Temporal patterns of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation following DDDR pacemaker implantation
Abstract
Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) episodes have been reported to be randomly distributed. However, because patients are not always symptomatic, it has been difficult to study temporal patterns of AF. Newer implantable pulse generators have data-logging capabilities that permit the detection and analysis of temporal patterns of AF. This study tested the hypothesis that AF episodes occur in clusters over time and that these episodes are not randomly distributed in individual patients. The date and time of 582 episodes of AF were recorded from the data logs of 16 patients with a Medtronic Thera DR followed 6 weeks and 6 and 12 months after pulse generator implant. The probability of AF recurrence and the interevent intervals between successive episodes of AF were fitted to monoexponential and Weibull distributions. A Weibull distribution best described the nonrandom distribution of AF for 67% of follow-up visits. Temporal clustering of AF (interevent intervals <24 hours) declined during follow-up (95 +/- 10%, 90 +/- 11%, and 74 +/- 28% at the 6-week and 6- and 12-month visits, respectively; p <0.05). The average duration of an episode of AF tended to increase over time (0.31 hour, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.17 to 0.58 hours; 0.36 hours, 95% CI 0. 17 to 0.78 hours; 0.65 hours, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.45 hours [p = 0.07] at the 6-week and 6- and 12-month visits, respectively). Paroxysmal AF recurrence is nonrandomly distributed over the long term in many patients. The temporal patterns of AF change over time after pacemaker implantation. This has implications for the selection of study end points in AF clinical trials.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The distribution of paroxysmal AF recurrences is not random, but clustered.
“The distribution of paroxysmal AF recurrences is not random, but clustered.162”
From 2016 ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with EACTS (2016) · cites this paper as [162]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 14 · Cited by 55
- Authors
- Gillis, A. M., & Rose, M. S.
- Affiliations
- University of Calgary (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Gillis, Anne M.
- ORCID
- Gillis, Anne M.
- Venue
- The American Journal of Cardiology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2000-06
- Volume
- 85
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1445-1450
- ISSN
- 0002-9149 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2067102234
- Cited by
- 55
- References
- 14
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 2.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The American Journal of Cardiology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
- Keywords
- paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, DDDR pacemaker, atrial fibrillation recurrence, temporal clustering, inter-event time, Weibull distribution
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Atrial Fibrillation, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Models, Theoretical, Pacemaker, Artificial, Recurrence, Sensitivity and Specificity, Time Factors
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review