Aims: We aimed to investigate the safety of discontinuing oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy after apparently successful atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation, using data from the Chinese Atrial Fibrillation Registry study. Methods and results: We identified 4512 consecutive patients who underwent successful AF ablation between August 2011 and December 2017. Of them, 3149 discontinued OAC 3 months post-ablation (Off-OAC group) and 1363 continued OAC beyond this period (On-OAC group). Regular follow-up examinations were undertaken to detect AF recurrence, monitor OAC therapy, and measure clinical outcomes. Primary outcomes included thromboembolic and major bleeding (MB) events experienced beyond 3 months after ablation. Low thromboembolic and MB event rates were noted in the on-treatment analysis. The incidence rates for thromboembolism were 0.54 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39–0.76] and 0.86 (95% CI 0.56–1.30) per 100 patient-years, and that for MB events were 0.19 (95% CI 0.11–0.34) and 0.35 (95% CI 0.18–0.67) per 100 patient-years, for the Off-OAC and On-OAC groups over mean follow-up periods of 24.2 ± 14.7 and 23.0 ± 13.6 months, respectively. Similar results were observed in the intention-to-treat analysis. Previous history of ischaemic stroke (IS)/transient ischaemic attack (TIA)/systemic embolism (SE) [hazard ratio (HR) 3.40, 95% CI 1.92–6.02; P < 0.01] and diabetes mellitus (HR 2.06, 95% CI 1.20–3.55, P = 0.01) were independently associated with thromboembolic events, while OAC discontinuation (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.41–1.23, P = 0.21) remained insignificant in multivariable analysis. Conclusions: This study suggests that it may be safe to discontinue OAC in post-ablation patients under diligent monitoring, in the absence of AF recurrence, history of IS/TIA/SE, and diabetes mellitus. However, further large-scale randomized trials are required to confirm this. Trial registration: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR-OCH-13003729. URL: http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=5831.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is associated with an increased risk of all-cause death and cardiovascular events. However, it is uncertain whether frailty modifies the efficacy and safety of intensive blood pressure control. METHODS: Data from SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) were used to construct a frailty index. Subgroup differences in intensive blood pressure control treatment effects and safety outcomes were measured on a relative and an absolute scale in patients with and without frailty (defined as a frailty index >0.21) using Cox proportional hazard models and generalized linear models, respectively. The primary outcome was a composite of myocardial infarction, acute coronary syndrome without myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, and cardiovascular death. RESULTS: A total of 9306 patients (mean age, 67.9±9.4 years), 2560 (26.7%) of whom had frailty, were included in our study. Over a median follow-up of 3.22 years, 561 primary outcomes were observed. Patients with frailty had a significantly higher risk of primary outcome in both the intensive and standard blood pressure control arms (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.10 [95% CI, 1.59–2.77] and 1.85 [95% CI, 1.46–2.35], respectively). Intensive treatment effects on primary and secondary outcomes were not significantly different on a relative scale (except for cardiovascular death [hazard ratio in patients with and without frailty, 0.91 (95% CI, 0.52–1.60) versus 0.30 (95% CI, 0.16–0.59), respectively; P _interaction =0.01]) or absolute scale. There was no significant interaction between frailty and risks for serious adverse events with intensive treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Frailty status was a marker of high cardiovascular risk. Patients with frailty benefit similarly to other patients from intensive blood pressure control without an increased risk of serious adverse events.

Background: The association between sodium‐glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence after catheter ablation among patients with diabetes and AF remains unclear. Methods and Results: Patients with AF undergoing initial catheter ablation with a history of diabetes from the China AF registry were included. Patients using SGLT2i were identified and matched by propensity score with non‐SGLT2i patients in a 1:3 ratio. The main outcome was AF recurrence during the 18‐month follow‐up. A total of 138 patients with diabetes with SGLT2i therapy and 387 without SGLT2i were analyzed. AF recurrence occurred in 37 patients (26.8%) in the SGLT2i group and 152 patients (39.3%) in the non‐SGLT2i group during a total of 593.3 person‐years follow‐up. The SGLT2i group was associated with lower AF recurrence compared with the non‐SGLT2i group (hazard ratio, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.44–0.90], P =0.007). A total of 4 studies were analyzed in our meta‐analysis demonstrating that SGLT2i was associated with lower AF recurrence after catheter ablation (odds ratio, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.54–0.69]; P <0.001, I ² =0.0%). Conclusions: Our prospective study coupled with a meta‐analysis demonstrated a lower risk of AF recurrence with the use of SGLT2i among patients with diabetes after AF ablation.

Background: Registry studies in high-income countries have defined contemporary management of heart failure (HF), but few such data exist in the large aging population of China. We report the study design and baseline characteristics of the Heart Failure Registry of Patient Outcomes (HERO) study, undertaken to determine evidence–practice gaps in the management of HF in a broad and representative population of China. Methods and results: The HERO study is a prospective, longitudinal, seasonally-rotating, multicentre registry study of patients hospitalized with acute HF who are followed up over 12 months. Patients were recruited on the basis of primary admission clinical diagnosis of acute HF at 73 hospitals in Henan, the largest and most socio-economically diverse province in China, from November 2017 to November 2018; follow-up is ongoing. For each patient, data obtained through interview and medial record review by independent clinical research staff include: socio-demographics, clinical features, diagnostic investigations, and treatment, with a subset of patients providing blood samples for future biomarker investigation. Surviving patients are scheduled to be followed up by telephone at 2 weeks, and 3, 6 and 12 months post-admission, or until death or study withdrawal. A total of 5620 patients (mean age 72 ± 12 years; 50% female) with acute HF were recruited from 8 provincial-, 22 municipal-, and 43 county-level hospitals. Patients had co-morbid hypertensive (48%), coronary (29%), or metabolic (20%) diseases. Among 3147 patients who had echocardiography, 54%, 20% and 25% of patients had ejection fraction of ≥50%, 40–50%, and < 40%, respectively. In-hospital or 3-day post-discharge mortality was 3.2% (182/5620). Death or readmission rate from the 4th day post-discharge to first follow-up (median 32 days) was 22.4% (977/4368). Conclusions: The HERO study provides a unique opportunity to profile evidence–practice gaps across a broad spectrum of patients with acute HF in China.

Hypertension is an important cause of cerebral small vessel disease, especially of white matter hyperintensity (WMH). The ability of intensive blood pressure (BP) control in preventing this pathological progression remains unclear. The authors systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and Cochrane library for publications until July 20, 2020. Studies included were clinical trials with random allocation to an antihypertensive medication against placebo, or different treatment targets. The primary outcome was intergroup differences in the change of WMH volume. A random‐effect model was applied for pooling effect measures. Subgroup analysis and meta‐regression were conducted to explore heterogeneity. Seven studies with 2693 patients were identified. Compared with the control group, patients in the intensive BP control group had a slower progression of WMH, with a pooled intergroup standard mean difference (SMD) for WMH change of −0.22 (95% CI: −0.35 ~ −0.09, I² = 63%). For studies comparing intensive and standard BP target, the pooled SMD is −0.37 (95% CI:‐0.50~‐0.24, I² = 0%), while the pooled SMD of studies comparing active antihypertensive medication and placebo was only −0.08 (95% CI: −0.17 ~ 0.01, I² = 0%). Meta‐regression analysis showed that the reduction in WMH progression is proportional to the magnitude of intensive BP control (β = −0.028,P < .001). In conclusion, intensive BP control prevents WMH progression, and its effect is associated with the magnitude of intensive BP control.

BACKGROUND: Systolic blood pressure (SBP) time in target range (TTR) indicates the mean value, exposure time, and variability in blood pressure over time. The prognostic value of SBP TTR for incident atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with hypertension is unclear. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial), a randomized controlled trial comparing intensive (<120 mm Hg) and standard (<140 mm Hg) SBP interventions in participants with hypertension. SBP target ranges for intensive and standard arms were defined as 110 to 130 and 120 to 140 mm Hg, respectively. TTR was calculated by linear interpolation method using SBP from months 0 to 3. We used Cox proportional regression models to assess the association of SBP TTR with incident AF. RESULTS: Among 7939 participants included in this analysis, 187 incident AF cases occurred during follow-up. After multivariable adjustment, a 10% increase in SBP TTR was independently associated with a 7% lower risk of incident AF (hazard ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.88–0.97]; P =0.003). The restricted spline curve depicted a linear and inverse relationship between SBP TTR and incident AF. Sensitivity analyses generated consistent results when calculating TTR over a longer period or setting target range as 110 to 140 mm Hg for the whole population. CONCLUSIONS: Higher SBP TTR independently predicts a lower risk of incident AF. Efforts to attain SBP within 110 to 140 mm Hg over time may be an effective strategy to prevent AF. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT01206062.