Table 2

Results from Cox proportional hazard models for individuals with LAF in the Swedish population (1987–2009): parent-offspring analysis (n=16,160)
Variable Model 1.A Model 1.B Model 1.C Model 1.D
HR (95% CI) HR (95% CI) HR (95% CI) HR (95% CI)
AF in parent(s) (yes/no) 1.23 (1.17-1.30) 1.22 (1.15-1.28)
AF in 1 parent 1.16 (1.10-1.23)
AF in 2 parents 1.65 (1.44-1.90)
LAF in parent(s) (yes/no) 1.42 (1.23-1.63)
Sex (Reference: females) 1.20 (1.13-1.27) 1.20 (1.13-1.27) 1.20 (1.13-1.27)
Age at diagnosis of LAF (yearly increase) 1.02 (1.02-1.02) 1.02 (1.02-1.02) 1.02 (1.02-1.02)
Age at diagnosis of AF in parent(s) 0.99 (0.99-0.99)
Model 1.E Model 1.F Model 1.G
HR (95% CI) HR (95% CI) HR (95% CI)
AF in parent(s) 1.07 (1.00-1.14) 1.22 (1.15-1.31) 1.23 (1.15-1.31)
Sex (Reference: females) 1.05 (0.97-1.13) 1.22 (1.14-1.31) 1.22 (1.14-1.31)
Age at diagnosis of LAF (yearly increase) 1.00 (1.00-1.01) 1.02 (1.02-1.02) 1.02 (1.02-1.02)

Model 1.A: HR of parental history of AF. Model 1B: also included sex, age at diagnosis of LAF (centered at the mean value), and terms for the interaction between parental history of AF and age/sex. The interaction terms were only included in the model if the p-values were <0.05. Model 1C: the variable parental history was categorized as no parental history of AF, one parent with AF and two parents with AF. Model 1D: the association of parental history of LAF with time to first recurrence of AF in proband cases in proband cases was determined. Model 1E: time from first until second recurrence of AF was used to calculate the familial HR. Model 1F: time from diagnosis of LAF until second recurrence of AF was used. Model 1G: time to first recurrence of AF in individuals who did not experience any other CVD outcome during the 10-year follow-up period was used to calculate HR.

Zöller et al.

Zöller et al. BMC Cardiovascular Disorders 2012 12:121   doi:10.1186/1471-2261-12-121

Open Data