Novel oral anticoagulants and valvular atrial fibrillation: are they always contraindicated?

Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Closure: is there a Role in Valvular Atrial Fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation, a chronic and highly morbid cardiovascular condition which affects over 33 million people worldwide, can be broadly categorized as valvular vs non-valvular in etiology. However, definitions of valvular atrial fibrillation have varied widely in the literature, and there is no clear consensus definition to date. Historically, patients with atrial fibrillation in the setting of rheumatic mitral valve disease have constituted a particularly high risk group for cardioembolic stroke, and for this reason many contemporary trials of pharmaceutical and device therapies for atrial fibrillation have systematically excluded patients with valvular heart disease. Therefore, vitamin K antagonism remains the favored approach to mitigate stroke risk in valvular atrial fibrillation, and the optimal strategy to treat atrial fibrillation patients with valvular heart disease who cannot tolerate oral anticoagulation therapy is unknown. Recent trials have demonstrated an important role for percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion devices in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation, but the role of these devices in patients with valvular atrial fibrillation is uncertain. Given the worldwide burden of valvular atrial fibrillation, future trials intended to clarify the role of percutaneous left atrial appendage closure devices in valvular atrial fibrillation should provide important insight for the care of millions of patients.

Evolving cardiovascular uses of direct-acting oral anticoagulants: a paradigm shift on the horizon?

Direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs), by virtue of pharmacological properties perceived as innovative, are changing the therapeutic scenario of patients requiring short- and long-term anticoagulation. The evidence gathered so far (from pre-approval pivotal trials to real-world post-marketing observational data) consistently confirms that DOACs are overall comparable to vitamin-K antagonists (VKAs) in terms of safety, efficacy, effectiveness and unequivocally documents a clinically relevant reduced risk of intracranial bleeding in the settings of non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism. The following issues are attracting considerable clinical interest: (a) identifying specific subpopulations of patients with AF most likely to benefit from one of these agents (the so-called tailored therapy), and (b) expanding therapeutic indications in emerging diseases characterized by arterial and venous thromboembolic risk. In these scenarios, the risk-benefit profile of DOACs, as compared to VKAs or heparins, is still incompletely characterized. In cardiology, the challenging task of selecting a suitable or even the most appropriate DOAC for patients with AF and a particular phenotype prompted experts to provide suggestions based on careful review of subgroups of patients from pivotal RCTs. However, in the past few months, variegated multicenter trials have been published (RE-CIRCUIT, PIONEER-AF-PCI, GEMINI-ACS-1), with potential influence on clinical practice. Therefore, this review aims to update the latest evidence on the evolving therapeutic uses of DOACs in the cardiovascular area, addressing potential impact for clinicians.