Dataset Information

Use of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants Among Patients with Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation and Multimorbidity.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) is often accompanied by multiple comorbid conditions, which increase the associated risks and complexity of patient management. This study evaluated the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and major bleeding (MB) among multimorbid patients with NVAF who were prescribed non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) or warfarin.

Methods

A retrospective study of patients with NVAF and high multimorbidity who initiated apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin from 1 January 2013 to 30 September 2015 was conducted using five insurance claims databases. Multimorbidity was defined as six or more comorbid conditions, and 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was conducted between the NOAC-warfarin and NOAC-NOAC cohorts. Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate the hazard ratios of stroke/SE and MB.

Results

Of the NVAF population (n = 466,991), 33.4% (n = 155,959) had multimorbidity, including 36,921 apixaban, 10,248 dabigatran, 45,509 rivaroxaban, and 63,281 warfarin patients. Compared to warfarin, apixaban and rivaroxaban were associated with a lower risk of stroke/SE (hazard ratio [HR] 0.63, 95% CI 0.54-0.74; HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.64-0.77, respectively). Apixaban and dabigatran were associated with a lower risk of MB (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.56-0.67; HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.66-0.86, respectively) and rivaroxaban was associated with a higher risk of MB (HR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01-1.12) compared to warfarin.

Conclusions

Among patients with NVAF and six or more comorbid conditions, NOACs were associated with varying risk of stroke/SE and MB compared to warfarin and to each other. Rather than a "one drug fits all" approach, our results may be useful for appropriate OAC treatment for multimorbid patients.

SUBMITTER: Deitelzweig S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8190022 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) depend on some degree of renal excretion, and no head-to-head comparisons based on renal function is available. This study mainly investigated the trade-off property of NOACs in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) with varying degrees of renal function. Methods: A comprehensive search of Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Clinical Trials.gov Website was performed for eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported the efficacy and safety outcomes according to renal function of NOACs. Primary efficacy outcome was any Stroke or systemic embolism (S/SE). Major bleeding was considered as a primary safety outcome. Risk ratios (RRs) with their confidence intervals (CIs), the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA), and trade-off analysis were conducted by renal function. Results: Finally, 5 phase III Clinical Trials (72961 NVAF patients) comparing NOACs with warfarin in NVAF patients were included. In terms of normal renal function, dabigatran-150 mg was ranked first for efficacy (SUCRA: 90.3), and edoxaban-30 mg was ranked first for safety (SUCRA: 93.3). Dabigatran-110 mg/150 mg, and apixaban-5 mg were regarded as the most effective and reasonably safe interventions in the trade-off analysis. Regarding mild renal impairment, edoxaban-60 mg was ranked first for efficacy (SUCRA: 97.8), and edoxaban-30 mg was ranked first for safety (SUCRA: 99.5). Edoxaban-60 mg and dabigatran-150 mg were accounted as the most effective and reasonably safe interventions. With regards to moderate renal impairment, dabigatran-150 mg was ranked first for efficacy (SUCRA: 95.1), and edoxaban-15 mg was ranked first for safety (SUCRA: 98.2). Apixaban-2.5 mg and Edoxaban-30 mg was considered as the reasonably effective and the safest interventions. Conclusions: Dabigatran-150 mg seems the most effective therapy in patients with normal renal function and moderate renal impairment, and edoxaban-60 mg in patients with mild renal impairment. Low dose edoxaban (15 and 30 mg) seems the safest intervention. Apixaban-2.5 mg and edoxaban-30 mg might be the best trade-off property in moderate renal insufficiency. HIGHLIGHTS Dabigatran-150 mg seems the most effective therapy for normal renal function and moderate renal impairment patients, edoxaban-60 mg for mild renal impairment patients.Low-dose edoxaban can be considered as a good choice in NVAF patients at high risk of bleeding.Apixaban-2.5 mg and edoxaban-30 mg might be the balanced option in NVAF patients with moderate renal insufficiency.STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO Identifier, CRD42017054235.

Project description:Background Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) are associated with coronary artery calcification in low-risk populations, but their effect on calcification of large arteries remains uncertain. The effect of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) on vascular calcification is unknown. We investigated the influence of use of VKA and NOAC on calcification of the aorta and aortic valve. Methods In patients with atrial fibrillation without a history of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events who underwent computed tomographic angiography, the presence of ascending aorta calcification (AsAC), descending aorta calcification (DAC), and aortic valve calcification (AVC) was determined. Confounders for VKA/NOAC treatment were identified and propensity score adjusted logistic regression explored the association between treatment and calcification (Agatston score > 0). AsAC, DAC, and AVC differences were assessed in propensity score-matched groups. Results Of 236 patients (33% female, age: 58 ± 9 years), 71 (30%) used VKA (median duration: 122 weeks) and 79 (34%) used NOAC (median duration: 16 weeks). Propensity score-adjusted logistic regression revealed that use of VKA was significantly associated with AsAC (odds ratio [OR]: 2.31; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.16-4.59; p = 0.017) and DAC (OR: 2.38; 95% CI: 1.22-4.67; p = 0.012) and a trend in AVC (OR: 1.92; 95% CI: 0.98-3.80; p = 0.059) compared with non-anticoagulation. This association was absent in NOAC versus non-anticoagulant (AsAC OR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.21-1.21; p = 0.127; DAC OR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.36-1.76; p = 0.577; AVC OR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.27-1.40; p = 0.248). A total of 178 patients were propensity score matched in three pairwise comparisons. Again, use of VKA was associated with DAC ( p = 0.043) and a trend toward more AsAC ( p = 0.059), while use of NOAC was not (AsAC p = 0.264; DAC p = 0.154; AVC p = 0.280). Conclusion This cross-sectional study shows that use of VKA seems to contribute to vascular calcification. The calcification effect was not observed in NOAC users.

Project description: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.Data sourcesStudies were searched for in PubMed and Google Scholar databases.Study eligibility criteriaStudies were considered eligible if: they evaluated the clinical impact of NOACs versus VKAs; they specifically analyzed the use of anticoagulants during periprocedural phase of RFCA; they reported clinical outcome data.Study appraisal and synthesis methods25 studies were selected, including 9881 cases. The summary measure used was the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). The random-effects or the fixed effect model were used to synthesize results from the selected studies.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 implicationsThe 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.