Safety and efficacy of DOACs vs acenocoumarol in patients undergoing catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation

Association of beat-to-beat P-wave analysis index to the extent of left atrial low-voltage areas in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Left atrial (LA) fibrosis has been shown to be associated with atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence. Beat-to-beat (B2B) index is a non-invasive classifier, based on B2B P-wave morphological and wavelet analysis, shown to be associated with AF incidence and recurrence. In this study, we tested the hypothesis that the B2B index is associated with the extent of LA low-voltage areas (LVAs) on electroanatomical mapping.

METHODS

Patients with paroxysmal AF scheduled for pulmonary vein isolation, without evident structural remodeling, were included. Pre-ablation electroanatomical voltage maps were used to calculate the surface of LVAs (<0.5 mV). B2B index was compared between patients with small versus large LVAs.

RESULTS

35 patients were included (87% male, median age 62). The median surface area of LVAs was 7.7 (4.4-15.8) cm2 corresponding to 5.6 (3.3-12.1) % of LA endocardial surface. B2B index was 0.57 (0.52-0.59) in patients with small LVAs (below the median) compared to 0.65 (0.56-0.77) in those with large LVAs (above the median) (p = 0.009). In the receiver operator characteristic curve analysis for predicting large LVAs, the c-statistic was 0.75 (p = 0.006) for B2B index and 0.81 for the multivariable model including B2B index (multivariable p = 0.04) and P-wave duration.

CONCLUSION

In patients with paroxysmal AF without overt atrial myopathy, B2B P-wave analysis appears to be a useful non-invasive correlate of low-voltage areas-and thus fibrosis-in the LA. This finding establishes a pathophysiological basis for B2B index and its potential usefulness in the selection process of patients who are likely to benefit most from further invasive treatment.

Meta-analysis of controlled studies on minimally interrupted vs. continuous use of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation

Aims

At present, there are no guideline recommendations for minimally interrupted use of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (mi-NOAC) during catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation (AF). Current evidence is predominantly based on observational studies, with continuous use of vitamin K antagonist in the control arm. This quantitative summary reflects the first high-level evidence on contemporary regimens, with continuous NOAC use (c-NOAC) as the current gold standard.

Methods and results

Meta-analysis (Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science) on prospective, controlled studies comparing contemporary mi-NOAC (without bridging) with c-NOAC. Net adverse clinical events (major bleeding, thrombo-embolic events) were the primary outcome. In addition, we analysed total bleeding, minor bleeding, and silent cerebral embolism.

Eight studies (six randomized, two observational) with 2168 patients were summarized. The primary endpoint occurred in 1.0% (18/1835): 1.1% (11/1005) vs. 0.8% (7/830) for the mi-NOAC and c-NOAC groups, respectively; odds ratio (OR) 1.20 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49–2.92, P = 0.64]. The OR for total bleeding on mi-NOAC was 1.26 (95% CI 0.97–1.63, P = 0.07). ORs for minor bleeding and silent cerebral embolism were 1.17 (95% CI 0.80–1.70, P = 0.34) and 2.62 (95% CI 0.54–12.61, P = 0.12), respectively.

Conclusion

This synopsis provides a quantitative synthesis of high-level evidence on a contemporary strategy of mi-NOAC in CA for AF, and overall clinical outcomes were not different from continuous NOAC use. Despite preprocedural interruption, there was no sign of lower bleeding rates. Additional higher volume datasets are warranted for more precise treatment effect estimations of this everyday alternative anticoagulation strategy in AF ablation.

Meta-analysis of the safety and efficacy of using minimally interrupted novel oral anticoagulants in patients undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation

PURPOSE

The ideal periprocedural anticoagulation strategy for patients being treated with a novel oral anticoagulant (NOAC) during catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) is unclear. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of using a minimally interrupted NOAC strategy versus an uninterrupted NOAC or vitamin K antagonist (VKA) strategy during AF ablation.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, PubMed, and EMBASE databases were searched for randomized controlled or prospective observational studies that compared a minimally interrupted NOAC strategy with an uninterrupted NOAC or VKA strategy from the time of database establishment up to December 2019. The primary endpoints were major bleeding, minor bleeding, and symptomatic thromboembolism. The secondary endpoint was silent cerebral infarction (SCI) as detected by post-ablation brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). A measurement of treatment effect for the endpoint was reported as pooled odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

A total of 18 studies (6 randomized, 11 observational, and 1 randomized registry) with 6203 patients were included in the final analysis (47% of the patients received minimally interrupted NOAC). There was no significant difference between treatment groups regarding the risk for major bleeding (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.69-1.57, P = 0.86, I² = 27%). Different stratification methods did not yield significant difference regarding the risk for major bleeding. There was no difference between groups regarding the risk for minor bleeding (P = 1.00) or symptomatic thromboembolism (P = 0.26). Brain MRI results showed that both uninterrupted NOAC (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.23-0.83, P = 0.01, I² = 72%) and uninterrupted VKA (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.24-0.97, P = 0.04, I² = 36%) produced a significant reduction in the rate of SCI when compared with minimally interrupted NOAC.

CONCLUSIONS

A periprocedural anticoagulation strategy of minimally interrupted NOAC is not superior to uninterrupted NOAC or VKA when used during AF ablation. There is evidence favoring the use of uninterrupted NOAC or VKA in terms of the risk for SCI.

Safety and efficacy of nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants during catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with a transitory increase in the risk of both thromboembolic and bleeding events. Evidence on the use of nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in patients undergoing AF ablation mostly comes from small observational studies, underpowered to detect differences in clinical outcomes between NOACs and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) treated patients. This updated meta-analysis aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of periprocedural anticoagulation with NOACs compared with VKAs in AF patients undergoing catheter ablation.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane library, and web sources for randomized and observational studies comparing periprocedural treatment with NOACs and VKAs in patients undergoing AF ablation. The primary safety endpoint was major bleeding events, and the primary efficacy endpoint was thromboembolic events (a composite of systemic thromboembolism, transient ischemic attack, and stroke).

RESULTS

A total of 29 studies with 12 644 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, patients on NOACs had a significantly lower risk of major bleeding compared to VKAs either in observational studies (Peto OR 0.68; 95% CI: 0.48-0.95; P = 0.022; I²  = 20%) or in RCTs (Peto OR 0.30; 95% CI: 0.14-0.62; P = 0.001; I²  = 28%). Uninterrupted NOACs reduced the risk of major bleeding when compared to uninterrupted VKAs (Peto OR 0.66; 95% CI: 0.45-0.96; P = 0.028; I²  = 1%), similarly, interrupted NOACs lowered the risk of major bleeding compared to interrupted VKAs (Peto OR 0.29; 95% CI: 0.13-0.66; P = 0.003; I²  = 0%; P_interaction  = 0.076). The rate of thromboembolic complications was very low and did not significantly differ between the study groups either in observational studies (Peto OR 0.91; 95% CI: 0.49-1.67; P = 0.755; I²  = 0%) or in RCTs (Peto OR 0.14; 95% CI: 0.01-1.30; P = 0.083; I²  = 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of NOACs compared to VKAs significantly reduced the risk of bleeding in patients with AF ablation. Similarly, the risk of bleeding was lower with uninterrupted NOACs than with uninterrupted VKAs, and with interrupted NOACs than with interrupted VKAs. The rate of thromboembolic complications was extremely low in both study groups without any differences.

Meta-analysis of safety and efficacy of oral anticoagulants in patients requiring catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

The ideal oral anticoagulant agent during catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) remained unclear.

HYPOTHESIS

Novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are safer and effective compared to uninterrupted vitamin K antagonists (U-VKA) among patients requiring CA for AF.

METHODS

Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 9 observational studies (OS) were selected using PubMed/Medline, EMBASE and the CENTRAL data bases (Inception-December-2017). Estimates were reported as random effects risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). The primary safety outcome was major bleeding and main efficacy endpoint was thromboembolism.

RESULTS

In RCTs restricted analysis, NOACs significantly reduced the relative risk of major bleeding by 72% compared to U-VKA (RR, 0.28, 95% CI, 0.14-0.58, P < 0.001). This significant effect was not achieved in OS based analysis (RR, 0.86, 95% CI, 0.42-1.78, P = 0.68). In terms of thromboembolism, both anticoagulation strategies were equally effective in analysis of RCTs (RR, 0.28, 95% CI, 0.05-1.70, P = 0.17) or OS (RR, 1.43, 95% CI, 0.46-4.39, P = 0.54). In sensitivity analysis, there was no difference among uninterrupted NOACs (U-NOACs) and U-VKA in terms of major bleeding [(RCTs: RR, 0.33, 95% CI, 0.10-1.06, P = 0.06); (OS: RR, 0.70, 95% CI, 0.28-1.78, P = 0.46)] or thromboembolism [(RCTs: RR, 0.25, 95% CI, 0.03-2.29, P = 0.22); (OS: RR, 0.68, 95% CI, 0.08-5.53, P = 0.72)].

CONCLUSION

NOACs, either interrupted or un-interrupted, are safer and equally effective drugs compared to U-VKA in AF patients requiring CA.

Apixaban, rivaroxaban, and dabigatran use in patients undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation using the second-generation cryoballoon

BACKGROUND

Data are limited on the safety of periprocedural anticoagulation with novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in patients undergoing pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) using the second-generation cryoballoon (CB) for the treatment of atrial fibrillation.

HYPOTHESIS

We hypothesized that the incidence of acute periprocedural complications in patients undergoing PVI do not differ between patients treated with VKA compared to NOACs.

METHODS

In 200 consecutive patients (mean age, 64.3 _ 10.6 years; female, n = 83) with symptomatic atrial fibrillation, PVI using the second-generation 28-mm CB was performed. In patients treated with NOACs, the medication was stopped the day of the procedure and continued the evening after the procedure with a reduced dosage. Patients treated with phenprocoumon were continued on uninterrupted phenprocoumon with a target INR of 2 to 3. If INR was <2, bridging with low-molecular-weight heparin was performed.

RESULTS

Forty-seven of 200 patients (23.5%) were treated with a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and 55 (27.5%) were treated with apixaban, 67 (33.5%) with rivaroxaban, and 31 (15.5%) with dabigatran. Seven (3.5%) major complications occurred in the overall population. Major bleeding complications did not differ significantly between the 2 groups (P = 0.23). One patient taking VKA had a pericardial tamponade at the end of the procedure; 2 patients treated with apixaban developed a groin hematoma requiring surgical intervention. Transient ischemic attack occurred in 1 patient of the apixaban and rivaroxaban group.

CONCLUSIONS

Apixaban, rivaroxaban, and dabigatran, compared with uninterrupted VKA, did not show a higher risk for major bleeding or ischemic complications in patients undergoing PVI using the second-generation CB.

Safety and efficacy of DOACs vs acenocoumarol in patients undergoing catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Thromboembolic complications can be life-threatening during atrial fibrillation (AF) catheter ablation. The aim of our study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of continuous treatment using direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) as an alternative to uninterrupted acenocoumarol for periprocedural anticoagulation.

HYPOTHESIS

Continuous treatment with DOACs has similar safety and efficacy compared to acenocoumarol.

METHODS

We enrolled 474 patients (mean age, 58 years; 68.4% male) undergoing AF catheter ablation between June 2013 and December 2016. All patients were equally assigned to take acenocoumarol (group 1, 136 patients) or DOACs (group 2, 338 patients) for ≥2 months before the procedure. We compared thromboembolic and bleeding complications between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

Our analysis showed no significant difference in major and minor complications between the 2 patient groups. Specifically, 3 of 136 patients (2.2%) using uninterrupted acenocoumarol had a major complication (1 patient [0.7%] had transient ischemic attack resolved 8 hours later, 1 [0.7%] had pericardial tamponade, and 1 [0.7%] had a subcapsular renal hematoma) and 2 patients (1.4%) had minor complications (1 [0.7%] pseudoaneurysm and 1 [0.7%] groin hematoma). In group 2, 1 of 338 patients (0.3%) had a major complication (transient ischemic attack). In the same group, 7 patients (2.1%) had a minor complication (1 patient [0.3%] presented with pseudoaneurysm, 4 [1.2%] with pericardial effusion <1 cm, 1 [0.3%] femoral arteriovenous fistula between the femoral artery and femoral vein, and 1 [0.7%] groin hematoma).

CONCLUSIONS

DOACs and acenocoumarol have similar safety and effectiveness regarding thromboembolic complications prevention without increasing bleeding complications.