The totally subcutaneous implantable-defibrillator (S-ICD) is a new alternative to the conventional transvenous ICD system to minimize intravascular lead complications. There are limited data describing the long-term performance of the S-ICD. This paper presents the first large international patient population collected as part of the EFFORTLESS S-ICD Registry. The EFFORTLESS S-ICD Registry is a non-randomized, standard of care, multicentre Registry designed to collect long-term, system-related, clinical, and patient reported outcome data from S-ICD implanted patients since June 2009. Follow-up data are systematically collected over 60-month post-implant including Quality of Life. The study population of 472 patients of which 241 (51%) were enrolled prospectively has a mean follow-up duration of 558 days (range 13–1342 days, median 498 days), 72% male, mean age of 49 ± 18 years (range 9–88 years), 42% mean left ventricular ejection fraction. Complication-free rates were 97 and 94%, at 30 and 360 days, respectively. Three hundred and seventeen spontaneous episodes were recorded in 85 patients during the follow-up period. Of these episodes, 169 (53%) received therapy, 93 being for Ventricular Tachycardia/Fibrillation (VT/VF). One patient died of recurrent VF and severe bradycardia. Regarding discrete VT/VF episodes, first shock conversion efficacy was 88% with 100% overall successful clinical conversion after a maximum of five shocks. The 360-day inappropriate shock rate was 7% with the vast majority occurring for oversensing (62/73 episodes), primarily of cardiac signals (94% of oversensed episodes). The first large cohort of real-world data from an International patient S-ICD population demonstrates appropriate system performance with clinical event rates and inappropriate shock rates comparable with those reported for conventional ICDs. Clinical trial registration URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier NCT01085435.

GLORIA-AF (Global Registry on Long-Term Oral Antithrombotic Treatment in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation) is a prospective, global registry program describing antithrombotic treatment patterns in patients with newly diagnosed nonvalvular atrial fibrillation at risk of stroke. Phase 2 began when dabigatran, the first non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC), became available. This study sought to describe phase 2 baseline data and compare these with the pre-NOAC era collected during phase 1. During phase 2, 15,641 consenting patients were enrolled (November 2011 to December 2014); 15,092 were eligible. This pre-specified cross-sectional analysis describes eligible patients' baseline characteristics. Atrial fibrillation disease characteristics, medical outcomes, and concomitant diseases and medications were collected. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Of the total patients, 45.5% were female; median age was 71 (interquartile range: 64, 78) years. Patients were from Europe (47.1%), North America (22.5%), Asia (20.3%), Latin America (6.0%), and the Middle East/Africa (4.0%). Most had high stroke risk (CHA2DS2-VASc [Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age ≥75 years, Diabetes mellitus, previous Stroke, Vascular disease, Age 65 to 74 years, Sex category] score ≥2; 86.1%); 13.9% had moderate risk (CHA2DS2-VASc = 1). Overall, 79.9% received oral anticoagulants, of whom 47.6% received NOAC and 32.3% vitamin K antagonists (VKA); 12.1% received antiplatelet agents; 7.8% received no antithrombotic treatment. For comparison, the proportion of phase 1 patients (of N = 1,063 all eligible) prescribed VKA was 32.8%, acetylsalicylic acid 41.7%, and no therapy 20.2%. In Europe in phase 2, treatment with NOAC was more common than VKA (52.3% and 37.8%, respectively); 6.0% of patients received antiplatelet treatment; and 3.8% received no antithrombotic treatment. In North America, 52.1%, 26.2%, and 14.0% of patients received NOAC, VKA, and antiplatelet drugs, respectively; 7.5% received no antithrombotic treatment. NOAC use was less common in Asia (27.7%), where 27.5% of patients received VKA, 25.0% antiplatelet drugs, and 19.8% no antithrombotic treatment. The baseline data from GLORIA-AF phase 2 demonstrate that in newly diagnosed nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients, NOAC have been highly adopted into practice, becoming more frequently prescribed than VKA in Europe and North America. Worldwide, however, a large proportion of patients remain undertreated, particularly in Asia and North America. (Global Registry on Long-Term Oral Antithrombotic Treatment in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation [GLORIA-AF]; NCT01468701).

Background: Even on optimal therapy, many patients with heart failure and atrial fibrillation experience cardiovascular complications. Additional treatments are needed to reduce these events, especially in patients with heart failure and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction. Methods: This prespecified subanalysis of the randomized EAST-AFNET4 trial (Early Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation for Stroke Prevention Trial) assessed the effect of systematic, early rhythm control therapy (ERC; using antiarrhythmic drugs or catheter ablation) compared with usual care (allowing rhythm control therapy to improve symptoms) on the 2 primary outcomes of the trial and on selected secondary outcomes in patients with heart failure, defined as heart failure symptoms New York Heart Association II to III or left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] <50%. Results: This analysis included 798 patients (300 [37.6%] female, median age 71.0 [64.0, 76.0] years, 785 with known LVEF). The majority of patients (n=442) had heart failure and preserved LVEF (LVEF≥50%; mean LVEF 61±6.3%), the others had heart failure with midrange ejection fraction (n=211; LVEF 40%–49%; mean LVEF 44 ± 2.9%) or heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (n=132; LVEF<40%; mean LVEF 31±5.5%). Over the 5.1-year median follow-up, the composite primary outcome of cardiovascular death, stroke, or hospitalization for worsening of heart failure or for acute coronary syndrome occurred less often in patients randomly assigned to ERC (94/396; 5.7 per 100 patient-years) compared with patients randomly assigned to usual care (130/402; 7.9 per 100 patient-years; hazard ratio, 0.74 [0.56–0.97]; P =0.03), not altered by heart failure status (interaction P value=0.63). The primary safety outcome (death, stroke, or serious adverse events related to rhythm control therapy) occurred in 71 of 396 (17.9%) patients with heart failure randomly assigned to ERC and in 87 of 402 (21.6%) patients with heart failure randomly assigned to usual care (hazard ratio, 0.85 [0.62–1.17]; P =0.33). LVEF improved in both groups (LVEF change at 2 years: ERC 5.3±11.6%, usual care 4.9±11.6%, P =0.43). ERC also improved the composite outcome of death or hospitalization for worsening of heart failure. Conclusions: Rhythm control therapy conveys clinical benefit when initiated within 1 year of diagnosing atrial fibrillation in patients with signs or symptoms of heart failure. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT01288352. URL: http://www.controlled-trials.com ; Unique identifier: ISRCTN04708680. URL: https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu ; Unique identifier: 2010-021258-20.

While management of atrial fibrillation (AF) patients is improved by guideline-conform application of anticoagulant therapy, rate control, rhythm control, and therapy of accompanying heart disease, the morbidity and mortality associated with AF remain unacceptably high. This paper describes the proceedings of the 3rd Atrial Fibrillation NETwork (AFNET)/European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) consensus conference that convened over 60 scientists and representatives from industry to jointly discuss emerging therapeutic and diagnostic improvements to achieve better management of AF patients. The paper covers four chapters: (i) risk factors and risk markers for AF; (ii) pathophysiological classification of AF; (iii) relevance of monitored AF duration for AF-related outcomes; and (iv) perspectives and needs for implementing better antithrombotic therapy. Relevant published literature for each section is covered, and suggestions for the improvement of management in each area are put forward. Combined, the propositions formulate a perspective to implement comprehensive management in AF.

Background and Purpose—: In patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), stroke risk stratification schema do not consider AF parameters. The aim of the study is to assess the impact of combining risk factors with continuous AF burden monitoring. Methods—: In this retrospective study 568 patients implanted with a DDDR-P pacemaker (AT-500; Medtronic) and a history of AF were continuously monitored for 1 year. Results—: During follow-up, 14 patients (2.5%) had a thromboembolic event. Patients were divided into 3 groups: AF burden ≤5 minutes per day (AF-free; n=223 [39%]), AF burden >5 minutes but <24 hours per day (AF-5 minutes; n=179 [32%]), and AF burden ≥24 hours (AF-24 hours; n=166 [29%]). Patients were also classified according to CHADS ₂ and CHA ₂ DS ₂ -VASc risk scores. The discrimination ability of each risk score was evaluated performing a logistic regression analysis and calculating the corresponding C-statistic. The addition of AF burden improved C-statistics: for CHADS ₂ from 0.653 ( P =0.051) to 0.713 ( P =0.007); for CHA ₂ DS ₂ -VASc, from 0.898 ( P <0.0001) to 0.910 ( P <0.0001). Conclusions—: The CHA ₂ DS ₂ -VASc score had a high sensitivity to predict thromboembolism. Implementation of device data on AF presence/duration/burden has the potential to contribute to improved clinical risk stratification and should be tested prospectively.

Since the advent of the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) agents, which act as direct thrombin inhibitors or inhibitors of Factor Xa, clinicians are provided with valuable alternatives to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). At the same time, electrophysiologists frequently perform more invasive procedures, increasingly involving the left chambers of the heart. Thus, they are constantly faced with the dilemma of balancing the risk for thromboembolic events and bleeding complications. These changes in the rapidly evolving field mandate an update of the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) 2008 consensus document on this topic.¹ The present document covers the antithrombotic management during different ablation procedures, implantation or exchange of cardiac implantable electronical devices (CIEDs), as well as the management of peri-interventional bleeding complications.