Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Despite endorsement of digoxin in clinical practice guidelines, there exist limited data on its safety in atrial fibrillation/flutter (AF). OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The goal of this study was to evaluate the association of digoxin with mortality in AF. METHODS:Using complete data of the TREAT-AF (The Retrospective Evaluation and Assessment of Therapies in AF) study from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system, we identified patients with newly diagnosed, nonvalvular AF seen within 90 days in an outpatient setting between VA fiscal years 2004 and 2008. We used multivariate and propensity-matched Cox proportional hazards to evaluate the association of digoxin use with death. Residual confounding was assessed by sensitivity analysis. RESULTS:Of 122,465 patients with 353,168 person-years of follow-up (age 72.1 ± 10.3 years, 98.4% male), 28,679 (23.4%) patients received digoxin. Cumulative mortality rates were higher for digoxin-treated patients than for untreated patients (95 vs. 67 per 1,000 person-years; p < 0.001). Digoxin use was independently associated with mortality after multivariate adjustment (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.26, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.23 to 1.29, p < 0.001) and propensity matching (HR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.17 to 1.25, p < 0.001), even after adjustment for drug adherence. The risk of death was not modified by age, sex, heart failure, kidney function, or concomitant use of beta-blockers, amiodarone, or warfarin. CONCLUSIONS:Digoxin was associated with increased risk of death in patients with newly diagnosed AF, independent of drug adherence, kidney function, cardiovascular comorbidities, and concomitant therapies. These findings challenge current cardiovascular society recommendations on use of digoxin in AF.

Although extending the duration of ambulatory electrocardiographic monitoring beyond 24 to 48 hours can improve the detection of arrhythmias, lead-based (Holter) monitors might be limited by patient compliance and other factors. We, therefore, evaluated compliance, analyzable signal time, interval to arrhythmia detection, and diagnostic yield of the Zio Patch, a novel leadless, electrocardiographic monitoring device in 26,751 consecutive patients. The mean wear time was 7.6 ± 3.6 days, and the median analyzable time was 99% of the total wear time. Among the patients with detected arrhythmias (60.3% of all patients), 29.9% had their first arrhythmia and 51.1% had their first symptom-triggered arrhythmia occur after the initial 48-hour period. Compared with the first 48 hours of monitoring, the overall diagnostic yield was greater when data from the entire Zio Patch wear duration were included for any arrhythmia (62.2% vs 43.9%, p <0.0001) and for any symptomatic arrhythmia (9.7% vs 4.4%, p <0.0001). For paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF), the mean interval to the first detection of AF was inversely proportional to the total AF burden, with an increasing proportion occurring after 48 hours (11.2%, 10.5%, 20.8%, and 38.0% for an AF burden of 51% to 75%, 26% to 50%, 1% to 25%, and <1%, respectively). In conclusion, extended monitoring with the Zio Patch for ≤14 days is feasible, with high patient compliance, a high analyzable signal time, and an incremental diagnostic yield beyond 48 hours for all arrhythmia types. These findings could have significant implications for device selection, monitoring duration, and care pathways for arrhythmia evaluation and AF surveillance.

BACKGROUND:Atrial fibrillation and flutter (AF, collectively) cause stroke. We evaluated whether treating specialty influences warfarin prescription in patients with newly diagnosed AF. METHODS:In the TREAT-AF study, we used Veterans Health Administration health record and claims data to identify patients with newly diagnosed AF between October 2004 and November 2008 and at least 1 internal medicine/primary care or cardiology outpatient encounter within 90 days after diagnosis. The primary outcome was prescription of warfarin. RESULTS:In 141,642 patients meeting the inclusion criteria, the mean age was 72.3 ± 10.2 years, 1.48% were women, and 25.8% had cardiology outpatient care. Cardiology-treated patients had more comorbidities and higher mean CHADS2 scores (1.8 vs 1.6, P < .0001). Warfarin use was higher in cardiology-treated vs primary care only-treated patients (68.6% vs 48.9%, P < .0001). After covariate and site-level adjustment, cardiology care was significantly associated with warfarin use (odds ratio [OR] 2.05, 95% CI 1.99-2.11). These findings were consistent across a series of adjusted models (OR 2.05-2.20), propensity matching (OR 1.98), and subgroup analyses (OR 1.58-2.11). Warfarin use in primary-care-only patients declined from 2004 to 2008 (51.6%-44.0%, P < .0001), whereas the adjusted odds of warfarin receipt with cardiology care (vs primary care) increased from 2004 to 2008 (1.88-2.24, P < .0001). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:In patients with newly diagnosed AF, we found large differences in anticoagulation use by treating specialty. A divergent 5-year trend of risk-adjusted warfarin use was observed. Treating specialty influences stroke prevention care and may impact clinical outcomes.