Arrhythmias & electrophysiology
Major clinical outcomes in symptomatic vs. asymptomatic atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis
Authors' conclusion
The risk of major clinical outcomes did not differ between individuals with and without AF-related symptoms. Asymptomatic patients had a greater hazard of progression to permanent AF.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF)
- Participants
- 217,850 patients36 studies
- Comparison
- Symptomatic vs asymptomatic AF
- Outcome
- Major clinical outcomes (frequentist analysis)
Methodological detailsrandom-effects, Medline, Cochrane Library and Scopus searched until 25 March 2024
- Random-effects
- Medline, Cochrane Library and Scopus searched until 25 March 2024
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
Symptomatic vs AsymptomaticHazard ratio (95% CI)
All-cause mortality
.97(.80-1.17)
CV mortality
1.04(.72-1.49)
Thromboembolism
1.06(.87-1.28)
Stroke
1.06(.84-1.34)
Hospitalization
1.34(.89-2.02)
MI
.98(.70-1.36)
New-onset HF
1.33(1.19–1.49)
Progression to permanent AF
.70(.54-.89)
Further pooled results
| Outcome | Estimate | |
|---|---|---|
| New-onset HF (Bayesian analysis)CrI; Bayes factor = 1.2; not significant · Bayesian analysis otherwise comparable | HR 1.27 (95% CrI .76-1.93) | |
| Antiarrhythmic drugs | OR 1.64 (95% CI 1.33–2.03) | |
| Ablation therapy | OR 1.47 (95% CI 1.06–2.05) | |
| 0.512Ratio (log scale) |
Original publication
Major clinical outcomes in symptomatic vs. asymptomatic atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis. Eur Heart J. Published 21 October 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →