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: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: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.

Project description:BackgroundOral anticoagulation (OAC) in atrial fibrillation (AF) reduces the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (SE). The impact of OAC discontinuation is less well documented.ObjectiveInvestigate outcomes of patients prospectively enrolled in the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the Field-Atrial Fibrillation study who discontinued OAC.MethodsOral anticoagulation discontinuation was defined as cessation of treatment for ≥7 consecutive days. Adjusted outcome risks were assessed in 23 882 patients with 511 days of median follow-up after discontinuation.ResultsPatients who discontinued (n = 3114, 13.0%) had a higher risk (hazard ratio [95% CI]) of all-cause death (1.62 [1.25-2.09]), stroke/systemic embolism (SE) (2.21 [1.42-3.44]) and myocardial infarction (MI) (1.85 [1.09-3.13]) than patients who did not, whether OAC was restarted or not. This higher risk of outcomes after discontinuation was similar for patients treated with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) (p for interactions range = 0.145-0.778). Bleeding history (1.43 [1.14-1.80]), paroxysmal vs. persistent AF (1.15 [1.02-1.29]), emergency room care setting vs. office (1.37 [1.18-1.59]), major, clinically relevant nonmajor, and minor bleeding (10.02 [7.19-13.98], 2.70 [2.24-3.25] and 1.90 [1.61-2.23]), stroke/SE (4.09 [2.55-6.56]), MI (2.74 [1.69-4.43]), and left atrial appendage procedures (4.99 [1.82-13.70]) were predictors of discontinuation. Age (0.84 [0.81-0.88], per 10-year increase), history of stroke/transient ischemic attack (0.81 [0.71-0.93]), diabetes (0.88 [0.80-0.97]), weeks from AF onset to treatment (0.96 [0.93-0.99] per week), and permanent vs. persistent AF (0.73 [0.63-0.86]) were predictors of lower discontinuation rates.ConclusionsIn GARFIELD-AF, the rate of discontinuation was 13.0%. Discontinuation for ≥7 consecutive days was associated with significantly higher all-cause mortality, stroke/SE, and MI risk. Caution should be exerted when considering any OAC discontinuation beyond 7 days.

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