BACKGROUND: Device-detected atrial fibrillation (also known as subclinical atrial fibrillation or atrial high-rate episodes) is a common finding in patients with an implanted cardiac rhythm device and is associated with an increased risk of ischemic stroke. Whether oral anticoagulation is effective and safe in this patient population is unclear. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of MEDLINE and Embase for randomized trials comparing oral anticoagulation with antiplatelet or no antithrombotic therapy in adults with device-detected atrial fibrillation recorded by a pacemaker, implantable cardioverter defibrillator, cardiac resynchronization therapy device, or implanted cardiac monitor. We used random-effects models for meta-analysis and rated the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework (GRADE). The review was preregistered (PROSPERO CRD42023463212). RESULTS: From 785 citations, we identified 2 randomized trials with relevant clinical outcome data: NOAH-AFNET 6 (Non–Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Atrial High Rate Episodes; 2536 participants) evaluated edoxaban, and ARTESiA (Apixaban for the Reduction of Thrombo-Embolism in Patients With Device-Detected Sub-Clinical Atrial Fibrillation; 4012 participants) evaluated apixaban. Meta-analysis demonstrated that oral anticoagulation with these agents reduced ischemic stroke (relative risk [RR], 0.68 [95% CI, 0.50–0.92]; high-quality evidence). The results from the 2 trials were consistent (I ² statistic for heterogeneity=0%). Oral anticoagulation also reduced a composite of cardiovascular death, all-cause stroke, peripheral arterial embolism, myocardial infarction, or pulmonary embolism (RR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.73–0.99]; I ² =0%; moderate-quality evidence). There was no reduction in cardiovascular death (RR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.76–1.17]; I ² =0%; moderate-quality evidence) or all-cause mortality (RR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.96–1.21]; I ² =0%; moderate-quality evidence). Oral anticoagulation increased major bleeding (RR, 1.62 [95% CI, 1.05–2.50]; I²=61%; high-quality evidence). CONCLUSIONS: The results of the NOAH-AFNET 6 and ARTESiA trials are consistent with each other. Meta-analysis of these 2 large randomized trials provides high-quality evidence that oral anticoagulation with edoxaban or apixaban reduces the risk of stroke in patients with device-detected atrial fibrillation and increases the risk of major bleeding.

Among patients having noncardiac surgery, perioperative hemodynamic abnormalities are associated with vascular complications. Uncertainty remains about what intraoperative blood pressure to target and how to manage long-term antihypertensive medications perioperatively. To compare the effects of a hypotension-avoidance and a hypertension-avoidance strategy on major vascular complications after noncardiac surgery. Partial factorial randomized trial of 2 perioperative blood pressure management strategies (reported here) and tranexamic acid versus placebo. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03505723). 110 hospitals in 22 countries. 7490 patients having noncardiac surgery who were at risk for vascular complications and were receiving 1 or more long-term antihypertensive medications. In the hypotension-avoidance strategy group, the intraoperative mean arterial pressure target was 80 mm Hg or greater; before and for 2 days after surgery, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors were withheld and the other long-term antihypertensive medications were administered only for systolic blood pressures 130 mm Hg or greater, following an algorithm. In the hypertension-avoidance strategy group, the intraoperative mean arterial pressure target was 60 mm Hg or greater; all antihypertensive medications were continued before and after surgery. The primary outcome was a composite of vascular death and nonfatal myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery, stroke, and cardiac arrest at 30 days. Outcome adjudicators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome occurred in 520 of 3742 patients (13.9%) in the hypotension-avoidance group and in 524 of 3748 patients (14.0%) in the hypertension-avoidance group (hazard ratio, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.88 to 1.12]; P = 0.92). Results were consistent for patients who used 1 or more than 1 antihypertensive medication in the long term. Adherence to the assigned strategies was suboptimal; however, results were consistent across different adherence levels. In patients having noncardiac surgery, our hypotension-avoidance and hypertension-avoidance strategies resulted in a similar incidence of major vascular complications. Canadian Institutes of Health Research, National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia), and Research Grant Council of Hong Kong.

Background: Sodium‐glucose co‐transporter (SGLT) inhibitors reduce cardiovascular outcomes including mortality in several populations; however, their effect on atrial fibrillation/flutter (AF) remains unclear. Our objective was to determine whether SGLT inhibitors reduce AF and whether a history of AF modifies the effect of SGLT inhibitors on the composite of heart failure hospitalization or cardiovascular death. Methods and Results: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL to March 2021. Pairs of reviewers identified randomized controlled trials that compared an SGLT inhibitor with placebo or no therapy. We pooled data using RevMan 5.4.1, assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane tool, and determined the overall quality of evidence using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Thirty‐one eligible trials reported on AF events (75 279 participants, mean age 62 years, 35.0% women). Moderate quality evidence supported a lower risk of serious AF events with SGLT inhibitors (1.1% versus 1.5%; risk ratio 0.75 [95% CI, 0.66–0.86]; I ² =0%). A similar reduction in total AF events was also noted with SGLT inhibitors. Three trials reported on heart failure hospitalization/cardiovascular death stratified by a baseline history of AF (18 832 participants, mean age 66 years, 38.1% women); in patients with a history of AF, SGLT inhibitors resulted in a lower risk in the composite of heart failure hospitalization or cardiovascular death (hazard ratio, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.57–0.85]; I ² =0%)—similar to the effect estimate for patients without AF, P value for interaction: 1.00. Conclusions: SGLT inhibitors may reduce AF events and likely reduce heart failure hospitalization/cardiovascular death to a similar extent in patients with and without AF.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common and morbid arrhythmia. Stroke is a major hazard of AF and may be preventable with oral anticoagulation. Yet since AF is often asymptomatic, many individuals with AF may be unaware and do not receive treatment that could prevent a stroke. Screening for AF has gained substantial attention in recent years as several studies have demonstrated that screening is feasible. Advances in technology have enabled a variety of approaches to facilitate screening for AF using both medical-prescribed devices as well as consumer electronic devices capable of detecting AF. Yet controversy about the utility of AF screening remains owing to concerns about potential harms resulting from screening in the absence of randomized data demonstrating effectiveness of screening on outcomes such as stroke and bleeding. In this review, we summarize current literature, present technology, population-based screening considerations, and consensus guidelines addressing the role of AF screening in practice.

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) improve cardiovascular outcomes in a variety of settings. This study aimed to assess whether cardioprotective effects of MRAs are modified by heart failure (HF) and atrial fibrillation (AF) status and to study their impact on AF events. MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central databases were searched to 24 March 2023 for randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of MRAs as compared with placebo or usual care in reducing cardiovascular outcomes and AF events in patients with or at risk for cardiovascular diseases. Random-effects models and interaction analyses were used to test for effect modification. Meta-analysis of seven trials (20 741 participants, mean age: 65.6 years, 32% women) showed that the efficacy of MRAs, as compared with placebo, in reducing a composite of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization remains consistent across patients with HF [risk ratio = 0.81; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.67–0.98] and without HF (risk ratio = 0.84; 95% CI: 0.75–0.93; interaction P = .77). Among patients with HF, MRAs reduced cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization in patients with AF (hazard ratio = 0.95; 95% CI: 0.54–1.66) to a similar extent as in those without AF (hazard ratio = 0.82; 95% CI: 0.63–1.07; interaction P = .65). Pooled data from 20 trials (21 791 participants, mean age: 65.2 years, 31.3% women) showed that MRAs reduce AF events (risk ratio = 0.76; 95% CI: 0.67–0.87) in both patients with and without prior AF. Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists are similarly effective in preventing cardiovascular events in patients with and without HF and most likely retain their efficacy regardless of AF status. Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists may also be moderately effective in preventing incident or recurrent AF events. Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists and atrial fibrillation. AF, atrial fibrillation; CI, confidence interval; CV, cardiovascular; HF, heart failure; MRA, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist; RCT, randomized controlled trial.