The new oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation: an update

In patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, oral anticoagulation with the vitamin K antagonists acenocoumarol, phenprocoumon and warfarin reduces the risk of stroke by more than 60 %, whereas single or double antiplatelet therapy is much less effective and sometimes associated with a similar bleeding risk as vitamin K antagonists. Besides bleeding, and intracranial haemorrhage in particular, INR monitoring remains the largest drawback of vitamin K antagonists. In the last decade oral agents have been developed that directly block the activity of thrombin (factor IIa), as well as drugs that directly inhibit activated factor X (Xa), which is the first compound in the final common pathway to the activation of thrombin. These agents have been approved for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation and are now reimbursed under a national guideline for their safe use. They have advantages in that they do not need monitoring and have a fast onset and offset of action, but lack an established specific antidote. This survey addresses the role of modern anticoagulation for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation.     

Stroke risk in patients with device-detected atrial high-rate episodes

Cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) can detect atrial arrhythmias, i.?e. atrial high-rate episodes (AHRE). The thrombo-embolic risk in patients showing AHRE appears to be lower than in patients with clinical atrial fibrillation (AF) and it is unclear whether the former will benefit from oral anticoagulants. Based on currently available evidence, it seems reasonable to consider antithrombotic therapy in patients without documented AF showing AHRE >24 hours and a CHA₂DS₂-VASc score (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75 years [doubled], diabetes mellitus, prior stroke [doubled], vascular disease, age 65–74 years and female sex) ≥1, awaiting definite answers from ongoing randomised clinical trials. In patients with AHRE <24 hours, current literature does not support starting oral anticoagulation. In these patients, intensifying CIED read-outs can be considered to find progression in AHRE duration sooner, enhancing timely stroke prevention. The notion that AHRE and stroke coincide perseveres but should be abandoned since CIED data show a clear disconnect.     

Efficacy and Safety of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants versus Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Patients Undergoing Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation: A Meta-Analysis

BackgroundUse of the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) is endorsed by current guidelines for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However efficacy and safety of NOACs in patients undergoing catheter ablation (RFCA) of AF has not been well established yet.ObjectivesTo perform a meta-analysis of all studies comparing NOACs and vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (VKAs) in patients undergoing RFCA.ResultsThere was no significant difference in thromboembolic complications (RR 1.39; p=0.13). Bleeding complications were significantly lower in the NOACs-treated arm as compared to VKAs (RR=0.67, p<0.001). Interestingly, a larger number of thromboembolic events was found in the VKAs-treated arm in those studies where VKAs had been interrupted during the periprocedural phase (RR=0.68; p=ns). In this same subgroup a significantly higher incidence of both minor (RR=0.54; p=0.002) and major bleeding (RR=0.41; p=0.01) events was recorded. Conversely, the incidence of thromboembolic events in the VKAs-treated arm was significantly lower in those studies with uninterrupted periprocedural anticoagulation treatment (RR=1.89; p=0.02).LimitationsAs with every meta-analysis, no patients-level data were available.

Conclusions and Implications

The use of NOACs in patients undergoing RFCA is safe, given the lower incidence of bleedings observed with NOACs. On the other side, periprocedural interruption of VKAs and bridging with heparin is associated with a higher bleeding rate with no significant benefit on onset of thromboembolic events.     

Organisation of care for patients using direct oral anticoagulants

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are recommended by several scientific societies as first-line therapy for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation. However, there is uncertainty regarding the organisation of anticoagulation care, with various caregivers being involved. Patients and caregivers are often confronted by uncertainty about the coordination of treatment. With the functional resonance analysis method we visualised the process of anticoagulation care in daily practice in the Maastricht region. This resulted in recommendations on how to improve the organisation of anticoagulation care for DOAC patients.

     

Optimal antithrombotic treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: triple therapy is too much!

Patients with atrial fibrillation who undergo a coronary intervention are eligible for both anticoagulation and (dual) antiplatelet therapy ((D)APT). An optimal balance has to be found to reduce the thromboembolic risk (i.e. stroke, systemic embolism and myocardial infarction) and to minimise the increased risk of bleeding with concomitant use of an anticoagulant and (D)APT. Owing to a lack of evidence, the guideline recommendations are predominantly based on expert opinion. Current evidence indicates that the combination of a non-vitamin K oral anticoagulant (NOAC) and clopidogrel is safer than vitamin-K oral antagonists plus DAPT, which increases the risk of bleeding, without clear advantages in regard to efficacy. Concerning whether (N)OACs should be combined with single APT rather than DAPT, the findings of the WOEST, PIONEER AF-PCI and RE-DUAL PCI trials seem to favour a combination with clopidogrel only, thus omitting aspirin. Choosing the optimal treatment strategies for individual patients on NOACs and (D)APT will remain a challenge for clinicians, though triple therapy seems to be the less favourable option owing to the increased risk of bleeding.     

The new oral anticoagulants

In patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation oral anticoagulation with the vitamin K antagonists acenocoumarol, phenprocoumon and warfarin reduces the risk of stroke by more than 60%, whereas single or double antiplatelet therapy is much less effective and sometimes associated with a similar bleeding risk as vitamin K antagonists. Besides bleeding, INR monitoring and high interindividual variability remain the largest drawbacks of vitamin K antagonists. In the last decade oral agents have been developed that directly block the activity of thrombin (factor IIa), as well as drugs that directly inhibit activated factor X (Xa), which is the first protein in the final common pathway to the activation of thrombin. These agents have huge advantages in that they do not need monitoring and have a fast onset and offset of action. This survey addresses the role of classical and modern anticoagulation in stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. (Neth Heart J 2010;18:314-8.)     

Management of the patient with an acute coronary syndrome using oral anticoagulation

A significant number of patients with atrial fibrillation, treated with oral anticoagulants, present with an acute coronary syndrome. Many of these patients have an indication for coronary angiography. The introduction of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and the novel P2Y12 inhibitors has generated new uncertainty about the optimal treatment regimen, whether triple or dual therapy should be given and which is the most beneficial P2Y12 inhibitor (clopidogrel, ticagrelor, prasugrel). In this article, we will summarise the practical advice on the management of acute coronary syndrome patients requiring oral anticoagulants following the recent consensus document of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Working Group on Thrombosis in association with the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) and ESC guidelines.     

Rate-control or rhythm-control: where do we stand?

Atrial fibrillation is the most common sustained rhythm disturbance and its prevalence is increasing worldwide due to the progressive aging of the population. Current guidelines clearly depict the gold standard management of acute symptomatic atrial fibrillation but the best-long term approach for first or recurrent atrial fibrillation is still debated with regard to quality of life, risk of new hospitalizations, and possible disabling complications, such as thromboembolic stroke, major bleeds and death. Some authors propose that regaining sinus rhythm in all cases, thus re-establishing a physiologic cardiac function not requiring a prolonged antithrombotic therapy, avoids the threat of intracranial or extracranial haemorrhages due to Vitamin K antagonists or aspirin. On the contrary, advocates of a rate control approach with an accurate antithrombotic prophylaxis propose that such a strategy may avoid the risk of cardiovascular and non cardiovascular side effects related to antiarrhythmic drugs. This review aims to explore the state of our knowledge in order to summarize evidences and issues that need to be furthermore clarified.     

New oral anticoagulant drugs: dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban. Present and future

For years, prevention and treatment of thromboembolic events have been restricted to the use of heparins and vitamin K antagonists. These treatments, in spite of their unquestioned efficacy, present numerous limits (hemorrhagic risk, need for regular laboratory controls). These limits call for the development of new antithrombotic drugs. This review briefly reports on three new molecules, in very advanced phases of clinical research: dabigatran (Pradaxa?), rivaroxaban (Xarelto?) and apixaban. These molecules represent new oral anticoagulants, which directly inhibit a coagulation factor (thrombin for dabigatran, factor Xa for rivaroxaban and apixaban) and do not need regular anticoagulant monitoring or dose adjustment. The approval is still restricted in France to the prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in orthopaedics. Dabigratran will be soon available in the prevention of stroke in atrial fibrillation. With the forthcoming phase III studies to prevent and treat venous thromboembolism, anticoagulant therapy management will be most probably improved in the coming years.     

Antithrombotic management of patients with atrial fibrillation—Dutch anticoagulant initiatives anno 2020

In recent years, as more and more experience has been gained with prescribing direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), new research initiatives have emerged in the Netherlands to improve the safety and appropriateness of DOAC treatment for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). These initiatives address several contemporary unresolved issues, such as inappropriate dosing, non-adherence and the long-term management of DOAC treatment. Dutch initiatives have also contributed to the development and improvement of risk prediction models. Although fewer bleeding complications (notably intracranial bleeding) are in general seen with DOACs in comparison with vitamin K antagonists, to successfully identify patients with high bleeding risk and to tailor anticoagulant treatment accordingly to mitigate this increased bleeding risk, is one of the research aims of recent and future years. This review highlights contributions from the Netherlands that aim to address these unresolved issues regarding the anticoagulant management in AF in daily practice, and provides a narrative overview of contemporary stroke and bleeding risk assessment strategies.

     

Left atrial appendage closure: outcomes and challenges

Whereas the left atrial appendage plays a rather minor role under physiological circumstances, it gains an importance in patients with atrial fibrillation. Compelling evidence has revealed that the left atrial appendage is implicated as the source of thrombus in the vast majority of strokes in atrial fibrillation. Oral anticoagulation remains the standard of care for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation; nevertheless, this treatment has several limitations and is often contraindicated, particularly in the elderly population in whom the risk of stroke is high. Therefore, occluding the left atrial appendage is a logical approach to prevent thrombus formation and subsequent cardioembolic events in these patients. We present a review of clinical outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing left atrial appendage closure and the challenges faced in this field.     

Impact of Antithrombotic Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation on the Presentation of Coronary Artery Disease

Background

Little is known about whether atrial fibrillation is a presentation of coronary disease. There is a paucity of knowledge about their causal relationship and also the impact of different antithrombotic strategies on the subsequent presentation of symptomatic coronary disease.

Methods and Results

We studied 7,526 Chinese patients diagnosed with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and no documented history of coronary artery disease. The primary endpoint was the new occurrence of coronary artery disease—either stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndrome. After a mean follow-up of 3.2±3.5 years (24,071 patient-years), a primary endpoint occurred in 987 patients (13.1%). The overall annual incidence of coronary artery disease was 4.10%/year. No significant differences in age, sex, and mean CHA₂DS₂-VASc score were observed between patients with and without the primary endpoint. When stratified according to the antithrombotic strategies applied for stroke prevention, the annual incidence of coronary artery disease was 5.49%/year, 4.45%/year and 2.16%/year respectively in those prescribed no antithrombotic therapy, aspirin, and warfarin. Similar trends were observed in patients with acute coronary syndromes. Diabetes mellitus, smoking history and renal failure requiring dialysis were predictors for primary endpoint in all antithrombotic therapies.

Conclusion

In patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation, there is a modest association with coronary artery disease. Patients prescribed warfarin had the lowest risk of new onset coronary artery disease.     

Antiplatelet therapy in secondary stroke prevention – state of the art

Our objective is to provide the reader with an overview as well as an update on current antiplatelet therapy for secondary stroke prevention. Relevant journals were hand-searched by the authors to compile a broad but by far not comprehensive summary of innovative and clinically relevant studies. Aspirin, clopidogrel and the combination of dipyridamole plus aspirin are the cornerstone therapy in secondary prevention after non-cardio-embolic stroke or transient ischaemic attack. A head-to-head comparison showed no difference in the prevention of recurrent stroke between dipyridamole plus aspirin and clopidogrel. More potent antiplatelet drugs or the combination of aspirin and clopidogrel prevent more ischaemic events, but also lead to more bleeding complications. For secondary stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation, oral anticoagulation is more effective than aspirin or the combination of aspirin and clopidogrel.     

Anticoagulación en población anciana con fibrilación auricular no valvular. Artículo de revisión

Aging is an important risk factor for patients with atrial fibrillation. The estimated prevalence of atrial fibrillation in patients aged ≥80 years is 9–10%, and is associated with a four to five fold increased risk of embolic stroke, and with an estimated increased stroke risk of 1.45-fold per decade in aging. Older age is also associated with an increased risk of major bleeding with oral anticoagulant therapy. This review will focus on the role of oral anticoagulation with new oral anticoagulants, non-vitamin K antagonist in populations with common comorbid conditions, including age, chronic kidney disease, coronary artery disease, on multiple medication, and frailty. In patients 75 years and older, randomised trials have shown new oral anticoagulants to be as effective as warfarin, or in some cases superior, with an overall better safety profile, consistently reducing rates of intracranial haemorrhages. Prior to considering oral anticoagulant therapy in an elderly frail patient, a comprehensive assessment should be performed to include the risks and benefits, stroke risk, baseline kidney function, cognitive status, mobility and fall risk, multiple medication, nutritional status assessment, and life expectancy.     

心房颤动对不同时间窗内急性缺血性脑卒中患者静脉溶栓疗效的对比研究

目的:探讨与对比心房颤动对不同时间窗内急性缺血性脑卒中患者静脉溶栓疗效的影响。方法:选择2014年8月到2016年5月在我院进行诊治的急性缺血性脑卒中患者98例,其中卒中前已诊断心房颤动定义为慢性心房颤动组(n=50),入院后诊断心房颤动者为新发心房颤动组(n=48);两组都给予重组组织型纤溶酶原激活剂(rt-PA)静脉溶栓治疗,记录两组预后情况。结果:两组患者的性别、年龄、时间窗、合并疾病、血糖与甘油三酯含量对比无明显差异(P0.05)。慢性心房颤动组与新发心房颤动组的有效率分别为94.0%和95.8%,组间比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。慢性心房颤动组与新发心房颤动组治疗后的m RS评分分别为6.22±1.83分和6.29±1.45分,都明显低于治疗前的9.24±1.31分和9.19±1.52分(P0.05),组间对比无明显差异(P0.05)。慢性心房颤动组的症状性脑出血与非症状性脑出血发生率分别为4.0%和2.0%,都明显低于新发心房颤动组的14.6%和12.5%(P0.05)。结论:发病4.5h之内静脉溶栓急性缺血性脑卒中是安全有效的,新发心房颤动不影响患者静脉溶栓后的神经功能结局,但是会增加症状性脑出血与非症状性脑出血,需要加强预防性管理。     

Also the very elderly benefit from warfarin in atrial fibrillation

Warfarin therapy is the cornerstone in the prevention of thromboembolism in patients with atrial fibrillation. It reduces the risk of stroke by two thirds in comparison with no anticoagulation. 1 A weak alternative to warfarin is aspirin, which is also effective over placebo in the prevention of stroke in atrial fibrillation. 1 Aspirin is safer than warfarin in general use. The incidence of atrial fibrillation sharply increases with age, but also the risk of bleeding from warfarin shows the same pattern.     

Treatment of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.

Nonvalvular atrial fibrillation is an increasingly common condition. It may cause disabling symptoms and is an important risk factor for stroke. The goals of treatment include the relief and prevention of rate- and rhythm-related symptoms and the prevention of stroke and systemic emboli. Three principal treatments should be considered: pharmacologic rate control, cardioversion and antiarrhythmic therapy to restore and maintain sinus rhythm, and prophylactic anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy to reduce the risk of stroke. The risks and benefits of each of these therapies have been reviewed. Symptoms, if present, can often be managed safely with rate-directed therapy alone. Until issues regarding safety and long-term efficacy are resolved, cardioversion and antiarrhythmic therapy should be limited to those patients whose symptoms cannot otherwise be controlled. The benefits of warfarin anticoagulation for the primary and secondary prevention of stroke in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation have been demonstrated convincingly by several randomized clinical trials. These benefits must be weighed against the real risk of major hemorrhage. For patients at low risk of stroke, the use of aspirin may be an acceptable alternative to warfarin sodium therapy.     

How cardiologists manage antithrombotic treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary stenting: the WOEST survey 2018

BackgroundAntithrombotic treatment choices are complicated when patients have both atrial fibrillation (AF) and acute coronary syndrome and/or undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In this study, we aimed to gain insight into antithrombotic management strategies in daily clinical practice.MethodsWe invited interventional cardiologists to complete the WOEST (What is the Optimal antiplatElet & Anticoagulant Therapy in Patients With Oral Anticoagulation and Coronary StenTing) survey 2018. In this questionnaire, we presented a patient with a non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and an elective PCI case.ResultsThe results were based on 118 completed questionnaires (response rate 69.4%). In the case of the AF patient with NSTEMI, most cardiologists indicated they would initiate dual antiplatelet therapy (acetylsalicylic acid and clopidogrel) and continue non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) therapy at admission and during coronary angiography/PCI. At discharge, 70.3% would prescribe triple antithrombotic therapy (oral anticoagulation, acetylsalicylic acid and clopidogrel), mostly for 1 month. One year after NSTEMI, 83.1% would cancel the antiplatelet therapy and prescribe NOAC monotherapy. For the AF patient undergoing elective PCI, 51.7% would start dual antiplatelet therapy prior to the procedure and 52.5% would discontinue NOAC therapy prior to the PCI. At discharge, 55.1% would start triple antithrombotic therapy. Furthermore, 25.4% responded they routinely prescribe a reduced dose of NOAC after discharge. One year after PCI, 89.0% would continue NOAC monotherapy.ConclusionThe WOEST survey demonstrated heterogeneity in antithrombotic management strategies among interventional cardiologists. This observed variety mirrors the heterogeneity of the many guidelines and consensus documents. Further research is needed to guide patient-tailored medicine for AF patients undergoing PCI.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s12471-020-01500-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.     

Percutaneous closure of a left atrial appendage with relevant suture dehiscence

Atrial fibrillation is a widespread disease and highly relevant as it carries an extended risk for ischaemic stroke. Surgical closure of the left atrial appendage is routinely performed during open heart surgery in patients with atrial fibrillation with the aim of thromboembolic protection. In this report we present a successful percutaneous closure of a left atrial appendage, which showed clinically relevant suture dehiscence several years after surgical closure.