Differences in Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation Incidence and Outcomes After Cardiac Surgery According to Assessment Method and Definition: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Author:

Perezgrovas‐Olaria Roberto1ORCID,Alzghari Talal1ORCID,Rahouma Mohammed1ORCID,Dimagli Arnaldo1,Harik Lamia1,Soletti Giovanni J.1ORCID,An Kevin R.12ORCID,Caldonazo Tulio3,Kirov Hristo3ORCID,Cancelli Gianmarco1ORCID,Audisio Katia1,Yaghmour Mohammad1ORCID,Polk Hillary1,Toor Rajbir1,Sathi Swetha1ORCID,Demetres Michelle4ORCID,Girardi Leonard N.1,Biondi‐Zoccai Giuseppe56,Gaudino Mario1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery Weill Cornell Medicine New York NY USA

2. Division of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Surgery University of Toronto ON Canada

3. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery Friedrich Schiller University Jena Jena Germany

4. Samuel J. Wood Library and C.V. Starr Biomedical Information Centre, Weill Cornell Medicine New York NY USA

5. Department of Medical‐Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies Sapienza University of Rome Latina Italy

6. Mediterranea Cardiocentro Naples Italy

Abstract

Background Postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) is the most frequent complication of cardiac surgery. Despite clinical and economic implications, ample variability in POAF assessment method and definition exist across studies. We performed a study‐level meta‐analysis to evaluate the influence of POAF assessment method and definition on its incidence and association with clinical outcomes. Methods and Results A systematic literature search was conducted to identify studies comparing the outcomes of patients with and without POAF after cardiac surgery that also reported POAF assessment method. The primary outcome was POAF incidence. The secondary outcomes were in‐hospital mortality, stroke, intensive care unit length of stay, and postoperative length of stay. Fifty‐nine studies totaling 197 774 patients were included. POAF cumulative incidence was 26% (range: 7.3%–53.1%). There were no differences in POAF incidence among assessment methods (27%, [range: 7.3%–53.1%] for continuous telemetry, 27% [range: 7.9%–50%] for telemetry plus daily ECG, and 19% [range: 7.8%–42.4%] for daily ECG only; P >0.05 for all comparisons). No differences in in‐hospital mortality, stroke, intensive care unit length of stay, and postoperative length of stay were found between assessment methods. No differences in POAF incidence or any other outcomes were found between POAF definitions. Continuous telemetry and telemetry plus daily ECG were associated with higher POAF incidence compared with daily ECG in studies including only patients undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass grafting. Conclusions POAF incidence after cardiac surgery remains high, and detection rates are variable among studies. POAF incidence and its association with adverse outcomes are not influenced by the assessment method and definition used, except in patients undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass grafting.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3