TWENTY-FOUR-HOUR HEART RATE EVALUATION FOR PERMANENT ATRIAL FIBRILLATION PATIENTS RISK ASSESSMENT

I. Kurcalte, O. Kalejs, R. Erts, A. Kalnins, A. Kalinin, A. Lejnieks

Clinic of Cardiovascular disease, Riga Eastern Clinical University Hospital, Riga, Latvia

Abstract

Introduction: Heart rate (HR), ventricular arrhythmias (VA) and QRS complex width analysis is used for ECG-based noninvasive risk evaluation for permanent atrial fibrillation(PAF) patients. We speculate: impaired circadian HR changeability is associated with higher PAF patients mortality risk.
Methods: In cohort of 253 PAF patients (dead - 74 pts, 34(46%) male, mean age(SD) - 78(7.8), alive – 179pts, 79(44%) male, age - 74(10.1) HM records archived in 2007-2010 (follow-up – 47(8.4) month) were analysed. Primary end-point – total mortality. Characteristics of 24-hours HR changes were calculated, analysed using univariate analysis and included in logistic regression(LR) models. ROC curves were obtained to establish optimal cut-off point for continuous characteristics and compare LR models including patient clinical characteristics only, HM data only and combined models including clinical and HM parameters.
Results: All calculated 24-hours HR changeability parameters were statistically significantly lower in dead patients (table 1). Maximum risk assessment model capability(AUC) was obtained by including 24-hour HR parameters (table 2).
Conclusions: PAF patient with lower 24-hours HR changeability are in higher mortality risk. Inclusion of circadian HR characteristics in risk assessment could improve mortality prediction for PAF patients.


Univariate analysis of 24-hour HR changes.
Variable Dead (n=74) Alive (n=179) OR (95%CI) AUC p-value Sensi-tivity (%) Speci-fity(%) You-den index Accu-racy
DeltaHR (bpm) (mean (SD) 98 (25.0) 112 (32.2) .64 (.57; .71) .001
DeltaHR< 108bpm (patient (%) 51 (69%) 76 (42%) 2.93 (1.65; 5.2) <.001 69 57 .26 .60
AveDNHRratio (mean (SD) 1.14 (0.13) 1.26 (0.16) .697(.629; 764) <.001
AveDNHRratio< 1,13 41 (55%) 46 (25%) 3.65 (2.07; 6.43) <.001 75 55 .30 .69
AveDNHRdif(bpm) (median[25;75%] 9 [0; 20] 16 [2; 30] .701 (633; .777) <.001
AveDNHRdif=9bpm 45 (61%) 47(26%) 4.42 (2.50; 7.85) <.001 74 61 .26 .69
MaxMinHRratio (mean (SD) 3.30 (0.74) 3.60 (0.84) .621 (.547;.695) .008
MaxMinHRratio <3,11 39 (53%) 51 (28%) 2.84 (1,62; 4.97) <.001 53 72 .23 .59

Comparison of risk assessment models.
Model AUC (95% CI) p-value Correct prediction % Nagelkerke R square
Clinical .744 (.679; .808) <.001 72,7 .199
HR + VA .780 (.714; .846) <.001 81 .321
Clinical + VA analysis .794 (.732; .855) <.001 77.9 .301
Clinical + HR analysis .801 (.744; .859) <.001 77.9 .325
Clinical + HR + VA .839 (.784; .895 <.001 81.4 .408
Abbreviations: SD, standard deviation; bpm, beats per minute; CI, confidence interval; OR, Odds ratio; Max, maximum; Min, minimum; Ave, average; dif, difference; DeltaHR, max min HR difference; D, day; N, night.