This Week in Cardiology Mar 06 2026 This Week in Cardiology
Mar 6, 2026
Listener feedback and clinician influence on patient choices kick off the conversation. The risks and timing of urgent versus elective AF ablation are debated. The value of AF ablation for stroke prevention is examined alongside trial limitations. Implantable loop recorder accuracy and strategies to reduce false alerts are reviewed. Heart failure therapy decisions in patients with serious cancer are discussed.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Patient Preferences Change With Trusted Clinicians
- John Mandrola describes a JAMA Internal Medicine survey where nearly one in four people would refuse statins even with large benefit.
- He shares Dr. Kuma Fomsby’s point that survey respondents never exposed to statins may answer differently than patients in a trusted doctor–patient relationship.
Use Continuity To Influence Preventive Choices
- When counseling screening or prevention, use continuity and personalized discussion because trusted clinicians can shift patient decisions.
- Mandrola illustrates this with his own experience relenting to PSA testing after trusting his urologist’s argument.
Urgent AF Ablation Carries Higher Inpatient Risk
- Registry data show urgent AF ablations done during unrelated hospitalizations rose to ~2% and occur in sicker patients with more comorbidities.
- Adjusted inpatient complication rate was nearly double for urgent versus elective ablation (4.9% vs 2.4%).