Macle Laurent, Cairns John A, Andrade Jason G, Mitchell L Brent, Nattel Stanley, Verma Atul
Montreal Heart Institute and Department of Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Québec, Canada.
University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Can J Cardiol. 2015 Oct;31(10):1207-18. doi: 10.1016/j.cjca.2015.06.005.
The Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) Atrial Fibrillation Guidelines Program has generated a comprehensive series of documents regarding the management of atrial fibrillation (AF) between 2010 and 2014. The guidelines provide evidence-based consensus management recommendations in a broad range of areas. These guidelines have proven useful in informing clinical practice, but often lack detail in specifications related to practical application, particularly for areas in which the evidence base is limited or conflicting. Based on feedback from the community, the CCS Atrial Fibrillation Guidelines Committee has identified a number of areas that require clarification to address commonly asked practical questions related to guidelines application. In the present article a number of such questions are presented and suggestions about how they can be answered are suggested. Among the issues considered are: (1) What duration of AF is clinically significant? (2) How are the risk factors in the CCS Algorithm for selecting anticoagulation therapy derived and defined? (3) How is valvular heart disease defined and how do different forms of valve disease affect the choice of anticoagulant therapy for AF patients? (4) How should we quantify renal dysfunction and how does it affect therapeutic choices? The response to these questions and the underlying logic are provided, along with an indication of future research needed where no specific approach can presently be recommended based on the literature.
加拿大心血管学会(CCS)心房颤动指南项目在2010年至2014年间生成了一系列关于心房颤动(AF)管理的全面文件。这些指南在广泛领域提供了基于证据的共识管理建议。这些指南已被证明对指导临床实践有用,但在与实际应用相关的规范方面往往缺乏细节,特别是在证据基础有限或相互矛盾的领域。根据来自各界的反馈,CCS心房颤动指南委员会确定了一些需要澄清的领域,以解决与指南应用相关的常见实际问题。在本文中,提出了一些此类问题,并给出了关于如何回答这些问题的建议。所考虑的问题包括:(1)具有临床意义的房颤持续时间是多久?(2)CCS选择抗凝治疗算法中的危险因素是如何推导和定义的?(3)如何定义瓣膜性心脏病,不同形式的瓣膜疾病如何影响房颤患者抗凝治疗的选择?(4)我们应如何量化肾功能不全,它如何影响治疗选择?提供了对这些问题的回答及其背后的逻辑,并指出了在目前根据文献无法推荐具体方法的情况下未来所需的研究方向。