Research
Print page Print page
Switch language
Rigshospitalet - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital
Published

Risk of atrial fibrillation after pacemaker implantation: A nationwide Danish registry-based follow-up study

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Tayal, B, Riahi, S, Sogaard, P, Nielsen, G, Thøgersen, AM, Dutta, A, Gislason, G, Kober, L, Torp-Pedersen, C & Kragholm, KH 2020, 'Risk of atrial fibrillation after pacemaker implantation: A nationwide Danish registry-based follow-up study', Journal of Electrocardiology, vol. 63, pp. 153-158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2019.09.021

APA

Tayal, B., Riahi, S., Sogaard, P., Nielsen, G., Thøgersen, A. M., Dutta, A., Gislason, G., Kober, L., Torp-Pedersen, C., & Kragholm, K. H. (2020). Risk of atrial fibrillation after pacemaker implantation: A nationwide Danish registry-based follow-up study. Journal of Electrocardiology, 63, 153-158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2019.09.021

CBE

MLA

Vancouver

Author

Tayal, Bhupendar ; Riahi, Sam ; Sogaard, Peter ; Nielsen, Gitte ; Thøgersen, Anna Margrethe ; Dutta, Abhishek ; Gislason, Gunnar ; Kober, Lars ; Torp-Pedersen, Christian ; Kragholm, Kristian Hay. / Risk of atrial fibrillation after pacemaker implantation : A nationwide Danish registry-based follow-up study. In: Journal of Electrocardiology. 2020 ; Vol. 63. pp. 153-158.

Bibtex

@article{8f9602d0960a4ff983d09dbbb232531c,
title = "Risk of atrial fibrillation after pacemaker implantation: A nationwide Danish registry-based follow-up study",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: The overall risk of atrial fibrillation (AF) among patients with pacemaker (PM) in comparison to control cohort is unknown.PURPOSE: To investigate the risk of AF after implantation of a PM in an AF-naive population in comparison to an age- and sex-matched PM- and AF-free population cohort.METHODS: All patients with a dual chamber PM (DDD) implanted between 2000 and 2014 without a known history of AF were included (n = 17,428). To compare, a general population cohort without pacemaker and a cohort with loop recorder was identified. Outcome was the cumulative incidence of AF within the first 2 years from 3-months after device implantation.RESULTS: At the end of first 3-months after device implantation, 16,383 patients were free of AF and were included in the current study. In comparison to controls (n = 86,167), patients with PM had higher cumulative incidence of AF (5.2% vs 2.7%, P < 0.001)). Due to interaction with age, patients were divided into three age-groups) and the relative risk for the diagnosis of AF were: < 70 years (HR 4.46, 95% CI 3.65-5.44); 70-79 years (HR 2.60, 95% CI 2.27-2.98); and ≥ 80 years (HR 1.29, 95% CI 1.15-1.45). For comparison between PM and loop-recorder cohort (1:1 matching), 2202 patients were available in both groups. The incidence of AF within the first 2-years in the both groups was 7.9% vs. 8.4% (loop vs pacemaker).CONCLUSIONS: Patients with PM have an increased risk of being diagnosed with AF in comparison to general cohort likely due to continuous monitoring.",
keywords = "Atrial fibrillation, Epidemiology, Pacemaker",
author = "Bhupendar Tayal and Sam Riahi and Peter Sogaard and Gitte Nielsen and Th{\o}gersen, {Anna Margrethe} and Abhishek Dutta and Gunnar Gislason and Lars Kober and Christian Torp-Pedersen and Kragholm, {Kristian Hay}",
note = "Copyright {\textcopyright} 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.",
year = "2020",
doi = "10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2019.09.021",
language = "English",
volume = "63",
pages = "153--158",
journal = "Journal of Electrocardiology",
issn = "0022-0736",
publisher = "Churchill Livingstone",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Risk of atrial fibrillation after pacemaker implantation

T2 - A nationwide Danish registry-based follow-up study

AU - Tayal, Bhupendar

AU - Riahi, Sam

AU - Sogaard, Peter

AU - Nielsen, Gitte

AU - Thøgersen, Anna Margrethe

AU - Dutta, Abhishek

AU - Gislason, Gunnar

AU - Kober, Lars

AU - Torp-Pedersen, Christian

AU - Kragholm, Kristian Hay

N1 - Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

PY - 2020

Y1 - 2020

N2 - BACKGROUND: The overall risk of atrial fibrillation (AF) among patients with pacemaker (PM) in comparison to control cohort is unknown.PURPOSE: To investigate the risk of AF after implantation of a PM in an AF-naive population in comparison to an age- and sex-matched PM- and AF-free population cohort.METHODS: All patients with a dual chamber PM (DDD) implanted between 2000 and 2014 without a known history of AF were included (n = 17,428). To compare, a general population cohort without pacemaker and a cohort with loop recorder was identified. Outcome was the cumulative incidence of AF within the first 2 years from 3-months after device implantation.RESULTS: At the end of first 3-months after device implantation, 16,383 patients were free of AF and were included in the current study. In comparison to controls (n = 86,167), patients with PM had higher cumulative incidence of AF (5.2% vs 2.7%, P < 0.001)). Due to interaction with age, patients were divided into three age-groups) and the relative risk for the diagnosis of AF were: < 70 years (HR 4.46, 95% CI 3.65-5.44); 70-79 years (HR 2.60, 95% CI 2.27-2.98); and ≥ 80 years (HR 1.29, 95% CI 1.15-1.45). For comparison between PM and loop-recorder cohort (1:1 matching), 2202 patients were available in both groups. The incidence of AF within the first 2-years in the both groups was 7.9% vs. 8.4% (loop vs pacemaker).CONCLUSIONS: Patients with PM have an increased risk of being diagnosed with AF in comparison to general cohort likely due to continuous monitoring.

AB - BACKGROUND: The overall risk of atrial fibrillation (AF) among patients with pacemaker (PM) in comparison to control cohort is unknown.PURPOSE: To investigate the risk of AF after implantation of a PM in an AF-naive population in comparison to an age- and sex-matched PM- and AF-free population cohort.METHODS: All patients with a dual chamber PM (DDD) implanted between 2000 and 2014 without a known history of AF were included (n = 17,428). To compare, a general population cohort without pacemaker and a cohort with loop recorder was identified. Outcome was the cumulative incidence of AF within the first 2 years from 3-months after device implantation.RESULTS: At the end of first 3-months after device implantation, 16,383 patients were free of AF and were included in the current study. In comparison to controls (n = 86,167), patients with PM had higher cumulative incidence of AF (5.2% vs 2.7%, P < 0.001)). Due to interaction with age, patients were divided into three age-groups) and the relative risk for the diagnosis of AF were: < 70 years (HR 4.46, 95% CI 3.65-5.44); 70-79 years (HR 2.60, 95% CI 2.27-2.98); and ≥ 80 years (HR 1.29, 95% CI 1.15-1.45). For comparison between PM and loop-recorder cohort (1:1 matching), 2202 patients were available in both groups. The incidence of AF within the first 2-years in the both groups was 7.9% vs. 8.4% (loop vs pacemaker).CONCLUSIONS: Patients with PM have an increased risk of being diagnosed with AF in comparison to general cohort likely due to continuous monitoring.

KW - Atrial fibrillation

KW - Epidemiology

KW - Pacemaker

U2 - 10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2019.09.021

DO - 10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2019.09.021

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 31668456

VL - 63

SP - 153

EP - 158

JO - Journal of Electrocardiology

JF - Journal of Electrocardiology

SN - 0022-0736

ER -

ID: 58441598