↓ Skip to main content

American College of Cardiology

Incidence, Management, and Associated Clinical Outcomes of New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement An Analysis From the STS/ACC TVT Registry

Overview of attention for article published in JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
8 news outlets
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
85 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
Title
Incidence, Management, and Associated Clinical Outcomes of New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement An Analysis From the STS/ACC TVT Registry
Published in
JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions, September 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.jcin.2018.05.042
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amit N. Vora, Dadi Dai, Roland Matsuoka, J. Kevin Harrison, G. Chad Hughes, Matthew W. Sherwood, Jonathan P. Piccini, Bhaskar Bhardwaj, Renato D. Lopes, David Cohen, David R. Holmes, Vinod H. Thourani, Eric Peterson, Ajay Kirtane, Samir Kapadia, Sreekanth Vemulapalli

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate incidence, care patterns, and clinical outcomes in patients developing new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Pre-procedural AF has been associated with adverse outcomes in patients undergoing TAVR, but the incidence of new-onset AF, associated anticoagulant management, and subsequent clinical outcomes are unclear. Using the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology TVT (Transcatheter Valve Therapy) Registry linked with Medicare claims, patients undergoing TAVR from 2011 to 2015 who developed post-procedural AF were evaluated. Patients with known AF prior to TAVR were excluded. Outcomes of interest included in-hospital mortality and stroke and all-cause mortality, stroke, and bleeding at 12 months. Multivariate adjustment was then performed to determine differences in 1-year outcomes among those with and without new post-procedural AF, stratified by anticoagulation status. We identified 1,138 of 13,556 patients (8.4%) who developed new onset AF (4.4% of transfemoral [TF]-access patients, 16.5% of non-TF-access patients). Patients developing AF were older, more likely female, had higher Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk scores, and were often treated using non-TF access. Despite having a median CHA2DS2-VASc score of 5 (25th and 75th percentile: 5 to 6), only 28.9% of patients with new AF were discharged on oral anticoagulation. In-hospital mortality (7.8% vs. 3.4%; p < 0.01) and stroke (4.7% vs. 2.0%; p < 0.01) were higher among patients who developed post-procedural AF compared with those who did not. At 1 year, rates of death (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.37; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.19 to 1.59), stroke (adjusted HR: 1.50; 95% CI: 1.14 to 1.98), and bleeding (adjusted HR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.10 to 1.40) were higher among patients with new-onset AF. One-year mortality rates were highest among patients who developed new-onset AF but were not discharged on anticoagulation. Post-TAVR AF occurred in 8.4% of patients (4.4% with TF access, 16.5% with non-TF access), with fewer than one-third of patients receiving anticoagulation at discharge, and was associated with increased risk for in-hospital and 1-year mortality and stroke. Given the clinical significance of post-TAVR AF, additional studies are necessary to delineate the optimal management strategy in this high-risk population.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 19%
Other 8 11%
Researcher 8 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Student > Master 5 7%
Other 13 19%
Unknown 17 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 49%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Computer Science 1 1%
Other 1 1%
Unknown 27 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 61. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 October 2019.
All research outputs
#694,520
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
#175
of 4,032 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,939
of 345,739 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
#4
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,032 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 345,739 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.