Prognostic impact of oral anticoagulation therapy and atrial fibrillation in patients with type B acute aortic dissection
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Ishizue N
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10995604 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundPost-operative atrial fibrillation (POAF) is the most common complication after cardiac surgery. Recent studies had shown this phenomenon is no longer considered transitory and is associated with higher risk of thromboembolic events or death. The aim of this study was to systematically review and analyze previous studies comparing oral anticoagulation therapy with no anticoagulation, regarding these long-term outcomes.MethodsPubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Database were systematically searched to identify the studies comparing the risk of stroke, or thromboembolic events or mortality of POAF patients who received anticoagulation compared with those who were not anticoagulated. Incidence of stroke, thromboembolic events and all-cause mortality were evaluated up to 10 years after surgery. Time-to-event outcomes were collected through hazard ratio (HR) along with their variance and the early endpoints using frequencies or odds ratio (OR). Random effect models were used to compute statistical combined measures and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Heterogeneity was evaluated through Q statistic-related measures of variance (Tau2, I2, Chi-squared test).ResultsEight observational cohort studies were selected, including 15,335 patients (3492 on Oral Anticoagulants (OAC) vs 11,429 without OAC) that met the inclusion criteria for qualitative synthesis. Patients had a wide gender distribution (38.6-82.3%), each study with a mean age above 65 years (67.5-85). Vitamin K antagonists were commonly prescribed anticoagulants (74.3-100%). OAC was associated with a protective impact on all-cause mortality at a mean of 5.0 years of follow-up (HR is 0.85 [0.72-1.01]; p = 0.07; I2 = 48%). Thromboembolic events did not differ between the two treatment arms (HR 0.68 [0.40-1.15], p = 0.15).ConclusionCurrent literature suggests a possibly protective impact of OAC therapy for all-cause mortality in patients with new-onset atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery. However, it does not appear to impact thromboembolism rate.
| S-EPMC8603521 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and purposeOral anticoagulants (OACs) prevent stroke recurrence and vascular embolism in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and atrial fibrillation (AF). Based on empirical consensus, current guidance recommends a "1-3-6-12 days" rule to resume OACs after AIS. This study investigated the suitability of guideline-recommended timing for OAC initiation.MethodsUsing data of 12,307 AF patients hospitalized for AIS, for the period 2012 to 2016, in Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database, we constructed a sequence of cohorts of OAC users and propensity score-matched nonusers, creating one cohort on each day of OAC initiation for 30 days since admission. Composite outcome included effectiveness (cardiovascular death, ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction, transient ischemic attack, systemic embolism, and venous thromboembolism) and safety (intracranial hemorrhage, gastrointestinal bleeding, and hematuria) outcomes. Comparing with nonusers, we examined the risks in the early OAC use (within 1-3-6-12 days) or guideline-recommended delayed use. Indirect comparison between the early and delayed use was conducted using mixed treatment comparison.ResultsAcross the AIS severity, the risks of composite or effectiveness outcome were lower in OAC users than nonusers, and the risks were similar between the early and delayed use groups. In patients with severe AIS, early OAC use was associated with an increased risk of safety outcome, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.67 (confidence interval [CI]: 1·30-2·13) compared with nonusers and a HR of 1.44 (CI: 0·99-2·09) compared with the delayed use.ConclusionOur study findings support an early OAC initiation in AF patients with mild-to-moderate AIS and a routine delayed use of OACs can be considered in those with severe AIS to avoid a serious bleeding event.
| S-EPMC9251709 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionAtrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia and can lead to significant comorbidities and mortality. Persistence with oral anticoagulation (OAC) is crucial to prevent stroke but rates of discontinuation are high. This systematic review explored underlying reasons for OAC discontinuation.MethodsA systematic review was undertaken to identify studies that reported factors influencing discontinuation of OAC in AF, in 11 databases, grey literature and backwards citations from eligible studies published between 2000 and 2019. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and papers against inclusion criteria and extracted data. Study quality was appraised using Gough's weight of evidence framework. Data were synthesised narratively.ResultsOf 6,619 sources identified, 10 full studies and 2 abstracts met the inclusion criteria. Overall, these provided moderate appropriateness to answer the review question. Four reported clinical registry data, six were retrospective reviews of patients' medical records and two studies reported interviews and surveys. Nine studies evaluated outcomes relating to dabigatran and/or warfarin and three included rivaroxaban (n = 3), apixaban (n = 3) and edoxaban (n = 1). Bleeding complications and gastrointestinal events were the most common factors associated with discontinuation, followed by frailty and risk of falling. Patients' perspectives were seldom specifically assessed. Influence of family carers in decisions regarding OAC discontinuation was not examined.ConclusionThe available evidence is derived from heterogeneous studies with few relevant data for the newer direct oral anticoagulants. Reasons underpinning decision-making to discontinue OAC from the perspective of patients, family carers and clinicians is poorly understood.
| S-EPMC8839858 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained arrhythmia encountered in clinical practice today. For those who present with it, one of the most major risks associated with the condition is stroke. AF is associated with a fivefold increased risk of stroke and thromboembolism. Oral anticoagulation has been the cornerstone of stroke prevention in patients with AF. In some individuals who exhibit a higher risk of bleeding, other alternatives for stroke prevention have been sought, including the use of left atrial appendage occlusion devices and surgical exclusion of the left atrial appendage. Catheter ablation is an important treatment strategy in those patients for whom a rhythm control strategy has been selected. This article reviews some of the available anticoagulant drug options and their use prior to, during, and after catheter ablation.
| S-EPMC7252752 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo assess budget impact of the implementation of an anticoagulation clinic (AC) compared to usual care (UC), in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF).MethodA decision tree was designed to analyze the cost and events rates over a 1-year horizon. The patients were distributed according to treatment, 30% Direct Oral Anticoagulant (DOAC) regimens and the rest to warfarin. The thromboembolism and bleeding were derived from observational studies which demonstrated that ACs had important impact in reducing the frequency of these events compared with UC, due to higher adherence with DOACs and proportion of time in therapeutic range (TTR) with warfarin. Costs were derived from the transactional platform of Colombian government, healthcare authority reimbursement and published studies. The values were expressed in American dollars (USD). The exchanged rate used was COP $3.693 per dollar.ResultsDuring 1 year of follow-up, in a cohort of 228 patients there were estimated 48 bleedings, 6 thromboembolisms in AC group versus 84 bleedings, and 12 thromboembolisms events in patients receiving UC. Total costs related to AC were $126 522 compared with $141 514 in UC. The AC had an important reduction in the cost of clinical events versus UC ($52 085 vs $110 749) despite a higher cost of care facilities ($74 436 vs $30 765). A sensibility analysis suggested that in the 83% of estimations, the AC produced savings varied between $27 078 and $135 391.ConclusionsThis study demonstrated that AC compared with UC, produced an important savings in the oral anticoagulation therapy for patients with NVAF.
| S-EPMC7968007 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) experiencing ischemic stroke despite oral anticoagulation (OAC), i.e., breakthrough strokes, are not uncommon, and represent an important clinical subgroup in view of the consistently high risk of stroke recurrence and mortality. The understanding of the heterogenous potential mechanism underlying OAC failure is essential in order to implement specific therapeutic measures aimed at reducing the risk of recurrent ischemic stroke. However, due to the incomplete comprehension of this phenomenon and the limited available data, secondary stroke prevention in such high-risk patients represents a clinical dilemma. There are several available strategies to prevent ischemic stroke recurrence in AF patients with breakthrough stroke in the absence of competing causes unrelated to AF, and these include continuation or change in the type of OAC, addition of antiplatelet therapy, left atrial appendage closure, or any combination of the above options. However, due to the limited available data, the latest guidelines do not provide any specific recommendations about which of the above strategies may be preferred. This review describes the incidence, the clinical impact and the potential mechanisms underlying OAC failure in AF patients. Furthermore, the evidence supporting each of the above therapeutic options for secondary stroke prevention and the potential future directions will be discussed.
| S-EPMC10532406 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveOral anticoagulation (OAC) prescribed to AF patients for the prevention of cardioembolic complications likely has the added benefit of preventing venous thromboembolism (VTE). This study evaluated, among AF patients who are anticoagulated, whether type of OAC was associated with subsequent VTE risk.MethodsNon-valvular AF patients prescribed OACs between 2010 and September 2015 were identified via the MarketScan administrative claims databases. OACs included warfarin and direct OACs (DOACs: dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban). Incident VTE was defined by ICD-9-CM codes. Patients were matched on age, sex, CHA2DS2-VASc, and high-dimensional propensity scores. The final analysis included 117,912 AF patients.ResultsIn total, 1357 VTE events accrued over a mean follow-up of 484 days. In multivariable-adjusted, propensity score-matched Cox models, relative to new users of warfarin, risk of incident VTE was lower among new users of dabigatran [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) = 0.55 (0.47-0.66)] and apixaban [0.51 (0.39-0.68)], but similar among new users of rivaroxaban [1.01 (0.87-1.19)]. In head-to-head DOAC comparisons, VTE risk was lower among users of dabigatran [0.48 (0.36-0.64)] and apixaban [0.61 (0.47-0.78)] vs rivaroxaban. Findings were mostly similar across patient sub-groups.ConclusionsIn this large practice-based population of AF patients prescribed OACs for primary prevention of stroke and systemic embolization, subsequent risk of VTE was lowest among those prescribed apixaban and dabigatran, while risk was similar with prescriptions for warfarin and rivaroxaban. Among AF patients prescribed OACs, lowering the risk of VTE may be an additional benefit of apixaban and dabigatran, beyond the reduced bleeding risk observed in randomized clinical trials.
| S-EPMC6449182 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background We compared the cognitive status and quality of life in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) or remaining on oral anticoagulation (OAC) after atrial fibrillation ablation. Methods and Results Cognition was assessed by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) survey at baseline and follow-up. Consecutive patients receiving LAAO or OAC after atrial fibrillation ablation were screened, and patients with a score of ≤17 were excluded from the study. Quality of life was measured at baseline and 1 year using the Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality of Life survey. A total of 50 patients (CHA2DS2-VASc [congestive heart failure, hypertension, age≥75 years, diabetes mellitus, stroke or transient ischemic attack, vascular disease, age 65-74 years, sex category] score: 3.30±1.43) in the LAAO group and 48 (CHA2DS2-VASc score 2.73±1.25) in the OAC group were included in this prospective study. Mean baseline MoCA score was 26.18 and 26.08 in the LAAO and OAC groups, respectively (P=0.846). At 1 year, scores were 26.94 and 23.38 in the respective groups. MoCA score decreased by an estimated -2.74 (95% CI, -3.61 to -1.87; P<0.0001) points in the OAC group, whereas the change in the LAAO group was nonsignificant (0.79; (95% CI, -0.06 to 1.64; P=0.07). After adjusting for baseline clinical characteristics, remaining on OAC was an independent predictor of MoCA change at 1 year (regression coefficient, -3.38; 95% CI, -4.75 to -2.02; P<0.0001). Change in Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality of Life score did not differ significantly in achieving a clinically important difference between groups. Conclusions In this series, a significant difference in the postprocedure MoCA score was observed in postablation patients with atrial fibrillation receiving LAAO versus remaining on OAC with a substantial decline in the score in the OAC group. However, quality of life improved similarly across groups. Registration https://www.ClinicalTrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01816308.
| S-EPMC8200746 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) are at increased thromboembolic risk, and they suffer more severe strokes with worse outcomes. Most thromboembolic complications of AF are eminently preventable with oral anticoagulation, and the increasing numbers of AF patients mean antithrombotic therapy is the most crucial management aspect of this common arrhythmia. Despite the proven efficacy of warfarin, a string of limitations have meant that it is underused by physicians and patients alike. This has prompted a search for new anticoagulants that could overcome many of the inconveniences of dose variability and anticoagulant monitoring associated with warfarin, but without sacrificing efficacy in thromboprophylaxis. The arrival of new oral anticoagulants has been complemented by improved risk stratification schemes, which permit clinicians to easily and reliably identify patients requiring anticoagulation and their bleeding risk. These advances in AF treatment will hopefully translate into improved outcomes for patients, especially as our experience with the new agents grows.
| S-EPMC4711491 | biostudies-other
Project description:BACKGROUND:Cardiological societies recommend, in their guidelines, that patients with atrial fibrillation and an intermediate (or higher) risk of stroke and systemic embolization should be treated with oral anticoagulant drugs. For patients who do not have mitral valve stenosis or a mechanical valve prosthesis, non-vitamin-K dependent oral anticoagulants (NOAC) are preferred over vitamin K antagonists (VKA) for this purpose. It is unclear, however, whether patients with chronic kidney disease and atrial fibrillation benefit from oral anticoagulation to the same extent as those with normal kidney function. It is also unclear which of the two types of anti - coagulant drug is preferable for patients with chronic kidney disease; NOAC are, in part, renally eliminated. METHODS:This review is based on pertinent publications retrieved by a selective literature search, and on international guidelines. RESULTS:Current evidence suggests that patients with atrial fibrillation who have chronic kidney disease with a glomerular filtration rate (GFR) above 15 mL/ min/1.73 m² should be treated with an oral anticoagulant drug if they have an at least intermediate risk of embolization, as assessed with the CHA2DS2-VASc score. For patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (GFR from 15 to 29 mL/ min/1.73 m²), however, this recommendation is based only on registry studies. For dialysis patients with atrial fibrillation, decisions whether to give oral anticoagulant drugs should be taken on an individual basis, in view of the elevated risk of hemorrhage and the unclear efficacy of such drugs in these patients. The subgroup analyses of the NOAC approval studies show that, for patients with atrial fibrillation and chronic kidney disease with a creatinine clearance of >25-30 mL/min, NOAC should be given in preference to VKA, as long as the patient does not have mitral valve stenosis or a mechanical valve prosthesis. For those whose creatinine clearance is less than 25 mL/min, the relative merits of NOAC versus VKA are still debated. CONCLUSION:The cardiological societies' recommendation that patients with atrial fibrillation should be given oral anticoagulant drugs applies to the majority of such patients who also have chronic kidney disease.
| S-EPMC5974258 | biostudies-literature