Current Recommendations on Atrial Fibrillation: a comparison of the recent European and Canadian Guidelines.


Creative Commons License

Okutucu S., Gorenek B.

Cardiology, cilt.147, sa.1, ss.81-89, 2022 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 147 Sayı: 1
  • Basım Tarihi: 2022
  • Doi Numarası: 10.1159/000519465
  • Dergi Adı: Cardiology
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, Academic Search Premier, BIOSIS, EMBASE, MEDLINE
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.81-89
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: Anticoagulation, Atrial fibrillation, Canadian guidelines, European guidelines, Rate control, Rhythm control, RISK STRATIFICATION, EXPERT CONSENSUS, TASK-FORCE, SOCIETY, MANAGEMENT, THROMBOEMBOLISM, ASSOCIATION, STROKE, RACE, ESC
  • Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Background: Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation (AF) are frequently published and updated, reflecting the rapid evolution in AF pathogenesis and treatment modalities. Summary: Recently, 2 important guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial AF have been published by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), and Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS). Although the evidence-based recommendations and statements are quite similar, there are some important differences between the ESC and CCS guidelines for AF. Herein, we compared the current recommendations and highlighted the differences from the most recent guidelines for AF. Key Messages: Specifically, key differences can be observed in methods evaluating the recommendations; classifications and the definitions; the symptom score used to guide management decisions, longitudinal patient assessment, and structured characterization; the stroke risk stratification algorithm used to determine indications for oral anticoagulation therapy; the role of acetylsalicylic acid in stroke prevention in AF; the antithrombotic regimens that are employed in the setting of chronic coronary syndromes, acute coronary syndromes, and percutaneous coronary intervention; the target heart rate for rate control; and the algorithms for integrated or holistic management of AF. Differences are observed, particularly when the quality of evidence is moderate or low. More research and randomized controlled studies on major gaps identified in current guidelines will further clarify and modify our future management strategies in AF.