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.

Stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is one pillar of the management of this common arrhythmia. Substantial advances in the epidemiology and associated pathophysiology underlying AF-related stroke and thrombo-embolism are evident. Furthermore, the introduction of the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (also called direct oral anticoagulants) has clearly changed our approach to stroke prevention in AF, such that the default should be to offer oral anticoagulation for stroke prevention, unless the patient is at low risk. A strategy of early rhythm control is also beneficial in reducing strokes in selected patients with recent onset AF, when compared to rate control. Cardiovascular risk factor management, with optimization of comorbidities and attention to lifestyle factors, and the patient’s psychological morbidity are also essential. Finally, in selected patients with absolute contraindications to long-term oral anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion or exclusion may be considered. The aim of this state-of-the-art review article is to provide an overview of the current status of AF-related stroke and prevention strategies. A holistic or integrated care approach to AF management is recommended to minimize the risk of stroke in patients with AF, based on the evidence-based Atrial fibrillation Better Care (ABC) pathway, as follows: A: Avoid stroke with Anticoagulation; B: Better patient-centred, symptom-directed decisions on rate or rhythm control; C: Cardiovascular risk factor and comorbidity optimization, including lifestyle changes.

Integrated care for the clinical management of atrial fibrillation patients is advocated as a holistic way to improve outcomes; the simple Atrial fibrillation Better Care (ABC) pathway has been proposed. The ABC pathway streamlines care as follows: 'A' Avoid stroke; 'B' Better symptom management; 'C' Cardiovascular and Comorbidity optimization. We performed a post hoc analysis of the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-Up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) trial. An 'integrated care' approach was defined according to the ABC pathway. Patients fulfilling all criteria were categorized as the 'ABC' group; those not fulfilling all criteria were the 'non-ABC' group. Trial-adjudicated all-cause death, composite outcome of stroke/major bleeding/cardiovascular death, and first hospitalization were the main study outcomes. Among the 4060 patients in the original cohort, 3169 (78%) had available data to compare integrated care (ABC; n = 222; 7%) vs non-ABC (n = 2947; 93%) management. Over a median follow-up of 3.7 (interquartile range, 2.8-4.6) years, atrial fibrillation patients managed with integrated care (ABC group) had lower rates for all study outcomes (all P < .001) compared with the non-ABC group. A Cox multivariable regression analysis showed that atrial fibrillation patients managed in the ABC group had a significantly lower risk of all-cause death (hazard ratio [HR], 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.17-0.75), composite outcome (HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.18-0.68), and first hospitalization (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.53-0.80). The simple ABC pathway allows the streamlining of integrated care for atrial fibrillation patients in a holistic manner and is associated with a lower risk of adverse outcomes (including mortality, stroke/major bleeding/cardiovascular death, and hospitalization).

Summary: Oral anticoagulation is pivotal in the management of thromboembolic risk in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients. Effective anticoagulation is important to avoid major adverse events and medication adherence is central to achieve good anticoagulation control. Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are as effective and safe as vitamin K antagonist (VKAs) in NVAF patients. Due to the absence of routine anticoagulation monitoring with NOACs treatment, concerns have been raised about patient’s adherence to NOACs and real-life data demonstrates variability in adherence and persistence. A multi-level approach, including patients’ preferences, factors determining physicians’ prescribing habits and healthcare system infrastructure and support, is warranted to improve initiation and adherence of anticoagulants. Adherence to NOACs is paramount to achieve a clinical benefit. Implementation of educational programs and easy-to-use tools to identify patients most likely to be non-adherent to NOACs, are central issues in improving the quality of NVAF anticoagulation management.Note: The review process for this manuscript was fully handled by C. Weber, Editor in Chief.