Atrial fibrillation (AF) is highly prevalent with a lifetime risk of about 1 in 3-5 individuals after the age of 45 years. Between 2010 and 2019, the global prevalence of AF has risen markedly from 33.5 million to 59 million individuals living with AF. Early detection of AF and implementation of appropriate treatment could reduce the frequency of complications associated with AF. International AF management guidelines recommend opportunistic and systematic screening for AF, but additional data are needed. Digital approaches and pathways have been proposed for early detection and for the transition to early AF management. Mobile health (mHealth) devices provide an opportunity for digital screening and should be part of novel models of care delivery based on integrated AF care pathways. For a broad implementation of mHealth-based, integrated care for patients with chronic diseases as AF, further high quality evidence is necessary. In this review, we present an overview of the present data on epidemiology, screening techniques, and the contribution of digital health solutions to the integrated management of AF. We also provide a systemic review on current data of digital and integrated AF management.

The consensus of the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS) on stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) has been published in 2017 which provided useful clinical guidance for cardiologists, neurologists, geriatricians, and general practitioners in the Asia-Pacific region. In these years, many important new data regarding stroke prevention in AF were reported. The practice guidelines subcommittee members comprehensively reviewed updated information on stroke prevention in AF, and summarized them in this 2021 focused update of the 2017 consensus guidelines of the APHRS on stroke prevention in AF. We highlighted and focused on several issues, including the importance of the AF Better Care pathway, the advantages of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) for Asians, the considerations of use of NOACs for Asian AF patients with single one stroke risk factor beyond gender, the role of lifestyle factors on stroke risk, the use of oral anticoagulants during the “coronavirus disease 2019” pandemic, etc. We fully realize that there are gaps, unaddressed questions, and many areas of uncertainty and debate in the current knowledge of AF, and the physician's decision remains the most important factor in the management of AF. ^* This is an executive summary of the full consensus guideline, which is published in Journal of Arrhythmia by Chao et al. [6] Note: The review process for this paper was fully handled by Christian Weber, Editor-in-Chief. Received: 15 October 2021 Accepted: 20 October 2021 Article published online: 13 November 2021 © 2021. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) Georg Thieme Verlag KG Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

Objective The ‘Atrial fibrillation Better Care’ (ABC) pathway has been recently proposed as a holistic approach for the comprehensive management of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). We performed a systematic review of current evidence for the use of the ABC pathway on clinical outcomes. Methods and Results We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. PubMed and EMBASE were searched for studies reporting the prevalence of ABC-pathway-adherent management in AF patients, and its impact on clinical outcomes (all-cause death, cardiovascular death, stroke, and major bleeding). Meta-analysis of odds ratio (OR) was performed with random-effects models; subgroup analysis and meta-regression were performed to account for heterogeneity. Among the eight studies included, we found a pooled prevalence of ABC-adherent management of 21% (95% confidence interval, CI: 13–34%), with a high grade of heterogeneity, explained by the increasing adherence to each ABC criterion. Patients treated according to the ABC pathway showed a lower risk of all-cause death (OR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.31–0.56), cardiovascular death (OR: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.23–0.58), stroke (OR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.37–0.82) and major bleeding (OR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.51–0.94), with moderate heterogeneity. Prevalence of comorbidities was moderators of heterogeneity for all-cause and cardiovascular death, while longer follow-up was associated with increased effectiveness for all outcomes. Conclusion Adherence to the ABC pathway was suboptimal, being adopted in one in every five patients. Adherence to the ABC pathway was associated with a reduction in the risk of major adverse outcomes.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), currently a worldwide pandemic, is a viral illness caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The suspected contribution of thrombotic events to morbidity and mortality in COVID-19 patients has prompted a search for novel potential options for preventing COVID-19-associated thrombotic disease. In this article by the Global COVID-19 Thrombosis Collaborative Group, we describe novel dosing approaches for commonly used antithrombotic agents (especially heparin-based regimens) and the potential use of less widely used antithrombotic drugs in the absence of confirmed thrombosis. Although these therapies may have direct antithrombotic effects, other mechanisms of action, including anti-inflammatory or antiviral effects, have been postulated. Based on survey results from this group of authors, we suggest research priorities for specific agents and subgroups of patients with COVID-19. Further, we review other agents, including immunomodulators, that may have antithrombotic properties. It is our hope that the present document will encourage and stimulate future prospective studies and randomized trials to study the safety, efficacy, and optimal use of these agents for prevention or management of thrombosis in COVID-19. ^* Drs. Bikdeli and Madhavan contributed equally to this manuscript.

Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) increase mortality risk from coronavirus infection (COVID-19). There are also concerns that the pandemic has affected supply and demand of acute cardiovascular care. We estimated excess mortality in specific CVDs, both ‘direct’, through infection, and ‘indirect’, through changes in healthcare. We used (i) national mortality data for England and Wales to investigate trends in non-COVID-19 and CVD excess deaths; (ii) routine data from hospitals in England (n = 2), Italy (n = 1), and China (n = 5) to assess indirect pandemic effects on referral, diagnosis, and treatment services for CVD; and (iii) population-based electronic health records from 3 862 012 individuals in England to investigate pre- and post-COVID-19 mortality for people with incident and prevalent CVD. We incorporated pre-COVID-19 risk (by age, sex, and comorbidities), estimated population COVID-19 prevalence, and estimated relative risk (RR) of mortality in those with CVD and COVID-19 compared with CVD and non-infected (RR: 1.2, 1.5, 2.0, and 3.0). Mortality data suggest indirect effects on CVD will be delayed rather than contemporaneous (peak RR 1.14). CVD service activity decreased by 60–100% compared with pre-pandemic levels in eight hospitals across China, Italy, and England. In China, activity remained below pre-COVID-19 levels for 2–3 months even after easing lockdown and is still reduced in Italy and England. For total CVD (incident and prevalent), at 10% COVID-19 prevalence, we estimated direct impact of 31 205 and 62 410 excess deaths in England (RR 1.5 and 2.0, respectively), and indirect effect of 49 932 to 99 865 deaths. Supply and demand for CVD services have dramatically reduced across countries with potential for substantial, but avoidable, excess mortality during and after the pandemic.

The consensus guidelines of the Geriatric Society of Chinese Medical Association on the management of atrial fibrillation (AF) in the elderly was first published in 2011 and updated in 2016, with endorsement by Chinese Society of Geriatric Health Medicine. Since then, many important studies regarding the screening and treatment in the elderly population have been reported, necessitating this updated expert consensus guideline. The writing committee members comprehensively reviewed updated evidence pertaining to elderly patients with AF, and formulated this 2024 update. The highlighted issues focused on the following: screening for AF, geriatric comprehensive assessment, use of the Atrial fibrillation Better Care (ABC) pathway for the elderly patients, and special clinical settings related to elderly patients with AF. New recommendations addressing smart technology facilitated AF screening, ABC pathway based management, and optimal anticoagulation were developed, with a focus on the elderly.