» Articles » PMID: 34247459

Atrial Fibrillation in Critically Ill Patients Who Received Prolonged Mechanical Ventilation: a Nationwide Inpatient Report

Overview
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2021 Jul 12
PMID 34247459
Citations 1
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background/aims: To evaluate temporal trends of atrial fibrillation (AF) prevalence in critically ill patients who received prolonged mechanical ventilation (MV) in the United States.

Methods: We used the 2008 to 2014 National Inpatient Sample to compute the weighted prevalence of AF among hospitalized adult patients on prolonged MV. We used multivariable-adjusted models to evaluate the association of AF with clinical factors, in-hospital mortality, hospitalization cost, and length of stay (LOS).

Results: We identified 2,578,165 patients who received prolonged MV (21.27% of AF patients). The prevalence of AF increased from 14.63% in 2008 to 24.43% in 2014 (p for trend < 0.0001). Amongst different phenotypes of critically ill patients, the prevalence of AF increased in patients with severe sepsis, asthma exacerbation, congestive heart failure exacerbation, acute stroke, and cardiac arrest. Older age, male sex, white race, medicare access, higher income, urban teaching hospital setting, and Western region were associated with a higher prevalence of AF. AF in critical illness was a risk factor for in-hospital death (odds ratio, 1.13; 95% confidence interval, 1.11 to 1.15), but in-hospital mortality in critically ill patients with AF decreased from 11.6% to 8.3%. AF was linked to prolonged LOS (2%, p < 0.0001) and high hospitalization cost (4%, p < 0.0001). LOS (-1%, p < 0.0001) and hospitalization cost (-4%, p < 0.0001) decreased yearly.

Conclusion: The prevalence of comorbid AF is increasing, particularly in older patients. AF may lead to poorer prognosis, and high-quality intensive care is imperative for this population.

Citing Articles

Beyond the Beat: A Multifaceted Review of Atrial Fibrillation in Sepsis: Risk Factors, Management Strategies, and Economic Impact.

Ho W, Umais M, Bai M, Dang N, Kumari K, Izhar S Cardiol Res. 2025; 16(1):1-14.

PMID: 39897439 PMC: 11779681. DOI: 10.14740/cr1723.


Prevalence and outcomes of atrial fibrillation in patients suffering prostate cancer: a national analysis in the United States.

Pan Z, Xu X, Xu X, Wu S, Zhang Z, Liu S Front Cardiovasc Med. 2024; 11:1382166.

PMID: 38638883 PMC: 11025351. DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2024.1382166.

References
1.
Lip G, Banerjee A, Boriani G, Chiang C, Fargo R, Freedman B . Antithrombotic Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation: CHEST Guideline and Expert Panel Report. Chest. 2018; 154(5):1121-1201. DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2018.07.040. View

2.
Lin M, Ma J, Weissman J, Bernard K, Schuur J . Hospital-level variation and predictors of admission after ED visits for atrial fibrillation: 2006 to 2011. Am J Emerg Med. 2016; 34(11):2094-2100. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2016.07.023. View

3.
Menke A, Casagrande S, Geiss L, Cowie C . Prevalence of and Trends in Diabetes Among Adults in the United States, 1988-2012. JAMA. 2015; 314(10):1021-9. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2015.10029. View

4.
Morelli A, Ertmer C, Westphal M, Rehberg S, Kampmeier T, Ligges S . Effect of heart rate control with esmolol on hemodynamic and clinical outcomes in patients with septic shock: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2013; 310(16):1683-91. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2013.278477. View

5.
Carrera P, Thongprayoon C, Cheungpasitporn W, Iyer V, Moua T . Epidemiology and outcome of new-onset atrial fibrillation in the medical intensive care unit. J Crit Care. 2016; 36:102-106. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2016.06.032. View