Dataset Information

Anticoagulation in Atrial Fibrillation.

ABSTRACT: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) are at increased thromboembolic risk, and they suffer more severe strokes with worse outcomes. Most thromboembolic complications of AF are eminently preventable with oral anticoagulation, and the increasing numbers of AF patients mean antithrombotic therapy is the most crucial management aspect of this common arrhythmia. Despite the proven efficacy of warfarin, a string of limitations have meant that it is underused by physicians and patients alike. This has prompted a search for new anticoagulants that could overcome many of the inconveniences of dose variability and anticoagulant monitoring associated with warfarin, but without sacrificing efficacy in thromboprophylaxis. The arrival of new oral anticoagulants has been complemented by improved risk stratification schemes, which permit clinicians to easily and reliably identify patients requiring anticoagulation and their bleeding risk. These advances in AF treatment will hopefully translate into improved outcomes for patients, especially as our experience with the new agents grows.

SUBMITTER: Ahmad Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4711491 | biostudies-other | 2012 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Anticoagulation in Atrial Fibrillation.

Ahmad Yousif Y Lip Gregory Yh GY

Arrhythmia & electrophysiology review 20120901 1

Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) are at increased thromboembolic risk, and they suffer more severe strokes with worse outcomes. Most thromboembolic complications of AF are eminently preventable with oral anticoagulation, and the increasing numbers of AF patients mean antithrombotic therapy is the most crucial management aspect of this common arrhythmia. Despite the proven efficacy of warfarin, a string of limitations have meant that it is underused by physicians and patients alike. This ha ...[more]

PMID: 26835023

Similar Datasets

Project description:It is uncertain whether bridging anticoagulation is necessary for patients with atrial fibrillation who need an interruption in warfarin treatment for an elective operation or other elective invasive procedure. We hypothesized that forgoing bridging anticoagulation would be noninferior to bridging with low-molecular-weight heparin for the prevention of perioperative arterial thromboembolism and would be superior to bridging with respect to major bleeding.We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in which, after perioperative interruption of warfarin therapy, patients were randomly assigned to receive bridging anticoagulation therapy with low-molecular-weight heparin (100 IU of dalteparin per kilogram of body weight) or matching placebo administered subcutaneously twice daily, from 3 days before the procedure until 24 hours before the procedure and then for 5 to 10 days after the procedure. Warfarin treatment was stopped 5 days before the procedure and was resumed within 24 hours after the procedure. Follow-up of patients continued for 30 days after the procedure. The primary outcomes were arterial thromboembolism (stroke, systemic embolism, or transient ischemic attack) and major bleeding.In total, 1884 patients were enrolled, with 950 assigned to receive no bridging therapy and 934 assigned to receive bridging therapy. The incidence of arterial thromboembolism was 0.4% in the no-bridging group and 0.3% in the bridging group (risk difference, 0.1 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.6 to 0.8; P=0.01 for noninferiority). The incidence of major bleeding was 1.3% in the no-bridging group and 3.2% in the bridging group (relative risk, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.78; P=0.005 for superiority).In patients with atrial fibrillation who had warfarin treatment interrupted for an elective operation or other elective invasive procedure, forgoing bridging anticoagulation was noninferior to perioperative bridging with low-molecular-weight heparin for the prevention of arterial thromboembolism and decreased the risk of major bleeding. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health; BRIDGE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00786474.).

Project description:Three target-specific oral anticoagulants (TSOACs)-dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban-have been approved by the FDA to reduce the risk of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation; however, no agents are currently approved to reverse the anticoagulant effects of these TSOACs in cases of active bleeding. This review discusses the benefits and risks of these TSOACs from a clinician's perspective, with a focus on the interruption of treatment for either elective or emergent surgery, monitoring, and reversal of anticoagulation. Available coagulation assays are not ideal for monitoring the effects of TSOACs and do not provide reliable quantitative measurement of their anticoagulant effects. When necessary, activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) may provide qualitative information on dabigatran, and prothrombin time (PT) may provide qualitative assessment of the presence of the factor Xa inhibitors, rivaroxaban and apixaban. Current recommendations for reversal of TSOACs are based largely on limited and sometimes conflicting data from in vitro or in vivo animal models, and clinical experience with these recommendations is also limited. Methods that have been investigated for effectiveness for reversal of the pharmacodynamic effects of the TSOACs include dialysis, activated charcoal, prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC), and recombinant activated factor VII. It is important to note that even within a class of anticoagulant drugs, compounds respond differently to reversal agents; therefore, recommendations for one agent should not be extrapolated to another, even if they are from the same therapeutic class. New antidotes are being explored, including a mouse monoclonal antibody to dabigatran; andexanet alfa, a potential universal factor Xa inhibitor reversal agent; and a synthetic small molecule (PER977) that may be effective for the reversal of factor Xa inhibitors and direct thrombin inhibitors. Given the short half-lives of TSOACs, watchful waiting, rather than reversal, may be the best approach in some circumstances.

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

Anticoagulation in Atrial Fibrillation.

Publications

Anticoagulation in Atrial Fibrillation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure