Dataset Information

Association Between Warfarin Control Metrics and Atrial Fibrillation Outcomes in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation.

ABSTRACT: Importance:Bleeding and thrombotic events (eg, stroke and systemic embolism) are common in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) taking warfarin sodium despite a well-established therapeutic range. Objective:To evaluate whether history of therapeutic warfarin control in patients with AF is independently associated with subsequent bleeding or thrombotic events. Design, Setting, and Participants:In this multicenter cohort study of 176 primary care, cardiology, and electrophysiology clinics in the United States, data were obtained during 51?830 visits among 10?137 patients with AF in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF) Registry; 5545 patients treated with warfarin were included in the bleeding analysis, and 5635 patients were included in the thrombotic event analysis. Patient follow-up was performed from June 29, 2010, to November 30, 2014. Data analysis was performed from August 4, 2016, to February 15, 2019. Exposures:Multiple measures of warfarin control within the preceding 6 months were analyzed: time in therapeutic range of 2.0 to 3.0, most recent international normalized ratio (INR), percentage of time that a patient had interpolated INR values less than 2.0 or greater than 3.0, INR variance, INR range, and percentage of INR values in therapeutic range. Main Outcomes and Measures:Association of INR measures, alone or in combination, with clinical factors and risk for thrombotic events and bleeding during the subsequent 6 months was assessed post hoc using logistic regression models. Results:A total of 5545 patients (mean [SD] age, 74.5 [9.8] years; 3184 [57.4%] male) with AF were included in the major bleeding analysis and 5635 patients (mean [SD] age, 74.5 [9.8] years; 3236 [57.4%] male) in the thrombotic event analysis. During a median follow-up of 1.5 years (interquartile range, 1.0-2.5 years), there were 339 major bleeds (6.1%) and 51 strokes (0.9%). Multiple metrics of warfarin control were individually associated with subsequent bleeding. After adjustment for clinical bleeding risk, 3 measures-time in therapeutic range (per 1-SD increase ?55: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.16; 95% CI, 1.02-1.32), variation in INR values (aOR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.19-1.47), and maximum INR (aOR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.10-1.31)-remained associated with bleeding risk. Adding INR variance to a clinical risk model slightly increased the C statistic from 0.68 to 0.69 and had a net reclassification improvement index of 0.028 (95% CI, -0.029 to 0.067). No INR measures were associated with subsequent stroke risk. Conclusions and Relevance:Three metrics of prior warfarin control were associated with bleeding risk but only marginally more so than traditional clinical factors. This study did not identify any measures of INR control that were significantly associated with stroke risk.

SUBMITTER: Pokorney SD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6613340 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Association Between Warfarin Control Metrics and Atrial Fibrillation Outcomes in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation.

Pokorney Sean D SD Holmes DaJuanicia N DN Thomas Laine L Fonarow Gregg C GC Kowey Peter R PR Reiffel James A JA Singer Daniel E DE Freeman James V JV Gersh Bernard J BJ Mahaffey Kenneth W KW Hylek Elaine M EM Naccarelli Gerald V GV Ezekowitz Michael D MD Piccini Jonathan P JP Peterson Eric D ED

JAMA cardiology 20190801 8

<h4>Importance</h4>Bleeding and thrombotic events (eg, stroke and systemic embolism) are common in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) taking warfarin sodium despite a well-established therapeutic range.<h4>Objective</h4>To evaluate whether history of therapeutic warfarin control in patients with AF is independently associated with subsequent bleeding or thrombotic events.<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4>In this multicenter cohort study of 176 primary care, cardiology, and electrophy ...[more]

PMID: 31268487

Similar Datasets

Project description:Whereas insurance status has been previously associated with care patterns, little is currently known about the association between Medicaid insurance and the clinical characteristics, treatment, or outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).We used data from adults with AF enrolled in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of AF (ORBIT-AF), a national outpatient registry conducted at 176 community, multispecialty sites. The primary outcome of interest was the proportion of patients prescribed any oral anticoagulation (OAC; warfarin or novel oral anticoagulants [NOAC]). Secondary outcomes of interest included the proportion of patients prescribed NOACs (dabigatran or rivaroxaban); time in therapeutic range (TTR) for warfarin users, all-cause mortality, stroke/systemic embolism, and major bleed. Of 10 133 patients, N=470 (4.6%) had Medicaid insurance. Medicaid patients were similarly likely to receive OAC at baseline (72.8% vs 76.3%; unadjusted P=0.079), but less likely to receive NOAC at baseline or follow-up (12.1% vs 16.3%; unadjusted P=0.019). After risk adjustment, Medicaid status was associated with lower use of OAC at baseline among patients with high stroke risk (odds ratio [OR]=0.68; 95% CI=0.49, 0.94), but was not associated with OAC use overall (OR=0.82; 95% CI=0.61, 1.09). Among warfarin users, median TTR was lower among Medicaid patients (60% vs 68%; P<0.0001; adjusted TTR difference, -2.9; 95% CI=-5.7, -0.2; P=0.04). Use of an NOAC over 2 years of follow-up was not statistically different by insurance. Compared with non-Medicaid patients, Medicaid patients had higher unadjusted rates of mortality, stroke/systemic embolism, and major bleeding; however, these differences were attenuated following adjustment for clinical characteristics.In a contemporary AF cohort, use of OAC overall and use of NOACs were not significantly lower among Medicaid patients relative to others. However, among warfarin users, Medicaid patients spent less time in therapeutic range compared with those with other forms of insurance.

Project description:ImportanceBlack and Hispanic patients are less likely than white patients to use oral anticoagulants for atrial fibrillation. Little is known about racial/ethnic differences in use of direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for atrial fibrillation.ObjectiveTo assess racial/ethnic differences in the use of oral anticoagulants, particularly DOACs, in patients with atrial fibrillation.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study used data from the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation II, a prospective, US-based registry of outpatients with nontransient atrial fibrillation 21 years and older who were followed up from February 2013 to July 2016. Data were analyzed from February 2017 to February 2018.ExposuresSelf-reported race/ethnicity as white, black, or Hispanic.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was use of any oral anticoagulant, particularly DOACs. Secondary outcomes included the quality of anticoagulation received and oral anticoagulant discontinuation at 1 year.ResultsOf 12 417 patients, 11 100 were white individuals (88.6%), 646 were black individuals (5.2%), and 671 were Hispanic individuals (5.4%) with atrial fibrillation. After adjusting for clinical features, black individuals were less likely to receive any oral anticoagulant than white individuals (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.75 [95% CI, 0.56, 0.99]) and less likely to receive DOACs if an anticoagulant was prescribed (aOR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.49-0.83]). After further controlling for socioeconomic factors, oral anticoagulant use was no longer significantly different in black individuals (aOR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.59-1.04]); among patients using oral anticoagulants, DOAC use remained significantly lower in black individuals (aOR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.55-0.95]). There was no significant difference between white and Hispanic groups in use of oral anticoagulants. Among patients receiving warfarin, the median time in therapeutic range was lower in black individuals (57.1% [IQR, 39.9%-72.5%]) and Hispanic individuals (51.7% [interquartile range {IQR}, 39.1%-66.7%]) than white individuals (67.1% [IQR, 51.8%-80.6%]; P < .001). Black and Hispanic individuals treated with DOACs were more likely to receive inappropriate dosing than white individuals (black patients, 61 of 394 [15.5%]; Hispanic patients, 74 of 409 [18.1%]; white patients, 1003 of 7988 [12.6%]; P = .01). One-year persistence on oral anticoagulants was the same across groups.Conclusions and relevanceAfter controlling for clinical and socioeconomic factors, black individuals were less likely than white individuals to receive DOACs for atrial fibrillation, with no difference between white and Hispanic groups. When atrial fibrillation was treated, the quality of anticoagulant use was lower in black and Hispanic individuals. Identifying modifiable causes of these disparities could improve the quality of care in atrial fibrillation.

Project description:BackgroundTemporary interruption of oral anticoagulation for procedures is often required, and some propose using bridging anticoagulation. However, the use and outcomes of bridging during oral anticoagulation interruptions in clinical practice are unknown.Methods and resultsThe Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF) registry is a prospective, observational registry study of US outpatients with atrial fibrillation. We recorded incident temporary interruptions of oral anticoagulation for a procedure, including the use and type of bridging therapy. Outcomes included multivariable-adjusted rates of myocardial infarction, stroke or systemic embolism, major bleeding, cause-specific hospitalization, and death within 30 days. Of 7372 patients treated with oral anticoagulation, 2803 overall interruption events occurred in 2200 patients (30%) at a median follow-up of 2 years. Bridging anticoagulants were used in 24% (n=665), predominantly low-molecular-weight heparin (73%, n=487) and unfractionated heparin (15%, n=97). Bridged patients were more likely to have had prior cerebrovascular events (22% versus 15%; P=0.0003) and mechanical valve replacements (9.6% versus 2.4%; P<0.0001); however, there was no difference in CHA2DS2-VASc scores (scores ≥ 2 in 94% versus 95%; P=0.5). Bleeding events were more common in bridged than nonbridged patients (5.0% versus 1.3%; adjusted odds ratio, 3.84; P<0.0001). The incidence of myocardial infarction, stroke or systemic embolism, major bleeding, hospitalization, or death within 30 days was also significantly higher in patients receiving bridging (13% versus 6.3%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.94; P=0.0001).ConclusionsBridging anticoagulation is used in one quarter of anticoagulation interruptions and is associated with higher risk for bleeding and adverse events. These data do not support the use of routine bridging, and additional data are needed to identify best practices concerning anticoagulation interruptions.Clinical trial registration urlhttp://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01165710.

Project description:BackgroundPhysicians treating patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) must weigh the benefits of anticoagulation in preventing stroke versus the risk of bleeding. Although empirical models have been developed to predict such risks, the degree to which these coincide with clinicians' estimates is unclear.Methods and resultsWe examined 10 094 AF patients enrolled in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of AF (ORBIT-AF) registry between June 2010 and August 2011. Empirical stroke and bleeding risks were assessed by using the congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75 years, diabetes mellitus, and previous stroke or transient ischemic attack (CHADS2) and Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation (ATRIA) scores, respectively. Separately, physicians were asked to categorize their patients' stroke and bleeding risks: low risk (<3%); intermediate risk (3%-6%); and high risk (>6%). Overall, 72% (n=7251) in ORBIT-AF had high-risk CHADS2 scores (≥2). However, only 16% were assessed as high stroke risk by physicians. Although 17% (n=1749) had high ATRIA bleeding risk (score ≥5), only 7% (n=719) were considered so by physicians. The associations between empirical and physician-estimated stroke and bleeding risks were low (weighted Kappa 0.1 and 0.11, respectively). Physicians weighed hypertension, heart failure, and diabetes mellitus less significantly than empirical models in estimating stroke risk; physicians weighted anemia and dialysis less significantly than empirical models when estimating bleeding risks. Anticoagulation use was highest among patients with high stroke risk, assessed by either empirical model or physician estimates. In contrast, physician and empirical estimates of bleeding had limited impact on treatment choice.ConclusionsThere is little agreement between provider-assessed risk and empirical scores in AF. These differences may explain, in part, the current divergence of anticoagulation treatment decisions from guideline recommendations.Clinical trial registration urlhttp://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01165710.

Dataset Information

Association Between Warfarin Control Metrics and Atrial Fibrillation Outcomes in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation.

Publications

Association Between Warfarin Control Metrics and Atrial Fibrillation Outcomes in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets