Practical aspects of the oral new anticoagulants

Interrupted versus uninterrupted anticoagulation therapy for catheter ablation in adults with arrhythmias

BACKGROUND

The management of anticoagulation therapy around the time of catheter ablation (CA) procedure for adults with arrhythmia is critical and yet is variable in clinical practice. The ideal approach for safe and effective perioperative management should balance the risk of bleeding during uninterrupted anticoagulation while minimising the risk of thromboembolic events with interrupted therapy.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and harms of interrupted versus uninterrupted anticoagulation therapy for catheter ablation (CA) in adults with arrhythmias.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and SCI-Expanded on the Web of Science for randomised controlled trials on 5 January 2021. We also searched three registers on 29 May 2021 to identify ongoing or unpublished trials. We performed backward and forward searches on reference lists of included trials and other systematic reviews and contacted experts in the field. We applied no restrictions on language or publication status.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing uninterrupted anticoagulation with any modality of interruption with or without heparin bridging for CA in adults aged 18 years or older with arrhythmia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors conducted independent screening, data extraction, and assessment of risk of bias. A third review author resolved disagreements. We extracted data on study population, interruption strategy, ablation procedure, thromboembolic events (stroke or systemic embolism), major and minor bleeding, asymptomatic thromboembolic events, cardiovascular and all-cause mortality, quality of life (QoL), length of hospital stay, cost, and source of funding. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.  MAIN RESULTS: We identified 12 studies (4714 participants) that compared uninterrupted periprocedural anticoagulation with interrupted anticoagulation. Studies performed an interruption strategy by either a complete interruption (one study) or by a minimal interruption (11 studies), of which a single-dose skipped strategy was used (nine studies) or two-dose skipped strategy (two studies), with or without heparin bridging. Studies included participants with a mean age of 65 years or greater, with only two studies conducted in relatively younger individuals (mean age less than 60 years). Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) was the primary type of AF in all studies, and seven studies included other types of AF (persistent and long-standing persistent). Most participants had CHADS2 or CHADS2-VASc demonstrating a low-moderate risk of stroke, with almost all participants having normal or mildly reduced renal function. Ablation source using radiofrequency energy was the most common (seven studies). Ten studies (2835 participants) were conducted in East Asian countries (Japan, China, and South Korea), while the remaining two studies were conducted in the USA. Eight studies were conducted in a single centre. Postablation follow-up was variable among studies at less than 30 days (three studies), 30 days (six studies), and more than 30 days postablation (three studies). Overall, the meta-analysis showed high uncertainty of the effect between the interrupted strategy compared to uninterrupted strategy on the primary outcomes of thromboembolic events (risk ratio (RR) 1.76, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.33 to 9.46; I2 = 59%; 6 studies, 3468 participants; very low-certainty evidence). However, subgroup analysis showed that uninterrupted vitamin A antagonist (VKA) is associated with a lower risk of thromboembolic events without increasing the risk of bleeding. There is also uncertainty on the outcome of major bleeding events (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.59 to 2.05; I2 = 6%; 10 studies, 4584 participants; low-certainty evidence). The uncertainty was also evident for the secondary outcomes of minor bleeding (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.46 to 2.22; I2 = 87%; 9 studies, 3843 participants; very low-certainty evidence), all-cause mortality (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.21; 442 participants; low-certainty evidence) and asymptomatic thromboembolic events (RR 1.45, 95% CI 0.85 to 2.47; I2 = 56%; 6 studies, 1268 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There was a lower risk of the composite endpoint of thromboembolic events (stroke, systemic embolism, major bleeding, and all-cause mortality) in the interrupted compared to uninterrupted arm (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.81; 1 study, 442 participants; low-certainty evidence). In general, the low event rates, different comparator anticoagulants, and use of different ablation procedures may be the cause of imprecision and heterogeneity observed.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis showed that the evidence is uncertain to inform the decision to either interrupt or continue anticoagulation therapy around CA procedure in adults with arrhythmia on outcomes of thromboembolic events, major and minor bleeding, all-cause mortality, asymptomatic thromboembolic events, and a composite endpoint of thromboembolic events (stroke, systemic embolism, major bleeding, and all-cause mortality).  Most studies in the review adopted a minimal interruption strategy which has the advantage of reducing the risk of bleeding while maintaining a lower level of anticoagulation to prevent periprocedural thromboembolism, hence low event rates on the primary outcomes of thromboembolism and bleeding. The one study that adopted a complete interruption of VKA showed that uninterrupted VKA reduces the risk of thromboembolism without increasing the risk of bleeding. Hence, future trials with larger samples, tailored to a more generalisable population and using homogeneous periprocedural anticoagulant therapy and ablation source are required to address the safety and efficacy of the optimal management of anticoagulant therapy prior to ablation.

How minimally interrupted direct oral anticoagulants affect intraprocedural anticoagulation during atrial fibrillation ablation? Insights from a Japanese single-center retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Data are still lacking regarding the effects of minimally interrupted direct oral anticoagulants (MID) on the intensity of intraprocedural anticoagulation of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation.

METHODS

A total of consecutive 269 patients who undergone AF ablation were eligible for the study. All oral anticoagulants (OACs) were discontinued just one dose before the procedure except warfarin. We assessed the total required dose of UFH and time-to-target ACT > 300 seconds (TTA) for each of direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) groups compared with the uninterrupted warfarin group.

RESULTS

DOACs were used in 86% of the patients in the present study (dabigatran group (DG)-17%, rivaroxaban group (RG)-30%, apixaban group (AG)-29%, and edoxaban group (EG)-10%). DG and EG used comparable dose of total UFH to WG (WG vs DG; 206 ± 53 U/kg vs 231 ± 63 U/kg; P = .664, vs EG; 239 ± 67 U/kg; P = .335), while RG and AG required higher total UFH (WG vs RG; 206 ± 53 U/kg vs 270 ± 63 U/kg; P < .001, vs AG; 263 ± 62 U/kg; P < .001). TTA was significantly longer in RG (RG:73 ± 28 minutes vs WG:51 ± 25 minutes; P = .001), AG (AG:64 ± 26 minutes vs WG:51 ± 25 minutes; P = .02), and EG (EG:67 ± 34 minutes vs WG:51 ± 25 minutes; P = .02) than WG, whereas DG was comparable to WG (DG:51 ± 29 minutes vs WG:51 ± 25 minutes; P = NS). Especially, only RG demonstrated significantly slower increase in ACT than WG (P = .013). In the multivariate analysis, warfarin or dabigatran use, age > 75 years, and body weight < 60 kg are clinical predictors for achieving TTA within 60 minutes (TTA-60).

CONCLUSION

MID-dabigatran was comparable to uninterrupted warfarin, whereas MID-factor Xa inhibitors were not. MID is a feasible protocol; however, we should be aware of its effect on the intraprocedural anticoagulation and differences among DOACs in the responsiveness to heparin.

Insights into direct anticoagulants

For the past five decades, vitamin K antagonists (VKA) have been the only class of oral anticoagulants available for treating or preventing venous and arterial thromboembolism. Recently, new oral anticoagulants were developed to address significant restrictions regarding the use of VKAs. These drugs act by direct blockade of activated coagulation factor X (FXa) or thrombin. This present mini-review highlights the pharmacological properties of these new anticoagulants, and discusses the supporting evidence for their usage as well as points to potential advantages and disadvantages of using these novel drugs in clinical practice.

Ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy of thyroid nodules in patients taking novel oral anticoagulants

BACKGROUND

Ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (USGFNAB) is the most accurate form of evaluation for thyroid nodules. Many patients with thyroid nodules who present for USGFNAB are on anticoagulant agents, including the novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs), for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation or venous thrombosis prophylaxis.

SUMMARY

There has been at least one retrospective study describing neck USGFNAB bleeding risks in patients on antithrombotic and/or anticoagulant agents. This study concluded that there was no major bleeding risk or increase in hematoma formation in patients on antithrombotic or anticoagulant agents while undergoing USGFNAB, and there was no need to discontinue these agents prior to the procedure. With the emergence of NOACs, further recommendations should be made for patients on these agents who will be undergoing USGFNAB for thyroid nodules. Currently, there are no published studies regarding patients on NOACs who undergo USGFNAB.

CONCLUSIONS

It has previously been established that patients on historical anticoagulant agents do not need to discontinue therapy prior to minor procedures such as needle aspirations or dental procedures. Therefore, in patients currently taking dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or apixaban, it is concluded that it is reasonable and safe to continue the novel oral anticoagulant agents prior to USGFNAB of thyroid nodules without major risk of bleeding. This conclusion is based not only on the fact that minor procedures are considered safe in patients on NOACs, but also because patients on historical anticoagulant agents do not need to discontinue therapy prior to minor procedures.

[Perioperative management of direct oral anticoagulant in emergency surgery and bleeding. Haemostasis monitoring and treatment]

There is an almost unanimous consensus on the management of the direct new oral anticoagulants, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban in elective surgery. However, this general consensus does not exist in relation with the direct new oral anticoagulants use in emergency surgery, especially in the bleeding patient. For this reason, a literature review was performed using the MEDLINE-PubMed. An analysis was made of the journal articles, reviews, systematic reviews, and practices guidelines published between 2000 and 2014 using the terms "monitoring" and "reversal". From this review, it was shown that the routine tests of blood coagulation, such as the prothrombin time and activated partial thromboplastin time, have a limited efficacy in the perioperative control of blood coagulation in these patients. There is currently no antidote to reverse the effects of these drugs, although the possibility of using concentrated prothrombin complex and recombinant activated factor vii has been suggested for the urgent reversal of the anticoagulant effect.

New oral anticoagulants increase risk for gastrointestinal bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

A new generation of oral anticoagulants (nOAC), which includes thrombin and factor Xa inhibitors, has been shown to be effective, but little is known about whether these drugs increase patients' risk for gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB). Patients who require OAC therapy frequently have significant comorbidities and may also take aspirin and/or thienopyridines. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the risk of GIB and clinically relevant bleeding in patients taking nOAC.

METHODS

We queried MEDLINE, EMbase, and the Cochrane library (through July 2012) without language restrictions. We analyzed data from 43 randomized controlled trials (151,578 patients) that compared nOAC (regardless of indication) with standard care for risk of bleeding (19 trials on GIB). Odds ratios (ORs) were estimated using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed with the Cochran Q test and the Higgins I(2) test.

RESULTS

The overall OR for GIB among patients taking nOAC was 1.45 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-1.97), but there was substantial heterogeneity among studies (I2, 61%). Subgroup analyses showed that the OR for atrial fibrillation was 1.21 (95% CI, 0.91-1.61), for thromboprophylaxis after orthopedic surgery the OR was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.31-1.96), for treatment of venous thrombosis the OR was 1.59 (95% CI, 1.03-2.44), and for acute coronary syndrome the OR was 5.21 (95% CI, 2.58-10.53). Among the drugs studied, the OR for apixaban was 1.23 (95% CI, 0.56-2.73), the OR for dabigatran was 1.58 (95% CI, 1.29-1.93), the OR for edoxaban was 0.31 (95% CI, 0.01-7.69), and the OR for rivaroxaban was 1.48 (95% CI, 1.21-1.82). The overall OR for clinically relevant bleeding in patients taking nOAC was 1.16 (95% CI, 1.00-1.34), with similar trends among subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies on treatment of venous thrombosis or acute coronary syndrome have shown that patients treated with nOAC have an increased risk of GIB, compared with those who receive standard care. Better reporting of GIB events in future trials could allow stratification of patients for therapy with gastroprotective agents.

Managing New Oral Anticoagulants in the Perioperative and Intensive Care Unit Setting

Managing patients in the perioperative setting receiving novel oral anticoagulation agents for thromboprophylaxis or stroke prevention with atrial fibrillation is an important consideration for clinicians. The novel oral anticoagulation agents include direct Factor Xa inhibitors rivaroxaban and apixaban, and the direct thrombin inhibitor dabigatran. In elective surgery, discontinuing their use is important, but renal function must also be considered because elimination is highly dependent on renal elimination. If bleeding occurs in patients who have received these agents, common principles of bleeding management as with any anticoagulant (including the known principles for warfarin) should be considered. This review summarizes the available data regarding the management of bleeding with novel oral anticoagulation agents. Hemodialysis is a therapeutic option for dabigatran-related bleeding, while in vitro studies showed that prothrombin complex concentrates are reported to be useful for rivaroxaban-related bleeding. Additional clinical studies are needed to determine the best method for reversal of the novel oral anticoagulation agents when bleeding occurs.

Recent advances in the diagnosis and treatment of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a drug-mediated, prothrombotic disorder caused by immunization against platelet factor 4 (PF4) after complex formation with heparin or other polyanions. After their binding to PF4/heparin complexes on the platelet surface, HIT antibodies are capable of intravascular platelet activation by cross-linking Fcγ receptor IIA leading to a platelet count decrease and/or thrombosis. Diagnosis of HIT is often difficult. This, and the low specificity of the commercially available immunoassays, leads currently to substantial overdiagnosis of HIT. Timing of onset, the moderate nature of thrombocytopenia, and the common concurrence of thrombosis are very important factors, which help to differentiate HIT from other potential causes of thrombocytopenia. A combination of a clinical pretest scoring system and laboratory investigation is usually necessary to diagnose HIT. Although HIT is considered to be a rare complication of heparin treatment, the very high number of hospital inpatients, and increasingly also hospital outpatients receiving heparin, still result in a considerable number of patients developing HIT. If HIT occurs, potentially devastating complications such as life-threatening thrombosis make it one of the most serious adverse drug reactions. If HIT is strongly suspected, all heparin must be stopped and an alternative nonheparin anticoagulant started at a therapeutic dose to prevent thromboembolic complications. However, the nonheparin alternative anticoagulants bear a considerable bleeding risk, especially if given to patients with thrombocytopenia due to other reasons than HIT. While established drugs for HIT are disappearing from the market (lepirudin, danaparoid), bivalirudin, fondaparinux and potentially the new anticoagulants such as dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban provide new treatment options.

Decrease in the oral bioavailability of dabigatran etexilate after co-medication with rifampicin

AIMS

This study examined the effects of the CYP3A/P-glycoprotein inducer, rifampicin, on the pharmacokinetics of dabigatran following oral administration of the prodrug, dabigatran etexilate.

METHODS

This was an open-label, fixed-sequence, four-period study in healthy volunteers. Subjects received a single dose of dabigatran etexilate 150 mg on day 1, rifampicin 600 mg once daily on days 2-8, and single doses of dabigatran etexilate on days 9, 16 and 23.

RESULTS

Twenty-four subjects were treated, of whom 22 received all treatments. Relative to the reference (single dose of dabigatran etexilate alone; treatment A), administration of dabigatran etexilate following 7 days of rifampicin (treatment B) decreased the geometric mean (gMean) area under the concentration-time curve (AUC(0-∞)) and maximal plasma concentration (C(max)) of total dabigatran by 67 and 65.5%, respectively. The time to peak and the terminal half-life were not affected. The gMean ratio for the primary comparison (treatment B vs. treatment A) was 33.0% (90% confidence interval 26.5, 41.2%) for AUC(0-∞) and 34.5% (90% confidence interval 26.9, 44.1%) for C(max), indicating a significant effect on total dabigatran exposure (total pharmacologically active dabigatran represents the sum of nonconjugated dabigatran and dabigatran glucuronide). After a 7 day (treatment C) or 14 day washout (treatment D), the AUC(0-∞) and C(max) of dabigatran were reduced by 18 and 20%, and by 15 and 20%, respectively, compared with treatment A, which was considered not clinically relevant. The overall safety profile of all treatments was good.

CONCLUSIONS

Administration of rifampicin for 7 days resulted in a significant reduction in the bioavailability of dabigatran, which returned almost to baseline after 7 days washout.

The promise of novel direct oral anticoagulants

The standard effective treatment of venous and arterial thromboembolism includes unfractionated and low-molecular weight heparin as well as warfarin, which have major disadvantages. In recent years, new anticoagulants have been developed in an attempt to overcome the known limitations of established treatment and develop improved therapies. This chapter reviews pharmacological properties of the new anticoagulants, the most recent trials assessing their safety and efficacy as well as potential advantages and disadvantages of using these novel drugs in real life.

Reversal of antithrombotic agents

Anticoagulants are the mainstay of therapy for thromboembolic diseases. In addition to the more traditional agents, new oral anticoagulants, including dabigatran etexilate, rivaroxaban, and apixaban, have been shown to be effective across several indications. Bleeding is a serious complication associated with any anticoagulant, but many of the traditional parenteral and new oral agents do not currently have specific antidotes. This review describes available and future options for the reversal of the effects of anticoagulants, in particular the new oral agents and discusses current management strategies for bleeding events in clinical practice.

Treatment of warfarin-associated coagulopathy with vitamin K

Warfarin is the most common form of oral anticoagulant therapy. Although it has indisputable benefit in the management of thromboembolic disease, warfarin-associated coagulopathy (WAC) is a well-documented complication of its use. As warfarin exerts its effect by impairing formation of the vitamin K-dependent clotting factors, a cornerstone of WAC management is vitamin K replacement. Daily vitamin K supplementation is an emerging approach to regulate international normalized ratios in difficult-to-control patients. Mild WAC without bleeding can often be managed with warfarin withdrawal alone. For excessive international normalized ratio elevation in the absence of bleeding, low-dose oral vitamin K (1?2.5 mg) is sufficient and achieves the same degree of international normalized ratio correction by 24 h as intravenous therapy. The stable patient with WAC and minor bleeding can also be given oral vitamin K, with correction of the underlying defect. Major bleeding should first be managed with factor replacement for immediate correction of the coagulopathy, using either a prothrombin complex concentrate or fresh-frozen plasma. High-dose vitamin K (10 mg) should be given concurrently via intravenous infusion to confer lasting correction. Warfarin resistance and vitamin K-associated anaphylaxis are rare. Despite development of new oral anticoagulant therapy compounds, warfarin will probably retain a prominent role in thromboembolism management for several years to come.

Between Scylla and Charybdis: antithrombotic therapy in hematopoietic progenitor cell transplant patients

Patients who undergo hematopoietic progenitor cell transplant may require antithrombotic therapy for a variety of reasons--history of vascular events or developing new ones during therapy. For patients with arterial disease, use of antiplatelet therapy is based on acuity. For primary prevention of an arterial event, aspirin can be withheld at the start of transplant. On the other hand, in the face of a patient experiencing an acute myocardial infarction, aspirin should be given, no matter what the degree of thrombocytopenia is. Patients with cardiac 'hardware'-stents and mechanical valves-pose difficult issues because as higher risk patients (especially patients with recent implantation of a drug eluting stent) they require more aggressive anticoagulation, even in the face of severe thrombocytopenia. Anticoagulation with heparin is dependent on the platelet count with full dose recommended for a platelet count over 50 × 10(9)/L and prophylactic dosing with platelets in the 20-50 × 10(9)/L range. If the patient develops a distal venous thrombosis, then simple observation can be used, but more proximal thrombosis or pulmonary embolism requires consideration of anticoagulation. Central venous catheter thrombosis is best treated by line removal, as the risk of bleeding is high if the device is left in. The advent of new anticoagulants with minimal drug and food interactions may offer better choices for therapy for these difficult patients. This is also an area in which clinical trials would be helpful to clarify the treatment choices.