Abstract
Background
COVID-19 infections can result in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) requiring admission to the intensive care unit (ICU). Cardiovascular manifestation or exacerbation of cardiovascular diseases could be another complication. Cardiac arrhythmias including New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation (NOAF), have been observed in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infections. In this analysis, we aimed to systematically compare the complications associated with NOAF in critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU.
Methods
MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane database, http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov, Google Scholar and Mendeley were searched for relevant publications based on COVID-19 patients with NOAF admitted to the ICU. Complications including in-hospital mortality, ICU mortality, patients requiring mechanical ventilation, acute myocardial infarction, acute kidney injury, renal replacement therapy and pulmonary embolism were assessed. This is a meta-analysis and the analytical tool which was used was the RevMan software version 5.4. Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to represent the data post analysis.
Results
In critically ill COVID-19 patients with NOAF admitted to the ICU, the risks of ICU mortality (RR: 1.39, 95% CI: 1.07 – 1.80; P = 0.01), in-hospital mortality (RR: 1.56, 95% CI: 1.20 – 2.04; P = 0.001), patients requiring mechanical ventilation (RR: 1.32, 95% CI: 1.04 – 1.66; P = 0.02) were significantly higher when compared to the control group without AF. Acute myocardial infarction (RR: 1.54, 95% CI: 1.31 – 1.81; P = 0.00001), the risk for acute kidney injury (RR: 1.31, 95% CI: 1.11 – 1.55; P = 0.002) and patients requiring renal replacement therapy (RR: 1.83, 95% CI: 1.60 – 2.09; P = 0.00001) were also significantly higher in patients with NOAF.
Conclusions
Critically ill COVID-19 patients with NOAF admitted to the ICU were at significantly higher risks of developing complications and death compared to similar patients without AF.
Keywords: New-onset atrial fibrillation, Intensive care unit, COVID-19 infection, Mortality, Myocardial infarction, Pulmonary embolism, Mechanical ventilation, Acute kidney injury, Renal replacement therapy
Introduction
COVID-19 infection, caused by the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-Cov-2), first emerged in China in December 2019 and was declared a pandemic by March 2020 [1]. Since then, there have been over 106 million confirmed cases and 2.3 million deaths globally as of February 2021 [2]. This pandemic has resulted in massive economic losses all around the world [3]. Even though COVID-19 infection mainly affects the lungs causing pneumonia [4], resulting in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) requiring admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) [5], it was observed that cardiovascular manifestation and exacerbation of cardiovascular diseases could be a complication of COVID-19 infection [6]. Cardiac arrhythmias including New Onset Atrial Fibrillation (NOAF), have been observed in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infections [7].
In this analysis, we aimed to systematically compare the complications associated with NOAF in critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU).
Methods
Search databases
MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane database, http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov, Google Scholar and Mendeley were searched for relevant publications based on COVID-19 patients with NOAF admitted to the ICU.
Reference lists of selective publications were also searched for relevant studies.
Search strategies
The following searched terms were used:
COVID-19 infection and intensive care unit;
COVID-19 infection and atrial fibrillation;
COVID-19 infection and atrial fibrillation and intensive care unit;
COVID-19 infection and critical care unit and atrial fibrillation;
COVID-19 infection and new-onset atrial fibrillation;
COVID-19 infection and new-onset atrial fibrillation and intensive care unit.
Abbreviations such as AF, NOAF, and ICU were also used during this search process.
Inclusion and exclusion criteria
The inclusion criteria were:
Studies including randomized trials or observational studies comparing the clinical outcomes in critically ill COVID-19 patients with NOAF admitted in the ICU;
Studies mentioned in part (a) reporting clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients with NOAF versus non-NOAF (control group);
Studies that included dichotomous data;
Studies that were published in English.
The exclusion criteria included:
Studies that did not involve patients who were admitted to the ICU;
Studies that were literature reviews, brief reviews, narrative reviews, meta-analyses and systematic reviews;
Repetitive studies.
Data extraction and quality assessment
The authors independently extracted data from the original studies. Extracted data were carefully cross-checked by the authors, and any disagreement that followed was resolved by consensus.
The following data were extracted:
Authors names;
Year of publication;
Number of COVID-19 participants with and without NOAF respectively;
Methodological features of the studies;
General features including the type of study;
Baseline features of the participants;
The complications which were reported in each original study;
The number of events associated with each complication subgroup in both the experimental and the control groups.
Quality assessment was carried out with reference to the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) [8]. A grade ranging from A to C was given, denoting low, moderate, and high risk of bias.
Outcomes reported
The endpoints of this analysis included:
In-hospital mortality;
ICU mortality;
Patients requiring mechanical ventilation;
Acute myocardial infarction;
Acute kidney injury;
Renal replacement therapy;
Pulmonary embolism.
The outcomes which were reported in the original studies have been listed in Table 1.
Table 1.
Outcomes reported
| Studies | Outcomes reported |
|---|---|
| Ergün 2021 [9] | Length of ICU stay, length of hospital stay, ICU mortality, Hospital mortality, vasopressor requirement, secondary bacterial infection, acute kidney injury, renal replacement therapy, acute myocardial infarction, cardiac injury, acute pulmonary embolism, CPR, ventilator acquired pneumonia |
| Kanthasamy 2021 [10] | Acute kidney injury, renal replacement therapy, venous thromboembolism, arterial embolism, length of ICU stay, In-hospital mortality |
| Kensara 2023 [11] | 30-day mortality, in-hospital mortality, Mechanical ventilation duration, ICU length of stay, Hospital length of stay, acute kidney injury, mechanical ventilation |
| Randy 2021 [12] | Mechanical ventilation, death, length of hospital stay |
| Rosenblatt 2022 [13] | Mortality, ICU death, non-ICU death, major adverse cardiac events, length of hospitalization, mechanical ventilation, myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest, stroke, deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism, renal replacement therapy |
| Zakynthinos 2022 [14] | Mortality |
Abbreviations: ICU Intensive care unit, CPR Cardiopulmonary resuscitation
Statistical analysis
This is a meta-analysis and the RevMan software version 5.4 was used to carry out this analysis. Heterogeneity [15] was assessed by the Q statistic test as well as the I2 statistic test. A subgroup analysis with a P value greater than 0.05 was considered statistically insignificant whereas a subgroup analysis with a P value less or equal to 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
For the I2 statistic test, an I2 value less than 50% denoted low heterogeneity, whereby a fixed effect statistical model was used during analysis, whereas an I2 value above 50% denoted higher heterogeneity and required the use of a random effect statistical model.
Risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to represent the data following analysis.
In addition, sensitivity analysis was also carried out to ensure that the final results were not influenced by any particular study. Also, publication bias was assessed by visually observing the funnel plot retrieved through the RevMan software.
Ethical approval
For this meta-analysis, ethical approval was not applicable. Data were extracted from previously published original studies. Therefore, the authors were not involved in any experiment carried out on animals or humans.
Results
Search outcomes
The Preferred Reporting Items in Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guideline was followed [16]. Our search resulted in a total number of 268 publications. Following a careful assessment of the titles and abstracts, an initial phase of elimination was carried out, and publications that were irrelevant to this analysis were directly eliminated. Seventy-eight (78) full-text articles were assessed for eligibility.
After carefully assessing the full-text articles, further eliminations were carried out based on the following reasons:
Literature reviews, brief reviews, narrative reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses (14);
A control group was not present (6);
Dichotomous data was absent (2);
Complications were not reported (6);
Repetitive studies (44).
Finally, only 6 studies were selected for this analysis. The flow diagram for the study selection has been demonstrated in Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.
Flow diagram representing the selection of studies for this analysis
General features of the studies
A total number of 9213 participants with COVID-19 were included in this analysis, whereby 1184 participants were patients with NOAF admitted to the ICU, whereas 8029 participants were COVID-19 patients without NOAF, as shown in Table 2. The participants’ enrollment period varied from year 2020 to 2021.
Table 2.
General features of the studies
| Studies | Type of study | Number of COVID-19 participants with NOAF in ICU (n) | Number of COVID-19 participants without NOAF in ICU (n) | Participants’ enrollment period | Bias risk score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ergün 2021 [9] | Retrospective study | 37 | 211 | 2020 – 2021 | B |
| Kanthasamy 2021 [10] | Retrospective study | 16 | 93 | 2020 | B |
| Kensara 2023 [11] | Multi-center cohort study | 100 | 300 | 2020 – 2021 | B |
| Randy 2021 [12] | Multi-center study | 34 | 111 | 2020 | B |
| Rosenblatt 2022 [13] | Observational study | 978 | 7254 | 2020 – 2021 | B |
| Zakynthinos 2022 [14] | Prospective study | 19 | 60 | 2020—2021 | B |
| Total no of patients (n) | 1184 | 8029 |
Abbreviations: NOAF New-onset atrial fibrillation, ICU Intensive care unit
Baseline features
The baseline features of the participants have been listed in Table 3. The mean age of the participants varied from 58.0 to 79.0 years with a male predominance ranging from 48.0% to 85.0%. Participants with co-morbidities, including hypertension (52.6% to 83.8%), diabetes mellitus (34.7% to 65.0%), and congestive heart failure (2.00% to 33.0%) were also listed in Table 3.
Table 3.
Baseline features of the participants
| Studies | Age (years) | Males (%) | HBP (%) | DM (%) | CHF (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NOAF/CL | NOAF/CL | NOAF/CL | NOAF/CL | NOAF/CL | |
| Ergün 2021 [9] | 79.0/70.0 | 78.4/69.7 | 83.8/68.2 | 37.8/36.5 | 24.3/14.2 |
| Kanthasamy 2021 [10] | 65.0/58.0 | 69.0/85.0 | 75.0/53.0 | 63.0/39.0 | 33.0/2.00 |
| Kensara 2023 [11] | 73.0/72.0 | 57.0/56.3 | 74.0/65.0 | 63.0/65.0 | 8.00/9.30 |
| Randy 2021 [12] | 76.0/63.0 | 57.9/57.9 | 71.2/71.2 | 37.4/37.4 | - |
| Rosenblatt 2022 [13] | 73.0/61.0 | 60.3/48.0 | 72.5/56.8 | 38.2/34.7 | 17.4/8.50 |
| Zakynthinos 2022 [14] | 69.7/68.2 | 74.0/76.0 | 52.6/76.6 | - | - |
Abbreviations: NOAF New-onset atrial fibrillation, CL Control group, HBP High blood pressure, DM Diabetes mellitus, CHF Congestive heart failure
The main results of this analysis
Results of this current analysis showed that in critically ill COVID-19 patients with NOAF admitted to the ICU, the risks of ICU mortality (RR: 1.39, 95% CI: 1.07 – 1.80; P = 0.01), in-hospital mortality (RR: 1.56, 95% CI: 1.20 – 2.04; P = 0.001), patients requiring mechanical ventilation (RR: 1.32, 95% CI: 1.04 – 1.66; P = 0.02) were significantly higher when compared to the control group without AF as shown in Fig. 2. Acute myocardial infarction (RR: 1.54, 95% CI: 1.31 – 1.81; P = 0.00001), the risk for acute kidney injury (RR: 1.31, 95% CI: 1.11 – 1.55; P = 0.002) and patients requiring renal replacement therapy (RR: 1.83, 95% CI: 1.60 – 2.09; P = 0.00001) were also significantly higher in patients with NOAF compared to the control group as shown in Fig. 3. However, the risk of pulmonary embolism (RR: 1.35, 95% CI: 0.77 – 2.37; P = 0.29) was not significant (Fig. 2).
Fig. 2.
Comparing the complications observed in critically ill COVID-19 patients with versus without new-onset atrial fibrillation admitted to the intensive care unit (A)
Fig. 3.
Comparing the complications observed in critically ill COVID-19 patients with versus without new-onset atrial fibrillation admitted to the intensive care unit (B)
The main results of this analysis have been tabulated (Table 4).
Table 4.
Results of this analysis
| Outcomes | RR with 95% CI | P value | I2 value (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| In hospital mortality | 1.56 [1.20 – 2.04] | 0.001 | 77 |
| ICU mortality | 1.39 [1.07 – 1.80] | 0.01 | 76 |
| Patients on mechanical ventilation | 1.32 [1.04 – 1.66] | 0.02 | 90 |
| Acute kidney injury | 1.31 [1.11 – 1.55] | 0.002 | 44 |
| Renal replacement therapy | 1.83 [1.60 – 2.09] | 0.00001 | 0 |
| Acute myocardial infarction | 1.54 [1.31 – 1.81] | 0.00001 | 35 |
| Pulmonary embolism | 1.35 [0.77 – 2.37] | 0.29 | 59 |
Abbreviations: RR Risk ratios, CI Confidence intervals, ICU Intensive care unit
Consistent results were obtained throughout during sensitivity analysis. Publication bias was visually assessed through the funnel plot. This visual assessment of the funnel plot showed low to moderate evidence of publication bias across the studies that were included during this meta-analysis. The funnel plot is illustrated in Fig. 4.
Fig. 4.
Funnel plot representing publication bias
Discussion
This current analysis showed that complications, including mortality, acute myocardial infarction, patients requiring mechanical ventilation, acute kidney injury, and patients requiring renal replacement therapy, were significantly higher in COVID-19 patients with NOAF admitted to the ICU.
Several potential reasons have been given for this significantly higher risk of complications in COVID-19 patients with NOAF. A probable mechanism that could contribute to the development of AF in such critical patients could be myocardial damage which might have resulted from viral-induced cardiac injury, giving rise to peri-myocarditis, hypoxemia and acid–base disturbances. The common use of adrenergic drugs in such critical patients could also lead to higher risk of complications [17].
Another causative factor could be secondary bacterial infections which could result in the development of NOAF in such COVID-19 patients. In a study published in the Journal of Infective Public Health [14] based on secondary bacterial infections as a leading factor triggering NOAF in intubated ICU COVID-19 ARDS patients, 24% of the participants were present with NOAF, among which, 89.5% suffered a septic secondary infection showing secondary infection to be a major contributor for the occurrence of NOAF in such COVID-19 patients.
AF was more likely to occur in patients with several co-morbidities including diabetes mellitus, heart failure, coronary artery disease, valvular heart diseases, chronic kidney disease, stroke and obese patients [18]. In addition, NOAF was considered as an independent prognostic indicator for mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients [19]. Furthermore, a low prevalence of AF was observed in clinically stable COVID-19 patients implying higher risk of NOAF in patients with severe COVID-19 infections [20].
A systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to show the prevalence and impact of AF in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 [21]. The analysis which included a total number of 187,716 COVID-19 patients showed that AF was found in at least 8% of the patients and those COVID-19 patients with AF were older, were more hypertensive and were in a more critical state. It was also stated that AF was associated with an increased risk of mortality in patients with COVID-19 infections. The occurrence of NOAF further contributed to co-morbidities and complications [17].
Similar to our analysis, a study demonstrated atrial arrhythmia-related outcomes in critically ill COVID-19 patients [22]. The study included 200 participants with COVID-19 infections. The authors concluded that atrial tachyarrhythmia was associated with an increased risk of mortality especially in those patients on mechanical ventilation. The authors also stated that if this matter is further explored, it would be beneficial in treating similar patients with COVID-19 infection.
A systematic review showed the risk factors for NOAF in patients admitted to the ICU [23]. The authors suggested age, male gender, pre-existing cardiovascular disease, acute kidney injuries, and acute respiratory failure contribute to the manifestation of NOAF in COVID-19 patients in the ICU.
Finally, in a multi-centre historical cohort study in the Netherlands including patients from 8 hospitals with 3064 hospitalized COVID-19 patients [24], it was shown that NOAF was associated with a higher incidence of mortality and other complications with lesser chance that the patients would be discharged home. This pattern was more prevalent in participants with NOAF compared to those who had AF prior to COVID-19 and the authors concluded that NOAF could be considered a marker for more severe disease. Similarly, a single-center retrospective cohort study including a total number of 492 participants showed NOAF to be considered a risk factor for worse outcomes in ICU patients admitted with severe COVID-19 infections [25].
Limitations
This study also has limitations. Data were extracted mostly from observational studies and the total number of participants was limited in comparison to other meta-analysis. Even though with such heterogeneous groups, we have been able to reach robust results. Also, several other complications were reported in the original studies but we could not include them in this current analysis since these complications were not reported in several of the studies. In addition, the other co-morbidities were ignored when carrying out this analysis. Furthermore, the COVID-19 treatment modalities and protocols varied in different countries and different hospitals. Therefore, this could also have an impact on the final outcomes.
Conclusions
Critically ill COVID-19 patients with NOAF admitted to the ICU were at significantly higher risks of developing complications and death compared to similar patients without AF.
Acknowledgements
Not applicable.
Abbreviations
- AF
Atrial fibrillation
- NOAF
New-onset atrial fibrillation
- ICU
Intensive care unit
- PE
Pulmonary embolism
- AMI
Acute myocardial infarction
- AKI
Acute kidney injury
Authors’ contributions
The authors Tao Zhang, Ping Gui and Bo Wang were responsible for the conception and design of the study, acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation of data, drafting the initial manuscript and revising it critically for important intellectual content. The final draft was written by the authors Tao Zhang and Ping Gui. All the authors gave their approval to the final manuscript as it has been written.
Authors’ information
Tao Zhang and Ping Gui are the first co-authors of this paper.
Funding
No external source of funding or sponsorship was received for this study.
Availability of data and materials
Data which have been used in this study can freely be accessed and are included in the original published articles. References of the original papers involving the data source which have been used in this paper have been listed in the main text of this current manuscript. All data are publicly available in electronic databases.
Declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Ethical approval and consent to participate were not applicable to this systematic review and meta-analysis.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Footnotes
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Tao Zhang and Ping Gui contributed equally to this work and they are the first co-authors.
References
- 1.Lai C-C, Shih T-P, Ko W-C, Tang H-J, Hsueh P-R. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19): The epidemic and the challenges. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2020;55(3):105924. 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2020.105924 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.World Health Organization. WHO coronavirus disease (COVID-19) dashboard. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2021. https://covid19.who.int/?gclid=Cj0KCQjwz4z3BRCgARIsAES_OVezBT1BH_I8YhZousdOX0PeMERwgm-YmKNco1F1bpTPcArm6HIgwM0aAigBEALw_wcB. Accessed 9 Feb 2021. [Google Scholar]
- 3.Meo SA, Alhowikan AM, Al-Khlaiwi T, Meo IM, Halepoto DM, Iqbal M, Usmani AM, Hajjar W, Ahmed N. Novel coronavirus 2019-nCoV: prevalence, biological and clinical characteristics comparison with SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2020;24(4):2012–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Pradhan M, Shah K, Alexander A, et al. COVID-19: clinical presentation and detection methods. J Immunoassay Immunochem. 2022;43(1):1951291. 10.1080/15321819.2021.1951291 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Ağababaoğlu İ, İnci K. Management of COVID-19 in the Intensive Care Unit. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2021;1353:81–9. 10.1007/978-3-030-85113-2_5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Ruzzenenti G, Maloberti A, Giani V, et al. Covid and Cardiovascular Diseases: Direct and Indirect Damages and Future Perspective. High Blood Press Cardiovasc Prev. 2021;28(5):439–45. 10.1007/s40292-021-00464-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Talaei F, Banga A, Pursell A, et al. New-onset atrial fibrillation among COVID-19 patients: A narrative review. World J Crit Care Med. 2023;12(5):236–47. 10.5492/wjccm.v12.i5.236 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Stang A. Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol. 2010;25(9):603–5. 10.1007/s10654-010-9491-z [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Ergün B, Ergan B, Sözmen MK, et al. New-onset atrial fibrillation in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). J Arrhythm. 2021;37(5):1196–204. 10.1002/joa3.12619 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Kanthasamy V, Schilling RJ. Incidence and Prognostic Impact of New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in Patients with Severe Covid-19: A Retrospective Cohort Study. J Atr Fibrillation. 2021;14(2):20200457. 10.4022/jafib.20200457 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Kensara R, Aljuhani O, Korayem GB, et al. Incidence and Clinical Outcomes of New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in Critically lll Patients with COVID-19: A Multicenter Cohort Study - New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation and COVID-19. Clin Appl Thromb Hemost. 2023;29:10760296231156178. 10.1177/10760296231156178 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Ip RJ, Ali A, Baloch ZQ, et al. Atrial Fibrillation as a Predictor of Mortality in High Risk COVID-19 Patients: A Multicentre Study of 171 Patients. Heart Lung Circ. 2021;30(8):1151–6. 10.1016/j.hlc.2021.02.010 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Rosenblatt AG, Ayers CR, Rao A, et al. New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19: Results From the American Heart Association COVID-19 Cardiovascular Registry. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2022;15(5):e010666. 10.1161/CIRCEP.121.010666 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Zakynthinos GE, Tsolaki V, Karavidas N, et al. Secondary bacterial infections are a leading factor triggering New Onset Atrial Fibrillation in intubated ICU Covid-19 ARDS patients. J Infect Public Health. 2022;15(7):766–72. 10.1016/j.jiph.2022.06.006 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Langan D. Assessing Heterogeneity in Random-Effects Meta-analysis. Methods Mol Biol. 2022;2345:67–89. 10.1007/978-1-0716-1566-9_4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71. 10.1136/bmj.n71 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Zakynthinos GE, Tsolaki V, Oikonomou E, Vavouranakis M, Siasos G, Zakynthinos E. New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in the Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients Hospitalized in the Intensive Care Unit. J Clin Med. 2023;12(22):6989. 10.3390/jcm12226989 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Zoni-Berisso M, Lercari F, Carazza T, Domenicucci S. Epidemiology of atrial fibrillation: European perspective. Clin Epidemiol. 2014;16(6):213–20. 10.2147/CLEP.S47385 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Aydemir S, Aksakal E, Aydınyılmaz F, et al. Does new onset and pre-existing atrial fibrillation predict mortality in COVID-19 patients? Egypt Heart J. 2022;74(1):53. 10.1186/s43044-022-00291-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Sala S, Peretto G, De Luca G, et al. Low prevalence of arrhythmias in clinically stable COVID-19 patients. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2020;43(8):891–3. 10.1111/pace.13987 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Romiti GF, Corica B, Lip GY, Proietti M. Prevalence and Impact of Atrial Fibrillation in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Clin Med. 2021;10(11):2490. 10.3390/jcm10112490 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Colon CM, Barrios JG, Chiles JW, et al. Atrial arrhythmia related outcomes in critically ill COVID-19 patients. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2021;44(5):814–23. 10.1111/pace.14221 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Bedford JP, Harford M, Petrinic T, Young JD, Watkinson PJ. Risk factors for new-onset atrial fibrillation on the general adult ICU: A systematic review. J Crit Care. 2019;53:169–75. 10.1016/j.jcrc.2019.06.015 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Spruit JR, Jansen RW, de Groot JR. Does atrial fibrillation affect prognosis in hospitalised COVID-19 patients? A multicentre historical cohort study in the Netherlands. BMJ Open. 2023;13(12):e071137. 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-071137 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Abdulrahman A, Hussain T, Nawaz S, AlShaikh S, Almadani A, Bardooli F. Is Atrial Fibrillation a Risk Factor for Worse Outcomes in Severe COVID-19 Patients: A Single Center Retrospective Cohort. J Saudi Heart Assoc. 2021;33(2):160–8. 10.37616/2212-5043.1255 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
Data which have been used in this study can freely be accessed and are included in the original published articles. References of the original papers involving the data source which have been used in this paper have been listed in the main text of this current manuscript. All data are publicly available in electronic databases.