Division of Cardiology Department of Medicine University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill NC.
Centers for Behavioral and Preventive Medicine The Miriam Hospital Providence RI.
J Am Heart Assoc. 2021 Jun;10(11):e020559. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.120.020559. Epub 2021 May 20.
Background Anger and extreme stress can trigger potentially fatal cardiovascular events in susceptible people. Political elections, such as the 2016 US presidential election, are significant stressors. Whether they can trigger cardiac arrhythmias is unknown. Methods and Results In this retrospective case-crossover study, we linked cardiac device data, electronic health records, and historic voter registration records from 2436 patients with implanted cardiac devices. The incidence of arrhythmias during the election was compared with a control period with Poisson regression. We also tested for effect modification by demographics, comorbidities, political affiliation, and whether an individual's political affiliation was concordant with county-level election results. Overall, 2592 arrhythmic events occurred in 655 patients during the hazard period compared with 1533 events in 472 patients during the control period. There was a significant increase in the incidence of composite outcomes for any arrhythmia (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.77 [95% CI, 1.42-2.21]), supraventricular arrhythmia (IRR, 1.82 [95% CI, 1.36-2.43]), and ventricular arrhythmia (IRR, 1.60 [95% CI, 1.22-2.10]) during the election relative to the control period. There was also an increase in specific types of arrhythmia, including atrial fibrillation (IRR, 1.50 [95% CI, 1.06-2.11]), supraventricular tachycardia (IRR, 3.7 [95% CI, 2.2-6.2]), nonsustained ventricular tachycardia (IRR, 1.7 [95% CI, 1.3-2.2]), and daily atrial fibrillation burden (<0.001). No significant interaction was found for sex, race/ethnicity, device type, age ≥65 years, hypertension, coronary artery disease, heart failure, political affiliation, or concordance between individual political affiliation and county-level election results. Conclusions There was a significant increase in cardiac arrhythmias during the 2016 US presidential election. These findings suggest that exposure to stressful sociopolitical events may trigger arrhythmogenesis in susceptible people.
背景 愤怒和极度的压力会在易感人群中引发潜在致命的心血管事件。政治选举,如 2016 年美国总统大选,是重大的压力源。它们是否会引发心律失常尚不清楚。
方法和结果 在这项回顾性病例交叉研究中,我们将心脏设备数据、电子健康记录和来自 2436 名植入心脏设备患者的历史选民登记记录联系起来。使用泊松回归比较选举期间心律失常的发生率与对照期。我们还通过人口统计学、合并症、政治派别以及个体的政治派别是否与县级选举结果一致来检验效应修饰。总的来说,在危险期间,655 名患者中有 2592 次心律失常事件,而在对照期间,472 名患者中有 1533 次。任何心律失常(发生率比 [IRR],1.77 [95%CI,1.42-2.21])、室上性心律失常(IRR,1.82 [95%CI,1.36-2.43])和室性心律失常(IRR,1.60 [95%CI,1.22-2.10])的发生率显著增加。与对照期相比,选举期间还出现了特定类型的心律失常增加,包括心房颤动(IRR,1.50 [95%CI,1.06-2.11])、室上性心动过速(IRR,3.7 [95%CI,2.2-6.2])、非持续性室性心动过速(IRR,1.7 [95%CI,1.3-2.2])和每日心房颤动负担(<0.001)。未发现性别、种族/民族、设备类型、年龄≥65 岁、高血压、冠状动脉疾病、心力衰竭、政治派别或个体政治派别与县级选举结果之间的一致性存在显著交互作用。
结论 在 2016 年美国总统大选中,心律失常显著增加。这些发现表明,暴露于应激性社会政治事件可能会在易感人群中引发心律失常发生。