The Potential Role of Screening for Atrial Fibrillation

EP: 1.Clinical Presentation of Arrhythmias

EP: 2.Long-Term Consequences of Arrhythmias

EP: 3.Common Comorbidities and Underdiagnosis Associated With Atrial Fibrillation

EP: 4.Unmet Needs in the Management of Atrial Fibrillation

EP: 5.Optimizing the Management of Atrial Fibrillation Through Team-Based Care

EP: 6.Best Practices for Diagnosing Arrhythmia

EP: 7.Prescribed Ambulatory Cardiac Rhythm Monitors

EP: 8.Electronic Health Records and Consumer Wearables

EP: 9.Remote Patient Monitoring and Artificial Intelligence

Now Viewing

EP: 10.The Potential Role of Screening for Atrial Fibrillation

The discussion centers on the challenges and opportunities in screening for subclinical or asymptomatic atrial fibrillation (AFib). Traditional opportunistic screening, like pulse checks during routine exams, contrasts with mass population screening, which remains controversial due to insufficient evidence supporting broad implementation. Unlike established cancer screenings, AFib screening currently lacks conclusive data showing improved outcomes when detecting subclinical episodes in the general population. Current guidelines reflect this caution, recommending targeted rather than universal screening.

Personalizing AFib screening is essential, focusing on high-risk subpopulations identified through data analytics and large databases. Patients with elevated stroke risk scores (eg, CHA2DS2-VASc) and other risk factors could benefit most from screening and early intervention. Rather than broad approaches, efforts should prioritize identifying these subsets to optimize resource use and clinical benefit. Parallel to screening is the proactive prevention of AFib development by addressing major cardiometabolic risk factors—such as hypertension, obesity, and diabetes—through existing treatments that improve cardiovascular health and reduce AFib incidence.

Screening considerations also include cost-effectiveness, availability of effective treatments like anticoagulation, and evolving device technologies. Wearables and continuous monitoring offer promising, more affordable options than traditional methods but need more evidence about their impact on clinical outcomes. The complexity of AFib, with possible subtypes and varying burden, further complicates screening and treatment decisions. Experts emphasize that while blanket population screening isn’t yet justified, targeted approaches based on patient risk profiles and data-driven insights hold promise. Ultimately, integrating personalized screening with robust prevention strategies and leveraging big data can guide future AFib care and improve patient outcomes.