4.6 Article

The interplay between atrial fibrillation and heart failure on long-term mortality and length of stay: Insights from the, United Kingdom ACALM registry

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
卷 252, 期 -, 页码 117-121

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2017.06.033

关键词

Atrial fibrillation; Mortality; Heart failure; Hospitalisation; Length of stay

资金

  1. Isaac Schapera Trust

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: There is concern that the development of heart failure and atrial fibrillation has a detrimental influence on clinical outcomes. The aim of this study was to assess all-cause mortality and length of hospital stay in patients with chronic and new-onset concomitant AF and HF. Methods: Using the ACALM registry, we analysed adults hospitalised between 2000 and 2013 with AF and HF and assessed prevalence, mortality and length of hospital stay. Patients with HF and/or AF at baseline (study-entry) were compared with patients who developed new-onset disease during follow-up. Results: Of 929,552 patients, 31,695 (3.4%) were in AF without HF, 20,768 (22%) had HF in sinus rhythm, and 10,992 (12%) had HF in AF. Patients with HF in AF had the greatest all-cause mortality (70.8%), followed by HF in sinus rhythm (64.1%) and AF alone (45.1%, p < 0.0001). Patients that developed new-onset AF, HF or both had significantly worse mortality (58.5%, 70.7% and 74.8% respectively) compared to those already with the condition at baseline (48.5%, 63.7% and 67.2% respectively, p < 0.0001). Patients with HI in AF had the longest length of hospital stay (9.41 days, 95% CI 8.90-9.92), followed by HF in sinus rhythm (7.67, 95% CI 7.34-8.00) and AF alone (6.05, 95% CI 5.78-631). Conclusions: Patients with HF in AF are at a greater risk of mortality and longer hospital stay compared to patients without the combination. New-onset AF or HF is associated with significantly worse prognosis than long-standing disease. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据