Dataset Information

Anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure: Insights from the NCDR PINNACLE-AF registry.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients, congestive heart failure (CHF) confers an increased risk of stroke or systemic thromboembolism. This risk is present in both heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). It is unclear if clinicians account for both types of CHF in their NVAF anticoagulation practices. Accordingly, we characterized current outpatient anticoagulation trends in NVAF patients with HFpEF compared to patients with HFrEF.

Methods

The outpatient NCDR PINNACLE-AF registry was analyzed to identify patients with NVAF and CHF. The study population was subdivided into HFpEF (ie, LVEF???40%) and HFrEF (LVEF?2 DS₂ -VASc score.

Results

A total of 340?127 patients with NVAF and CHF were identified, of whom 248?136 (73.0%) were classified as HFpEF and 91?991 (27.0%) as HFrEF. Patients with HFpEF had higher mean CHA₂ DS₂ -VASc scores and were more likely to be female, older, and have hypertension (P 2 DS₂ -VASc score demonstrated that lower rates of anticoagulation in patients with HFpEF persisted until a score of ?5.

Conclusions

Patients with NVAF and HFpEF have significantly lower anticoagulation rates when compared to their HFrEF counterparts. These findings suggest a potential underappreciation of HFpEF as a risk factor in patients with NVAF.

SUBMITTER: Contreras JP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6712307 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure: Insights from the NCDR PINNACLE-AF registry.

Contreras Johanna P JP Hong Kimberly N KN Castillo Javier J Marzec Lucas N LN Hsu Jonathan C JC Cannon Christopher P CP Yang Song S Maddox Thomas M TM

Clinical cardiology 20190130 3

<h4>Background</h4>In non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients, congestive heart failure (CHF) confers an increased risk of stroke or systemic thromboembolism. This risk is present in both heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). It is unclear if clinicians account for both types of CHF in their NVAF anticoagulation practices. Accordingly, we characterized current outpatient anticoagulation trends in NVAF patients with HFp ...[more]

PMID: 30582177

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPrevious studies examining the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in atrial fibrillation (AF) have largely focused on patients newly initiating therapy. Little is known about the prevalence/patterns of switching to DOACs among AF patients initially treated with warfarin.HypothesisTo examine patterns of anticoagulation among patients chronically managed with warfarin upon the availability of DOACs and identify patient/practice-level factors associated with switching from chronic warfarin therapy to a DOAC.MethodsProspective cohort study of AF patients in the NCDR PINNACLE registry prescribed warfarin between May 1, 2008 and May 1, 2015. Patients were followed at least 1 year (median length of follow-up 375 days, IQR 154-375) through May 1, 2016 and stratified as follows: continued warfarin, switched to DOAC, or discontinued anticoagulation. To identify significant predictors of switching, a three-level multivariable hierarchical regression was developed.ResultsAmong 383 008 AF patients initially prescribed warfarin, 16.3% (n = 62 620) switched to DOACs, 68.8% (n = 263 609) continued warfarin, and 14.8% (n = 56 779) discontinued anticoagulation. Among those switched, 37.6% received dabigatran, 37.0% rivaroxaban, 24.4% apixaban, and 1.0% edoxaban. Switched patients were more likely to be younger, women, white, and have private insurance (all P < .001). Switching was less likely with increased stroke risk (OR, 0.92; 95%CI, 0.91-0.93 per 1-point increase CHA2 DS2 -VASc), but more likely with increased bleeding risk (OR, 1.12; 95%CI, 1.10-1.13 per 1-point increase HAS-BLED). There was substantial variation at the practice-level (MOR, 2.33; 95%CI, 2.12-2.58) and among providers within the same practice (MOR, 1.46; 95%CI, 1.43-1.49).ConclusionsAmong AF patients treated with warfarin between October 1, 2010 and May 1, 2016, one in six were switched to DOACs, with differences across sociodemographic/clinical characteristics and substantial practice-level variation. In the context of current guidelines which favor DOACs over warfarin, these findings help benchmark performance and identify areas of improvement.

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:BackgroundThe COOL-AF (Cohort of Antithrombotic Use and Optimal International Normalized Ratio Levels in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation) risk scores for death, bleeding, and thromboembolic events (TEs) were derived from the COOL-AF cohort from Thailand and require external validation.ObjectivesThe authors sought to externally validate the COOL-AF scores in the APHRS (Asia-Pacific Heart Rhythm Society) registry and to compare their performance in the ESC-EHRA (European Society of Cardiology-European Heart Rhythm Association) EORP-AF (EURObservational Research Programme in Atrial Fibrillation) General Long-Term Registry.MethodsWe studied 3,628 APHRS and 8,825 EORP-AF patients. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and Cox regression analyses were used to test the predictive value of COOL-AF scores and to compared them with the CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores.ResultsPatients in the EORP-AF were older, had a higher prevalence of male sex, and were at higher thromboembolic and hemorrhagic risk than APHRS patients. After 1 year of follow-up in APHRS and EORP-AF, the following events were recorded: 87 (2.4%) and 435 (4.9%) death for any causes, 37 (1.0%) and 111 (1.3%) major bleeding, and 25 (0.7%) and 109 (1.2%) TEs, respectively. In APHRS, the COOL-AF scores showed moderate-to-good predictive value for all-cause mortality (area under the curve [AUC]: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.71-0.83), major bleeding (AUC: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.60-0.76), and TEs (AUC: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.51-0.71), and were similar to the CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores. In EORP-AF, the predictive value of COOL-AF for all-cause mortality (AUC: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.65-0.70) and major bleeding (AUC: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.60-0.62) was modest and lower than in APHRS. In EORP-AF, the COOL-AF score for TE was inferior to the CHA2DS2-VASc score.ConclusionsThe COOL-AF risk scores may be an easy tool to identify Asian patients with AF at risk for death and major bleeding and performs better in Asian than in European patients with AF. (Clinical Survey on the Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation in Asia [AF-Registry]; NCT04807049).

Project description:BACKGROUND:Stroke prophylaxis in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) in the era of direct oral anticoagulants is not well characterized. Using data from American Heart Association Get With The Guidelines-AFIB, we sought to evaluate oral anticoagulation (OAC) use at discharge among AF patients with concomitant HF. METHODS AND RESULTS:AF patients with a diagnosis of HF hospitalized from January 2013 to March 2017 were included. We compared patient characteristics and use of OAC at discharge among patients with reduced (redundant ejection fraction [EF], EF?40%), borderline (40%<EF<50%), and preserved (EF?50%) EF using multivariable mixed logistic regression models. Among 10?883 patients with AF and HF, 1790 (16.4%) had a reported contraindication to anticoagulation and were excluded from further analysis. Among 9093 patients eligible for OAC, 3499 (38.5%) had HF with reduced EF, 1062 (11.7%) had HF with borderline EF, and 4532 (49.8%) had HF with preserved EF. The median CHA2DS2-VASc score was 5 (Q1, Q3; 3, 6) among all patients and higher among those with HF with preserved EF than HF with reduced EF (5 [4, 6] versus 4 [3, 5]; P<0.0001). The proportion of eligible patients discharged on OAC was 94.9%, with 43.6% discharged on warfarin and 50.7% discharged on direct oral anticoagulants. A higher proportion of patients with HF with reduced EF and HF with borderline EF were discharged on direct oral anticoagulants than with HF with preserved EF, but the difference was small (52.8%, 53.1% versus 48.5%, respectively; P=0.0002). EF group was not significantly associated with a patient's OAC use at discharge. CONCLUSIONS:In the context of American Heart Association Get With The Guidelines-AFIB, a quality improvement program, the rate of use of OAC at discharge in eligible AF patients with HF was almost 95%. To our knowledge, these rates represent some of the highest use of appropriate anticoagulation for patients in a national registry to date.

Dataset Information

Anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure: Insights from the NCDR PINNACLE-AF registry.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure: Insights from the NCDR PINNACLE-AF registry.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets