Despite the availability of guidelines for treatment of heart failure (HF), only a few studies have assessed how hospitals adhere to the recommended therapies. Objectives: Compare the rates of adherence to the prescription of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ACEI/ARB) at hospital discharge, which is considered a quality indicator by the Joint Commission International, and to the prescription of beta-blockers at hospital discharge, which is recommended by national and international guidelines, in a hospital with a case management program to supervise the implementation of a clinical practice protocol (HCP) and another hospital that follows treatment guidelines (HCG). Methods: Prospective observational study that evaluated patients consecutively admitted to both hospitals due to decompensated HF between August 1st, 2006, and December 31st, 2008. We used as comparing parameters the prescription rates of beta-blockers and ACEI/ARB at hospital discharge and in-hospital mortality. Results: We analyzed 1,052 patients (30% female, mean age 70.6 ± 14.1 years), 381 (36%) of whom were seen at HCG and 781 (64%) at HCP. The prescription rates of beta-blockers at discharge at HCG and HCP were both 69% (p = 0.458), whereas those of ACEI/ARB were 83% and 86%, respectively (p = 0.162). In-hospital mortality rates were 16.5% at HCP and 27.8% at HCG (p < 0.001). Conclusion: There was no difference in prescription rates of beta-blocker and ACEI/ARB at hospital discharge between the institutions, but HCP had lower in-hospital mortality. This difference in mortality may be attributed to different clinical characteristics of the patients in both hospitals.