Skip to content
naulon
Get started

No retraction, correction or concern found when last checked on Oct 25, 2026.

Atrial fibrillation burden: a new outcome predictor and therapeutic target

Nina Becher, Andreas Metzner, Tobias Toennis and 2 more (opens in a new tab)

European Heart Journal · 2024 · Review · CC BY

doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehae373 (opens in a new tab)

Abstract

Atrial fibrillation (AF), the most common sustained cardiac arrhythmia, is not a dichotomous disease trait. Technological innovations enable long-term rhythm monitoring in many patients and can estimate AF burden. These technologies are already used to detect and monitor AF. This review describes the relation between AF burden and outcomes and potential effects of AF burden reduction. A lower AF burden is associated with a lower risk of stroke and heart failure in patients with AF: stroke risk without anticoagulation is lower in patients with device-detected AF and a low AF burden (stroke rate 1%/year) than in patients with persistent and permanent AF (stroke rate 3%/year). Paroxysmal AF shows intermediate stroke rates (2%/year). Atrial fibrillation burden–reducing interventions can reduce cardiovascular outcomes in patients with AF: early rhythm control reduces cardiovascular events including stroke and heart failure in patients with recently diagnosed AF and cardiovascular conditions. In patients with heart failure and AF, early rhythm control and AF ablation, interventions that reduce AF burden, reduce mortality and heart failure events. Recent technological innovations allow to estimate AF burden in clinical care, creating opportunities and challenges. While evidence remains limited, the existing data already suggest that AF burden reduction could be a therapeutic goal. In addition to anticoagulation and treatment of cardiovascular conditions, AF burden reduction emerges as a therapeutic goal. Future research will define the AF burden that constitutes a relevant risk of stroke and heart failure. Technologies quantifying AF burden need careful validation to advance the field.

Full text

From PubMed Central, U.S. National Library of Medicine, as current on Oct 25, 2026. Paragraph numbers are ours, so an answer can point at one.

Introduction

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common cause of stroke, heart failure, cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and dementia. In addition, AF decreases quality of life through symptoms, and psychological distress. A rising prevalence of AF will further increase the burden of AF and AF-related complications on healthcare. Oral anticoagulation and, more recently, early rhythm control therapy, improve outcomes in patients with AF by preventing stroke, cardiovascular death, heart failure hospitalizations, and acute coronary syndrome. Epidemiological, observational, and interventional research typically assume that the risk of these events depends on comorbidities without differences based on AF pattern. Recent trial outcomes challenge this simple concept: the outcome-reducing effect of early rhythm control therapy, linked to attaining sinus rhythm, supports the concept that less time in AF can reduce outcomes. The rate of stroke is low (1.1%–1.2%/year) without anticoagulation in patients with very rare and short episodes of device-detected AF (DDAF) despite multiple clinical stroke risk factors, and the effect of anticoagulation is weak. At the same time, the growing availability of consumer electronics equipped with increasingly reliable algorithms to monitor cardiac rhythm, including smartphones and wearables, offers accessible methods to detect rare and short episodes of AF and to estimate arrhythmia burden. This review summarizes the recent data on AF burden and its relation to outcomes, outlines findings that can help today’s shared decision-making with patients with AF, and identifies research and innovation opportunities.

Natural progression and regression of atrial fibrillation

The initial presentation of patients with newly diagnosed AF can be paroxysmal, persistent, or with an AF pattern that still requires determination (‘first diagnosed’). In the EAST-AFNET 4 (Early Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation for Stroke Prevention Trial) trial, an outcome trial that enrolled only patients with recently diagnosed AF, approximately one-third of the patients presented with each of these three AF patterns. When AF is established, typically when rhythm control treatment failed, AF is classified as permanent. Atrial fibrillation often progresses from paroxysmal, self-terminating episodes to persistent AF. On average, this progression is slow: ∼1 in 20 patients (5%/year) will experience progression from paroxysmal to persistent AF per year, and more than half of patients with paroxysmal AF without concomitant conditions do not progress over a 25 year period. Recent clinical research using continuous rhythm monitoring shows that many patients with AF do not show any recurrences in 1 year of follow-up and some even regress, showing paroxysmal AF after periods of persistent AF., This regression of AF patterns is not common, but consistently found. The average AF burden in patients with paroxysmal AF is ∼11% when monitored using implanted devices, and similar estimates are found when days in AF are counted in patients with paroxysmal AF undergoing daily telemetric electrocardiogram (ECG) monitoring. The daily AF burden in RACE-V increased from 3.2% to 3.8%, 5.2%, and 6.1% in patients with paroxysmal AF undergoing continuous rhythm monitoring by implanted devices. In RACE-V, AF progressed to non-paroxysmal patterns in some patients (5.5%/year), some patients regressed, and the overall AF burden remained low. Variable recurrences of AF and the slow and varying progression of AF can explain that 60% of patients randomized to usual care in the EAST-AFNET 4 trial were in sinus rhythm at 2 years, and that AF ablation retains its efficacy after a 12-month waiting period. Conceptually, the AF burden should be 100% in patients with non-paroxysmal AF, but spontaneous regression reduces their arrhythmia burden to 70%–100% (Figure 1).

Device-detected atrial fibrillation

Systematic Holter ECG recordings first showed that short atrial arrhythmias, including atrial runs and frequent atrial ectopy, can be precursors of AF., Such short atrial arrhythmias are associated with a risk of AF, stroke, and death. Different terms were used to describe short and rare atrial arrhythmias, including micro-AF, subclinical AF, and atrial high-rate episodes. In the NOAH-AFNET 6 (Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Patients with Atrial High Rate Episodes) trial, almost all (97%) atrial high-rate episodes documented at enrolment were confirmed to be AF by an experienced core lab. The analysis of DDAF episodes helped to improve our understanding of the development of AF: DDAF is found 10 times more (∼30% of patients with implanted devices and stroke risk factors) than ECG-diagnosed AF. Many patients only have a few short episodes of DDAF. In the LOOP (Atrial Fibrillation Detected by Continuous ECG Monitoring Using Implantable Loop Recorder to Prevent Stroke in High-risk Individuals) study, the median AF burden was 0.13%, 16% of patients in LOOP progressed to episodes lasting longer than 24 h, but 22% did not have repeat episodes in the last 6 months or longer of monitoring. Two large randomized trials with 6-monthly ECGs during clinic visits consistently show a slow progression from DDAF to ECG-diagnosed AF [ARTESiA (Apixaban for the Reduction of Thrombo-Embolism in Patients with Device-Detected Subclinical Atrial Fibrillation), 6%/year including advancement to long episodes of DDAF; NOAH-AFNET 6, 9%/year]. The slightly higher rate of progression in NOAH-AFNET 6 may be due to the shorter follow-up time and inclusion of patients with longer episodes in NOAH-AFNET 6.,

The interplay of atrial fibrillation burden, comorbidities, and outcomes

Atrial fibrillation and comorbidities interact in complex ways, modulating the rate of AF progression and the risk of AF-related outcomes. Comorbidities accelerate the progression of AF. Lack of comorbidities appears to reduce the rate of AF progression by two-thirds from 5%/year in average populations with AF to 1%–2%/year. Furthermore, the burden of DDAF appears higher in patients with more comorbidities, estimated by a higher CHADS2 (heart failure, hypertension, age ≥ 75 years, diabetes mellitus, stroke, or transient ischaemic attack) score. A large observational study linking device data with outcomes in electronic health records suggests that a higher burden of DDAF and a very high CHA2DS2-VASc score (heart failure, hypertension, age ≥ 75 years, diabetes mellitus, prior stroke or transient ischaemic attack, vascular disease, age 65–74 years, and female) could be associated with a higher risk of stroke and systemic embolism. The effect of comorbidities on stroke risk was weak in the NOAH-AFNET 6 trial, and very long DDAF episodes ≥24 h were not associated with a higher CHA2DS2-VASc score in that data set. Thus, the interaction between DDAF and comorbidities is subtle and probably not linear.

At the same time, presence of AF also enhances the risk of heart failure events, stroke, and cardiovascular death (Table 1).

Atrial fibrillation and left ventricular function. Atrial fibrillation directly impairs ventricular function and can even result in arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy that will reverse after restoration of normal sinus rhythm using AF ablation. In other patients, heart failure can predispose to AF,, and AF and heart failure share genetic and acquired pathomechanisms. A high AF burden was associated with more heart failure events in a large population of patients with paroxysmal AF. There is a strong bidirectional association between heart failure and AF burden, where heart failure can contribute to AF, and vice versa. Controlled clinical trials of rhythm control and AF ablation, interventions that lower AF burden, reduce heart failure events in patients with reduced left ventricular function and AF.,, Ongoing studies testing AF ablation will determine whether reducing AF burden can improve outcomes in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and AF (NCT055008256).

Atrial fibrillation and stroke. Reduced flow in the left atrium and especially in the left atrial appendage, endothelial dysfunction, and activation of local and systemic prothrombotic signalling combine to enhance thrombogenesis in the left atrium and cardioembolic stroke in patients with AF.,, This leads to cardioembolic strokes that are commonly found in patients with AF. The incidence of cardioembolic strokes can be significantly reduced by oral anticoagulants., Left atrial appendage occlusion and early rhythm control therapy each reduce stroke by one-third on top of anticoagulation, demonstrating a prominent atrial contribution to stroke. On the other hand, atrial arrhythmia may be more frequent in the acute phase after a stroke. Thus, interactions between comorbidities and AF appear to create an atrial prothrombotic milieu.

Cardiovascular death can be due to AF and occur independent of AF. The reductions in mortality seen in anticoagulation trials, suggest that stroke prevention can reduce cardiovascular deaths. The effects of early rhythm control and AF ablation, on cardiovascular death and total mortality suggest that rhythm control can have similar effects, probably by preventing stroke and heart failure events. Overall, these effects of AF on cardiovascular death compete with other diseases causing cardiovascular death, and the contribution of AF on cardiovascular death will depend on the number, intensity, and quality of treatment of other cardiovascular diseases.

Atrial fibrillation also affects symptoms, quality of life, and other outcomes. Its effects on dementia, and quality of life, are covered elsewhere and will not be discussed in detail in this paper.

Rhythm control therapy reduces atrial fibrillation burden and prevents atrial fibrillation–related outcomes

Rhythm control therapy using antiarrhythmic drugs and, more effectively, AF ablation prevents AF recurrences, prolongs the time to recurrent AF, and reduces the AF burden.,, Atrial fibrillation ablation lowers the average AF burden to <1%, while antiarrhythmic drug therapy appears to reduce AF burden to 1%–3%, (Figure 1). Rhythm control also slows the progression from paroxysmal to persistent AF. Atrial fibrillation ablation slows AF progression more effectively than antiarrhythmic drug therapy.,, Intensive treatment of concomitant conditions has a smaller effect on recurrent AF and outcomes. The concept that reducing AF burden can reduce cardiovascular events has been revived by the outcome-reducing effect of systematic early rhythm control therapy in the EAST-AFNET 4 trial and by smaller AF ablation trials in patients with heart failure., The safety and the effectiveness of early rhythm control have been replicated in several non-randomized analyses of large healthcare data sets. They are aligned with the outcome-improving effect of AF ablation in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction and in patients on a waiting list for heart transplantation. Similarly, outcome-reducing effects of rhythm control therapy with dronedarone were already observed in the ATHENA (A Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind, Parallel Arm Trial to Assess the Efficacy of Dronedarone 400 mg bid for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Hospitalization or Death from Any Cause in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation/Atrial Flutter) trial, including a reduction of stroke. The neutral results of the older AFFIRM (Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management) and RACE (Rate Control versus Electrical Cardioversion for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation) trials can be explained by withdrawal of oral anticoagulation in patients receiving rhythm control with apparent stable sinus rhythm and by the enhanced pro-arrhythmic effects of antiarrhythmic drug therapy as practiced in the last century. The AF-CHF (Atrial Fibrillation and Congestive Heart Failure) study compared rhythm control therapy with amiodarone to no rhythm control in patients with AF and a left ventricular ejection fraction < 35% and found no difference in cardiovascular death. While the neutral effect of amiodarone in AF-CHF is not fully understood, especially in context with the CASTLE-AF (Catheter Ablation versus Standard Conventional Therapy in Patients with Left Ventricular Dysfunction and Atrial Fibrillation) and CASTLE-HTx (Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation in Patients with End-Stage Heart Failure and Eligibility for Heart Transplantation) trial results,, it is possible that the AF burden reduction achieved by amiodarone was not sufficient to reduce cardiovascular events. Furthermore, the primary outcome of AF-CHF, cardiovascular death, was not the most sensitive primary outcome parameter (see prior section), considering the available heart failure treatments applied at the time. Overall, recent results from randomized trials support the concept that reducing AF burden has a positive effect on outcomes in patients with AF and risk factors.

The outcome-reducing effect of rhythm control is more pronounced in patients with a high comorbidity burden (CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥ 4), suggesting an interaction between these two drivers of stroke risk. Providing early rhythm control systematically and subsequently lowering AF burden to patients with a high comorbidity burden, results in a more pronounced reduction in cardiovascular outcomes. Similarly, the difference between AF ablation and medical therapy is more pronounced in patients with heart failure and a higher comorbidity burden. The recently published update of the ACC/AHA/HRS AF guidelines recognizes AF burden reduction as a therapeutic goal in patients with AF, partially based on these recent findings.

Symptoms and quality of life

There is excellent evidence that rhythm control therapy improves AF-related symptoms and quality of life.,,,, This effect is more pronounced after AF ablation than on antiarrhythmic drug therapy,,,, but can be achieved on long-term rhythm control using both modalities. The outcome-reducing effect of early rhythm control is also found in asymptomatic patients with AF, suggesting that AF burden reduction may be justified beyond symptom reduction. Clearly, reducing AF-related symptoms, psychological distress, and other domains of quality of life remain important treatment goals in all patients with chronic cardiovascular diseases, including in patients with AF. It is conceivable that symptom reduction follows AF burden reduction, but other mechanisms and factors will interact in this complex treatment domain.

Anticoagulation is not more effective than antiplatelet therapy in patients without atrial fibrillation

Anticoagulation does not prevent strokes in patients without AF, as shown in randomized controlled trials in patients with heart failure,, in patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS),, and in patients with atrial cardiomyopathy (Table 2). Atrial fibrillation detected after an acute stroke (AFDAS) will be detected more often when ECG monitoring is prolonged., Atrial fibrillation detected after an acute stroke can be a first sign of paroxysmal AF but can also occur as a consequence of specific heart–brain interactions triggering transient episodes of AF. The causal role of short episodes of AFDAS for the stroke event detected with intensified monitoring for longer periods and DDAF including implantable loop recorders, which have increasingly been used for AFDAS search, has remained unclear. Based on detection rates of DDAF in elderly patients with implanted loop recorders,,, patients randomized in the ESUS and heart failure trials included a proportion of patients (20%–30%) with rare and short episodes of DDAF. The clinical AF detection of 3.3% over a median follow-up of 11 months and 7.5% over a median of 19 months after an initial workup to exclude AF on enrolment is consistent with this assumption and with a low AF burden.,

Atrial fibrillation burden of device-detected atrial fibrillation, its temporal relation to stroke, and development to electrocardiogram-documented atrial fibrillation

Cardiac implantable electronic devices detect short and rare episodes of DDAF in 10%–30% of patients. The median AF burden in LOOP was 0.13% (Figure 1). There is no clear temporal relation of DDAF episodes and stroke in ASSERT (Asymptomatic Atrial Fibrillation and Stroke Evaluation in Pacemaker Patients and the Atrial Fibrillation Reduction Atrial Pacing Trial) or in LOOP, although a small increase in AF burden can be detected in the month prior to a stroke in patients with DDAF. Similar to the progression of paroxysmal AF, DDAF advances slowly to ECG-diagnosed AF. In the NOAH-AFNET 6 trial, ECG-detected AF developed in almost 9% per patient-year and increased to 17% per patient-year in patients with DDAF episodes >24 h at baseline. Device-detected AF was also strongly associated with development of ECG-documented AF in a meta-analysis with an odds ratio of 5.7 for ECG-documented AF. The ongoing Find-AF 2 (Intensive Rhythm Monitoring to Decrease Stroke and Systemic Embolism) and AF SPICE (Atrial Fibrillation Screening Post Ischemic Cerebrovascular Events) studies will provide additional randomized data on repeat continuous rhythm monitoring by Holter ECG and standard ECG monitoring post-ischaemic stroke.,

Atrial fibrillation burden and stroke rate in patients with different atrial fibrillation patterns

Anticoagulants prevent stroke in patients with ECG-diagnosed AF., The risk of stroke in patients with paroxysmal AF (2%/year without anticoagulation) is lower than the stroke risk in patients with chronic forms of AF (3%/year without anticoagulation; Figure 2)., The average AF burden in patients with paroxysmal AF is around 5%–11%. Conceptually, the arrhythmia burden should be 100% in patients with persistent and permanent AF. Occasional regression of AF leads to an estimated AF burden of 70%–100% in patients with persistent AF. Still, the AF burden is ∼10-fold higher in persistent AF than in paroxysmal AF (Figures 1 and 2). Rhythm control therapy achieves a 10-fold reduction of AF burden compared with paroxysmal AF without rhythm control (0.5%–3%). Early rhythm control therapy reduces cardiovascular outcomes including stroke in the EAST-AFNET 4 trial to below 1%/year (Table 3). Rate of stroke appears <1%/year after AF ablation, the most effective rhythm control therapy., Whether oral anticoagulation remains effective after successful AF ablation is studied in the ongoing OCEAN (Optimal Anti-Coagulation for Enhanced-Risk Patients Post–Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation) trial. This is a rate of stroke that appears similar to the rate of stroke in patients with DDAF receiving anticoagulation (0.7%/year) who have an even lower AF burden than those with AF on rhythm control (0.13%; Figure 1).

Recent data suggest that circulating biomolecules, including elevated N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and elevated bone morphogenetic protein 10, can identify patients at risk of AF and of stroke because these biomolecules are associated with atrial dysfunction and AF., Combinations of these biomolecules can help to predict recurrent AF and may be useful proxies to find patients with a high AF burden. The ongoing STROKESTOP II study is testing whether NT-proBNP can be used to enrich patients undergoing systematic AF screening.

From binary atrial fibrillation detection to quantification of atrial fibrillation burden

The current ‘yes/no’ binary definition of AF is established in clinical practice and easily implemented in different healthcare settings, including initiation of anticoagulants in non-specialist settings. The data discussed here illustrate that a more granular view can refine risk prediction, considering AF burden as a contributor to stroke, heart failure, and other outcomes in AF. Despite the remaining uncertainty about its estimation in patients, integrating AF burden into treatment decisions in patients with AF has the potential for more precise estimation of risk and better selection of therapies (Graphical Abstract).

Clinical implications

The association of AF burden with cardiovascular events needs more research. Based on the data available so far, the following clinical implications can be inferred:

AF burden affects cardiovascular events in patients with AF. Therefore, most treatment decisions in patients with ECG-documented clinical AF remain valid.

Reducing AF burden, typically using rhythm control therapy, should be a therapeutic goal in patients with AF at risk of stroke and heart failure, as long as it can be achieved safely. A first step towards this is reflected in the recent update of the ACC/AHA/HRS AF guidelines.

Patients with a very low AF burden appear to have a risk of stroke and heart failure that is relatively low and not dissimilar to patients without AF. Treatment decisions should be individualized, considering the effectiveness and safety of anticoagulation and rhythm control therapy.

Atrial fibrillation burden can be quantified in patients with implanted devices. A uniform, cross-manufacturer standard to measure time in AF, and to calculate AF burden, would greatly help clinicians caring for patients with implanted devices.

The AF burden in patients with AF detected by consumer electronics is typically low unless they have ECG-diagnosed AF. Monitoring for ECG-documented AF appears reasonable in these patients at present.

When only intermittent rhythm monitoring is available, AF burden can be estimated by the time in AF divided by the monitoring time, or by days in AF divided by monitored days. These estimates need to be applied with care, considering their uncertainty.

When longer monitoring durations are available and AF burden cannot be exactly calculated, the duration of the longest episode can be used as a proxy for AF burden.

Knowledge gaps and research opportunities

To better understand the relation between AF burden and outcomes, quantification of AF burden is needed in more patients, and its relation to outcomes needs to be analysed (Table 4). Fortunately, the development of innovative data science tools and the development of simple devices capable of continuous rhythm monitoring, now enable such research in broader patient populations. Conventionally agreed stroke risk thresholds, e.g. a CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥ 3 or >4 or detection of episodes of DDAF ≥ 24 h duration, may not be sufficient to identify patients with DDAF at high risk of stroke. Linkage of continuous monitoring for AF burden with outcome data can define AF patterns (number of episodes, episode duration) and AF burden thresholds that constitute a risk of stroke in interaction between comorbidity burden. Such research should integrate additional risk modifiers including genetic information, circulating biomolecules,,, and imaging data. Such research will also be able to delineate the amount of AF burden reduction that affects outcomes and to identify AF burden thresholds, most likely in interaction with clinical and other factors increasing risk of AF-related complications, that identify patients with a clear benefit of anticoagulation therapy. Quantitative proxies for arrhythmia burden and for comorbidity severities should be defined to identify tipping points that justify a change in therapy. These will be different for stroke, heart failure, or dementia.

Ongoing trials

Whether a low arrhythmia burden is a justification to reduce therapy is tested in ongoing studies. The OCEAN trial will test whether anticoagulation can be withheld after successful AF ablation in patients with and stroke risk factors. Based on the hypothesis that only longer episodes of AF increase thromboembolic risk in paroxysmal AF with limited comorbidities and arrhythmia substrate, the REACT-AF (Rhythm Evaluation for Anticoagulation Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation) trial will compare continuous anticoagulation with a smartwatch-guided time-delimited anticoagulation regime that is confined to periods with a high AF burden. At least two trials, ongoing or planned, will evaluate the effect of AF burden reduction by AF ablation on outcomes in patients with AF and HFpEF (CABA-HFPEF, NCT05508256) and in patients with AF and multiple comorbidities (EASThigh-AFNET 11, NCT06324188). For AF screening, enrichment strategies using circulating biomolecules associated with AF, stroke, and heart failure (BMP10, NT-proBNP, troponin, angiopoietin-2, fibroblast growth factor-23, and others) may be useful. Other ongoing AF screening studies such as the SAFER (Screening for Atrial Fibrillation with ECG to Reduce Stroke, ISRCTN72104369) study with intermittent handheld device tracings over 3 weeks in over 100 000 individuals or the AMALFI (Active Monitoring for Atrial Fibrillation, ISRCTN15544176) study with 2-week patch device monitoring will provide further data on threshold for treatment in screen-detected AF.

Limitations

The review draws data from different research areas and combines them to propose the concept of AF burden and AF burden reduction. We did not see a mechanism to formalize the data analysis for this purpose, e.g. as meta-analysis. Quantitative details are reported where available. Patients with AF experience reduced quality of life due to a complex interplay of symptoms, anxiety, fear of AF-related adverse outcomes, and concerns about recurrence. Rhythm control therapy is clearly indicated to mitigate these symptoms., Many of the details required for interpretation of AF burden in clinical practice await evaluation and quantification. We hope that this review triggers more research and technological innovation to better measure and understand AF burden and its role in the diagnosis and management of patients with AF.

Summary

The enhanced ability to quantify the burden of AF by implanted devices and wearables demonstrates a large spread of DDAF episodes for duration, frequency, dispersion, and development. A burden-based description of temporal AF patterns related to outcomes and treatment strategies can improve risk prediction based on earlier classification into paroxysmal, persistent, and long-standing persistent AF. Early rhythm control can reduce AF burden and is associated with improved outcomes. Similar effects can be seen for AF ablation in patients with heart failure. These interventional data provide first evidence that AF burden reduction can improve outcomes. Current data indicate that short, infrequent episodes of DDAF carry a low stroke risk and may not require anticoagulation therapy. Individual decisions on anticoagulation initiation need to be balanced considering the individual risk of stroke and bleeding and will likely include AF burden in the near future. Device-detected AF episodes can develop into ECG-diagnosed AF over time. This development is slow, comparable with the long time from paroxysmal to persistent AF. Regular ECGs are useful for clinical practice because the transition from DDAF to ECG-documented AF significantly increases the evidence base available for guideline-directed AF therapy.

Supplementary data

Supplementary data are not available at European Heart Journal online.

References 135

  1. 1.

    Hindricks G, Potpara T, Dagres N, Arbelo E, Bax JJ, Blomstrom-Lundqvist C, et al 2020 ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS): the task force for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) developed with the special contribution of the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J 2021;42:373–498.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa612 (opens in a new tab)

  2. 2.

    Fabritz L, Crijns H, Guasch E, Goette A, Hausler KG, Kotecha D, et al Dynamic risk assessment to improve quality of care in patients with atrial fibrillation: the 7th AFNET/EHRA Consensus Conference. Europace 2021;23:329–44.

    Not in our library10.1093/europace/euaa279 (opens in a new tab)

  3. 3.

    Rivard L, Friberg L, Conen D, Healey JS, Berge T, Boriani G, et al Atrial fibrillation and dementia: a report from the AF-SCREEN international collaboration. Circulation 2022;145:392–409.

    Not in our library10.1161/circulationaha.121.055018 (opens in a new tab)

  4. 4.

    Kim D, Yang PS, Sung JH, Jang E, Yu HT, Kim TH, et al Less dementia after catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: a nationwide cohort study. Eur Heart J 2020;41:4483–93.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa726 (opens in a new tab)

  5. 5.

    Andrade JG, Deyell MW, Macle L, Steinberg JS, Glotzer TV, Hawkins NM, et al Healthcare utilization and quality of life for atrial fibrillation burden: the CIRCA-DOSE study. Eur Heart J 2023;44:765–76.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehac692 (opens in a new tab)

  6. 6.

    Al-Kaisey AM, Parameswaran R, Bryant C, Anderson RD, Hawson J, Chieng D, et al Atrial fibrillation catheter ablation vs medical therapy and psychological distress: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2023;330:925–33.

    Not in our library10.1001/jama.2023.14685 (opens in a new tab)

  7. 7.

    Schnabel RB, Yin X, Gona P, Larson MG, Beiser AS, McManus DD, et al 50 year trends in atrial fibrillation prevalence, incidence, risk factors, and mortality in the Framingham Heart Study: a cohort study. Lancet 2015;386:154–62.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0140-6736(14)61774-8 (opens in a new tab)

  8. 8.

    Ruff CT, Giugliano RP, Braunwald E, Hoffman EB, Deenadayalu N, Ezekowitz MD, et al Comparison of the efficacy and safety of new oral anticoagulants with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomised trials. Lancet 2014;383:955–62.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0140-6736(13)62343-0 (opens in a new tab)

  9. 9.

    Kirchhof P, Camm AJ, Goette A, Brandes A, Eckardt L, Elvan A, et al Early rhythm-control therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2020;383:1305–16.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa2019422 (opens in a new tab)

  10. 10.
    Systematic, early rhythm control strategy for atrial fibrillation in patients with or without symptoms: the EAST-AFNET 4 trial · 2021
    No notice
  11. 11.

    Eckardt L, Sehner S, Suling A, Borof K, Breithardt G, Crijns H, et al Attaining sinus rhythm mediates improved outcome with early rhythm control therapy of atrial fibrillation: the EAST-AFNET 4 trial. Eur Heart J 2022;43:4127–44.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehac471 (opens in a new tab)

  12. 12.

    Kirchhof P, Toennis T, Goette A, Camm AJ, Diener HC, Becher N, et al Anticoagulation with edoxaban in patients with atrial high-rate episodes. N Engl J Med 2023;389:1167–79.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa2303062 (opens in a new tab)

  13. 13.

    Becher N, Toennis T, Bertaglia E, Blomstrom-Lundqvist C, Brandes A, Cabanelas N, et al Anticoagulation with edoxaban in patients with long atrial high-rate episodes ≥24 hours. Eur Heart J 2024;45:837–49.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehad771 (opens in a new tab)

  14. 14.

    Healey JS, Lopes RD, Granger CB, Alings M, Rivard L, McIntyre WF, et al Apixaban for stroke prevention in subclinical atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2024;390:107–17.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa2310234 (opens in a new tab)

  15. 15.

    Fabritz L, Connolly DL, Czarnecki E, Dudek D, Guasch E, Haase D, et al Smartphone and wearable detected atrial arrhythmias in older adults: results of a fully digital European case finding study. Eur Heart J Digit Health 2022;3:610–25.

    Not in our library10.1093/ehjdh/ztac067 (opens in a new tab)

  16. 16.

    Rizas KD, Freyer L, Sappler N, von Stulpnagel L, Spielbichler P, Krasniqi A, et al Smartphone-based screening for atrial fibrillation: a pragmatic randomized clinical trial. Nat Med 2022;28:1823–30.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41591-022-01979-w (opens in a new tab)

  17. 17.

    Bauer A, Sappler N, von Stulpnagel L, Klemm M, Schreinlechner M, Wenner F, et al Telemedical cardiac risk assessment by implantable cardiac monitors in patients after myocardial infarction with autonomic dysfunction (SMART-MI-DZHK9): a prospective investigator-initiated, randomised, multicentre, open-label, diagnostic trial. Lancet Digit Health 2022;4:e105–16.

    Not in our library10.1016/s2589-7500(21)00253-3 (opens in a new tab)

  18. 18.

    Schnabel RB, Marinelli EA, Arbelo E, Boriani G, Boveda S, Buckley CM, et al Early diagnosis and better rhythm management to improve outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation: the 8th AFNET/EHRA consensus conference. Europace 2023;25:6–27.

    Not in our library10.1093/europace/euac062 (opens in a new tab)

  19. 19.

    Kerr CR, Boone J, Connolly SJ, Dorian P, Green M, Klein G, et al The Canadian Registry of Atrial Fibrillation: a noninterventional follow-up of patients after the first diagnosis of atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol 1998;82:82N–5N.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0002-9149(98)00589-x (opens in a new tab)

  20. 20.

    Jahangir A, Lee V, Friedman PA, Trusty JM, Hodge DO, Kopecky SL, et al Long-term progression and outcomes with aging in patients with lone atrial fibrillation: a 30-year follow-up study. Circulation 2007;115:3050–6.

    Not in our library10.1161/circulationaha.106.644484 (opens in a new tab)

  21. 21.

    Nieuwlaat R, Prins MH, Le Heuzey JY, Vardas PE, Aliot E, Santini M, et al Prognosis, disease progression, and treatment of atrial fibrillation patients during 1 year: follow-up of the Euro Heart Survey on atrial fibrillation. Eur Heart J 2008;29:1181–9.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehn139 (opens in a new tab)

  22. 22.

    De With RR, Erkuner O, Rienstra M, Nguyen BO, Korver FWJ, Linz D, et al Temporal patterns and short-term progression of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: data from RACE V. Europace 2020;22:1162–72.

    Not in our library10.1093/europace/euaa123 (opens in a new tab)

  23. 23.

    Schnabel RB, Pecen L, Engler D, Lucerna M, Sellal JM, Ojeda FM, et al Atrial fibrillation patterns are associated with arrhythmia progression and clinical outcomes. Heart 2018;104:1608–14.

    Not in our library10.1136/heartjnl-2017-312569 (opens in a new tab)

  24. 24.

    Charitos EI, Purerfellner H, Glotzer TV, Ziegler PD. Clinical classifications of atrial fibrillation poorly reflect its temporal persistence: insights from 1,195 patients continuously monitored with implantable devices. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;63:2840–8.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.jacc.2014.04.019 (opens in a new tab)

  25. 25.

    Goette A, Schon N, Kirchhof P, Breithardt G, Fetsch T, Hausler KG, et al Angiotensin II-antagonist in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (ANTIPAF) trial. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2012;5:43–51.

    Not in our library10.1161/circep.111.965178 (opens in a new tab)

  26. 26.

    Nguyen BO, Weberndorfer V, Crijns HJ, Geelhoed B, Ten Cate H, Spronk H, et al Prevalence and determinants of atrial fibrillation progression in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Heart 2022;109:186–94.

    Not in our library10.1136/heartjnl-2022-321027 (opens in a new tab)

  27. 27.

    Metzner A, Suling A, Brandes A, Breithardt G, Camm AJ, Crijns H, et al Anticoagulation, therapy of concomitant conditions, and early rhythm control therapy: a detailed analysis of treatment patterns in the EAST-AFNET 4 trial. Europace 2022;24:552–64.

    Not in our library10.1093/europace/euab200 (opens in a new tab)

  28. 28.

    Kalman JM, Al-Kaisey AM, Parameswaran R, Hawson J, Anderson RD, Lim M, et al Impact of early versus delayed atrial fibrillation catheter ablation on atrial arrhythmia recurrences. Eur Heart J 2023;44:2447–54.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehad247 (opens in a new tab)

  29. 29.

    Diederichsen SZ, Haugan KJ, Brandes A, Lanng MB, Graff C, Krieger D, et al Natural history of subclinical atrial fibrillation detected by implanted loop recorders. J Am Coll Cardiol 2019;74:2771–81.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.jacc.2019.09.050 (opens in a new tab)

  30. 30.

    Fredriksson T, Gudmundsdottir KK, Frykman V, Friberg L, Al-Khalili F, Engdahl J, et al Brief episodes of rapid irregular atrial activity (micro-AF) are a risk marker for atrial fibrillation: a prospective cohort study. BMC Cardiovasc Disord 2020;20:167.

    Not in our library10.1186/s12872-020-01453-w (opens in a new tab)

  31. 31.

    Binici Z, Intzilakis T, Nielsen OW, Kober L, Sajadieh A. Excessive supraventricular ectopic activity and increased risk of atrial fibrillation and stroke. Circulation 2010;121:1904–11.

    Not in our library10.1161/circulationaha.109.874982 (opens in a new tab)

  32. 32.

    Kirchhof P, Schotten U, Zapf A. Anticoagulation with edoxaban in patients with atrial high-rate episodes. Reply. N Engl J Med 2023;389:2302–3.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmc2312837 (opens in a new tab)

  33. 33.

    Toennis T, Bertaglia E, Brandes A, Dichtl W, Fluschnik N, de Groot JR, et al The influence of atrial high-rate episodes on stroke and cardiovascular death: an update. Europace 2023;25:euad166.

    Not in our library10.1093/europace/euad166 (opens in a new tab)

  34. 34.

    Healey JS, Alings M, Ha A, Leong-Sit P, Birnie DH, de Graaf JJ, et al Subclinical atrial fibrillation in older patients. Circulation 2017;136:1276–83.

    Not in our library10.1161/circulationaha.117.028845 (opens in a new tab)

  35. 35.

    Sanna T, Diener HC, Passman RS, Lazzaro D, Bernstein V, Morillo RA, et al Cryptogenic stroke and underlying atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2014;370:2478–86.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa1313600 (opens in a new tab)

  36. 36.

    McIntyre WF, Benz AP, Becher N, Healey JS, Granger CB, Rivard L, et al Direct oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in patients with device-detected atrial fibrillation: a study-level meta-analysis of the NOAH-AFNET 6 and ARTESiA trials. Circulation 2024;149:981–8.

    Not in our library10.1161/circulationaha.123.067512 (opens in a new tab)

  37. 37.

    Schotten U, Verheule S, Kirchhof P, Goette A. Pathophysiological mechanisms of atrial fibrillation: a translational appraisal. Physiol Rev 2011;91:265–325.

    Not in our library10.1152/physrev.00031.2009 (opens in a new tab)

  38. 38.

    Botto GL, Padeletti L, Santini M, Capucci A, Gulizia M, Zolezzi F, et al Presence and duration of atrial fibrillation detected by continuous monitoring: crucial implications for the risk of thromboembolic events. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2009;20:241–8.

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1540-8167.2008.01320.x (opens in a new tab)

  39. 39.

    Kaplan RM, Koehler J, Ziegler PD, Sarkar S, Zweibel S, Passman RS. Stroke risk as a function of atrial fibrillation duration and CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score. Circulation 2019;140:1639–46.

    Not in our library10.1161/circulationaha.119.041303 (opens in a new tab)

  40. 40.

    Lip GYH, Nikorowitsch J, Sehner S, Becher N, Bertaglia E, Blomstrom Lundqvist C, et al Effects of age, sex, cardiovascular comorbidities, and kidney function on outcomes with and without oral anticoagulation in patients with device-detected atrial fibrillation. The NOAH-AFNET 6 trial. Eur Heart J 2024;45:1733–7.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehae225 (opens in a new tab)

  41. 41.

    Linz D, Andrade J, Arbelo E, Boriani G, Breithardt G, Camm AJ, et al Longer and better lives for patients with atrial fibrillation: the 9th AFNET/EHRA consensus conference. Europace 2024;26:euae070.

    Not in our library10.1093/europace/euae070 (opens in a new tab)

  42. 42.

    Li YG, Miyazawa K, Pastori D, Szekely O, Shahid F, Lip GYH. Atrial high-rate episodes and thromboembolism in patients without atrial fibrillation: the West Birmingham Atrial Fibrillation Project. Int J Cardiol 2019;292:126–30.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ijcard.2019.04.055 (opens in a new tab)

  43. 43.

    Vanassche T, Lauw MN, Eikelboom JW, Healey JS, Hart RG, Alings M, et al Risk of ischaemic stroke according to pattern of atrial fibrillation: analysis of 6563 aspirin-treated patients in ACTIVE-A and AVERROES. Eur Heart J 2015;36:281–7a.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehu307 (opens in a new tab)

  44. 44.

    Boriani G, Glotzer TV, Santini M, West TM, De Melis M, Sepsi M, et al Device-detected atrial fibrillation and risk for stroke: an analysis of >10,000 patients from the SOS AF project (Stroke preventiOn Strategies based on Atrial Fibrillation information from implanted devices). Eur Heart J 2014;35:508–16.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/eht491 (opens in a new tab)

  45. 45.

    Van Gelder IC, Healey JS, Crijns H, Wang J, Hohnloser SH, Gold MR, et al Duration of device-detected subclinical atrial fibrillation and occurrence of stroke in ASSERT. Eur Heart J 2017;38:1339–44.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehx042 (opens in a new tab)

  46. 46.

    Glotzer TV, Daoud EG, Wyse DG, Singer DE, Ezekowitz MD, Hilker C, et al The relationship between daily atrial tachyarrhythmia burden from implantable device diagnostics and stroke risk: the TRENDS study. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2009;2:474–80.

    Not in our library10.1161/circep.109.849638 (opens in a new tab)

  47. 47.

    Svennberg E, Friberg L, Frykman V, Al-Khalili F, Engdahl J, Rosenqvist M. Clinical outcomes in systematic screening for atrial fibrillation (STROKESTOP): a multicentre, parallel group, unmasked, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2021;398:1498–506.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0140-6736(21)01637-8 (opens in a new tab)

  48. 48.

    Svendsen JH, Diederichsen SZ, Hojberg S, Krieger DW, Graff C, Kronborg C, et al Implantable loop recorder detection of atrial fibrillation to prevent stroke (The LOOP Study): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2021;398:1507–16.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0140-6736(21)01698-6 (opens in a new tab)

  49. 49.

    Pabel S, Knierim M, Stehle T, Alebrand F, Paulus M, Sieme M, et al Effects of atrial fibrillation on the human ventricle. Circ Res 2022;130:994–1010.

    Not in our library10.1161/circresaha.121.319718 (opens in a new tab)

  50. 50.

    Paulus MG, Renner K, Nickel AG, Brochhausen C, Limm K, Zugner E, et al Tachycardiomyopathy entails a dysfunctional pattern of interrelated mitochondrial functions. Basic Res Cardiol 2022;117:45.

    Not in our library10.1007/s00395-022-00949-0 (opens in a new tab)

  51. 51.

    Willems S, Meyer C, de Bono J, Brandes A, Eckardt L, Elvan A, et al Cabins, castles, and constant hearts: rhythm control therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation. Eur Heart J 2019;40:3793–3799c.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehz782 (opens in a new tab)

  52. 52.

    Khan MN, Jais P, Cummings J, Biase D, Sanders L, Martin P, et al Pulmonary-vein isolation for atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure. N Engl J Med 2008;359:1778–85.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa0708234 (opens in a new tab)

  53. 53.

    Hsu LF, Jais P, Sanders P, Garrigue S, Hocini M, Sacher F, et al Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in congestive heart failure. N Engl J Med 2004;351:2373–83.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa041018 (opens in a new tab)

  54. 54.

    McDonagh TA, Metra M, Adamo M, Gardner RS, Baumbach A, Bohm M, et al 2021 ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure. Eur Heart J 2021;42:3599–726.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehab368 (opens in a new tab)

  55. 55.

    Santema BT, Kloosterman M, Van Gelder IC, Mordi I, Lang CC, Lam CSP, et al Comparing biomarker profiles of patients with heart failure: atrial fibrillation vs. sinus rhythm and reduced vs. preserved ejection fraction. Eur Heart J 2018;39:3867–75.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehy421 (opens in a new tab)

  56. 56.

    Arbelo E, Protonotarios A, Gimeno JR, Arbustini E, Barriales-Villa R, Basso C, et al 2023 ESC guidelines for the management of cardiomyopathies. Eur Heart J 2023;44:3503–626.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehad194 (opens in a new tab)

  57. 57.

    Steinberg BA, Li Z, O'Brien EC, Pritchard J, Chew DS, Bunch TJ, et al Atrial fibrillation burden and heart failure: data from 39,710 individuals with cardiac implanted electronic devices. Heart Rhythm 2021;18:709–16.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.hrthm.2021.01.021 (opens in a new tab)

  58. 58.

    Kotecha D, Piccini JP. Atrial fibrillation in heart failure: what should we do? Eur Heart J 2015;36:3250–7.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehv513 (opens in a new tab)

  59. 59.

    Marrouche NF, Brachmann J, Andresen D, Siebels J, Boersma L, Jordaens L, et al Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation with heart failure. N Engl J Med 2018;378:417–27.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa1707855 (opens in a new tab)

  60. 60.

    Sohns C, Fox H, Marrouche NF, Crijns H, Costard-Jaeckle A, Bergau L, et al Catheter ablation in end-stage heart failure with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2023;389:1380–9.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa2306037 (opens in a new tab)

  61. 61.

    Watson T, Shantsila E, Lip GY. Mechanisms of thrombogenesis in atrial fibrillation: Virchow’s triad revisited. Lancet 2009;373:155–66.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0140-6736(09)60040-4 (opens in a new tab)

  62. 62.

    Spronk HM, De Jong AM, Verheule S, De Boer HC, Maass AH, Lau DH, et al Hypercoagulability causes atrial fibrosis and promotes atrial fibrillation. Eur Heart J 2017;38:38–50.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehw119 (opens in a new tab)

  63. 63.

    Hart RG, Pearce LA, Aguilar MI. Meta-analysis: antithrombotic therapy to prevent stroke in patients who have nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Ann Intern Med 2007;146:857–67.

    Not in our library10.7326/0003-4819-146-12-200706190-00007 (opens in a new tab)

  64. 64.

    Whitlock RP, Belley-Cote EP, Paparella D, Healey JS, Brady K, Sharma M, et al Left atrial appendage occlusion during cardiac surgery to prevent stroke. N Engl J Med 2021;384:2081–91.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa2101897 (opens in a new tab)

  65. 65.

    Sposato LA, Lip GYH, Haeusler KG. Atrial fibrillation first detected after stroke: is timing and detection intensity relevant for stroke risk? Eur Heart J 2024;45:396–8.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehad744 (opens in a new tab)

  66. 66.

    Kirchhof P, Auricchio A, Bax J, Crijns H, Camm J, Diener HC, et al Outcome parameters for trials in atrial fibrillation: executive summary: recommendations from a consensus conference organized by the German Atrial Fibrillation Competence NETwork (AFNET) and the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA). Eur Heart J 2007;28:2803–17.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehm358 (opens in a new tab)

  67. 67.

    Connolly SJ, Pogue J, Hart RG, Hohnloser SH, Pfeffer M, Chrolavicius S, et al Effect of clopidogrel added to aspirin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2009;360:2066–78.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa0901301 (opens in a new tab)

  68. 68.

    Friberg L, Andersson T, Rosenqvist M. Less dementia and stroke in low-risk patients with atrial fibrillation taking oral anticoagulation. Eur Heart J 2019;40:2327–35.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehz304 (opens in a new tab)

  69. 69.

    Hendriks JM, Vrijhoef HJ, Crijns HJ, Brunner-La Rocca HP. The effect of a nurse-led integrated chronic care approach on quality of life in patients with atrial fibrillation. Europace 2014;16:491–9.

    Not in our library10.1093/europace/eut286 (opens in a new tab)

  70. 70.

    Kuck KH, Furnkranz A, Chun KR, Metzner A, Ouyang F, Schluter M, et al Cryoballoon or radiofrequency ablation for symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: reintervention, rehospitalization, and quality-of-life outcomes in the FIRE AND ICE trial. Eur Heart J 2016;37:2858–65.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehw285 (opens in a new tab)

  71. 71.

    Mark DB, Anstrom KJ, Sheng S, Piccini JP, Baloch KN, Monahan KH, et al Effect of catheter ablation vs medical therapy on quality of life among patients with atrial fibrillation: the CABANA randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2019;321:1275–85.

    Not in our library10.1001/jama.2019.0692 (opens in a new tab)

  72. 72.

    Kotecha D, Bunting KV, Gill SK, Mehta S, Stanbury M, Jones JC, et al Effect of digoxin vs bisoprolol for heart rate control in atrial fibrillation on patient-reported quality of life: the RATE-AF randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2020;324:2497–508.

    Not in our library10.1001/jama.2020.23138 (opens in a new tab)

  73. 73.

    Blomstrom-Lundqvist C, Gizurarson S, Schwieler J, Jensen SM, Bergfeldt L, Kenneback G, et al Effect of catheter ablation vs antiarrhythmic medication on quality of life in patients with atrial fibrillation: the CAPTAF randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2019;321:1059–68.

    Not in our library10.1001/jama.2019.0335 (opens in a new tab)

  74. 74.

    Kuniss M, Pavlovic N, Velagic V, Hermida JS, Healey S, Arena G, et al Cryoballoon ablation vs. antiarrhythmic drugs: first-line therapy for patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Europace 2021;23:1033–41.

    Not in our library10.1093/europace/euab029 (opens in a new tab)

  75. 75.

    Wazni OM, Dandamudi G, Sood N, Hoyt R, Tyler J, Durrani S, et al Cryoballoon ablation as initial therapy for atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2021;384:316–24.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa2029554 (opens in a new tab)

  76. 76.

    Andrade JG, Deyell MW, Macle L, Wells GA, Bennett M, Essebag V, et al Progression of atrial fibrillation after cryoablation or drug therapy. N Engl J Med 2023;388:105–16.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa2212540 (opens in a new tab)

  77. 77.

    Cosedis Nielsen J, Johannessen A, Raatikainen P, Hindricks G, Walfridsson H, Kongstad O, et al Radiofrequency ablation as initial therapy in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2012;367:1587–95.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa1113566 (opens in a new tab)

  78. 78.

    Andrade JG, Deyell MW, Khairy P, Champagne J, Leong-Sit P, Novak P, et al Atrial fibrillation progression after cryoablation versus radiofrequency ablation: the CIRCA-DOSE trial. Eur Heart J 2024;45:510–8.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehad572 (opens in a new tab)

  79. 79.

    De Vos CB, Breithardt G, Camm AJ, Dorian P, Kowey PR, Le Heuzey JY, et al Progression of atrial fibrillation in the registry on cardiac rhythm disorders assessing the control of atrial fibrillation cohort: clinical correlates and the effect of rhythm-control therapy. Am Heart J 2012;163:887–93.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ahj.2012.02.015 (opens in a new tab)

  80. 80.

    Berman AE, Kabiri M, Wei T, Galvain T, Sha Q, Kuck KH. Economic and health value of delaying atrial fibrillation progression using radiofrequency catheter ablation. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2023;16:e011237.

    Not in our library10.1161/circep.122.011237 (opens in a new tab)

  81. 81.

    Kuck KH, Lebedev DS, Mikhaylov EN, Romanov A, Geller L, Kalejs O, et al Catheter ablation or medical therapy to delay progression of atrial fibrillation: the randomized controlled atrial fibrillation progression trial (ATTEST). Europace 2021;23:362–9.

    Not in our library10.1093/europace/euaa298 (opens in a new tab)

  82. 82.

    Rienstra M, Hobbelt AH, Alings M, Tijssen JGP, Smit MD, Brugemann J, et al Targeted therapy of underlying conditions improves sinus rhythm maintenance in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation: results of the RACE 3 trial. Eur Heart J 2018;39:2987–96.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehx739 (opens in a new tab)

  83. 83.

    Nguyen BO, Crijns H, Tijssen JGP, Geelhoed B, Hobbelt AH, Hemels MEW, et al Long-term outcome of targeted therapy of underlying conditions in patients with early persistent atrial fibrillation and heart failure: data of the RACE 3 trial. Europace 2022;24:910–20.

    Not in our library10.1093/europace/euab270 (opens in a new tab)

  84. 84.

    Kany S, Cardoso VR, Bravo L, Williams JA, Schnabel R, Fabritz L, et al Eligibility for early rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation in the UK biobank. Heart 2022;108:1873–80.

    Not in our library10.1136/heartjnl-2022-321196 (opens in a new tab)

  85. 85.

    Kim D, Yang PS, You SC, Sung JH, Jang E, Yu HT, et al Treatment timing and the effects of rhythm control strategy in patients with atrial fibrillation: nationwide cohort study. BMJ 2021;373:n991.

    Not in our library10.1136/bmj.n991 (opens in a new tab)

  86. 86.

    Dickow J, Kany S, Roth Cardoso V, Ellinor PT, Gkoutos GV, Van Houten HK, et al Outcomes of early rhythm control therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation and a high comorbidity burden in large real-world cohorts. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2023;16:e011585.

    Not in our library10.1161/circep.122.011585 (opens in a new tab)

  87. 87.

    Hohnloser SH, Crijns HJ, van Eickels M, Gaudin C, Page RL, Torp-Pedersen C, et al Effect of dronedarone on cardiovascular events in atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2009;360:668–78.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa0803778 (opens in a new tab)

  88. 88.

    Connolly SJ, Crijns HJ, Torp-Pedersen C, van Eickels M, Gaudin C, Page RL, et al Analysis of stroke in ATHENA: a placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-arm trial to assess the efficacy of dronedarone 400 mg BID for the prevention of cardiovascular hospitalization or death from any cause in patients with atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter. Circulation 2009;120:1174–80.

    Not in our library10.1161/circulationaha.109.875252 (opens in a new tab)

  89. 89.

    Wyse DG, Waldo AL, DiMarco JP, Domanski MJ, Rosenberg Y, Schron EB, et al A comparison of rate control and rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2002;347:1825–33.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa021328 (opens in a new tab)

  90. 90.

    Van Gelder I, Hagens VE, Bosker HA, Kingma H, Kamp O, Kingma T, et al A comparison of rate control and rhythm control in patients with recurrent persistent atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2002;347:1834–40.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa021375 (opens in a new tab)

  91. 91.

    Corley SD, Epstein AE, DiMarco JP, Domanski MJ, Geller N, Greene HL, et al Relationships between sinus rhythm, treatment, and survival in the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-Up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) study. Circulation 2004;109:1509–13.

    Not in our library10.1161/01.cir.0000121736.16643.11 (opens in a new tab)

  92. 92.

    Roy D, Talajic M, Nattel S, Wyse DG, Dorian P, Lee KL, et al Rhythm control versus rate control for atrial fibrillation and heart failure. N Engl J Med 2008;358:2667–77.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa0708789 (opens in a new tab)

  93. 93.

    McDonagh TA, Metra M, Adamo M, Gardner RS, Baumbach A, Bohm M, et al 2023 focused update of the 2021 ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure. Eur Heart J 2023;44:3627–39.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehad195 (opens in a new tab)

  94. 94.

    Rillig A, Borof K, Breithardt G, Camm AJ, Crijns H, Goette A, et al Early rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation and high comorbidity burden. Circulation 2022;146:836–47.

    Not in our library10.1161/circulationaha.122.060274 (opens in a new tab)

  95. 95.

    Packer DL, Piccini JP, Monahan KH, Al-Khalidi HR, Silverstein AP, Noseworthy PA, et al Ablation versus drug therapy for atrial fibrillation in heart failure: results from the CABANA trial. Circulation 2021;143:1377–90.

    Not in our library10.1161/circulationaha.120.050991 (opens in a new tab)

  96. 96.

    Joglar JA, Chung MK, Armbruster AL, Benjamin EJ, Chyou JY, Cronin EM, et al 2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS guideline for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation 2024;149:e1–156.

    Not in our library10.1161/cir.0000000000001193 (opens in a new tab)

  97. 97.

    Arbelo E, Brugada J, Blomstrom-Lundqvist C, Laroche C, Kautzner J, Pokushalov E, et al Contemporary management of patients undergoing atrial fibrillation ablation: in-hospital and 1-year follow-up findings from the ESC-EHRA atrial fibrillation ablation long-term registry. Eur Heart J 2017;38:1303–16.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehw564 (opens in a new tab)

  98. 98.
    Apixaban in patients at risk of stroke undergoing atrial fibrillation ablation · 2018
    No notice
  99. 99.

    Andrade JG, Wells GA, Deyell MW, Bennett M, Essebag V, Champagne J, et al Cryoablation or drug therapy for initial treatment of atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2021;384:305–15.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa2029980 (opens in a new tab)

  100. 100.

    Moons P, Norekval TM, Arbelo E, Borregaard B, Casadei B, Cosyns B, et al Placing patient-reported outcomes at the centre of cardiovascular clinical practice: implications for quality of care and management. Eur Heart J 2023;44:3405–22.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehad514 (opens in a new tab)

  101. 101.

    Homma S, Thompson JL, Pullicino PM, Levin B, Freudenberger RS, Teerlink JR, et al Warfarin and aspirin in patients with heart failure and sinus rhythm. N Engl J Med 2012;366:1859–69.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa1202299 (opens in a new tab)

  102. 102.

    Zannad F, Anker SD, Byra WM, Cleland JGF, Fu M, Gheorghiade M, et al Rivaroxaban in patients with heart failure, sinus rhythm, and coronary disease. N Engl J Med 2018;379:1332–42.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa1808848 (opens in a new tab)

  103. 103.

    Hart RG, Sharma M, Mundl H, Kasner SE, Bangdiwala SI, Berkowitz SD, et al Rivaroxaban for stroke prevention after embolic stroke of undetermined source. N Engl J Med 2018;378:2191–201.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa1802686 (opens in a new tab)

  104. 104.

    Diener HC, Sacco RL, Easton JD, Granger CB, Bernstein RA, Uchiyama S, et al Dabigatran for prevention of stroke after embolic stroke of undetermined source. N Engl J Med 2019;380:1906–17.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa1813959 (opens in a new tab)

  105. 105.

    Kamel H, Longstreth WT Jr, Tirschwell DL, Kronmal RA, Marshall RS, Broderick JP, et al Apixaban to prevent recurrence after cryptogenic stroke in patients with atrial cardiopathy. JAMA 2024;331:573–81.

    Not in our library10.1001/jama.2023.27188 (opens in a new tab)

  106. 106.

    Haeusler KG, Kirchhof P, Kunze C, Tutuncu S, Fiessler C, Malsch C, et al Systematic monitoring for detection of atrial fibrillation in patients with acute ischaemic stroke (MonDAFIS): a randomised, open-label, multicentre study. Lancet Neurol 2021;20:426–36.

    Not in our library10.1016/s1474-4422(21)00067-3 (opens in a new tab)

  107. 107.

    Sposato LA, Field TS, Schnabel RB, Wachter R, Andrade JG, Hill MD. Towards a new classification of atrial fibrillation detected after a stroke or a transient ischaemic attack. Lancet Neurol 2024;23:110–22.

    Not in our library10.1016/s1474-4422(23)00326-5 (opens in a new tab)

  108. 108.

    Sposato LA, Cipriano LE, Saposnik G, Ruiz Vargas E, Riccio PM, Hachinski V. Diagnosis of atrial fibrillation after stroke and transient ischaemic attack: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Neurol 2015;14:377–87.

    Not in our library10.1016/s1474-4422(15)70027-x (opens in a new tab)

  109. 109.

    Healey JS, Gladstone DJ, Swaminathan B, Eckstein J, Mundl H, Epstein AE, et al Recurrent stroke with rivaroxaban compared with aspirin according to predictors of atrial fibrillation: secondary analysis of the NAVIGATE ESUS randomized clinical trial. JAMA Neurol 2019;76:764–73.

    Not in our library10.1001/jamaneurol.2019.0617 (opens in a new tab)

  110. 110.

    Bahit MC, Sacco RL, Easton JD, Meyerhoff J, Cronin L, Kleine E, et al Predictors of atrial fibrillation development in patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source: an analysis of the RE-SPECT ESUS trial. Circulation 2021;144:1738–46.

    Not in our library10.1161/circulationaha.121.055176 (opens in a new tab)

  111. 111.

    Brambatti M, Connolly SJ, Gold MR, Morillo CA, Capucci A, Muto C, et al Temporal relationship between subclinical atrial fibrillation and embolic events. Circulation 2014;129:2094–9.

    Not in our library10.1161/circulationaha.113.007825 (opens in a new tab)

  112. 112.

    Singer DE, Ziegler PD, Koehler JL, Sarkar S, Passman RS. Temporal association between episodes of atrial fibrillation and risk of ischemic stroke. JAMA Cardiol 2021;6:1364–9.

    Not in our library10.1001/jamacardio.2021.3702 (opens in a new tab)

  113. 113.

    Mahajan R, Perera T, Elliott AD, Twomey DJ, Kumar S, Munwar DA, et al Subclinical device-detected atrial fibrillation and stroke risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Heart J 2018;39:1407–15.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehx731 (opens in a new tab)

  114. 114.

    Uhe T, Wasser K, Weber-Kruger M, Schabitz WR, Kohrmann M, Brachmann J, et al Intensive heart rhythm monitoring to decrease ischemic stroke and systemic embolism—the Find-AF 2 study—rationale and design. Am Heart J 2023;265:66–76.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ahj.2023.06.016 (opens in a new tab)

  115. 115.

    Engdahl J, Straat K, Isaksson E, Rooth E, Svennberg E, Norrving B, et al Multicentre, national, investigator-initiated, randomised, parallel-group, register-based superiority trial to compare extended ECG monitoring versus standard ECG monitoring in elderly patients with ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack and the effect on stroke, death and intracerebral bleeding: the AF SPICE protocol. BMJ Open 2023;13:e073470.

    Not in our library10.1136/bmjopen-2023-073470 (opens in a new tab)

  116. 116.

    Patel MR, Mahaffey KW, Garg J, Pan G, Singer DE, Hacke W, et al Rivaroxaban versus warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2011;365:883–91.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa1009638 (opens in a new tab)

  117. 117.

    Nielsen JC, Johannessen A, Raatikainen P, Hindricks G, Walfridsson H, Pehrson SM, et al Long-term efficacy of catheter ablation as first-line therapy for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: 5-year outcome in a randomised clinical trial. Heart 2017;103:368–76.

    Not in our library10.1136/heartjnl-2016-309781 (opens in a new tab)

  118. 118.

    Bunch TJ, Crandall BG, Weiss JP, May HT, Bair TL, Osborn JS, et al Patients treated with catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation have long-term rates of death, stroke, and dementia similar to patients without atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2011;22:839–45.

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1540-8167.2011.02035.x (opens in a new tab)

  119. 119.

    Themistoclakis S, Corrado A, Marchlinski FE, Jais P, Zado E, Rossillo A, et al The risk of thromboembolism and need for oral anticoagulation after successful atrial fibrillation ablation. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;55:735–43.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.jacc.2009.11.039 (opens in a new tab)

  120. 120.

    Verma A, Ha ACT, Kirchhof P, Hindricks G, Healey JS, Hill MD, et al The Optimal Anti-Coagulation for Enhanced-Risk Patients Post-Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation (OCEAN) trial. Am Heart J 2018;197:124–32.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ahj.2017.12.007 (opens in a new tab)

  121. 121.

    Brady PF, Chua W, Nehaj F, Connolly DL, Khashaba A, Purmah YJV, et al Interactions between atrial fibrillation and natriuretic peptide in predicting heart failure hospitalization or cardiovascular death. J Am Heart Assoc 2022;11:e022833.

    Not in our library10.1161/jaha.121.022833 (opens in a new tab)

  122. 122.

    Chua W, Khashaba A, Canagarajah H, Blankenberg S, Cosedis Nielsen J, di Biase L, et al Disturbed atrial metabolism, shear stress, and cardiac load after AF ablation: AXAFA biomolcules study. Europace 2024;26:euae028.

    Not in our library10.1093/europace/euae028 (opens in a new tab)

  123. 123.

    Inohara T, Kim S, Pieper K, Blanco RG, Allen LA, Fonarow GC, et al B-type natriuretic peptide, disease progression and clinical outcomes in atrial fibrillation. Heart 2019;105:370–7.

    Not in our library10.1136/heartjnl-2018-313642 (opens in a new tab)

  124. 124.

    Chua W, Cardoso VR, Guasch E, Sinner MF, Al-Taie C, Brady P, et al An angiopoietin 2, FGF23, and BMP10 biomarker signature differentiates atrial fibrillation from other concomitant cardiovascular conditions. Sci Rep 2023;13:16743.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41598-023-42331-7 (opens in a new tab)

  125. 125.

    Reyat JS, Chua W, Cardoso VR, Witten A, Kastner PM, Kabir SN, et al Reduced left atrial cardiomyocyte PITX2 and elevated circulating BMP10 predict atrial fibrillation after ablation. JCI Insight 2020;5:e139179.

    Not in our library10.1172/jci.insight.139179 (opens in a new tab)

  126. 126.

    Hennings E, Blum S, Aeschbacher S, Coslovsky M, Knecht S, Eken C, et al Bone morphogenetic protein 10—a novel biomarker to predict adverse outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation. J Am Heart Assoc 2023;12:e028255.

    Not in our library10.1161/jaha.122.028255 (opens in a new tab)

  127. 127.

    Hijazi Z, Benz AP, Lindback J, Alexander JH, Connolly SJ, Eikelboom JW, et al Bone morphogenetic protein 10: a novel risk marker of ischaemic stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation. Eur Heart J 2023;44:208–18.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehac632 (opens in a new tab)

  128. 128.

    Chua W, Law JP, Cardoso VR, Purmah Y, Neculau G, Jawad-Ul-Qamar M, et al Quantification of fibroblast growth factor 23 and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide to identify patients with atrial fibrillation using a high-throughput platform: a validation study. PLoS Med 2021;18:e1003405.

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pmed.1003405 (opens in a new tab)

  129. 129.

    Engdahl J, Svennberg E, Friberg L, Al-Khalili F, Frykman V, Kemp Gudmundsdottir K, et al Stepwise mass screening for atrial fibrillation using N-terminal pro b-type natriuretic peptide: the STROKESTOP II study design. Europace 2017;19:297–302.

    Not in our library10.1093/europace/euw319 (opens in a new tab)

  130. 130.

    Phillips K, Subramanian A, Thomas GN, Khan N, Chandan JS, Brady P, et al Trends in the pharmacological management of atrial fibrillation in UK general practice 2008–2018. Heart 2022;108:517–22.

    Not in our library10.1136/heartjnl-2021-319338 (opens in a new tab)

  131. 131.

    Gill SK, Karwath A, Uh HW, Cardoso VR, Gu Z, Barsky A, et al Artificial intelligence to enhance clinical value across the spectrum of cardiovascular healthcare. Eur Heart J 2023;44:713–25.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehac758 (opens in a new tab)

  132. 132.

    Marston NA, Garfinkel AC, Kamanu FK, Melloni GM, Roselli C, Jarolim P, et al A polygenic risk score predicts atrial fibrillation in cardiovascular disease. Eur Heart J 2023;44:221–31.

    Not in our library10.1093/eurheartj/ehac460 (opens in a new tab)

  133. 133.
    Data-driven discovery and validation of circulating blood-based biomarkers associated with prevalent atrial fibrillation · 2019
    No notice
  134. 134.

    Peigh G, Passman RS. Pill-in-Pocket anticoagulation for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2023;34:2152–7.

    Not in our library10.1111/jce.15866 (opens in a new tab)

  135. 135.

    Williams K, Modi RN, Dymond A, Hoare S, Powell A, Burt J, et al Cluster randomised controlled trial of screening for atrial fibrillation in people aged 70 years and over to reduce stroke: protocol for the pilot study for the SAFER trial. BMJ Open 2022;12:e065066.

    Not in our library10.1136/bmjopen-2022-065066 (opens in a new tab)

Questions about this paper

We email you if it is retracted, withdrawn, corrected or flagged.

Reads

Read by people on this page

None yet.

Checked or read by AI through naulon

None yet.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

Are you an author?

Is this your paper?

Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.