AI-enabled Left Atrial Volumetry in Cardiac CT Scans Improves CHARGE-AF and Outperforms NT-ProBNP for Prediction of Atrial Fibrillation in Asymptomatic Individuals: Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis ========================================================================================================================================================================================================== * Morteza Naghavi * David Yankelevitz * Anthony P. Reeves * Matthew J. Budoff * Dong Li * Kyle C. Atlas * Chenyu Zhang * Thomas L. Atlas * Seth Lirette * Jakob Wasserthal * Claudia Henschke * Christopher Defilippi * Susan R. Heckbert * Philip Greenland ## Abstract **Background** Coronary artery calcium (CAC) scans contain actionable information beyond CAC scores that is not currently reported. **Methods** We have applied artificial intelligence-enabled automated cardiac chambers volumetry to CAC scans (AI-CAC), taking on average 21 seconds per CAC scan, to 5535 asymptomatic individuals (52.2% women, ages 45-84) that were previously obtained for CAC scoring in the baseline examination (2000-2002) of the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). We used the 5-year outcomes data for incident atrial fibrillation (AF) and compared the time-dependent AUC of AI-CAC LA volume with known predictors of AF, the CHARGE-AF Risk Score and NT-proBNP (BNP). The mean follow-up time to an AF event was 2.9±1.4 years. **Results** At 1,2,3,4, and 5 years follow-up 36, 77, 123, 182, and 236 cases of AF were identified, respectively. The AUC for AI-CAC LA volume was significantly higher than CHARGE-AF or BNP at year 1 (0.836, 0.742, 0.742), year 2 (0.842, 0.807,0.772), and year 3 (0.811, 0.785, 0.745) (p<0.02), but similar for year 4 (0.785, 0.769, 0.725) and year 5 (0.781, 0.767, 0.734) respectively (p>0.05). AI-CAC LA volume significantly improved the continuous Net Reclassification Index for prediction of AF over years 1-5 when added to CAC score (0.74, 0.49, 0.53, 0.39, 0.44), CHARGE-AF Risk Score (0.60, 0.28, 0.32, 0.19, 0.24), and BNP (0.68, 0.44, 0.42, 0.30, 0.37) respectively (p<0.01). **Conclusion** AI-CAC LA volume enabled prediction of AF as early as one year and significantly improved on risk classification of CHARGE-AF Risk Score and BNP. Key words * Coronary artery calcium * atrial fibrillation * left atrial volume * artificial intelligence * CHARGE-AF ## Introduction Coronary artery calcium (CAC) scoring is the strongest predictor of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in asymptomatic individuals available today1. However, it is a weak predictor of atrial fibrillation (AF), the most common sustained arrhythmia that significantly increases the risk of stroke and cardiovascular mortality2. Incident AF is on the rise leading to morbidity and mortality worldwide, both in the elderly and among younger adults2,3,4,5,6,7. Currently for prediction of AF in asymptomatic population we are limited to the CHARGE-AF Risk Score which is an epidemiological risk calculator created based on both asymptomatic people and patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD). Amino terminal Pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) is a blood protein that is associated with enlarged cardiac chambers and correlates with left atrial (LA) volume. Recent studies have linked NT-proBNP to the incidence of AF and reported incremental predictive value when BNP is added to the CHARGE-AF Risk Score8,9. Since left atrial diameter and strain are known to be associated with risk for developing atrial fibrillation10,11, and pioneering efforts from Heinz Nixdorf Recall Study showed the potential value of non-coronary findings in CAC scans12,13,14,15,16, we hypothesized that AI-powered cardiac chambers volumetry in CAC scans (AI-CAC) could enable AF prediction in asymptomatic individuals. In this study, we present AI-CAC data obtained from existing CAC scans in a large prospective study and compare the predictive value of AI-CAC estimated LA volume versus the CHARGE-AF Score and BNP for predicting AF. ## Methods ### Study population The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) is a prospective, population-based, observational cohort study of 6,814 men and women without clinical cardiovascular disease (CVD) at the time of recruitment from six field centers in the United States. As part of the initial evaluation (2000-2002), participants received a comprehensive medical history, clinic examination, and laboratory tests. Demographic information, medical history, and medication use at baseline were obtained by self-report. An ECG-gated non-contrast CT was performed at the baseline examination to measure CAC. Non-CT scan covariates included BNP and variables used in calculating the CHARGE-AF Risk Score. Details on BNP assays measurements are described below under BNP Measurement. Covariates used in CHARGE-AF Score for our analyses are age, gender, ethnicity, height, weight, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, current smoking, hypertension medication, diabetes, which were obtained as a part of MESA baseline exam 1 previously described18. Additionally, CHARGE-AF Risk Score includes myocardial infarction and heart failure which were by default absent in the asymptomatic MESA population at baseline exam 1. For our study, we removed 771 MESA participants who did not consent for commercial use of data, leaving 6043 participants for our analysis. After removing 125 cases with missing slices in CAC scans, 4 cases with missing data for CHARGE-AF Risk Score, and 168 cases with missing BNP values we have 5746 remaining participants. Subsequently, we have removed 70 cases with pre-baseline AF, 9 cases with surgical AF, and 132 non-AF deaths resulting in the total number of 5535 cases available for analysis. ### Outcomes Participants were contacted by telephone every 9-12 months during follow-up and asked to report all new cardiovascular diagnoses. International Classification of Disease (ICD) codes were obtained. Incident AF was identified by ICD codes 427.3x (version 9) or I48.x (version 10) from inpatient stays and, for participants enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare, from Medicare claims for outpatient and provider services. For participant reports of heart failure, coronary heart disease, stroke, and CVD mortality, detailed medical records were obtained, and diagnoses were adjudicated by the MESA Morbidity and Mortality Committee. Additionally, BNP data was obtained from MESA core laboratory for MESA exam 1 participants. A detailed study design for MESA has been published elsewhere18. MESA participants have been followed since the year 2000. Incident AF has been identified through December 2018. 70 cases with previously diagnosed AF prior to MESA enrollment were removed from the analysis. ### The AI tool for Automated Cardiac Chambers Volumetry The automated cardiac chambers volumetry tool referred to in this study is called AutoChamberTM (HeartLung.AI, Houston, TX), a deep learning model that used TotalSegmentator19 as the base input and was further developed to segment not only each of the four cardiac chambers; left atrium (LA), left ventricle (LV), right atrium (RA), and right ventricle (RV) but also ascending aorta, aortic root and valves, pulmonary arteries, and several other components which are not presented here. The AI-CAC LA volumetry is the focus of this manuscript. Figure 1 shows the segmentations of cardiac chambers in color. The base architecture of the TotalSegmentator model was trained on 1139 cases with 447 cases of coronary CT angiography (CCTA) using nnU-Net, a self-configuring method for deep learning-based biomedical image segmentation20. The initial input training data were matched non-contrast and contrast-enhanced ECG-gated cardiac CT scans with 1.5 mm slice thickness. ![Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/01/24/2024.01.22.24301384/F1.medium.gif) [Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/01/24/2024.01.22.24301384/F1) Figure 1. Examples of AI-CAC segmentations in a cardiac CT scan. Because the images were taken from the same patients in the same session, registration was done with good alignment. Following this transfer of segmentations, a nnU-Net deep learning tool was used for training the model. Additionally, iterative training was implemented whereby human supervisors corrected errors made by the model, and the corrected data were used to further train the model, leading to improved accuracy. To standardize the comparison in MESA, cardiac chambers were reported by gender and ethnicity adjusted by body surface area (BSA) using residual adjustment techniques. (BSA: 0.007184 x (height(m)^0.725) x (weight(kg)^0.425)). Additionally, an internal reference was developed based on the field of view size and the posterior height of thoracic vertebral bones. This measure would be used whenever BSA information is unavailable, however it was not an issue in MESA. AutoChamber™ AI was run on 6043 non-contrast CAC scans that consented to commercial data usage out of the 6814 scans available in MESA exam 1. Expert rules built in the AI-model excluded 125 cases due to missing slices in image reconstruction created by some of the electron beam CT scanners used in MESA baseline. These cases were random, and our investigations did not reveal any particular association with dependent or independent variables in our study (see Results). ### CHARGE-AF Risk Score The CHARGE-AF risk score was developed to predict risk of incident AF in three American cohorts, and it was validated in two European cohorts. The linear predictor from the CHARGE-AF Risk Score is calculated as: (age in years/5) * 0.5083+ethnicity (Caucasian/white) * 0.46491 + (height in centimeters/10) * 0.2478 + (weight in kg/15) * 0.1155 + (SBP in mm Hg/20) * 0.1972 – (DBP in mm Hg/10) * 0.1013+current smoking * 0.35931+antihypertensive medication use * 0.34889+DM * 0.2366621. The result is the sum of the product of the regression coefficients and the predictor variables, which represents the change in the hazard ratio for a one-unit change in the corresponding predictor variable. ### BNP Measurement Details on BNP assays used in MESA have been reported17. N-terminal proBNP is more reproducible than BNP at the lower end of the distribution range, and more stable at room temperature. However, both BNP and N-terminal proBNP are clinically available. Intra-assay and inter-assay coefficients of variation at various concentrations of NT-proBNP have been previously reported22,23. The analytical measurement range for NT-proBNP in exam 1 was 4.9– 11699 pg/ml. The lower limits of detection for the NT-proBNP assay is 5 pg/mL, thus cases above 0 and below 4.99 were treated as 4.99 pg/mL. Clinically, values are not reported below 4.99 pg/mL because the analytical accuracy is poor at those low levels (i.e. typically a coefficient of variation of greater than 20% between repeat measures). ### Statistical Analysis We used SAS (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC) and Stata (StatCorp LLC, College Station, TX) software for statistical analyses. All values are reported as means ± SD except for BNP which did not show normal distribution and is presented in median and interquartile range (IQR). All tests of significance were two tailed, and significance was defined at the p<0.05 level. Cumulative incidence was calculated using one minus the Kaplan-Meier survival estimate. Group differences in incidence were determined using the log-rank test. Cox proportional hazards regression was used for survival analysis. The time-dependent ROC (receiver operator curve) AUC (area under the curve) was calculated using the inverse probability of censoring weighting estimator. Hazard ratios over 5 years were calculated per SD. BNP and CAC were natural logarithm-transformed (ln-transformed) to avoid undue influence of large values. AI-CAC LA volume and CHARGE-AF Risk Score showed a normal distribution. Category-free (continuous) net reclassification index (NRI) was calculated using the sum of the differences between the proportions of upward reclassifications and downward reclassifications for AF events and AF non-events, respectively. NRI was developed as a statistical measure to evaluate the improvement in risk prediction models when additional variables are incorporated into a base model24. We have analyzed data for AF prediction at 1 to 5 years follow up. ### Ethical Approval This study has received proper ethical oversight. All subjects gave their informed consent for inclusion before they participated in the study. Subjects who did not consent were removed from the study. ## Results In the cohort, ages ranged from 45-84, 52.2% were women, 39.7% were White, 26.1% Black, 22% Hispanic, and 12.1% Chinese. Table 1 shows the baseline characteristics of MESA participants who were diagnosed with incident AF versus those who were not over the period of 5 years follow up. At 1,2,3,4, and 5 years follow up 36, 77, 123, 182, and 236 cases of AF were identified respectively. In univariate comparisons, incident AF cases were older, more likely male, and more likely White. The incident AF cases had higher cardiac chamber volumes for LA, LV, RA, LV Wall, CHARGE-AF Risk Scores and NT-proBNP levels versus those without incident AF (all comparisons p< 0.001) (Table 1). View this table: [Table 1:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/01/24/2024.01.22.24301384/T1) Table 1: Baseline characteristics of the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) participants including cases with and without Atrial Fibrillation (AF) at 5 years. The cumulative incidence of AF over 5 years for AI-estimated LA volume, CHARGE-AF Risk Score and BNP are shown in Figure 2. The incidence of AF in the 99th percentile of AI-LA volume, CHARGE-AF Risk Score, and BNP were 37.3%, 16.5%, 27.1 respectively (p<0.0001). ![](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/01/24/2024.01.22.24301384/F2/graphic-5.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/01/24/2024.01.22.24301384/F2/graphic-5) ![](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/01/24/2024.01.22.24301384/F2/graphic-6.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/01/24/2024.01.22.24301384/F2/graphic-6) ![](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/01/24/2024.01.22.24301384/F2/graphic-7.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/01/24/2024.01.22.24301384/F2/graphic-7) ![](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/01/24/2024.01.22.24301384/F2/graphic-8.medium.gif) [](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/01/24/2024.01.22.24301384/F2/graphic-8) Figure 2a-d. Cumulative Incidence of Atrial Fibrillation (AF) in the Top Quartile of AI-CAC Left Atrial (LA) Volume, CHARGE-AF Score, NT-proBNP (BNP) and coronary artery calcium (CAC) over 5 years of follow-up. The AUC for AI-estimated LA volume (adjusted by age, gender, BSA) was significantly higher than AUC for CHARGE-AF Risk Score and BNP over 1-5 years (Table 2). When comparing AUC individually between AI-LA volume vs. BNP the differences were statistically significant (p < 0.001) for years 1 to 5. The AUC for AI-LA volume vs. CHARGE AF was statistically significant (p < 0.02) for years 1, 2, 3, but not statistically significant for year 4 (p = 0.11) and year 5 (p=0.08). The difference in AUC for AI-estimated LA volume alone versus CHARGE-AF and BNP combined, despite higher AUC for LA volume in years 1 to 3, was not statistically significant (year 1, 0.836 vs. 0.775, p = 0.07, year 2, 0.842 vs. 0.835, p = 0.66, year 3, 0.811 vs. 0.785, p = 0.99, year 4, 0.785 vs. 0.791, p = 0.50, year 5, 0.781 vs. 0.787, p = 0.41). View this table: [Table 2:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/01/24/2024.01.22.24301384/T2) Table 2: Time-dependent Area Under Curve (AUC) and Net Reclassification Index (NRI) for Atrial Fibrillation (AF) Prediction between AI-CAC Left Atrial (LA) Volume, CHARGE-AF Risk Score, and NT-proBNP (BNP) over 1 to 5 Years in Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) The continuous NRI for prediction of AF when AI-estimated LA volume was added to CAC score as the only predictor in the base model for years 1-5 were highly significant (0.75, 0.51, 0.53, 0.39, and 0.44 respectively p<0.0001). Similarly, the NRI for AI-LA volume over 1-5 years when added to base model with CHARGE-AF Risk Score (0.60, 0.28, 0.33, 0.19, 0.24) and BNP (0.68, 0.44, 0.42, 0.30, 0.37) were significant (respectively, p for all < 0.0001). (Table 2) Univariate and multivariate models assessed 5-year HR increase per SD for each predictor for incident AF (Table 3). All predictors were statistically significant in univariate models, while only AI-CAC LA and BNP were significant in multivariate adjustment models based on age, gender, and BSA. View this table: [Table 3:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/01/24/2024.01.22.24301384/T3) Table 3: Five-Year Atrial Fibrillation Risk Prediction: Hazard Ratios per Standard Deviation (SD) Increase in AI-CAC LA Volume, NT-proBNP (BNP), Agatston CAC Score (CAC), and CHARGE-AF Risk Score. A considerable portion of participants classified as low-risk for incident AF over 5 years by CHARGE-AF score have enlarged LA (Figure 3). ![Figure 3.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/01/24/2024.01.22.24301384/F3.medium.gif) [Figure 3.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/01/24/2024.01.22.24301384/F3) Figure 3. Quartiles of AI-CAC Left Atrial (LA) Volume by predicted 5-year CHARGE-AF Risk The 125 cases with missing slices were 49.8% male and 50.2% females. None of these cases had a diagnosis of AF. These cases were random, and our investigations did not reveal any association with dependent or independent variables in our study. ## Discussion To our knowledge this is the first report of an AI-enabled automated cardiac chambers volumetry in non-contrast CT scans obtained for coronary calcium score in a large multi-ethnic study of asymptomatic individuals. Our study demonstrated that the AI-enabled LA volumetry 1) has enabled prediction of AF in CAC scans, 2) significantly outperformed BNP over 1-5 years, 3) significantly outperformed CHARGE-AF Risk Score over 1-3 years, 4) provided for a sizable net reclassification improvement on top of CHARGE-AF Risk Score and BNP, and 5) showed comparable performance against a combined model of CHARGE-AF and BNP over 1-5 years. CHARGE-AF is an epidemiological risk score for predicting AF based on risk factors at population levels, but it does not lend itself to a useful clinical tool for individualized risk assessment and monitoring of high-risk patients because the large impact of unmodifiable risk factors. For example, if a patient loses 30 lbs. or lowers systolic blood pressure by 20mmHg, the linear predictor from the CHARGE-AF Risk Score only goes down by 0.1. This would be a very minimal change (0.8%) knowing the average CHARGE-AF score in MESA AF cases was 12.8±0.9. Nonetheless, in the absence of an individualized metric with comparable predictive power, it serves as a useful tool for estimating risk and alerting high risk populations to reduce future AF risk21,25. BNP is a serum biomarker of cardiac volume overload particularly and has been studied extensively in various cardiovascular diseases, particularly heart failure26,27,28. Thejus et al have shown values above the 80th percentile (97 pg/ml in women and 60 pg/ml in men) present an odds ratio of 2.65 for the incidence of AF29. Asselberg et al30 found that in the general population, elevated BNP levels at baseline predicted the development of AF when reassessed at 4 years. The baseline median level was 62.2 pg/ml in those who eventually developed AF compared to 35.7 pg/ml in those who did not (p = 0.001). Our study shows that LA volume outperformed BNP in MESA consistently over 5 and improved its predictive value by NRI of 0.69 for year 1 to NRI of 0.38 for year 5. This may be due to the fact that BNP is not specific to LA or RA volume and can be influenced by other factors. Although ECG-based screening for AF is currently a topic of great clinical interest31,32 it would not be a proper comparison for this study because ECG is primarily used for the detection of prevalent AF not for prediction of future AF. However, recent studies suggest that AI-enabled ECG could play a role in predicting future AF33,34,35 .A study by Christopoulos et al that compared the performance of AI-enabled ECG with CHARGE-AF Risk Score, there was no significant difference between the cumulative incidence of AF in the top quartile of the two methods34 whereas in our study the top percentiles of AI-estimated LA volume detected a significantly higher percentage of AF versus CHARGE-AF. Perhaps by directly identifying individuals with a very large LA volume, our approach is inherently more capable of detecting high-risk cases for future AF than other methods including ECG-based predictive AI models36. ### CAC Scans Can Provide More than CAC Scores Our study corroborates findings from the Heinz Nixdorf Recall Study and others, and further brings to light the value of non-coronary findings in coronary calcium scans for a comprehensive CVD risk assessment beyond coronary heart disease12,13,14,15. Although manual and automated LA volumetry in chest CT scans are relatively novel37 ,38, the pathophysiology of enlarged LA and its relationship with AF is well understood39,40. Several echocardiographic studies have shown that increased LA strain is associated with atrial arrhythmia41,42,43,44. Tsang et in 2001 reported that larger LA volume in echocardiographic studies was associated with a higher risk of AF in older patients. The predictive value of LA volume was incremental to that of clinical risk profile and conventional M-mode LA dimension45,46. Kizer et showed that LA size was an independent predictor of CVD events26. Mahabadi et al13 showed in the longitudinal Heinz Nixdorf Recall Study that two-dimensional LA size and epicardial adipose tissue from non-contrast CT were strongly associated with prevalent and incident AF and that LA size diminished the link of epicardial adipose tissue with AF, and was also associated with incident major CV events independent of risk factors and CAC-score14. In a study of 131 cases AutoChamber measurements in non-contrast cardiac CT scans were well correlated with automated cardiac chambers volumetry in contrast-enhanced cardiac CT scans using Philips Brilliance Workspace47. Similarly, AutoChamber measurements in 169 ECG-gated cardiac versus non-gated chest CT scans in the same patients (paired scans done same day) showed strong correlations (R2= 0.85-0.95 for different chambers)48. ### Limitations Our study has some limitations. The MESA Exam 1 baseline CT scans, performed between 2000 and 2002, were predominantly conducted using electron-beam computed tomography (EBCT) scanners. This technology is no longer the commonly used method of CAC scanning. Since our AI training was done completely outside of MESA and used a modern multi-detector (256 slice) scanner, we do not anticipate this to affect the generalizability of our findings. Because MESA used the ICD codes to identify a history of AF at baseline and newly diagnosed AF, and it is known that ICD based diagnosis can be inaccurate (PPV 70–96%, median sensitivity 79%)49 it is likely that MESA missed some cases of AF. ## Conclusion In this study, we presented AI-CAC data obtained from existing CAC scans in a large multi-ethnic prospective study and compared the predictive value of AI-CAC estimated LA volume versus the CHARGE-AF Score and BNP for predicting AF. AI-CAC LA volumetry enabled prediction of AF and improved on the predictive value of CHARGE-AF Risk Score and BNP. ## Clinical Perspectives The potential value of non-coronary findings in coronary calcium scans is significant. The clinical utility of this opportunistic add-on to CAC scans warrants further validation in other longitudinal cohorts. Additionally, the high rate of AF in the 99th percentile of AI-CAC LA volume makes it attractive for selection of participants into AF prevention clinical trials. ## Data Availability All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors. ## Disclosures Several members of the writing group are inventors of the AI tool mentioned in this paper. Dr. Naghavi is the founder of HeartLung.AI. Dr. Reeves, Dr. Atlas, Dr. Yankelevitz, and Dr. Li are advisors to HeartLung.AI and have received advisory compensation. Chenyu Zhang is a research contractor of HeartLung.AI. Kyle Atlas is a graduate research associate of HeartLung.AI. The remaining authors have nothing to disclose. ## Funding and Acknowledgement This research was supported by 2R42AR070713 and R01HL146666 and MESA was supported by contracts 75N92020D00001, HHSN268201500003I, N01-HC-95159, 75N92020D00005, N01-HC-95160, 75N92020D00002, N01-HC-95161, 75N92020D00003, N01-HC-95162, 75N92020D00006, N01-HC-95163, 75N92020D00004, N01-HC-95164, 75N92020D00007, N01-HC-95165, N01-HC-95166, N01-HC-95167, N01-HC-95168 and N01-HC-95169 from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, and by grants UL1-TR-000040, UL1-TR-001079, and UL1-TR-001420 from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS). ## Acknowledgements Special thank you to Philip Greenland and Susan Heckbert for reviewing early versions of the manuscript. This research was supported by 2R42AR070713 and R01HL146666 and MESA was supported by contracts 75N92020D00001, HHSN268201500003I, N01-HC-95159, 75N92020D00005, N01-HC-95160, 75N92020D00002, N01-HC-95161, 75N92020D00003, N01-HC-95162, 75N92020D00006, N01-HC-95163, 75N92020D00004, N01-HC-95164, 75N92020D00007, N01-HC-95165, N01-HC-95166, N01-HC-95167, N01-HC-95168 and N01-HC-95169 from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, and by grants UL1-TR-000040, UL1-TR-001079, and UL1-TR-001420 from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS). The authors thank the other investigators, the staff, and the participants of the MESA study for their valuable contributions. A full list of participating MESA investigators and institutions can be found at [http://www.mesa-nhlbi.org](http://www.mesa-nhlbi.org) * Received January 22, 2024. * Revision received January 22, 2024. * Accepted January 24, 2024. * © 2024, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory This pre-print is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International), CC BY-NC 4.0, as described at [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ## References 1. 1.Greenland P, Lloyd-Jones DM. Role of Coronary Artery Calcium Testing for Risk Assessment in Primary Prevention of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: A Review. JAMA Cardiol. 2022;7(2):219–224. doi:10.1001/jamacardio.2021.3948 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/jamacardio.2021.3948&link_type=DOI) 2. 2.Mou L, Norby FL, Chen LY, et al. Lifetime Risk of Atrial Fibrillation by Race and Socioeconomic Status: ARIC Study (Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities). Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2018;11(7):e006350. doi:10.1161/CIRCEP.118.006350 [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NjoiY2lyY2FlIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjEyOiIxMS83L2UwMDYzNTAiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyNC8wMS8yNC8yMDI0LjAxLjIyLjI0MzAxMzg0LmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 3. 3.Jiang S, Seslar SP, Sloan LA, Hansen RN. Health care resource utilization and costs associated with atrial fibrillation and rural-urban disparities. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2022;28(11):1321–1330. doi:10.18553/jmcp.2022.28.11.1321 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.18553/jmcp.2022.28.11.1321&link_type=DOI) 4. 4.Rozen G, Hosseini SM, Kaadan MI, et al. Emergency Department Visits for Atrial Fibrillation in the United States: Trends in Admission Rates and Economic Burden From 2007 to 2014. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018;7(15):e009024. doi:10.1161/JAHA.118.009024 [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NToiYWhhb2EiO3M6NToicmVzaWQiO3M6MTI6IjcvMTUvZTAwOTAyNCI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDI0LzAxLzI0LzIwMjQuMDEuMjIuMjQzMDEzODQuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 5. 5.Alonso A, Roetker NS, Soliman EZ, Chen LY, Greenland P, Heckbert SR. Prediction of Atrial Fibrillation in a Racially Diverse Cohort: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). JAHA. 2016;5(2):e003077. doi:10.1161/JAHA.115.003077 [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NToiYWhhb2EiO3M6NToicmVzaWQiO3M6MTE6IjUvMi9lMDAzMDc3IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjQvMDEvMjQvMjAyNC4wMS4yMi4yNDMwMTM4NC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 6. 6.Alonso A, Krijthe BP, Aspelund T, et al. Simple risk model predicts incidence of atrial fibrillation in a racially and geographically diverse population: the CHARGE-AF consortium. J Am Heart Assoc. 2013;2(2):e000102. doi:10.1161/JAHA.112.000102 [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NToiYWhhb2EiO3M6NToicmVzaWQiO3M6MTE6IjIvMi9lMDAwMTAyIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjQvMDEvMjQvMjAyNC4wMS4yMi4yNDMwMTM4NC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 7. 7.Tanaka Y, Shah NS, Passman R, Greenland P, Lloyd-Jones DM, Khan SS. Trends in Cardiovascular Mortality Related to Atrial Fibrillation in the United States, 2011 to 2018. J Am Heart Assoc. 2021;10(15):e020163. doi:10.1161/JAHA.120.020163 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1161/JAHA.120.020163&link_type=DOI) 8. 8.Xiao J, Persson AP, Engström G, Johnson LSB. Supraventricular arrhythmia, N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide and troponin T concentration in relation to incidence of atrial fibrillation: a prospective cohort study. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2021;21(1):134. doi:10.1186/s12872-021-01942-6 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1186/s12872-021-01942-6&link_type=DOI) 9. 9.Sinner MF, Stepas KA, Moser CB, et al. B-type natriuretic peptide and C-reactive protein in the prediction of atrial fibrillation risk: the CHARGE-AF Consortium of community-based cohort studies. Europace. 2014;16(10):1426–1433. doi:10.1093/europace/euu175 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/europace/euu175&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=25037055&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F01%2F24%2F2024.01.22.24301384.atom) 10. 10.Parajuli P, Ahmed AA. Left Atrial Enlargement. In: StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; 2023. Accessed May 16, 2023. [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK553096/](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK553096/) 11. 11.Benjamin EJ, D’Agostino RB, Belanger AJ, Wolf PA, Levy D. Left atrial size and the risk of stroke and death. The Framingham Heart Study. Circulation. 1995;92(4):835–841. doi:10.1161/01.cir.92.4.835 [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MTQ6ImNpcmN1bGF0aW9uYWhhIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjg6IjkyLzQvODM1IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjQvMDEvMjQvMjAyNC4wMS4yMi4yNDMwMTM4NC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 12. 12.Mahabadi AA, Lehmann N, Sonneck NC, et al. Left atrial size quantification using non-contrast-enhanced cardiac computed tomography - association with cardiovascular risk factors and gender-specific distribution in the general population: the Heinz Nixdorf Recall study. Acta Radiol. 2014;55(8):917–925. doi:10.1177/0284185113507446 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1177/0284185113507446&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24113145&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F01%2F24%2F2024.01.22.24301384.atom) 13. 13.Mahabadi AA, Lehmann N, Kälsch H, et al. Association of epicardial adipose tissue and left atrial size on non-contrast CT with atrial fibrillation: the Heinz Nixdorf Recall Study. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;15(8):863–869. doi:10.1093/ehjci/jeu006 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/ehjci/jeu006&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24497517&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F01%2F24%2F2024.01.22.24301384.atom) 14. 14.Mahabadi AA, Geisel MH, Lehmann N, et al. Association of computed tomography-derived left atrial size with major cardiovascular events in the general population: the Heinz Nixdorf Recall Study. Int J Cardiol. 2014;174(2):318–323. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2014.04.068 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.ijcard.2014.04.068&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24768385&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F01%2F24%2F2024.01.22.24301384.atom) 15. 15.Mahabadi AA, Lehmann N, Möhlenkamp S, et al. Noncoronary Measures Enhance the Predictive Value of Cardiac CT Above Traditional Risk Factors and CAC Score in the General Population. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016;9(10):1177–1185. doi:10.1016/j.jcmg.2015.12.024 [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoiamltZyI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czo5OiI5LzEwLzExNzciO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyNC8wMS8yNC8yMDI0LjAxLjIyLjI0MzAxMzg0LmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 16. 16.Dykun I, Mahabadi AA, Lehmann N, et al. Left ventricle size quantification using non-contrast-enhanced cardiac computed tomography--association with cardiovascular risk factors and coronary artery calcium score in the general population: The Heinz Nixdorf Recall Study. Acta Radiol. 2015;56(8):933–942. doi:10.1177/0284185114542996 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1177/0284185114542996&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=25033994&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F01%2F24%2F2024.01.22.24301384.atom) 17. 17.Patton KK, Heckbert SR, Alonso A, et al. N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide as a predictor of incident atrial fibrillation in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis: the effects of age, sex and ethnicity. Heart. 2013;99(24):1832–1836. doi:10.1136/heartjnl-2013-304724 [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6ODoiaGVhcnRqbmwiO3M6NToicmVzaWQiO3M6MTA6Ijk5LzI0LzE4MzIiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyNC8wMS8yNC8yMDI0LjAxLjIyLjI0MzAxMzg0LmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 18. 18.Bild DE, Bluemke DA, Burke GL, et al. Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis: objectives and design. Am J Epidemiol. 2002;156(9):871–881. doi:10.1093/aje/kwf113 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/aje/kwf113&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=12397006&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F01%2F24%2F2024.01.22.24301384.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000179035100012&link_type=ISI) 19. 19.Wasserthal J, Meyer M, Breit HC, Cyriac J, Yang S, Segeroth M. TotalSegmentator: robust segmentation of 104 anatomical structures in CT images. Published online August 11, 2022. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2208.05868 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.48550/arXiv.2208.05868&link_type=DOI) 20. 20.Isensee F, Jaeger PF, Kohl SAA, Petersen J, Maier-Hein KH. nnU-Net: a self-configuring method for deep learning-based biomedical image segmentation. Nat Methods. 2021;18(2):203–211. doi:10.1038/s41592-020-01008-z [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/s41592-020-01008-z&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=33288961&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F01%2F24%2F2024.01.22.24301384.atom) 21. 21.Himmelreich JCL, Lucassen WAM, Harskamp RE, Aussems C, van Weert HCPM, Nielen MMJ. CHARGE-AF in a national routine primary care electronic health records database in the Netherlands: validation for 5-year risk of atrial fibrillation and implications for patient selection in atrial fibrillation screening. Open Heart. 2021;8(1):e001459. doi:10.1136/openhrt-2020-001459 [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6Nzoib3BlbmhydCI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoxMToiOC8xL2UwMDE0NTkiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyNC8wMS8yNC8yMDI0LjAxLjIyLjI0MzAxMzg0LmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 22. 22.N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, left ventricular mass, and incident heart failure: Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis - PubMed. Accessed May 16, 2023. [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23032197/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23032197/) 23. 23.Elecsys® NT-proBNP. Diagnostics. Accessed May 16, 2023. [https://diagnostics.roche.com/us/en/products/params/elecsys-nt-probnp.html](https://diagnostics.roche.com/us/en/products/params/elecsys-nt-probnp.html) 24. 24.Pencina MJ, D’Agostino RB, D’Agostino RB, Vasan RS. Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: from area under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond. Stat Med. 2008;27(2):157–172; discussion 207-212. doi:10.1002/sim.2929 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/sim.2929&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=17569110&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F01%2F24%2F2024.01.22.24301384.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000253098900001&link_type=ISI) 25. 25.Goudis C, Daios S, Dimitriadis F, Liu T. CHARGE-AF: A useful score for atrial fibrillation prediction? Curr Cardiol Rev. Published online September 1, 2022. doi:10.2174/1573403X18666220901102557 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.2174/1573403X18666220901102557&link_type=DOI) 26. 26.Wang TJ, Larson MG, Levy D, et al. Impact of age and sex on plasma natriuretic peptide levels in healthy adults. Am J Cardiol. 2002;90(3):254–258. doi:10.1016/s0002-9149(02)02464-5 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S0002-9149(02)02464-5&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=12127613&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F01%2F24%2F2024.01.22.24301384.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000177246400010&link_type=ISI) 27. 27.Shibazaki K, Kimura K, Okada Y, Iguchi Y, Terasawa Y, Aoki J. Heart failure may be associated with the onset of ischemic stroke with atrial fibrillation: a brain natriuretic peptide study. J Neurol Sci. 2009;281(1-2):55–57. doi:10.1016/j.jns.2009.02.374 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jns.2009.02.374&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=19321180&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F01%2F24%2F2024.01.22.24301384.atom) 28. 28.Vasan RS, Benjamin EJ, Larson MG, et al. Plasma natriuretic peptides for community screening for left ventricular hypertrophy and systolic dysfunction: the Framingham heart study. JAMA. 2002;288(10):1252–1259. doi:10.1001/jama.288.10.1252 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/jama.288.10.1252&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=12215132&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F01%2F24%2F2024.01.22.24301384.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000177917700024&link_type=ISI) 29. 29.Thejus J, Francis J. N-terminal Pro-Brain Natriuretic Peptide And Atrial Fibrillation. Indian Pacing and Electrophysiology Journal. 2009;9(1):1. 30. 30.Asselbergs FW, van den Berg MP, Bakker SJ, et al. N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide levels predict newly detected atrial fibrillation in a population-based cohort. Neth Heart J. 2008;16(3):73–78. doi:10.1007/BF03086122 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1007/BF03086122&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=18345329&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F01%2F24%2F2024.01.22.24301384.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000254504400002&link_type=ISI) 31. 31.Kahwati LC, Asher GN, Kadro ZO, et al. Screening for Atrial Fibrillation: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. JAMA. 2022;327(4):368–383. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.21811 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/jama.2021.21811&link_type=DOI) 32. 32.Greenland P. Screening for Atrial Fibrillation-More Data Still Needed. JAMA. 2022;327(4):329–330. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.23727 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/jama.2021.23727&link_type=DOI) 33. 33.Weil EL, Noseworthy PA, Lopez CL, et al. Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Electrocardiogram for Atrial Fibrillation Identifies Cognitive Decline Risk and Cerebral Infarcts. Mayo Clin Proc. 2022;97(5):871–880. doi:10.1016/j.mayocp.2022.01.026 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.mayocp.2022.01.026&link_type=DOI) 34. 34.Christopoulos G, Graff-Radford J, Lopez CL, et al. Artificial Intelligence-Electrocardiography to Predict Incident Atrial Fibrillation: A Population-Based Study. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2020;13(12):e009355. doi:10.1161/CIRCEP.120.009355 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1161/CIRCEP.120.009355&link_type=DOI) 35. 35.Verbrugge FH, Reddy YNV, Attia ZI, et al. Detection of Left Atrial Myopathy Using Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Electrocardiography. Circ Heart Fail. 2022;15(1):e008176. doi:10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.120.008176 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.120.008176&link_type=DOI) 36. 36.Pipilas D, Friedman SF, Khurshid S. The Use of Artificial Intelligence to Predict the Development of Atrial Fibrillation. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2023;25(5):381–389. doi:10.1007/s11886-023-01859-w [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1007/s11886-023-01859-w&link_type=DOI) 37. 37.Aquino GJ, Chamberlin J, Mercer M, et al. Deep learning model to quantify left atrium volume on routine non-contrast chest CT and predict adverse outcomes. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2022;16(3):245–253. doi:10.1016/j.jcct.2021.12.005 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jcct.2021.12.005&link_type=DOI) 38. 38.Aquino GJ, Chamberlin J, Yacoub B, et al. Diagnostic accuracy and performance of artificial intelligence in measuring left atrial volumes and function on multiphasic CT in patients with atrial fibrillation. Eur Radiol. 2022;32(8):5256–5264. doi:10.1007/s00330-022-08657-y [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1007/s00330-022-08657-y&link_type=DOI) 39. 39.Cardona A, Trovato V, Nagaraja HN, Raman SV, Harfi TT. Left atrial volume quantification using coronary calcium score scan: Feasibility, reliability and reproducibility analysis of a standardized approach. Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc. 2019;23:100351. doi:10.1016/j.ijcha.2019.100351 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.ijcha.2019.100351&link_type=DOI) 40. 40.Kubala M, Bohbot Y, Rusinaru D, Levy F, Maréchaux S, Tribouilloy C. Refining Risk Stratification in Severe Aortic Stenosis With Left Atrial Volume and Atrial Fibrillation. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2022;15(5):945–947. doi:10.1016/j.jcmg.2021.11.012 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jcmg.2021.11.012&link_type=DOI) 41. 41.Huber MP, Pandit JA, Jensen PN, et al. Left Atrial Strain and the Risk of Atrial Arrhythmias From Extended Ambulatory Cardiac Monitoring: MESA. J Am Heart Assoc. 2022;11(21):e026875. doi:10.1161/JAHA.122.026875 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1161/JAHA.122.026875&link_type=DOI) 42. 42.Lancini D, Prasad A, Thomas L, Atherton J, Martin P, Prasad S. Predicting new onset atrial fibrillation post acute myocardial infarction: Echocardiographic assessment of left atrial size. Echocardiography. Published online April 25, 2023. doi:10.1111/echo.15574 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1111/echo.15574&link_type=DOI) 43. 43.Mannina C, Ito K, Jin Z, et al. Association of Left Atrial Strain With Ischemic Stroke Risk in Older Adults. JAMA Cardiol. 2023;8(4):317–325. doi:10.1001/jamacardio.2022.5449 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/jamacardio.2022.5449&link_type=DOI) 44. 44.Güzel T, Kış M, Şenöz O. The correlation between the left atrial volume index and atrial fibrillation development in heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction and long-term follow-up results. Acta Cardiol. 2022;77(7):647–654. doi:10.1080/00015385.2022.2067674 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1080/00015385.2022.2067674&link_type=DOI) 45. 45.Tsang TS, Barnes ME, Bailey KR, et al. Left atrial volume: important risk marker of incident atrial fibrillation in 1655 older men and women. Mayo Clin Proc. 2001;76(5):467–475. doi:10.4065/76.5.467 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.4065/76.5.467&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=11357793&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F01%2F24%2F2024.01.22.24301384.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000168570000005&link_type=ISI) 46. 46.Tsang TSM, Abhayaratna WP, Barnes ME, et al. Prediction of cardiovascular outcomes with left atrial size: is volume superior to area or diameter? J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47(5):1018–1023. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2005.08.077 [FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6MzoiUERGIjtzOjExOiJqb3VybmFsQ29kZSI7czo0OiJhY2NqIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjk6IjQ3LzUvMTAxOCI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDI0LzAxLzI0LzIwMjQuMDEuMjIuMjQzMDEzODQuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 47. 47.Zhang et al. C. AI-enabled Cardiac Chambers Volumetry In Non-contrast Coronary Artery Calcium CT Scans Vs. Contrast-enhanced Coronary CT Angiography Scans In The Same Patients. Published online April 28, 2023. Accessed June 1, 2023. [https://scct.org/default.aspx](https://scct.org/default.aspx) 48. 48.Reeves et al. AP. AI-enabled Automated Cardiac Chambers Volumetry In Non-contrast ECG-gated Cardiac Scans Vs. Non-contrast Non-gated Lung Scans. Published online April 28, 2023. 49. 49.Jensen PN, Johnson K, Floyd J, Heckbert SR, Carnahan R, Dublin S. Identifying atrial fibrillation from electronic medical data: a systematic review. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2012;21(0 1):141–147. doi:10.1002/pds.2317 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/pds.2317&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=22262600&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F01%2F24%2F2024.01.22.24301384.atom)