Introducción y objetivos: Analizar la evolución de los pacientes que padecen fibrilación auricular (FA) y diabetes a medio plazo en una situación de pandemia de la COVID-19 y describir su influencia en esta población. Métodos: Registro multicéntrico y prospectivo que incluyó a pacientes con FA y diabetes atendidos en consultas de cardiología. Se realizó un análisis multivariante para determinar las variables asociadas a la aparición de eventos clínicos y mortalidad. La inclusión se realizó en febrero-diciembre de 2019. Resultados: Se analizó la evolución de 633 pacientes, 96,2% de los incluidos en el registro REFADI durante un seguimiento medio de 835 días (edad media 73,8 ± 8,5 años, 54,3% varones, CHA2DS2-VASc 4,34 ± 1,4, HAS-BLED 2,47 ± 0,96). La proporción de pacientes anticoagulados se mantuvo constante (95,6 frente a 94,5%; p = 0,24). Hubo un descenso de antagonistas de la vitamina K (del 31,4 al 19,7%; p < 0,01), y un aumento de los anticoagulantes directos (del 62,0 al 70,3%; p < 0,01). Durante el seguimiento hubo un aumento en la prescripción de inhibidores SGLT2 (del 20,0 al 25,5%; p < 0,01) y agonistas GLP1 (del 4,2 al 9,1%; p < 0,01). Falleció el 17,2% de los pacientes, la mayoría de causa cardiovascular, 6,4% por COVID-19, 2,8% por ictus y 1,8% por hemorragia. La mayor edad, la menor fracción de eyección, los niveles más bajos de hemoglobina y especialmente la menor prescripción de anticoagulantes directos se asociaron con la mortalidad. Conclusiones: Los pacientes con FA y diabetes tienen un elevado riesgo tromboembólico y de sufrir complicaciones, sobre todo de origen cardiovascular.

Background: The optimal anticoagulation strategy for patients with bioprosthetic valves and atrial fibrillation remains uncertain. We conducted a meta-analysis using updated evidence comparing direct anticoagulants (DOACs) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients with bioprosthetic valves and atrial fibrillation. Methods: Medline and Embase were searched through March 2021 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies investigating the outcomes of DOAC therapy and VKA therapy in patients with bioprosthetic valves and atrial fibrillation. The outcomes of interest were all-cause death, major bleeding, and stroke or systemic embolism. Results: Our analysis included 4 RCTs and 6 observational studies enrolling a total of 6405 patients with bioprosthetic valves and atrial fibrillation assigned to a DOAC group (n = 2142) or a VKA group (n = 4263). Pooled analysis demonstrated the similar rates of all-cause death (hazard ratio [HR], 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77-1.05; P = .18; I2 = 0%) in the DOAC and VKA groups. However, the rate of major bleeding was significantly lower in the DOAC group (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.48-0.89; P = .006; I2 = 0%), whereas the rate of stroke or systemic embolism was similar in the 2 groups (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.44-1.17; P = .18; I2 = 39%). Conclusions: DOAC might decrease the risk of major bleeding without increasing the risk of stroke or systemic embolism or all-cause death compared with VKA in patients with bioprosthetic valves and atrial fibrillation.

Background Patients with aortic stenosis (AS) have been underrepresented in the trials evaluating direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in atrial fibrillation (AF). We aimed to assess whether AS impacts outcomes in patients with AF and estimate the effects of DOACs versus warfarin in patients with AF and AS. Methods and Results The registry-based FinACAF (Finnish Anticoagulation in Atrial Fibrillation) study covered all patients with AF diagnosed during 2007 to 2018 in Finland. Hazard ratios (HRs) of first-ever gastrointestinal bleeding, intracranial bleeding, any bleeding, ischemic stroke, and death were estimated with cause-specific hazards regression adjusted for anticoagulant exposure variables. We identified 183 946 patients (50.5% women; mean age, 71.7 [SD, 13.5] years) with incident AF without prior bleeding or ischemic stroke, of whom 5231 (2.8%) had AS. The crude incidence rate of all outcomes was higher in patients with AS than in patients without AS. After propensity score matching, AS was associated with the hazard of any bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding, and death but not with intracranial bleeding or ischemic stroke (adjusted HRs, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.25-1.48], 1.63 [95% CI, 1.43-1.86], 1.32 [95% CI, 1.26-1.38], 0.96 [95% CI, 0.78-1.17], and 1.11 [95% CI, 0.99-1.25], respectively). Among patients with AS, DOACs were associated with a lower risk of ischemic stroke when compared with warfarin, while bleeding and mortality did not differ between DOACs and warfarin. Conclusions AS is associated with substantially higher risk of gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with AF. DOACs may be more effective in preventing ischemic stroke than warfarin in patients with AF and AS. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04645537.

fibrillation (NVAF) patients according to their profiles, appropriateness of dosing, patterns of crossover, effectiveness and safety. This is an observational and longitudinal prospective study in a cohort of patients attended in daily clinical practice in a regional hospital in Spain with 3-year a follow-up plan for patients initiating dabigatran, rivaroxaban or apixaban between JAN/2012-DEC/2016. Methods: We analyzed 490 episodes of treatment (apixaban 2.5 9.4%, apixaban 5 21.4%, dabigatran 75 0.6%, dabigatran 110 12,4%, dabigatran 150 19.8%, rivaroxaban 15 17.8% and rivaroxaban 20 18.6%) in 445 patients. 13.6% of patients on dabigatran, 9.7% on rivaroxaban, and 3.9% on apixaban switched to other DOACs or changed dosing. Results: Apixaban was the most frequent DOAC switched to. The most frequent reasons for switching were toxicity (23.8%), bleeding (21.4%) and renal deterioration (16.7%). Inappropriateness of dose was found in 23.8% of episodes. Rates of stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA) were 1.64/0.54 events/100 patients-years, while rates of major, clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) bleeding and intracranial bleeding were 2.4, 5, and 0.5 events/100 patients-years. Gastrointestinal and genitourinary bleeding were the most common type of bleeding events (BE). On multivariable analysis, prior stroke and age were independent predictors of stroke/TIA. Concurrent platelet inhibitors, male gender and age were independent predictors of BE. Conclusion: This study complements the scant data available on the use of DOACs in NVAF patients in Spain, confirming a good safety and effectiveness profile.

Aims: There is currently no consensus on whether atrial fibrillation (AF) patients at low risk for stroke (one non-sex-related CHA2DS2-VASc point) should be treated with an oral anticoagulant. Methods and results: We conducted a multi-country cohort study in Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and Scotland. In total, 59 076 patients diagnosed with AF at low stroke risk were included. We assessed the rates of stroke or major bleeding during treatment with a non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC), a vitamin K antagonist (VKA), or no treatment, using inverse probability of treatment weighted (IPTW) Cox regression. In untreated patients, the rate for ischaemic stroke was 0.70 per 100 person-years and the rate for a bleed was also 0.70 per 100 person-years. Comparing NOAC with no treatment, the stroke rate was lower [hazard ratio (HR) 0.72; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56-0.94], and the rate for intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) was not increased (HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.54-1.30). Comparing VKA with no treatment, the rate for stroke tended to be lower (HR 0.81; 95% CI 0.59-1.09), and the rate for ICH tended to be higher during VKA treatment (HR 1.37; 95% CI 0.88-2.14). Comparing NOAC with VKA treatment, the rate for stroke was similar (HR 0.92; 95% CI 0.70-1.22), but the rate for ICH was lower during NOAC treatment (HR 0.63; 95% CI 0.42-0.94). Conclusion: These observational data suggest that NOAC treatment may be associated with a positive net clinical benefit compared with no treatment or VKA treatment in patients at low stroke risk, a question that can be tested through a randomized controlled trial.

Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the risk of stroke and bleeding among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) despite anaemia at treatment initiation time. Methods and results: All Danish patients (N = 41 321) diagnosed with incident AF, having a baseline haemoglobin (Hb), and subsequently initiated DOAC therapy between 2012 and 2019 were identified through administrative registry databases. Patients with anaemia were subdivided according to the World Health Organization classification of anaemia and evaluated regarding risk of stroke and composite bleeding endpoint [hospitalization due to urogenital, gastrointestinal (GI), or intracranial bleeding or epistaxis]. Standardized absolute 1-year risks of stroke and composite bleeding endpoint were calculated using multivariable Cox regression analyses. The standardized absolute 1-year risk difference for composite bleeding increased by 0.96% [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38-1.54] for patients with moderate/severe anaemia compared with patients with no anaemia. This risk was mainly driven by an increase in standardized absolute 1-year risk for serious GI bleeding, which increased by 0.41% (95% CI 0.19-0.63). No significant difference in standardized absolute 1-year bleeding risk was observed among patients with mild anaemia compared with patients with no anaemia 0.36% (95% CI -0.10 to 0.82). No significant difference in standardized absolute 1-year risk of stroke was observed among patients with mild anaemia, -0.16% (95% CI -0.13 to 0.15), and moderate/severe anaemia, -0.47% (95% CI -0.16 to 0.19), compared with patients with no anaemia. Conclusion: For AF patients receiving DOACs, moderate/severe anaemia is a risk factor for serious GI bleeding, while stroke risk is the same regardless of whether anaemia was present at baseline or not.

Background: There is uncertainty surrounding the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with kidney dysfunction. Methods: Using the COMBINE AF (A Collaboration Between Multiple Institutions to Better Investigate Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulant Use in Atrial Fibrillation) database (data from RE-LY [Randomized Evaluation of Long-term Anticoagulation Therapy], ROCKET AF [Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared With Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation], ARISTOTLE [Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation], and ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 [Effective Anticoagulation With Factor Xa Next Generation in Atrial Fibrillation-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 48]), we performed an individual patient-level network meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and efficacy of DOACs versus warfarin across continuous creatinine clearance (CrCl). A multivariable Cox model including treatment-by-CrCl interaction with random effects was fitted to estimate hazard ratios for paired treatment strategies (standard-dose DOAC, lower-dose DOAC, and warfarin). Outcomes included stroke and systemic embolism (S/SE), major bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), and death. Results: Among 71 683 patients (mean age, 70.6±9.4 years; 37.3% female; median follow-up, 23.1 months), the mean CrCl was 75.5±30.5 mL/min. The incidence of S/SE, major bleeding, ICH, and death increased significantly with worsening kidney function. Across continuous CrCl values down to 25 mL/min, the hazard of major bleeding did not change for patients randomized to standard-dose DOACs compared with those randomized to warfarin (Pinteraction=0.61). Compared with warfarin, standard-dose DOAC use resulted in a significantly lower hazard of ICH at CrCl values <122 mL/min, with a trend for increased safety with DOAC as CrCl decreased (6.2% decrease in hazard ratio per 10-mL/min decrease in CrCl; Pinteraction=0.08). Compared with warfarin, standard-dose DOAC use resulted in a significantly lower hazard of S/SE with CrCl <87 mL/min, with a significant treatment-by-CrCl effect (4.8% decrease in hazard ratio per 10-mL/min decrease in CrCl; Pinteraction=0.01). The hazard of death was significantly lower with standard-dose DOACs for patients with CrCl <77 mL/min, with a trend toward increasing benefit with lower CrCl (2.1% decrease in hazard ratio per 10-mL/min decrease in CrCl; Pinteraction=0.08). Use of lower-dose rather than standard-dose DOACs was not associated with a significant difference in incident bleeding or ICH in patients with reduced kidney function but was associated with a higher incidence4 of death and S/SE. Conclusions: Standard-dose DOACs are safer and more effective than warfarin down to a CrCl of at least 25 mL/min. Lower-dose DOACs do not significantly lower the incidence of bleeding or ICH compared with standard-dose DOACs but are associated with a higher incidence of S/SE and death. These findings support the use of standard-dose DOACs over warfarin in patients with kidney dysfunction.

Background: Falls are always a concern regarding the balance of risk/benefit in patients with atrial fibrillation treated with anticoagulants. In this analysis, we aimed to evaluate the outcomes of patients that had a fall/head injury reported in the RE-LY clinical trial (Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy) and to explore the safety of dabigatran (a nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant). Methods: We performed a post hoc retrospective analysis of intracranial hemorrhage and major bleeding outcomes in the RE-LY trial with 18 113 individuals with atrial fibrillation, according to the status occurrence of falls (or head injury) reported as adverse events. Multivariate Cox regression models were used to provide adjusted hazard ratio (HR) and 95% CI. Results: In the study, 974 falls or head injury events were reported among 716 patients (4%). These patients were older and had more frequently comorbidities such as diabetes, previous stroke, or coronary artery disease. Patients with fall had a higher risk of major bleeding (HR, 2.41 [95% CI, 1.90-3.05]), intracranial hemorrhage (HR, 1.69 [95% CI, 1.35-2.13]), and mortality (HR, 3.91 [95% CI, 2.51-6.10]) compared to those who did not have reported falls or head injury. Among patients who had falls, those allocated to dabigatran showed a lower intracranial hemorrhage risk (HR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.18-0.98]) compared with warfarin. Conclusions: In this population, the risk of falls is important and confers a worse prognosis, increasing intracranial hemorrhage, and major bleeding. Patients who fell and were under dabigatran was associated with lower intracranial hemorrhage risk than those anticoagulated with warfarin, but the analysis was merely exploratory.

Background: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are useful for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. However, the concomitant administration of Levetiracetam limited their use in clinical practice, although some authors raise doubts about clinical relevance of the interaction. Case summary: We report a case of a 54-year-old male with AF, cirrhosis, and seizures, in which the assessment of Dabigatran plasma concentration was needed due to the concomitant use of Levetiracetam. In this case, no relevant reduction of trough Dabigatran plasma concentration was found. An increased peak serum level of dabigatran may be obtained delaying levetiracetam administration. The patient was then followed in our clinic and during 32 months of follow-up no ischaemic or haemorrhagic events occurred. Discussion: The evaluation of DOACs concentration could be helpful to start a tailored therapy in frailty patients.

Background: Dabigatran is the first oral direct thrombin inhibitor which is endorsed by Food and Drug Administration in the prevention of embolic events in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Suitable dose of the drug for the patient is selected based on CHA2DS2-VASc score and HAS-BLED score. Aim: To determine and compare the risk of occurrence of stroke and bleeding after the initiation of dabigatran therapy in patients prescribed with this drug. Methods: Patients with more than 18 years who were prescribed with dabigatran during 2017-2019 in a tertiary care hospital were selected for the study. Most of the patient's prescriptions contained an antiplatelet, so a comparison was made between the clinical outcomes of patients given with dabigatran alone and dabigatran with an antiplatelet because antiplatelet can have effects on the safety as well as efficacy profile of dabigatran. Results: Out of 75 patients enrolled in the study, 42 patients were in the dabigatran with the antiplatelet group and 33 were in the dabigatran alone group. In both the groups, there was a significant reduction in CHA2DS2-VASc score, i.e., 2.58 ± 1.32-1.94 ± 1.21 in dabigatran-treated patients within 6 months, and the score was lowered from 3.76 ± 1.22 to 2.92 ± 1.22 in other groups. The mean value of the HAS-BLED score of dabigatran was reduced from 1.15 ± 0.83 to 0.84 ± 0.78 and that of dabigatran with antiplatelet group from 2.10 ± 0.94 to 1.74 ± 0.92. Conclusion: It was observed that within 6 months, both the treatment groups showed a reduction in the risk scores. The dabigatran group had lower background risks of stroke and bleeding in comparison to the dabigatran plus antiplatelet group.

Given the paucity of comparative efficacy data and the difference in cost between andexanet-alfa and prothrombin complex concentrates (PCC), debates continue regarding optimal cost-effective therapy for patients who present with major bleeding associated with oral factor Xa inhibitors. Available literature comparing the cost-effectiveness of the reversal agents is limited, and the large difference in price between therapy options has led many health systems to exclude andexanet-alfa from their formularies. To evaluate the clinical outcomes and cost of PCC compared to andexanet-alfa for patients with factor Xa inhibitor associated bleeds. We performed a quasi-experimental, single health system study of patients treated with PCC or andexanet-alfa from March 2014 to April 2021. Deterioration-free discharge, thrombotic events, length of stay, discharge disposition, and cost were reported. 170 patients were included in the PCC group and 170 patients were included in the andexanet-alfa group. Deterioration-free discharge was achieved in 66.5% of PCC-treated patients compared to 69.4% in the andexanet alfa-treated patients. 31.8% of PCC-treated patients were discharged home compared to 30.6% in the andexanet alfa-treated patients. The cost per deterioration-free discharge was $20,773.62 versus $5230.32 in the andexanet alfa and 4 F-PCC group, respectively. Among patients that experienced a bleed while taking a factor Xa inhibitor, there was no difference in clinical outcomes for patients treated with andexanet-alfa compared to PCC. Although there was no difference in the clinical outcomes, there was a significant difference in cost with andexanet-alfa costing approximately four times as much as PCC per deterioration-free discharge.

Background: Idarucizumab has been approved to reverse the anticoagulant effect of dabigatran. However, there is little knowledge of the effectiveness and safety of idarucizumab in daily practice. Aims: This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the use, effectiveness and outcomes of idarucizumab. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed up to September 8th 2022. Original studies including patients prescribed idarucizumab, evaluating prescription indications, prescription appropriateness, haemostatic efficacy and/or the occurrence of adverse events were eligible. Case-reports and studies performed in patients ≤18 years or in healthy volunteers were excluded. Study selection and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. Pooled estimates were calculated using the random-effects model, after Freeman-Tukey double-arcsine transformation. Results: Thirty studies comprising 3602 patients were included. Idarucizumab was prescribed for bleeding (63.1 %, 95%CI 57.0 %-69.0 %), invasive procedures (30.5 %, 95%CI: 24.1 %-37.2 %), to enable thrombolysis (range: 2.0 %-27.3 %), dabigatran intoxication without bleeding (range: 3.6 %-7.0 %) or unspecified reasons (range: 0.4 %-18.8 %). Overall, 2.8 % (95%CI 0.5 %-6.2 %) of prescription indications were reported to be inappropriate upon post-hoc evaluation. Hemostatic effectiveness was achieved in 77.7 % (95%CI 66.7 %-87.2 %) and peri-procedural haemostasis was normal in 98.5 % (95%CI 86.6 %-100 %) of patients. The pooled incidences of all-cause mortality and thromboembolic events at any follow-up duration were 13.6 % (95%CI 9.6 %-17.9 %) and 2.0 % (95%CI 0.8 %-3.4 %), respectively. Conclusion: Idarucizumab was mainly prescribed in the setting of bleeding. The reported hemostatic effectiveness was good, especially perioperatively, and the incidence of thromboembolic events was low. Patients with dabigatran-associated bleeding or requiring an urgent procedure nonetheless face a high mortality risk.

Introduction: Recent anticoagulant intake represents a contraindication for thrombolysis in acute ischemic stroke. Idarucizumab reverses the anticoagulant effect of dabigatran, potentially allowing for thrombolysis. This nation-wide observational cohort study, systematic review, and meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of thrombolysis preceded by dabigatran-reversal in people with acute ischemic stroke. Patients and methods: We recruited people undergoing thrombolysis following dabigatran-reversal at 17 stroke centers in Italy (reversal-group), people on dabigatran treated with thrombolysis without reversal (no-reversal group), and age, sex, hypertension, stroke severity, and reperfusion treatment-matched controls in 1:7 ratio (control-group). We compared groups for symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH, main outcome), any brain hemorrhage, good functional outcome (mRS 0-2 at 3 months), and death. The systematic review followed a predefined protocol (CRD42017060274), and odds ratio (OR) meta-analysis was implemented to compare groups. Results: Thirty-nine patients in dabigatran-reversal group and 300 matched controls were included. Reversal was associated with a non-significant increase in sICH (10.3% vs 6%, aOR = 1.32, 95% CI = 0.39-4.52), death (17.9% vs 10%, aOR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.12-4.93) and good functional outcome (64.1% vs 52.8%, aOR = 1.41, 95% CI = 0.63-3.19). No hemorrhagic events or deaths were registered in no-reversal group (n = 12). Pooling data from 3 studies after systematic review (n = 1879), reversal carried a non-significant trend for sICH (OR = 1.53, 95% CI = 0.67-3.50), death (OR = 1.53, 95% CI = 0.73-3.24) and good functional outcome (OR = 2.46, 95% CI = 0.85-7.16). Discussion and conclusion: People treated with reperfusion strategies after dabigatran reversal with idarucizumab seem to have a marginal increase in the risk of sICH but comparable functional recovery to matched patients with stroke. Further studies are needed to define treatment cost-effectiveness and potential thresholds in plasma dabigatran concentration for reversal.

No abstract available