In order to bring you the best possible user experience, this site uses Javascript. If you are seeing this message, it is likely that the Javascript option in your browser is disabled. For optimal viewing of this site, please ensure that Javascript is enabled for your browser.
Did you know that your browser is out of date? To get the best experience using our website we recommend that you upgrade to a newer version. Learn more.

Is there a relationship between atrial fibrillation and peripheral arterial disease?

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and peripheral arterial disease (PAD) are two highly related clinical conditions. In recent years, accumulating evidence has underlined a strong relationship between AF and PAD. Some epidemiological data indicate that patients with PAD have an increased risk of developing AF, while other studies seem to suggest a similar increase in the risk of incident PAD for AF patients. The concomitant presence of AF and PAD exponentially increases the risk of major adverse events (stroke, myocardial infarction, cardiovascular and all-cause death). Further data are still needed to elucidate fully the physiopathological mechanisms which form the basis of this relationship.

Peripheral Artery Disease
Diseases of the Aorta, Peripheral Vascular Disease, Stroke


Atrial fibrillation (AF) and peripheral arterial disease (PAD) are widely prevalent and incident among the general population [1,2]. Both conditions have similar epidemiologic patterns and common risk factors [1,2]. In addition, as is commonly known, AF as well as PAD are equally associated with increased morbidity and mortality [1,2]. In recent years, accumulating evidence suggests a strong relationship between AF and atherosclerotic vascular disease [3,4]. Indeed, it has been suggested that a common underlying pathway exists between AF and clinical manifestations of atherosclerotic disease [5], which explains the large epidemiological evidence.

PAD represents one of the main signs that underline the presence of systemic atherosclerosis. Moreover, PAD is considered to be one of the main risk factors increasing the long-term risk of developing stroke and thromboembolic events in AF patients [6]. Hence, it is currently included in the main clinical score used in the baseline risk assessment for newly diagnosed AF patients, the CHA2DS2-VASc score [6]. Beyond this, the relationship between AF and PAD seems to be more substantial, with a bi-directional relationship between the two conditions that ultimately amplifies exponentially the risk associated with both conditions. The aim of this summary is to provide a brief review of the most relevant evidence related to the relationship between AF and PAD.

A bi-causal relationship

To date, several studies have sought to investigate the relationship between AF and PAD (Table 1). In most cases, however, they were subgroup or post hoc analyses derived from various kinds of studies. The challenging issue for most of the studies reporting about this relationship is the assessment of PAD. Indeed, PAD can often be asymptomatic and, even if use of the ankle-brachial index (ABI) is the recommended diagnostic tool, PAD is often assessed only on the basis of symptomatic status (i.e., the presence of claudicatio intermittens) or recorded in the clinical history if collected during the clinical interview. Among the reported studies, only one was specifically designed to investigate the association between AF and PAD. The “Atrial Fibrillation Registry for Ankle-brachial Index Prevalence Assessment: Collaborative Italian Study” (ARAPACIS) was an Italian observational study aiming to report the prevalence of PAD as assessed by an ABI ≤0.90 in a cohort of patients diagnosed with non-valvular AF [7]. Even though in the other studies the prevalence of PAD in AF patients had great variability [8,9] (Table 1), the ARAPACIS study demonstrated that, when using a well-established diagnostic tool, PAD affects many AF patients, with a total prevalence up to 21% [7], significantly higher than that reported in the general population [2]. Moreover, 10% of patients were found to have an ABI ≥1.40 [7]. Similarly, the prevalence of AF in patients with PAD (11.5%) [10] largely exceeds that reported in the general population [1].


Table 1. Main studies reporting about the relationship between AF and PAD.




Study type

Cohort characteristics


Condition prevalence


Frost [15]



Nationwide cohort

All patients discharged with an AF diagnosis and without any history of stroke


PAD: 4.2%

PAD increases independently risk of stroke both for men and women

Goto [10]



Observational prospective

Outpatients with established atherosclerotic disease or

multiple risk factors


AF: 11.5%

Concomitant AF and PAD increase the risk of major adverse events, in particular CV death

Naccarelli [8]



Insurance database

Patients diagnosed with AF or atrial flutter


PAD: 12.2%


Olesen [16]



Nationwide cohort

Patients diagnosed with non-valvular AF


PAD: 2.9%

PAD increases independently risk of stroke and TE

Violi [7,17]





Patients with non-valvular AF


PAD: 21%

Presence of PAD is independently associated with an increased risk for MI, CV events and CV death.

O’Neal [11]



Observational prospective

Adult patients (45-84 years) without any history of CV disease with available ABI



PAD independently increases the risk of incident AF, particularly in elderly patients. Risk increases with progressively lower ABI

Chang [13]



Nationwide cohort

Patients with newly diagnosed AF and without any history of PAD, HF and stroke



Final adjusted Cox regression analysis found that AF independently increases the risk of PAD

Griffin [12]



Prospective population cohort

Elderly subjects with risk factors for cardiovascular disease and without history of AF



Final adjusted Cox regression analysis found that PAD independently increases the risk of AF

Lin [14]



Nationwide Cohort

Adult patients (age ≥20 years) Without history of valvular disease


AF: 0.7%

PAD: 4.3%

AF & PAD: 0.08%

After multiple adjustments:

PAD increases risk of AF; AF patients have higher rate of incident PAD, but the risk seems dependent on other risk factors; coexistence of AF and PAD is associated with higher risk for CV death and other adverse events

Perera [9]




Subjects with AF and at least 1 additional risk factor


PAD: 3%

PAD independently increases the risk for all-cause death after full adjustment

Proietti [18]



Observational prospective

Patients with recent diagnosis of AF


PAD: 11%

PAD is associated with multiple comorbidities. Patients with concomitant PAD reported higher rates of CV and all-cause death, but the risk appears to be mediated by other comorbidities

Schuyler Jones [19]




Patients with non-valvular AF


PAD: 5.9%

PAD patients reported higher rates of MI, CV and all-cause death. This difference in risk was attenuated after adjustments and no longer significant

Hu [20]




Patients with non-valvular AF


PAD: 4.9%

PAD increased independently risk for CV and all-cause death. A non-significant trend for higher risk of stroke/TE was also found

*PAD subset. **AF subset.

ABI: ankle-brachial index; AF: atrial fibrillation; CV: cardiovascular; HF: heart failure; MI: myocardial infarction; PAD: peripheral arterial disease; RCT: randomised controlled trial; TE: thromboembolic events


Furthermore, several studies have reported that PAD is independently associated with an increased risk of incident AF and, conversely, that the presence of AF is associated with a higher risk of reporting PAD, even though this risk seems partially mediated by other concomitant risk factors. An analysis derived from the “Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis” (MESA) study found that patients with PAD, assessed by ABI measurement (defined as <1.00 and >1.4), have an increased risk for incident AF (hazard ratio [HR] 1.5, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.1-2.0) [11]. This relationship remains unchanged across various subgroup analyses (sex and race), while it seems more likely to be found in older patients (HR 1.7, 95% CI: 1.3-2.3 for patients ≥62 years old). Examining separately the ABI cut-offs, an ABI <1.0 was confirmed as significantly associated with a risk of incident AF (HR 1.5, 95% CI: 1.1-2.0), while with an ABI >1.4, despite showing a trend towards a higher risk, the association remains non-significant due to the very low number of patients (HR 1.8, 95% CI: 0.65-4.8) [11]. An additional analysis showed that, in patients with an ABI <1.0, progressively decreasing ABI was inversely associated with a higher risk of newly diagnosed AF (HR 1.1, 95% CI: 1.04-1.2 for each 0.1 decrease in ABI) [11].

Griffin and colleagues further verified this relationship in elderly patients [12]. Indeed, in an analysis from the Cardiovascular Health Study (CHS), which enrolled elderly patients (≥65 years old) affected with multiple cardiovascular risk factors, it was confirmed that the presence of PAD (defined as <1.00 and >1.4) was associated with an increased risk for incident AF (HR 1.25, 95% CI: 1.10-1.42) [12], with a similar inverse “dose-effect” relationship between lowering ABI and AF risk [12], as shown in the MESA study.

In a large population cohort study from Taiwan, Chang et al verified, conversely, the association between the presence of AF and the risk of incident AF [13]. Based on the ICD-9-CM codes, patients diagnosed with AF but with no history of PAD, heart failure or stroke were identified and compared with no AF patients. Over almost five years of follow-up observation, the presence of AF was found to be independently associated with incident PAD (HR 1.31, 95% CI: 1.19-1.45) [13]. This relationship was verified across gender and age subgroups [13]. Analysing the interaction between the presence of AF and other comorbidities/risk factors (hypertension, diabetes, hypercholesterolaemia, pulmonary disease, coronary artery disease, asthma), it was found that AF and other comorbidities had a similar increased risk for PAD when taken individually (HR 2.29 and HR 2.88, respectively), but when found together they increased exponentially the risk of PAD (HR 3.89, 95% CI: 2.82-5.36) [13].

Subsequently, another study derived from the same database further deepened the analysis about the relationship between AF and PAD [14]. All the patients available were divided into four groups: i) one control group without AF or PAD; ii) one group with AF only; iii) one group with PAD only; iv) one group with coexistent AF and PAD. Over 10 years of follow-up, Lin and colleagues found that the incidence rates for AF in PAD patients were higher than those in non-PAD patients, as well as the incidence rates for PAD in AF patients compared to non-AF ones [14]. Univariate Cox analysis found an increased risk both for incident AF in PAD patients and for incident PAD in AF patients. After full adjustments, increased risk for incident AF remained independently associated with PAD presence (HR 1.29, 95% CI: 1.17-1.42), while the risk for incident PAD became non-significant (HR 1.00, 95% CI: 0.89-1.11), seemingly mediated by other risk factors [14].

A dangerous combination

Moving from the epidemiological and pathophysiological link between AF and PAD to long-term follow-up observation, the relationship between these two conditions becomes stronger and more likely dangerous. Since 2000, Frost and colleagues, exploring the association between AF and incident stroke occurrence, found that, despite a not particularly high prevalence, PAD was independently associated with stroke occurrence, both in male and female subjects (HR 1.3, 95% CI: 1.0-1.7 and HR 1.3, 95% CI: 1.0-1.6, respectively) [15].

A subgroup analysis from the Reduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health (REACH) registry found that, when combined in the same subject, AF and PAD caused a significant increase in rates of cardiovascular (CV) death, as well as in rates of heart failure occurrence and the combined outcomes of CV death/myocardial infarction (MI)/stroke or hospitalisation for vascular events [10]. Moreover, in a large nationwide study derived from the Danish registers, PAD was significantly associated with an increased risk for stroke and thromboembolic events, even over a 12-year follow-up [16].

Follow-up analysis of the ARAPACIS study further extended the evidence about the association between AF and PAD in determining adverse outcomes. Indeed, an ABI ≤0.90 was found to be significantly associated with incident MI (HR 2.62, 95% CI: 1.32-5.20), vascular death (HR 2.24, 95% CI: 1.34-3.73) and the composite outcome of any vascular event (HR 1.50, 95% CI: 1.11-2.03) over a three-year follow-up period [17].

Expanding their analysis, Lin and colleagues also found that the coexistence of AF and PAD brought a relevant increase in risk for all the major adverse outcomes, carrying, after full adjustment, at least a twofold higher risk for CV death (HR 5.04, 95% CI: 3.00-8.47) than in patients with AF or PAD only [14].

An analysis from the EURObservational Research Programme in the AF pilot registry, an observational registry about AF patients held by the European Society of Cardiology, reported that AF patients with concomitant PAD had higher rates of CV and all-cause death, even though the Cox regression analysis found a non-significant trend in the association between PAD and the occurrence of all-cause death (HR 1.375, 95% CI: 0.931-2.030; p=0.1096), after adjustment for concomitant risk factors and comorbidities [18]. A fully adjusted analysis, comprising CV prevention drugs, further mitigated the association between PAD and all-cause death, conversely underlining a relevant role of statins in reducing mortality in PAD patients, with no difference in risk for the use of antiplatelet agents (mostly aspirin) [18].

In recent years, as is commonly known, non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) entered daily clinical practice in treating AF patients [1]. Despite this, there are few data about the use of NOACs in patients with AF and PAD, except for some subgroup analyses derived from the NOACs phase III trials, both reporting quite a low prevalence rate [19,20]. In the “Rivaroxaban Once daily, oral, direct factor Xa inhibition compared with vitamin K antagonism for prevention of stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation” (ROCKET-AF) study, despite a higher rate of major adverse events, PAD was not associated with any difference in risk after adjustment [19]. Comparing the use of rivaroxaban and warfarin interacting with the presence of PAD, the use of rivaroxaban was associated with an increased risk of bleeding outcomes (HR 1.40, 95% CI: 1.06-1.86 for major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding for rivaroxaban vs. warfarin in PAD patients) [19].

In the post hoc analysis from the “Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation” (ARISTOTLE) trial, the presence of PAD was associated with an increased risk of CV and all-cause death (HR 1.44 and HR 1.36, respectively), with a non-significant trend for higher risk in stroke and thromboembolic events (HR 1.32, 95% CI: 0.93-1.88; p=0.1227), probably due to the low absolute number of events in the PAD group [20]. The use of apixaban compared to warfarin in PAD patients was found to be associated with no difference in terms of bleeding outcome occurrences, which were instead strongly reduced in non-PAD patients [20].


Epidemiological data have shown a strong relationship between AF and PAD, underlining how often the two conditions are concomitant. Several studies have documented a clear effect in determining the occurrence of AF in PAD patients, while accumulating evidence suggests a similar effect the other way around, with an increased risk of PAD in AF patients, even though this relationship still deserves further insights, since it appears to be partially mediated by other concomitant risk factors and comorbidities.

Despite the fact that there are currently no further insights in terms of the mechanistic processes, it seems plausible that the association between AF and PAD, on the background of multiple common risk factors and comorbidities, lies in the mutual ground related to increased levels of inflammation, endothelial dysfunction and a prothrombotic state, which leads to a susceptibility for each condition to increase the risk for the other one [11]. Further data are still needed to elucidate fully the complex mechanisms linking AF and PAD to each other (Figure 1, left panel).

Furthermore, all the data presented clearly underline that the association of AF and PAD elicits a relevant increase in all the major outcomes associated with both conditions independently (stroke, MI, CV death, all-cause death), making their concomitant presence a much feared complication for both AF and PAD patients (Figure 1, right panel).


Figure 1. The complex relationship between AF and PAD and their association in determining major adverse outcomes.

131_Proietti_Figure 1.jpg


To date, European guidelines about AF and PAD are concordant in indicating the use of oral anticoagulant drugs rather than antiplatelet drugs when the two conditions occur in the same patient [1,2]. Even though current AF guidelines recommend the use of NOACs over warfarin and other vitamin K antagonists, there are no specific data investigating the use of NOACs in PAD patients, while data available from the NOACs trials seem to suggest a possible increase in the risk of bleeding outcomes with no clear advantage in terms of reduction of stroke and other major efficacy outcomes. A clear need for more research is warranted to clarify better this highly relevant issue in the clinical management of these patients.


  1. Kirchhof P, Benussi S, Kotecha D, Ahlsson A, Atar D, Casadei B, Castella M, Diener HC, Heidbuchel H, Hendriks J, Hindricks G, Manolis AS, Oldgren J, Popescu BA, Schotten U, Van Putte B, Vardas P, Agewall S, Camm J, Baron Esquivias G, Budts W, Carerj S, Casselman F, Coca A, De Caterina R, Deftereos S, Dobrev D, Ferro JM, Filippatos G, Fitzsimons D, Gorenek B, Guenoun M, Hohnloser SH, Kolh P, Lip GY, Manolis A, McMurray J, Ponikowski P, Rosenhek R, Ruschitzka F, Savelieva I, Sharma S, Suwalski P, Tamargo JL, Taylor CJ, Van Gelder IC, Voors AA, Windecker S, Zamorano JL, Zeppenfeld K. 2016 ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with EACTS. Eur Heart J. 2016 Oct 7;37(38):2893-2962.
  2. Aboyans V, Ricco JB, Bartelink MEL, Björck M, Brodmann M, Cohnert T, Collet JP, Czerny M, De Carlo M, Debus S, Espinola-Klein C, Kahan T, Kownator S, Mazzolai L, Naylor AR, Roffi M, Röther J, Sprynger M, Tendera M, Tepe G, Venermo M, Vlachopoulos C, Desormais I; ESC Scientific Document Group. 2017 ESC Guidelines on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Peripheral Arterial Diseases, in collaboration with the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS): Document covering atherosclerotic disease of extracranial carotid and vertebral, mesenteric, renal, upper and lower extremity arteriesEndorsed by: the European Stroke Organization (ESO)The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Peripheral Arterial Diseases of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and of the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS). Eur Heart J. 2017 Aug 26. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehx095. [Epub ahead of print]. 
  3. Anandasundaram B, Lane DA, Apostolakis S, Lip GY. The impact of atherosclerotic vascular disease in predicting a stroke, thromboembolism and mortality in atrial fibrillation patients: a systematic review. J Thromb Haemost. 2013 May;11(5):975-87. 
  4. Soliman EZ, Lopez F, O’Neal WT, Chen LY, Bengtson L, Zhang ZM, Loehr L, Cushman M, Alonso A. Atrial Fibrillation and Risk of ST-Segment-Elevation Versus Non-ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study. Circulation. 2015 May 26;131(21):1843-50. 
  5. Vermond RA, Van Gelder IC, Crijns HJ, Rienstra M. Does myocardial infarction beget atrial fibrillation and atrial fibrillation beget myocardial infarction? Circulation. 2015 May 26;131(21):1824-6. 
  6. Lip GY, Nieuwlaat R, Pisters R, Lane DA, Crijns HJ. Refining clinical risk stratification for predicting stroke and thromboembolism in atrial fibrillation using a novel risk factor-based approach: the euro heart survey on atrial fibrillation. Chest. 2010 Feb;137(2):263-72. 
  7. Violi F, Daví G, Hiatt W, Lip GY, Corazza GR, Perticone F, Proietti M, Pignatelli P, Vestri AR, Basili S; ARAPACIS Study Investigators. Prevalence of peripheral artery disease by abnormal ankle-brachial index in atrial fibrillation: implications for risk and therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013 Dec 10;62(23):2255-6. 
  8. Naccarelli GV, Varker H, Lin J, Schulman KL. Increasing prevalence of atrial fibrillation and flutter in the United States. Am J Cardiol. 2009 Dec 1;104(11):1534-9. 
  9. Perera KS, Pearce LA, Sharma M, Benavente O, Connolly SJ, Hart RG; ACTIVE A (Atrial Fibrillation Clopidogrel Trial With Irbesartan for Prevention of Vascular Events) Steering Committee and Investigators. Predictors of Mortality in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation (from the Atrial Fibrillation Clopidogrel Trial With Irbesartan for Prevention of Vascular Events [ACTIVE A]). Am J Cardiol. 2017 Dec 11. pii: S0002-9149(17)31853-2. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2017.11.028. [Epub ahead of print]. 
  10. Goto S, Bhatt DL, Röther J, Alberts M, Hill MD, Ikeda Y, Uchiyama S, D’Agostino R, Ohman EM, Liau CS, Hirsch AT, Mas JL, Wilson PW, Corbalán R, Aichner F, Steg PG; REACH Registry Investigators. Prevalence, clinical profile, and cardiovascular outcomes of atrial fibrillation patients with atherothrombosis. Am Heart J. 2008 Nov;156(5):855-63. 
  11. O’Neal WT, Efird JT, Nazarian S, Alonso A, Heckbert SR, Soliman EZ. Peripheral Arterial Disease and Risk of Atrial Fibrillation and Stroke: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis. J Am Heart Assoc. 2014 Nov 17;3(6):e001270. 
  12. Griffin WF, Salahuddin T, O’Neal WT, Soliman EZ. Peripheral arterial disease is associated with an increased risk of atrial fibrillation in the elderly. Europace. 2016 Jun;18(6):794-8. 
  13. Chang CJ, Chen YT, Liu CS, Lin WY, Lin CL, Lin MC, Kao CH. Atrial Fibrillation Increases the Risk of Peripheral Arterial Disease With Relative Complications and Mortality: A Population-Based Cohort Study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016 Mar;95(9):e3002. 
  14. Lin YS, Tung TH, Wang J, Chen YF, Chen TH, Lin MS, Chi CC, Chen MC. Peripheral arterial disease and atrial fibrillation and risk of stroke, heart failure hospitalization and cardiovascular death: A nationwide cohort study. Int J Cardiol. 2016 Jan 15;203:204-11. 
  15. Frost L, Engholm G, Johnsen S, Møller H, Husted S. Incident stroke after discharge from the hospital with a diagnosis of atrial fibrillation. Am J Med. 2000 Jan;108(1):36-40. 
  16. Olesen JB, Lip GY, Lane DA, Køber L, Hansen ML, Karasoy D, Hansen CM, Gislason GH, Torp-Pedersen C. Vascular disease and stroke risk in atrial fibrillation: a nationwide cohort study. Am J Med. 2012 Aug;125(8):826.e13-23. 
  17. Violi F, Davì G, Proietti M, Pastori D, Hiatt WR, Corazza GR, Perticone F, Pignatelli P, Farcomeni A, Vestri AR, Lip GY, Basili S; ARAPACIS (Atrial Fibrillation Registry for Ankle-Brachial Index Prevalence Assessment-Collaborative Italian Study) STUDY Investigators. Ankle-Brachial Index and cardiovascular events in atrial fibrillation. The ARAPACIS Study. Thromb Haemost. 2016 Apr;115(4):856-63. 
  18. Proietti M, Raparelli V, Laroche C, Dan GA, Janion M, Popescu R, Sinagra G, Vijgen J, Boriani G, Maggioni AP, Tavazzi L, Lip GYH; EORP-AF Gen Pilot Investigators. Adverse outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation and peripheral arterial disease: a report from the EURObservational research programme pilot survey on atrial fibrillation. Europace. 2017;19(9):1439-1448. 
  19. Jones WS, Hellkamp AS, Halperin J, Piccini JP, Breithardt G, Singer DE, Fox KA, Hankey GJ, Mahaffey KW, Califf RM, Patel MR. Efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in patients with peripheral artery disease and non-valvular atrial fibrillation: insights from ROCKET AF. Eur Heart J. 2014 Jan;35(4):242-9. 
  20. Hu PT, Lopes RD, Stevens SR, Wallentin L, Thomas L, Alexander JH, Hanna M, Lewis BS, Verheugt FW, Granger CB, Jones WS. Efficacy and Safety of Apixaban Compared With Warfarin in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Peripheral Artery Disease: Insights From the ARISTOTLE Trial. J Am Heart Assoc. 2017 Jan 17;6(1). pii: e004699. 



Notes to editor


Marco Proietti1,2,3, MD, FESC


  1. IRCCS – Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche “Mario Negri”, Milan, Italy;
  2. Institute of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom;
  3. Department of Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties, Sapienza-University of Rome, Rome, Italy


Address for correspondence:

Dr. Marco Proietti, Department of Neuroscience, IRCCS – Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche “Mario Negri”, Via Giuseppe La Masa 19, 20156 Milan, Italy




Author disclosures

Proietti declares receiving a consulting fee from Boehringer Ingelheim.



The content of this article reflects the personal opinion of the author/s and is not necessarily the official position of the European Society of Cardiology.