Dataset Information

Thromboembolic risk and effect of oral anticoagulation according to atrial fibrillation patterns: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: Oral anticoagulation (OAC) is recommended in both paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (pxAF) and nonparoxysmal AF (non-pxAF), but disagreement exists in classes of recommendation. Data on incidence/rate of stroke in pxAF are conflicting, and OAC is often underused in this population. The objectives of the meta-analysis were to investigate different impact on outcomes of pxAF and non-pxAF, with and without OAC. Two reviewers searched for prospective studies on risk of stroke and systemic embolism (SE) in pxAF and non-pxAF, with and without OAC. Quality of evidence was assessed according to GRADE approach. Stroke combined with SE was the main outcome. Meta-regression was performed to evaluate OAC effect on stroke and SE incidence rate. We identified 18 studies. For a total of 239?528 patient-years of follow-up. The incidence rate of stroke/SE was 1.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.3%-2.0%) in pxAF and 2.3% (95% CI: 2.0%-2.7%) in non-pxAF. Paroxysmal AF was associated with a lower risk of overall thromboembolic (TE) events (risk ratio: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.65-0.80, P < 0.00001) compared with non-pxAF. In both groups, the annual rate of TE events decreased as proportion of patients treated with OAC increased. Non-pxAF showed a reduction from 3.7% to 1.7% and pxAF from 2.5% to 1.2%. Major bleeding rates did not differ among groups. Stroke/SE risk is significantly lower, although clinically meaningful, in pxAF. OAC consistently reduces TE event rates across any AF pattern. As a whole, these data provide the evidence to warrant OAC irrespective of the AF pattern in most (virtually all) patients.

SUBMITTER: Lilli A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6490401 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Thromboembolic risk and effect of oral anticoagulation according to atrial fibrillation patterns: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Lilli Alessio A Di Cori Andrea A Zacà Valerio V

Clinical cardiology 20170504 9

Oral anticoagulation (OAC) is recommended in both paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (pxAF) and nonparoxysmal AF (non-pxAF), but disagreement exists in classes of recommendation. Data on incidence/rate of stroke in pxAF are conflicting, and OAC is often underused in this population. The objectives of the meta-analysis were to investigate different impact on outcomes of pxAF and non-pxAF, with and without OAC. Two reviewers searched for prospective studies on risk of stroke and systemic embolism (SE) ...[more]

PMID: 28471498

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.

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.

Dataset Information

Thromboembolic risk and effect of oral anticoagulation according to atrial fibrillation patterns: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Publications

Thromboembolic risk and effect of oral anticoagulation according to atrial fibrillation patterns: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets