Recipient organisationNIHR Sheffield Biomedical Research Centre
NIHR supportRecorded as supported by this research centre
PeriodFeb 2025 — Jan 2027
In plain English
AI plain-English summary
Doctors cannot tell whether chest pain in patients with atrial fibrillation comes from a chaotic heartbeat or from narrowed arteries, so they often perform invasive stenting that may be unnecessary. About 10% of older patients have atrial fibrillation, and many also have coronary artery disease, but the two conditions produce overlapping symptoms. This study follows patients who arrive at hospital with a mild heart attack and atrial fibrillation. After stabilising their heart rhythm with medication, researchers take angiograms to measure blood flow through the coronary arteries. If symptoms resolve, no further intervention occurs. If chest pain or breathlessness persists, patients return for angioplasty and stenting, and blood flow is measured again afterward. The goal is to gather data for a larger trial that will determine whether treating atrial fibrillation and its underlying causes is more important than stenting narrowed arteries using conventional flow measurements. If this research succeeds, it could spare thousands of elderly patients from unnecessary invasive procedures and their associated risks, while clarifying which patients genuinely benefit from coronary intervention. The primary endpoint is symptom burden six months after first presentation.
View original technical description
Normally the heart beats regularly, but as you get older it can become irregular. This is called atrial fibrillation (AF). It can commonly cause palpitations, breathlessness, chest pain and blood clots. It is a frequent cause of admission to hospital. About 10% of patients have it, and it is more common in the elderly. These patients often also have furred up blood vessels in the heart (coronary artery disease). It is difficult to work out if their symptoms are due to the irregular heartbeat or the furred-up arteries. We can treat both conditions, but opening up the arteries is invasive and can expose these patients to risk. It would be useful to work out who to treat. So we will study patients who come into hospital with a mild heart attack and AF. We will settle them down with tablets for their AF and (as long as it is not critical) their coronary artery disease. We will take pictures of their arteries (a coronary angiogram) to see how bad the ‘furring-up’ is and measure the blood flow through the arteries. Then, if the patients are better, we will stop and allow them home. If the patients are better, we will do no more. If they still have chest pain or breathlessness, we will bring them back to hospital and open up any narrowed arteries using balloons and stents (‘coronary angioplasty’; ‘percutaneous coronary intervention’ [PCI]). We will measure the blood flow after stenting, to investigate the degree of improvement in flow. This study will give us the information needed to design a large clinical trial to see whether treating the AF and associated conditions is more important than stenting the narrowed arteries using conventional measurements of blood flow. The primary endpoint will be the symptom burden six months after first presentation.
Plain English summaries and category classifications on this site are generated by AI and may not perfectly reflect the original research.
Is something wrong? Let us know