Restarting anticoagulation and outcomes after major gastrointestinal bleeding in atrial fibrillation

Multidisciplinary Expert Guidance for the Management of Severe Bleeding on Oral Anticoagulation: An Algorithm for Practicing Clinicians

Bleeding complications associated with oral anticoagulant (OAC) frequently lead to emergency department visits and hospitalization. Short-term all-cause mortality after severe bleeding is substantial ranging from approximately 10% for gastrointestinal bleeding (the most frequent single site) to approximately 50% for intracranial bleeding. A protocol for multidisciplinary approach to bleeding is needed to (i) ensure rapid identification of patients at risk of adverse outcomes, (ii) optimize delivery of supportive measures, (iii) treat the source of bleeding, and (iv) administer anticoagulant reversal or hemostatic therapies judiciously for patients most likely to benefit. We convened a multidisciplinary panel of experts (emergency medicine, gastroenterology, general internal medicine, hematology, neurology, pharmacy, thrombosis) to review the literature and provide practical guidance including a corresponding algorithm for use at the point of care to assist clinicians in the management of patients with acute severe OAC-related bleeding.

Endoscopic Hemostasis and Antithrombotic Management

This review highlights the available literature for antithrombotic management and hemostasis techniques that can be leveraged when caring for patients on antithrombotic medications who may develop gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB). Risks of both index GIB as well as risk of recurrent GIB are reviewed with emphasis on the balance between therapeutic benefits and bleeding hazards that are inherent with these medications. For management of these complications, an in-depth review of the various endoscopic hemostasis techniques that can be utilized is also provided.

Urgent Reversal of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Critical and Life-Threatening Bleeding: A Multidisciplinary Expert Consensus

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are increasingly being used due to their improved efficacy/safety ratio and lower clinical and economic burden when compared to vitamin K antagonists. However, bleeding is still the most frequent complication associated with DOACs, and although rare, bleeding episodes can be life-threatening or critical. The impact of DOAC anticoagulation activity during a bleeding event must be evaluated according to patient clinical assessment, dosage and time from last intake, the presence of comorbidities (especially kidney and liver dysfunction), and, whenever possible, coagulation tests. Unfortunately, DOACs' anticoagulation activity is not easily or usually detectable in routine common coagulation testing. Specific DOAC tests allow for specific drug monitoring, but they are too time consuming, and are usually unavailable in routine emergency practice. If a clinically relevant DOAC plasma concentration is assumed or proven in a severe bleeding scenario, DOAC reversal is needed to restore hemostasis. This experts' consensus provides a narrative review about DOAC reversal and practical life-threatening bleeding management in several scenarios (trauma, intracranial hemorrhage and gastrointestinal bleeding), focusing on the selection of patients to whom specific reversal agents should be given.

Optimizing antithrombotic therapy in patients with coexisting cardiovascular and gastrointestinal disease

Balancing the safety and efficacy of antithrombotic agents in patients with gastrointestinal disorders is challenging because of the potential for interference with the absorption of antithrombotic drugs and for an increased risk of bleeding. In this Review, we address considerations for enteral antithrombotic therapy in patients with cardiovascular disease and gastrointestinal comorbidities. For those with gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), we summarize a general scheme for risk stratification and clinical evidence on risk reduction approaches, such as limiting the use of concomitant medications that increase the risk of GIB and the potential utility of gastrointestinal protection strategies (such as proton pump inhibitors or histamine type 2 receptor antagonists). Furthermore, we summarize the best available evidence and potential gaps in our knowledge on tailoring antithrombotic therapy in patients with active or recent GIB and in those at high risk of GIB but without active or recent GIB. Finally, we review the recommendations provided by major medical societies, highlighting the crucial role of teamwork and multidisciplinary discussions to customize the antithrombotic regimen in patients with coexisting cardiovascular and gastrointestinal diseases.

Clinical outcomes of patients referred for left atrial appendage exclusion who did and did not undergo the procedure

BACKGROUND

Left atrial appendage exclusion (LAAE) is an effective alternative to long-term anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation. Not all patients considered for LAAE undergo the procedure because of ineligibility, anatomic or medical constraints, and preference of the patient.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to report on the management strategies and long-term clinical outcomes of patients referred to a dedicated multidisciplinary LAAE clinic, including all who subsequently did and did not undergo LAAE.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively acquired data from all patients referred to the comprehensive multidisciplinary LAAE clinic at the University of Michigan between 2016 and 2022. A consecutive 301 patients (age, 75 ± 8 years; 106 women) with atrial fibrillation were evaluated. LAAE was performed in 168 patients (56%) with use of the Watchman device in 146 (49%) and surgically in 22 (7%). LAAE was not performed in 133 patients (44%, no-LAAE group) because of ineligibility in 62 (21%), anatomic constraints in 23 (7%), and preference of the patient in 48 (36%). The CHA2DS2-VASc score (4.7 ± 1.5 vs 4.1 ± 1.6; P = .002) and HAS-BLED score (3.4 ± 1.0 vs 2.8 ± 1.1; P < .001) were higher in the LAAE groups.

RESULTS

Anticoagulant therapy was discontinued in 137 of 146 (94%) and 61 of 133 (61%) in the Watchman and no-LAAE groups, respectively (P < .001). During a median follow-up of 2.2 years (interquartile range, 1.2-4.0 years), in the LAAE (n = 168) and no-LAAE (n = 133) groups, respectively, 39 (23%) vs 29 (22%) deaths, 13 (8%) vs 5 (4%) thromboembolic events, and 24 (14%) vs 23 (17%) bleeding complications occurred. Continued long-term anticoagulation was not a predictor of clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSION

After a comprehensive evaluation in a multidisciplinary clinic, ∼50% of the patients referred for LAAE did not proceed with LAAE and resumed anticoagulation.

[Gastrointestinal bleeding in old age]

Gastrointestinal bleeding is a frequent symptom, with increasing age as a risk factor. Upper, middle and lower gastrointestinal bleeding are differentiated depending on the location, whereby only upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding are elucidated in this article. The symptomatology varies depending on the localization of the bleeding. German and international clinical guidelines currently exist for the preclinical and clinical management of gastrointestinal bleeding. The main focus of the article is on pre-endoscopic management of upper gastrointestinal nonvariceal and variceal bleeding, including the risk stratification, transfusion and coagulation management as well as the initial pharmacological treatment. In addition, current developments in endoscopic and interventional treatment of gastrointestinal bleeding are highlighted.

[Gastrointestinal bleeding in old age]

Gastrointestinal bleeding is a frequent symptom, with increasing age as a risk factor. Upper, middle and lower gastrointestinal bleeding are differentiated depending on the location, whereby only upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding are elucidated in this article. The symptomatology varies depending on the localization of the bleeding. German and international clinical guidelines currently exist for the preclinical and clinical management of gastrointestinal bleeding. The main focus of the article is on pre-endoscopic management of upper gastrointestinal nonvariceal and variceal bleeding, including the risk stratification, transfusion and coagulation management as well as the initial pharmacological treatment. In addition, current developments in endoscopic and interventional treatment of gastrointestinal bleeding are highlighted.

2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 12, 2022, to November 3, 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through November 2022, during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Atrial fibrillation is the most sustained common arrhythmia, and its incidence and prevalence are increasing in the United States and globally. Recommendations from the "2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" and the "2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic risk assessment, anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion, atrial fibrillation catheter or surgical ablation, and risk factor modification and atrial fibrillation prevention have been developed.

2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 12, 2022, to November 3, 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through November 2022, during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Atrial fibrillation is the most sustained common arrhythmia, and its incidence and prevalence are increasing in the United States and globally. Recommendations from the "2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" and the "2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic risk assessment, anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion, atrial fibrillation catheter or surgical ablation, and risk factor modification and atrial fibrillation prevention have been developed.

CURRENT PHARMACOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT IN UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL BLEEDING

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a common reason for presentation to the hospital. Appropriate resuscitation followed by endoscopic assessment and endotherapy for high-risk lesions (active bleeding or non-bleeding with visible vessels) forms the cornerstone of management. Pharmacological therapies are utilised at each stage of management in both variceal and non-variceal bleeding. Proton pump inhibitors and prokinetic agents can be administered pre-endoscopically with vasoactive medication and antibiotics utilised in suspected variceal bleeding. Epinephrine may be used as a temporising measure to improve visualisation during endoscopy but should not applied as a single agent. Topical endoscopic therapies have also shown promise in achieving haemostasis. Following endoscopy, a high dose of proton pump inhibitor should be given to patients who require endotherapy and vasoactive medications, and antibiotics continued in confirmed variceal bleeds. The timing of resumption of antithrombotic medication is dependent on the agent utilised and underlying thrombotic risk.

Functional outcomes of patients with ischaemic stroke with known atrial fibrillation not on therapeutic anticoagulation

BACKGROUND

Anticoagulation significantly reduces the risk of ischaemic stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). There are a proportion of patients with known AF who remain off anticoagulation. Aims This study aims to retrospectively compare the baseline characteristics, treatments and functional outcomes between patients with ischaemic stroke and known AF based on their anticoagulation status.

METHODS

A single-centre, retrospective review of consecutive patients with an ischaemic stroke and a known history of AF was conducted.

RESULTS

Two hundred four patients with an ischaemic stroke had documented AF prior to the index admission, of which 126 were anticoagulated. Median admission National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was lower for anticoagulated patients, though not statistically significant (5.1 vs 7.0, P = 0.09). Median baseline modified Rankin score (mRS) did not significantly differ. Nonanticoagulated patients were more likely to have large vessel occlusions (37.2% vs 23.8%, P = 0.04) and more likely to receive intravenous thrombolysis (15.4% vs 1.6%, P < 0.01). There was no difference in rates of endovascular clot retrieval between groups (P > 0.05). Unfavourable functional outcome at 90 days (mRS ≥ 3) did not significantly differ between groups (P = 0.51). A total of 38.5% of nonanticoagulated patients had no documented reason for this. Of the patients who survived the index admission, 81.5% of patients who were not anticoagulated on admission received anticoagulation.

CONCLUSIONS

Baseline anticoagulation was associated with milder stroke severity in ischaemic stroke patients with known AF. There was no significant difference in functional outcomes at 90 days between groups. Larger observational studies are required to further assess this cohort.

Thromboembolic and bleeding complications during interruptions and after discontinuation of anticoagulant treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation and active cancer: A daily practice evaluation

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Cancer provides challenges to the continuity of anticoagulant treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), e.g. through cancer-related surgery or complications. We aimed to provide data on the incidence and reasons for interrupting and discontinuing anticoagulant treatment in AF patients with cancer and to assess its contribution to the risk of thromboembolism (TE) and major bleeding (MB).

METHODS

This retrospective study identified AF patients with cancer in two hospitals between 2012 and 2017. Data on anticoagulant treatment, TE and MB were collected during two-year follow-up. Incidence rates (IR) per 100 patient-years and adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) were obtained for TE and MB occurring during on- and off-anticoagulant treatment, during interruption and after resumption, and after permanent discontinuation.

RESULTS

1213 AF patients with cancer were identified, of which 140 patients permanently discontinued anticoagulants and 426 patients experienced one or more interruptions. Anticoagulation was most often interrupted or discontinued due to cancer-related treatment (n = 441, 62 %), bleeding (n = 129, 18 %) or end of life (n = 36, 5 %). The risk of TE was highest off-anticoagulation and during interruptions, with IRs of 19 (14-25)) and 105 (64-13), and aHRs of 3.1 (1.9-5.0) and 4.6 (2.4-9.0), respectively. Major bleeding risk were not only increased during an interruption, but also in the first 30 days after resumption, with IRs of 33 (12-72) and 30 (17-48), and aHRs of 3.3 (1.1-9.8) and 2.4 (1.2-4.6), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Interruption of anticoagulation therapy harbors high TE and MB risk in AF patients with cancer. The high incidence rates call for better (periprocedural) anticoagulant management strategies tailored to the cancer setting.

Re-starting anticoagulation and antiplatelets after gastrointestinal bleeding: A systematic review

Background: Gastrointestinal bleeds (GIB) are associated with high morbidity and mortality, with upper GIB accounting for 20,000 deaths annually in the United States of America. Accurate risk stratification is essential in determining and differentiating high-risk versus low-risk patients, as low-risk patients have an overall better prognosis. Patients taking antithrombotics to reduce the risk of thromboembolic events have a 4% chance of developing a GIB. This then places physicians in a difficult position as they must perform a risk-and-benefit analysis of whether to reinstate antithrombotics after a major GIB. This systematic review aims to assess the general trends in time for resuming anticoagulation in the setting of upper GI bleed. Methods: A literary search of three different databases was performed by three independent reviewers. The research databases included PubMed, ScienceDirect, and ProQuest. Specific keywords were used to narrow the search and articles were screened based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. Results: Our initial search generated 11,769 potential articles and 22 articles were ultimately used for this review using specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. There is an increase in thrombotic events following a GIB if anticoagulants are not resumed. We also found that the best time to resume therapy was 15-30 days post-GIB. Conclusions: Therefore, the decision to resume anticoagulation therapy should consider the patients' medical history and should fall within 15-30 days post-GIB.

Position statement from the Indian Society of Gastroenterology, Cardiological Society of India, Indian Academy of Neurology and Vascular Society of India on gastrointestinal bleeding and endoscopic procedures in patients on antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant therapy

Antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant agents (collectively known as antithrombotic agents) are used to reduce the risk of thromboembolic events in patients with conditions such as atrial fibrillation, acute coronary syndrome, recurrent stroke prevention, deep vein thrombosis, hypercoagulable states and endoprostheses. Antithrombotic-associated gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is an increasing burden due to the growing population of advanced age with multiple comorbidities and the expanding indications for the use of antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants. GI bleeding in antithrombotic users is associated with an increase in short-term and long-term mortality. In addition, in recent decades, there has been an exponential increase in the use of diagnostic and therapeutic GI endoscopic procedures. Since endoscopic procedures hold an inherent risk of bleeding that depends on the type of endoscopy and patients' comorbidities, in patients already on antithrombotic therapies, the risk of procedure-related bleeding is further increased. Interrupting or modifying doses of these agents prior to any invasive procedures put these patients at increased risk of thromboembolic events. Although many international GI societies have published guidelines for the management of antithrombotic agents during an event of GI bleeding and during urgent and elective endoscopic procedures, no Indian guidelines exist that cater to Indian gastroenterologists and their patients. In this regard, the Indian Society of Gastroenterology (ISG), in association with the Cardiological Society of India (CSI), Indian Academy of Neurology (IAN) and Vascular Society of India (VSI), have developed a "Guidance Document" for the management of antithrombotic agents during an event of GI bleeding and during urgent and elective endoscopic procedures.

Previous antithrombotic therapy does not have an impact on the in-hospital mortality of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding

The association between antithrombotics (ATs) and the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding is well known; however, data regarding the influence of ATs on outcomes are scarce. The goals of this study are: (i) to assess the impact of prior AT therapy on in-hospital and 6-month outcomes and (ii) to determine the re-initiation rate of the ATs after a bleeding event. All patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGB) who underwent urgent gastroscopy in three centres from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2019 were retrospectively analysed. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used. Among 333 patients [60% males, mean age 69.2 (±17.3) years], 44% were receiving ATs. In multivariate logistic regression, no association between AT treatment and worse in-hospital outcomes was observed. Development of haemorrhagic shock led to worse survival [odds ratio (OR) 4.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.9-10.2, P < 0.001; after PSM: OR 5.3, 95% CI 1.8-15.7, P = 0.003]. During 6-months follow-up, higher age (OR 1.0, 95% CI 1.0-1.1, P = 0.002), higher comorbidity (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.2-1.7, P < 0.001), a history of cancer (OR 3.6, 95% CI 1.6-8.1, P < 0.001) and a history of liver cirrhosis (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.0-4.4, P = 0.029) were associated with higher mortality. After a bleeding episode, ATs were adequately re-initiated in 73.8%. Previous AT therapy does not worsen in-hospital outcomes in after UGB. Development of haemorrhagic shock predicted poor prognosis. Higher 6-month mortality was observed in older patients, patients with more comorbidities, with liver cirrhosis and cancer.

Management of Gastrointestinal Bleeding and Resumption of Oral Anticoagulant Therapy in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: A Multidisciplinary Discussion

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are recommended for the prevention of thromboembolism in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), and are now preferred over vitamin K antagonists due to their beneficial efficacy and safety profile. However, all oral anticoagulants carry a risk of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. Although the risk is well documented and acute bleeding well codified, there is limited high-quality evidence and no guidelines to guide physicians on the optimal management of anticoagulation after a GI bleeding event. The aim of this review is to provide a multidisciplinary critical discussion of the optimal management of GI bleeding in patients with AF receiving oral anticoagulants to help physicians provide individualized treatment for each patient and optimize outcomes. It is important to perform endoscopy when a patient presents with bleeding manifestations or hemodynamic instability to determine the bleed location and severity of bleeding and then perform initial resuscitation. Administration of all anticoagulants and antiplatelets should be stopped and bleeding allowed to resolve with time; however, anticoagulant reversal should be considered for patients who have life-threatening bleeding or when the bleeding is not controlled by the initial resuscitation. Anticoagulation needs to be timely resumed considering that bleeding risk outweighs thrombotic risk when anticoagulation is resumed early after the bleeding event. To prevent further bleeding, physicians should prescribe anticoagulant therapy with the lowest risk of GI bleeding, avoid medications with GI toxicity, and consider the effect of concomitant medications on potentiating the bleeding risk.

Challenges of Anticoagulant Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation-Focus on Gastrointestinal Bleeding

The rising prevalence and the complexity of atrial fibrillation (AF) pose major clinical challenges. Stroke prevention is accompanied by non-negligible risks, making anticoagulant treatment an ongoing challenge for the clinician. Current guidelines recommend direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) over warfarin for stroke prevention in most AF patients, mainly due to the ease of their use. However, assessing the bleeding risk in patients receiving oral anticoagulants remains-particularly in the case of DOACs-highly challenging. Using dose-adjusted warfarin increases threefold the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB). Although the overall bleeding risk appears to be lower, the use of DOACs has been associated with an increased risk of GIB compared to warfarin. Accurate bleeding (including GIB-specific) risk scores specific for DOACs remain to be developed. Until then, the assessment of bleeding risk factors remains the only available tool, although the extent to which each of these factors contributes to the risk of bleeding is unknown. In this paper, we aim to provide a comprehensive review of the bleeding risk associated with oral anticoagulant therapy in AF patients, with a highlight on the latest insights into GIB associated with oral anticoagulation; we emphasize questions that remain to be answered; and we identify hotspots for future research.

No Association between Gastrointestinal Rebleeding and DOAC Therapy Resumption: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

There are recommendations for anticoagulation resumption after gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), although data addressing this topic by direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs)-treated patients is lacking. We aim to determine the safety and efficacy of restarting DOACs after GIB.

METHODS

Studies that reported rebleeding, thromboembolic events, and mortality after restarting or withholding DOACs were selected. The systematic research was conducted in five databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and Scopus). The random effect model was implemented to calculate the pooled odds ratio (OR). The ROBINS-I tool was used for risk of bias assessment, and the certainty of the evidence was evaluated with the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

Four retrospective cohort studies (1722 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. We did not find a significant increase in the risk of rebleeding in patients restarting DOACs after index GIB (OR = 1.12; 95% CI: 0.74-1.68). The outcomes of thromboembolic events and mortality data were not suitable for meta-analytic calculations. Single studies did not show statistically significant differences. Data quality assessment showed a serious overall risk of bias and very low quality of evidence (GRADE D).

CONCLUSION

DOAC resumption after a GIB episode may not elevate the risk of rebleeding. However, the need for high-quality randomized clinical trials is crucial.

Resumption of Antiplatelet Therapy after Major Bleeding

Major bleeding is a common threat in patients requiring antiplatelet therapy. Timing and intensity with regard to resumption of antiplatelet therapy represent a major challenge in clinical practice. Knowledge of the patient's bleeding risk, defining transient/treatable and permanent/untreatable risk factors for bleeding, and weighing these against thrombotic risk are key to successful prevention of major adverse events. Shared decision-making involving various disciplines is essential to determine the optimal strategy. The present article addresses clinically relevant questions focusing on the most life-threatening or frequently occurring bleeding events, such as intracranial hemorrhage and gastrointestinal bleeding, and discusses the evidence for antiplatelet therapy resumption using individual risk assessment in high-risk cardiovascular disease patients.

Bleeding and ischaemic events after first bleed in anticoagulated atrial fibrillation patients: risk and timing

AIMS

To determine the risk of subsequent adverse clinical outcomes in anticoagulated patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who experienced a new bleeding event.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Anticoagulated AF patients were followed in two prospective cohort studies. Information on incident bleeding was systematically collected during yearly follow-up visits and events were adjudicated as major bleeding or clinically relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB) according to the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis guidelines. The primary outcome was a composite of stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), or all-cause death. Time-updated multivariable Cox proportional-hazards models were used to compare outcomes in patients with and without incident bleeding. Median follow-up was 4.08 years [interquartile range (IQR): 2.93-5.98]. Of the 3277 patients included (mean age 72 years, 28.5% women), 646 (19.7%) developed a new bleeding, 297 (9.1%) a major bleeding and 418 (12.8%) a CRNMB. The incidence of the primary outcome was 7.08 and 4.04 per 100 patient-years in patients with and without any bleeding [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR): 1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.16-1.61; P < 0.001; median time between a new bleeding and a primary outcome 306 days (IQR: 23-832)]. Recurrent bleeding occurred in 126 patients [incidence, 8.65 per 100 patient-years (95% CI: 7.26-10.30)]. In patients with and without a major bleeding, the incidence of the primary outcome was 11.00 and 4.06 per 100 patient-years [aHR: 2.04, 95% CI: 1.69-2.46; P < 0.001; median time to a primary outcome 142 days (IQR: 9-518)], and 59 had recurrent bleeding [11.61 per 100 patient-years (95% CI: 8.99-14.98)]. The incidence of the primary outcome was 5.29 and 4.55 in patients with and without CRNMB [aHR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.76-1.15; P = 0.53; median time to a composite outcome 505 days (IQR: 153-1079)], and 87 had recurrent bleeding [8.43 per 100 patient-years (95% CI: 6.83-10.40)]. Patients who had their oral anticoagulation (OAC) discontinued after their first bleeding episode had a higher incidence of the primary composite than those who continued OAC (63/89 vs. 159/557 patients; aHR: 4.46, 95% CI: 3.16-6.31; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In anticoagulated AF patients, major bleeding but not CRNMB was associated with a high risk of adverse outcomes, part of which may be explained by OAC discontinuation. Most events occurred late after the bleeding episode, emphasizing the importance of long-term follow-up in these patients.

Challenges in managing patients on anticoagulation: Thrombocytopenia, resumption after bleeding and recurrent thrombosis

Prescribing of anticoagulation is increasing worldwide. This is partly reflective of an aging population with cardiovascular comorbidities such as arrhythmias and prosthetic heart valves, alongside improvements in cancer treatments and survival. In this review, we discuss three common challenges faced by clinicians. These concern the management of patients with thrombosis and thrombocytopenia, resumption of anticoagulation in patients with a history of gastrointestinal or intracranial haemorrhage, and how to approach and treat a patient with recurrent thrombosis on anticoagulation. We consider the available evidence including relevant published recommendations and propose practical management suggestions to aid clinicians faced with these dilemmas.

Anticoagulation and bleeding in the cancer patient

Cancer patients have an increased risk of bleeding compared to non-cancer patients with anticoagulant therapy. A bleeding risk assessment before initiation of anticoagulation is recommended. Currently low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are the mainstays of treatment for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE). Since DOACs are administered orally, they offer some convenience and ease of administration; however, LMWH may be preferred in certain cancers. Given the prevalence of anticoagulant therapies in cancer patients, clinical providers must be able to recognize potentially critical bleeding sites and modalities to reverse major hemorrhage. Reversal agents or antidotes to bleeding may be required when bleeding is persistent or life-threatening. These include vitamin K, fresh frozen plasma (FFP), protamine, prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) or andexanet alfa, and idarucizumab. Inferior vena cava (IVC) filter insertion can be also considered in those with major bleeding. Evidence for timing and need for re-initiation of anticoagulant therapy after a major bleeding remains sparse, but a multi-disciplinary approach and shared decision-making can be implemented in the interim.

Risk factors for emergency department revisit in elderly patients with gastrointestinal bleeding secondary to anticoagulant therapy

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the frequency of emergency department (ED) revisits among elderly patients with gastrointestinal bleeding secondary to anticoagulant treatment and identify factors associated with an increased risk of ED revisits.

METHODS

A 3-year retrospective observational study was designed, including elderly patients (≥65 years) with atrial fibrillation and undergoing oral anticoagulation therapy who visited the ED for gastrointestinal bleeding. To evaluate the risk factors for 30-day revisit, a multivariate analysis was designed including comorbidities, concomitant treatment, change in anticoagulant treatment and prescription of direct-acting oral anticoagulants.

RESULTS

80 patients were included. At discharge, anticoagulation therapy was modified in 21 (26.2%) patients; and changed from an oral anticoagulant to heparin in 17 (21.2%) patients and to another oral anticoagulant in 4 (5.0%) patients. Anticoagulant treatment was withdrawn in 5 (6.3%) patients at discharge. Eleven (13.7%) patients revisited the ED 30 days after hospital discharge for bleeding episodes. No differences in the frequency of revisit to the ED were observed in the patients who changed their anticoagulant treatment at discharge. In the multivariate analysis, chronic kidney disease was the only factor significantly associated with revisits at 30 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Elderly patients who experience a first episode of gastrointestinal bleeding have a high risk of revisiting the ED for a bleeding episode, with no particular differences between the types of anticoagulant prescribed at discharge.

Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation: A Scientific Statement of JACC: Asia (Part 2)

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained cardiac arrhythmia and is associated with substantial increases in the risk for stroke and systemic thromboembolism. With the successful introduction of the first non-vitamin K antagonistdirect oral anticoagulant agent (NOAC) in 2009, the role of vitamin K antagonists has been replaced in most clinical settings except in a few conditions for which NOACs are contraindicated. Data for the use of NOACs in different clinical scenarios have been accumulating in the past decade, and a more sophisticated strategy for patients with AF is now warranted. JACC: Asia recently appointed a working group to summarize the most updated information regarding stroke prevention in AF. The aim of this statement is to provide possible treatment options in daily practice. Local availability, cost, and patient comorbidities should also be considered. Final decisions may still need to be individualized and based on clinicians' discretion. This is part 2 of the statement.

Effectiveness and safety of oral anticoagulant therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation with prior gastrointestinal bleeding: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) commonly complicates anticoagulant therapy for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, AF patients with prior GIB were excluded from most randomized controlled trials on anticoagulation therapy. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effect of oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy in this specific population.

Methods

Randomized trials and observational studies reporting the data about the resumption of OAC therapy among AF patients with prior GIB were included. The search was performed in the PubMed and Embase databasesup to March 2022. The adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled by a random-effects model with an inverse variance method.

Results

A total of 7 studies involving 57,623 patients were included. Compared with no anticoagulant therapy, OAC therapy was associated with decreased risks of stroke or systemic embolism (HR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.59–0.84) and all-cause death (HR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.60–0.72), but there was no significant difference in the risk of recurrent GIB (HR = 1.22, 95% CI: 0.94–1.59). Compared with vitamin K antagonists, non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) were associated with reduced risks of stroke or systemic embolism (HR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.54–0.68), all-cause mortality (HR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.75–0.99), major bleeding (HR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.66–0.84), and GIB recurrence (HR = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.72–0.96).

Conclusions

In AF patients with prior GIB, OAC therapy (especially NOACs) demonstrated superior effectiveness compared with no anticoagulant therapy.

Clinical outcomes of gastrointestinal bleeding management during anticoagulation therapy

Background

Acute gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is not an uncommon complication of oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy that requires medication cessation. However, drug cessation may cause fatal stroke or systemic embolization in patients at high thromboembolic risk. Here we sought to find an appropriate anticoagulation cessation strategy in cases of GI bleeding during OAC therapy.

Methods

This single-center retrospective cohort analysis was performed between 2010 and 2018. Patients were enrolled if the following three consecutive conditions were met: 1) electrocardiography electrocardiography-proven atrial fibrillation; 2) OAC therapy; and 3) GI bleeding. We divided the drug cessation strategy into the continuation and discontinuation groups. During 1-year follow-up, the rates of major thromboembolic and rebleeding events were calculated.

Results

One hundred and forty-six patients (continuation [n = 54] vs. discontinuation [n = 92] group) were enrolled. Patients in the discontinuation group were more likely to be older (69.8 ± 9.0 yrs vs. 74.9 ± 8.9 yrs, p = 0.001), while patients in the continuation group were more likely to have undergone cardiac valve surgery (51.9% vs. 20.7%, p<0.001). The presence of a mechanical mitral valve was a determinant of continuation strategy (38.9% vs. 7.5%, p<0.001). However, the mean CHA₂DS₂-VASc (3.4±1.3 vs. 4.1±1.6, p = 0.010) and Glasgow-Blatchford (8.0±2.4 vs. 8.9±2.5, p = 0.037) scores were higher in the discontinuation group.

Two major embolic strokes occurred in each group (3.7% vs. 2.2%, p = 0.585). Four of 54 (7.4%) and five of 92 (5.4%) patients had rebleeding events during follow-up (p = 0.632). One embolic event in the continuation group and one rebleeding event in the discontinuation group were fatal. The Glasgow-Blatchford score was a predictor of 1-year rebleeding events (odds ratio [OR], 1.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68–2.20; p = 0.028). The high CHA₂DS₂-VASc score showed a strong trend (OR, 1.71; 95% CI, 0.92–3.20; p = 0.089) in 1-year thromboembolic events.

Conclusion

No single risk factor or drug cessation strategy was attributed to adverse clinical events after GI bleeding. The risk of future thrombotic or rebleeding events should be individualized and controlled for based on a pre-existing stratification system.

Effectiveness and safety of oral anticoagulants in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients with prior bleeding events: a retrospective analysis of administrative claims databases

Introduction

There are a paucity of real-world data examining effectiveness and safety of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients with prior bleeding.

Methods

This retrospective analysis included data from 5 insurance claims databases and included NVAF patients prescribed OACs with prior bleeding. One-to-one propensity score matching was conducted between NOACs and warfarin and between NOACs in each database. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and MB.

Results

A total of 244,563 patients (mean age 77; 50% female) with prior bleeding included 55,094 (22.5%) treated with apixaban, 12,500 (5.1%) with dabigatran, 38,246 (15.6%) with rivaroxaban, and 138,723 (56.7%) with warfarin. Apixaban (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.76 [95% CI: 0.70, 0.83]) and rivaroxaban (HR: 0.79 [95% CI: 0.71, 0.87]) had a lower risk of stroke/SE vs. warfarin. Apixaban (HR: 0.67 [95% CI: 0.64, 0.70]) and dabigatran (HR: 0.88 [95% CI: 0.81, 0.96]) had a lower risk of MB vs. warfarin. Apixaban patients had a lower risk of stroke/SE vs. dabigatran (HR: 0.70 [95% CI: 0.57, 0.86]) and rivaroxaban (HR: 0.85 [95% CI: 0.76, 0.96]) and a lower risk of MB than dabigatran (HR: 0.73 [95% CI: 0.67, 0.81]) and rivaroxaban (HR: 0.64 [95% CI: 0.61, 0.68]).

Conclusions

In this real-world analysis of a large sample of NVAF patients with prior bleeding, NOACs were associated with similar or lower risk of stroke/SE and MB vs. warfarin and variable risk of stroke/SE and MB against each other.

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11239-022-02660-2.

Data on NOAC effectiveness and safety in NVAF patients with prior bleed history are lacking.

This study included data on OAC-treated NVAF patients with a history of bleeding.

NOACs were associated with similar or lower risk of stroke/SE and MB vs. warfarin.

NOACs were associated with variable risk of stroke/SE and MB against each other.

This study further demonstrated the effectiveness and safety profile when comparing NOACs to warfarin. The findings could aid to inform the discussion on the benefits and risks in the decision making process for NVAF patients who had a prior bleed.

Direct oral anticoagulants versus warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients with prior gastrointestinal bleeding: a network meta-analysis of real-world data

PURPOSE

The objective of present study was to compare the safety and efficacy of resuming direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and prior gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB).

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched from their inception until 2 June 2021 for observational cohort studies in patients with AF, who resumed VKAs or DOACs after a history of GIB. Studies that reported data on clinical outcomes including risk of recurrent GIB, thromboembolic events, or all-cause mortality were included. A network meta-analysis was performed to calculate the pooled hazard ratio (HR) and associated 95% credible intervals (CIs), using a random effects model in a Bayesian framework.

RESULTS

A total of 10 studies were included in the final analysis, including 59,244 AF patients with prior GIB, of whom 27,793 resumed DOACs, 24,635 resumed warfarin, and 6816 did not resume anticoagulation. Compared with no resumption of anticoagulation, resumption of warfarin was associated with an increased risk of recurrent GIB (HR 1.33, 95% CI: 1.06-1.70), but no increased risk of recurrent GIB was found with resumption of DOACs (HR 1.22, 95% CI: 0.88-1.71); among individual DOACs, only rivaroxaban was associated with an increased risk of recurrent GIB (HR 1.67, 95% CI: 1.16-2.65). Compared with no resumption of anticoagulation, resumption of DOACs and warfarin was associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality (HR 0.57, 95% CI: 0.40-0.84; HR 0.58, 95% CI: 0.44-0.79), but no statistically significant reduction in thromboembolic events (HR 0.69, 95% CI: 0.4-1.2; HR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.55-1.29).

CONCLUSIONS

In AF patients with prior GIB, resumption of DOACs may be safer, except for rivaroxaban.

Risk factors for short-term re-bleeding in patients with colonic diverticular bleeding: a multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Few studies have evaluated risk factors for short-term re-bleeding in patients with colonic diverticular bleeding (CDB). We aimed to reveal risk factors for re-bleeding within a month in patients with CDB.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed clinical course of patients with CDB diagnosed at 10 institutions between 2015 and 2019. Risk factors for re-bleeding within a month were assessed by Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

Among 370 patients, 173 (47%) patients had been under the use of antithrombotic agents (ATs) and 34 (9%) experienced re-bleeding within a month. Multivariate analysis revealed that the use of ATs was an independent risk factor for re-bleeding within a month (HR 2.38, 95% CI 1.10-5.50, p = .028). Furthermore, use of multiple ATs and continuation of ATs were found to be independent risk factors for re-bleeding within a month (HR 3.88, 95% CI 1.49-10.00, p = .007 and HR 3.30, 95% CI 1.23-8.63, p = .019, respectively). Two of 370 patients, who discontinued ATs, developed thromboembolic event.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of ATs was an independent risk factor for short-term re-bleeding within a month in patients with CDB. This was especially the case for the use of multiple ATs and continuation of ATs. However, discontinuation of ATs may increase the thromboembolic events those patients.

Restarting Warfarin vs Direct Oral Anticoagulants After Major Gastrointestinal Bleeding and Associated Outcomes in Atrial Fibrillation: A Cohort Study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Limited data exist on the management of anticoagulation after hospitalization for gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) and the risks of recurrent GIB and thromboembolism in patients who are prescribed warfarin vs direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). The purpose of this study was to assess the risk of recurrent GIB and thromboembolism with resumption of anticoagulation after GIB.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of adults with atrial fibrillation prescribed warfarin or DOACs and subsequently hospitalized for GIB. We used claims data from IBM MarketScan Databases from January 2008 through December 2017. Multivariable time-varying regression was used to determine the risks of recurrent GIB and thromboembolism within 6 months of the index hospitalization.

RESULTS

There were 2991 patients hospitalized for GIB on anticoagulants (warfarin, n = 1872; rivaroxaban, n = 676; dabigatran, n = 293; and apixaban, n = 250). Of warfarin users, 46% (n = 869) resumed warfarin after discharge compared with 43% (n = 483) of DOAC users who resumed DOACs. In the regression analysis modeling time-varying coefficients for anticoagulant use, warfarin resumption was associated with an increased risk of recurrent GIB (hazard ratio [HR], 2.12; 95% CI, 1.43-3.14; P = .0002) compared with no anticoagulant resumption, whereas there was no association with DOAC resumption and recurrent bleeding (HR, 1.43; 95% CI, 0.81-2.52; P = .22). Rivaroxaban was the only individual DOAC that was associated with recurrent GIB (HR, 2.73; 95% CI, 1.43-5.20; P = .002). Both warfarin (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.39-0.96; P = .033) and DOAC (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.28-0.98; P = .044) resumption as a class was associated with a decreased risk of thromboembolism.

CONCLUSIONS

Either warfarin or DOAC resumption after hospitalization for GIB was associated with a decreased risk of thromboembolism, whereas warfarin and rivaroxaban resumption were associated with an increased risk of recurrent GIB.

Atrial fibrillation: a geriatric perspective on the 2020 ESC guidelines

BACKGROUND

The Task Force for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation (AF) of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) published in 2020 the updated Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation with the contribution of the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) of the ESC and the European Association for Cardiothoracic Surgery (EACTS).

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this narrative viewpoint, we approach AF from the perspective of aging medicine and try to provide the readers with information usually neglected in clinical routine, mainly due to the fact that while the large majority of AF patients in real life are older, frail and cognitively impaired, these are mostly excluded from clinical trials, and physicians' attitudes often prevail over standardized algorithms.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of existing evidence, (1) opportunistic AF screening by pulse palpation or ECG rhythm strip is cost-effective, and (2) whereas advanced chronological age by itself is not a contraindication to AF treatment, a Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) including frailty, cognitive impairment, falls and bleeding risk may assist in clinical decision making to provide the best individualized treatment.

Safety and Effectiveness of Direct Oral Anticoagulants vs. Warfarin in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Endoscopy-Diagnosed Peptic Ulcer

Background: Patients with active peptic ulcer (PU) were excluded from direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) trials for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). This study evaluated the safety and effectiveness of DOACs in AF patients with active, inactive and no peptic ulcer (PU).

Methods: This study accessed electronic medical records from January 1, 2009 to May 31, 2019 at a multi-center healthcare provider in Taiwan and involved 2,955 AF patients who had undergone esophagogastroduodenoscopy ≤ 1 year before anticoagulation. Subjects were classified into 3 groups: active (n = 237), inactive (n = 828) and no-PU (n = 1,890) groups. We compared the risks of major bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding, and ischemic stroke/systemic embolism (IS/SE) between DOACs and warfarin among the 3 groups.

Results: In the active PU group, there were no significant differences in the risks of major bleeding [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.08–4.98, p = 0.676], gastrointestinal bleeding (HR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.08–4.98, p = 0.676) and IS/SE (HR = 2.58; 95% CI 0.53–12.70, p = 0.243) between DOAC and warfarin (as the reference). In the inactive PU group, there were no significant differences in the risks of major bleeding (HR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.09–1.39, p = 0.138), gastrointestinal bleeding (HR = 0.21, 95% CI 0.02–1.80, p = 0.153), and IS/SE (HR = 1.04, 95% CI 0.39–2.82, p = 0.934) between DOAC and warfarin (as the reference). In the no-PU group, DOACs were associated with lower risk of major bleeding (HR = 0.26, 95% CI 0.12–0.53, p < 0.001), gastrointestinal bleeding (HR = 0.25, 95% CI 0.01–0.59, p = 0.002), and similar risk of IS/SE (HR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.55–1.54, p = 0.757) compared to warfarin.

Conclusions: DOACs were as effective as warfarin in preventing IS/SE irrespective of PU status and safer than warfarin in reducing major bleeding in the no-PU group. In patients with active or inactive PUs, DOAC and warfarin were not significantly different in their effects on major bleeding or gastrointestinal bleeding.

Anticoagulation Changes Following Major and Clinically Relevant Nonmajor Bleeding Events in Non-valvular Atrial Fibrillation Patients

BACKGROUND

Bleeding events are common complications of oral anticoagulant drugs, including both warfarin and the direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Some patients have their anticoagulant changed or discontinued after experiencing a bleeding event, while others continue the same treatment. Differences in anticoagulation management between warfarin- and DOAC-treated patients following a bleeding event are unknown.

METHODS

Patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation from six anticoagulation clinics taking warfarin or DOAC therapy who experienced an International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH)-defined major or clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) bleeding event were identified between 2016 and 2020. The primary outcome was management of the anticoagulant following bleeding (discontinuation, change in drug class, and restarting of same drug class). DOAC- and warfarin-treated patients were propensity matched based on the individual elements of the CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores as well as the severity of the bleeding event.

RESULTS

Of the 509 patients on warfarin therapy and 246 on DOAC therapy who experienced a major or CRNM bleeding event, the majority of patients continued anticoagulation therapy. The majority of warfarin (231, 62.6%) and DOAC patients (201, 81.7%) restarted their previous anticoagulation.

CONCLUSION

Following a bleeding event, most patients restarted anticoagulation therapy, most often with the same type of anticoagulant that they previously had been taking.

Increased rebleeding and mortality in patients with gastrointestinal bleeding treated with anticoagulant drugs compared to antiplatelet drugs

BACKGROUND/AIM

We determined the effect of antiplatelet and anticoagulant agents on rebleeding and mortality in patients with gastrointestinal bleeding.

METHODS

This was a prospective study of patients admitted with gastrointestinal bleeding between 2013 and 2018. Outcomes were compared among patients on antiplatelet agents only, anticoagulant drugs only, combination therapy, and none. The association between mortality, rebleeding, and type of antithrombotic medication on admission and discharge was determined using multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 509 patients were followed up for a median of 19 months. End of follow-up rebleeding and mortality rates were 19.4% and 23.0%, respectively. Independent predictors of mortality were age [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.025 per year increase, P = 0.002], higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (HR = 1.4, P < 0.0001), severe bleeding (HR = 2.1, P < 0.0001), and being on anticoagulants (HR = 2.3, P = 0.002). Being on antiplatelets was protective against rebleeding (HR = 0.6, P = 0.047). Those on anticoagulants were more likely to die (HR = 2.5, P < 0.0001) and to rebleed (HR = 2.1, P = 0.01) than those on antiplatelets. Antithrombotic drug discontinuation upon discharge was associated with increased mortality in patients with cardiovascular disease.

CONCLUSION

In gastrointestinal bleeding, rebleeding and mortality were associated with being on anticoagulant drugs, while being on antiplatelet agents was protective against rebleeding. Discontinuation of antithrombotics upon discharge increased the risk of death. The findings inform risk stratification and decisions regarding continuation or discontinuation of antithrombotics.

Thrombotic events and rebleeding after hemorrhage in patients taking direct oral anticoagulants for non-valvular atrial fibrillation

Several direct oral anticoagulants have been developed to prevent cardiogenic thrombosis in patients with atrial fibrillation, on the other hand, have the complication of bleeding. Since clinical course after bleeding with direct oral anticoagulant remains unclear, the present retrospective cohort study was to clarify the course after hemorrhage among patients receiving direct oral anticoagulants. Among all 2005 patients prescribed dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, or edoxaban between April 2011 and June 2017, subjects comprised 96 patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation who experienced relevant bleeding during direct oral anticoagulant therapy (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2 or above). The clinical course after hemorrhage was reviewed to examine whether rebleeding or thrombotic events occurred up to the end of December 2019. Gastrointestinal bleeding was the most frequent cause of initial bleeding (57 patients, 59%). Rebleeding occurred in 11 patients (4.5%/year), with gastrointestinal bleeding in 10 and subarachnoid hemorrhage in 1. All rebleeding occurred in patients who resumed anticoagulation therapy. Another significant factor related with rebleeding included past history of gastrointestinal bleeding. On the other hand, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events occurred in 6 patients older than 75 years old or more (2.5%/year), with systemic thrombosis in 4 and cardiac death in 2. All 4 patients with systemic thrombosis withheld anticoagulants after index bleeding, although only 10 patients withheld anticoagulation therapy. Rebleeding should be taken care of when anticoagulants are resumed after bleeding, particularly among patients who initially experienced gastrointestinal bleeding. Systemic thrombosis occurred at a high rate when anticoagulant therapy was withheld after bleeding.

Anticoagulant Reversal in Gastrointestinal Bleeding: Review of Treatment Guidelines

BACKGROUND

Patients receiving anticoagulant therapies, such as vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) or direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), commonly experience gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding as a complication and may require anticoagulant reversal prior to endoscopic treatment. Anticoagulant reversal agents include prothrombin complex concentrates (PCCs; including 3 or 4 coagulation factors), plasma, vitamin K, and target-specific DOAC reversal agents (e.g., idarucizumab and andexanet alfa).

AIM

To review current US, as well as international, guidelines for anticoagulant reversal agents in patients on VKAs or DOACs presenting with GI bleeding prior to endoscopy, guideline-based management of coagulation defects, timing of endoscopy, and recommendations for resumption of anticoagulant therapy following hemostasis. Supporting clinical data were also reviewed.

METHODS

This is a narrative review, based on PubMed and Internet searches reporting GI guidelines and supporting clinical data.

RESULTS

GI-specific guidelines state that use of reversal agents should be considered in patients with life-threatening GI bleeding. For VKA patients presenting with an international normalized ratio > 2.5, guidelines recommend PCCs (specifically 4F-PCC), as they may exhibit greater efficacy/safety compared with fresh frozen plasma in reversal of VKA-associated GI bleeding. For DOAC patients, most guidelines recommend targeted specific reversal agents in the setting of GI bleeding; however, PCCs (primarily 4F-PCC) are often listed as another option. Resumption of anticoagulant therapy following cessation of GI bleeding is also recommended to reduce risks of future thromboembolic complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The utility of anticoagulant reversal agents in GI bleeding is recognized in guidelines; however, such agents should be reserved for use in truly life-threatening scenarios.

Anticoagulant-associated gastrointestinal bleeding: Framework for decisions about whether, when and how to resume anticoagulants

Gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is the most frequent single site of oral anticoagulant (OAC)-associated major bleeding. Patients with major GI bleeding experience morbidity and a substantial risk of short-term all-cause mortality up to 10%. While OACs are frequently discontinued during acute bleeding, there is substantial uncertainty about whether, when, and how OACs should be resumed after bleeding has resolved. Limited evidence suggests a lower risk of thromboembolism and death, and a higher risk of recurrent bleeding with OAC resumption. However, the absolute risks and optimal timing of anticoagulation remain uncertain based on these observational studies at risk of bias, particularly due to baseline confounding. In addition to an individualized approach to determining the benefits and harms of treatment decisions informed by the best available evidence about thrombosis and recurrent bleeding, discussions should meaningfully incorporate patient values and preferences. The objective of this review is to provide a framework for decision-making by summarizing the epidemiology and clinical outcomes of OAC-associated GI bleeding, providing an approach for assessment and risk stratification for OAC resumption and its timing, and outlining strategies for the prevention of recurrent GI bleeding.

Recurrent bleeding and thrombotic events after resumption of oral anticoagulants following gastrointestinal bleeding: Communication from the ISTH SSC Subcommittee on Control of Anticoagulation

BACKGROUND

Gastrointestinal bleeding frequently complicates anticoagulant therapy causing treatment discontinuation. Data to guide the decision regarding whether and when to resume anticoagulation based on the risks of thromboembolism and recurrent bleeding are scarce.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to retrospectively evaluate the incidence of these events after anticoagulant-related gastrointestinal bleeding and assess their relationship with timing of anticoagulation resumption.

METHODS

Patients hospitalized because of gastrointestinal bleeding during oral anticoagulation for any indication were eligible. All patients were followed up to 2 years after the index bleeding for recurrent major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding, venous or arterial thromboembolism, and mortality.

RESULTS

We included 948 patients hospitalized for gastrointestinal bleeding occurring during treatment with vitamin K antagonists (n = 531) or direct oral anticoagulants (n = 417). In time-dependent analysis, anticoagulant treatment was associated with a higher risk of recurrent clinically relevant bleeding (hazard ratio [HR] 1.55; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-2.22), but lower risk of thromboembolism (HR 0.34; 95% CI 0.21-0.55), and death (HR 0.50; 95% CI 0.36-0.68). Previous bleeding, index major bleeding, and lower glomerular filtration rate were associated with a higher risk of recurrent bleeding. The incidence of recurrent bleeding increased after anticoagulation restart independently of timing of resumption.

CONCLUSIONS

Anticoagulant treatment after gastrointestinal bleeding is associated with a lower risk of thromboembolism and death, but higher risk of recurrent bleeding. The latter seemed to be influenced by patient characteristics and less impacted by time of anticoagulation resumption.

Rates of rebleeding, thrombosis and mortality associated with resumption of anticoagulant therapy after anticoagulant-related bleeding

BACKGROUND:

Data on resuming oral anticoagulants (OACs) after bleeding are primarily from studies involving patients given warfarin, with few data on direct OACs (DOACs). We aimed to characterize prescribing patterns for OACs after OAC-related bleeding and compare the rates of bleeding, thrombosis and mortality in patients who resumed either type of OAC with those who did not.

METHODS:

We conducted a population-based cohort study of adults aged 66 years or older who were admitted to hospital for bleeding while receiving OACs from Apr. 1, 2012, to Mar. 31, 2017, using linked administrative health databases from Ontario. We used competing risk methods to calculate cause-specific adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for thrombosis, bleeding and mortality with resumption of OACs adjusted as a time-varying covariate. We determined time to OAC resumption using the Kaplan–Meier method.

RESULTS:

We included 6793 patients with gastrointestinal (n = 4297, 63.3%), intracranial (n = 805, 11.9%) or other bleeding (n = 1691, 25.0%). At cohort entry, 3874 patients (57.0%) were prescribed warfarin and 2919 patients (43.0%) were prescribed a DOAC. The most common indication for OAC was atrial fibrillation (n = 5557, 81.8%), followed by venous thromboembolism (n = 1367, 20.1%). Oral anticoagulants were resumed in 4792 patients (70.5%) within 365 days of the index bleed. The median time to resumption was 46 (interquartile range 6–550) days. We found that resuming OAC was associated with reduced rates of thrombosis (adjusted HR 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.50–0.72) and mortality (adjusted HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.48–0.60), and an increased rate of rebleeding (adjusted HR 1.88, 95% CI 1.64–2.17).

INTERPRETATION:

We found that resuming OAC is associated with a reduction in thrombosis and mortality but an increase in bleeding. Randomized controlled trials that evaluate the net benefit of strategies for resumption of OAC after a bleeding event are warranted.

Endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy: British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline update

This is a collaboration between the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), and is a scheduled update of their 2016 guideline on endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy. The guideline development committee included representatives from the British Society of Haematology, the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society, and two patient representatives from the charities Anticoagulation UK and Thrombosis UK, as well as gastroenterologists. The process conformed to AGREE II principles and the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were derived using GRADE methodology. Prior to submission for publication, consultation was made with all member societies of ESGE, including BSG. Evidence-based revisions have been made to the risk categories for endoscopic procedures, and to the categories for risks of thrombosis. In particular a more detailed risk analysis for atrial fibrillation has been employed, and the recommendations for direct oral anticoagulants have been strengthened in light of trial data published since the previous version. A section has been added on the management of patients presenting with acute GI haemorrhage. Important patient considerations are highlighted. Recommendations are based on the risk balance between thrombosis and haemorrhage in given situations.

Endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy: British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline update

This is a collaboration between the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), and is a scheduled update of their 2016 guideline on endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy. The guideline development committee included representatives from the British Society of Haematology, the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society, and two patient representatives from the charities Anticoagulation UK and Thrombosis UK, as well as gastroenterologists. The process conformed to AGREE II principles, and the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were derived using GRADE methodology. Prior to submission for publication, consultation was made with all member societies of ESGE, including BSG. Evidence-based revisions have been made to the risk categories for endoscopic procedures, and to the categories for risks of thrombosis. In particular a more detailed risk analysis for atrial fibrillation has been employed, and the recommendations for direct oral anticoagulants have been strengthened in light of trial data published since the previous version. A section has been added on the management of patients presenting with acute GI haemorrhage. Important patient considerations are highlighted. Recommendations are based on the risk balance between thrombosis and haemorrhage in given situations.

Left Atrial Thrombus Mimicking Myxoma Secondary to Rebound Hypercoagulable State

Novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have made the use of anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AFib) much more convenient and predictable. It is a very common practice to hold anticoagulation either in anticipation of surgical procedures (to prevent excessive bleeding) or in case of acute bleeding episodes. This abrupt withdrawal of anticoagulation tilts the balance in favor of pro-thrombotic state in the body. We present a case of a 60-year-old man with past medical history of AFib who abruptly discontinued his apixaban (Eliquis). This patient presented to emergency room with the complaint of weakness and numbness of left arm and left half of the face. Stroke code was activated, and patient received tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA). This resulted in significant improvement of symptoms within hours of receiving treatment. Later during the same day, patient developed numbness and tingling of fingers of left hand. On physical exam, left hand was cold to touch and radial pulse was absent. Arterial duplex revealed occluded ulnar and radial arteries. Vascular surgery performed embolectomy to establish blood flow in the radial and ulnar arteries. Transthoracic echocardiogram revealed large left atrial mass attached to the atrial septum. Most likely t-PA infusion in the setting of atrial mass led to distal showering of emboli resulting in stenosis of radial and ulnar arteries. The left atrial mass was most likely thrombus as patient had cardiac imaging including transthoracic echocardiogram and computed tomography of heart prior to these events which did not reveal any mass in left atrium. In short, as clinicians we should be aware of the hypercoagulability associated with withdrawal of anticoagulation. In addition, we should be wary of the challenges associated with differentiating cardiac masses of different etiology.

Clinical Guidelines for Drug-Related Peptic Ulcer, 2020 Revised Edition

Korean guidelines for nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-induced peptic ulcer were previously developed in 2009 with the collaboration of the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research and Korean Society of Gastroenterology. However, the previous guidelines were based mainly upon a review of the relevant literature and expert opinion. Therefore, the guidelines need to be revised. We organized a guideline Development Committee for drug-related peptic ulcer under the auspices of the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research in 2017 and developed nine statements, including four for NSAIDs, three for aspirin and other antiplatelet agents, and two for anticoagulants through a de novo process founded on evidence-based medicine that included a literature search and a meta-analysis, A consensus was reached through the application of the modified Delphi method. The primary target of these guidelines is adult patients undergoing long-term treatment with NSAIDs, aspirin or other antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants. The revised guidelines reflect the expert consensus and is intended to assist clinicians in the management and prevention of drug-induced peptic ulcer and associated conditions.

Observed risk of recurrent bleeding and thromboembolic disease in COVID-19 patients with gastrointestinal bleeding

Background and study aim  COVID-19 patients are at increased risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE) requiring the use of anticoagulation. Gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) is increasingly being reported, complicating the decision to initiate or resume anticoagulation as providers balance the risk of thrombotic disease with the risk of bleeding. Our study aimed to assess rebleeding rates in COVID-19 patients with GIB and determine whether endoscopy reduces these rebleeding events. We also report 30-day VTE and mortality rates. Methods  This was a retrospective study evaluating 56 COVID-19 patients with GIB for the following outcomes: 30-day rebleeding rate, 30-day VTE rate, effects of endoscopic intervention on the rate of rebleeding, and 30-day mortality. Results  The overall rates of VTE and rebleeding events were 27 % and 41 %, respectively. Rebleeding rates in patients managed conservatively was 42 % compared with 40 % in the endoscopy group. Overall, 87 % of those who underwent invasive intervention resumed anticoagulation vs. 55 % of those managed medically ( P  = 0.02). The all-cause 30-day mortality and GIB-related deaths were 32 % and 9 %, respectively. Mortality rates between the endoscopic and conservative management groups were not statistically different (25 % vs. 39 %; P  = 0.30). Conclusions  Although rebleeding rates were similar between the endoscopic and conservative management groups, patients who underwent intervention were more likely to restart anticoagulation. While endoscopy appeared to limit the duration that anticoagulation was withheld, larger studies are needed to further characterize its direct effect on mortality outcomes in these complex patients.

[Clinical Guidelines for Drug-induced Peptic Ulcer, 2020 Revised Edition]

The Korean guidelines for nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-induced peptic ulcers were previously developed under co-work with the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research and Korean Society of Gastroenterology at 2009. On the other hand, the previous guidelines were based mainly on a literature review and expert opinions. Therefore, the guidelines need to be revised. In this study, a guideline development committee for drug-induced peptic ulcers was organized under the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research in 2017. Nine statements were developed, including four for NSAID, three for aspirin and other antiplatelet agents, and two for anticoagulants through de novo processes based on evidence-based medicine, such as a literature search, meta-analysis, and the consensus was established using the modified Delphi method. The primary target of this guideline was adult patients taking long-term NSAIDs, aspirin, or other antiplatelet agent and anticoagulants. The revised guidelines reflect the consensus of expert opinions and are intended to assist relevant clinicians in the management and prevention of drug-induced peptic ulcers and associated conditions.

Diagnosis and management of acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

1: ESGE recommends that the initial assessment of patients presenting with acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding should include: a history of co-morbidities and medications that promote bleeding; hemodynamic parameters; physical examination (including digital rectal examination); and laboratory markers. A risk score can be used to aid, but should not replace, clinician judgment.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 2 : ESGE recommends that, in patients presenting with a self-limited bleed and no adverse clinical features, an Oakland score of ≤ 8 points can be used to guide the clinician decision to discharge the patient for outpatient investigation.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3 : ESGE recommends, in hemodynamically stable patients with acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding and no history of cardiovascular disease, a restrictive red blood cell transfusion strategy, with a hemoglobin threshold of ≤ 7 g/dL prompting red blood cell transfusion. A post-transfusion target hemoglobin concentration of 7-9 g/dL is desirable.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4 : ESGE recommends, in hemodynamically stable patients with acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding and a history of acute or chronic cardiovascular disease, a more liberal red blood cell transfusion strategy, with a hemoglobin threshold of ≤ 8 g/dL prompting red blood cell transfusion. A post-transfusion target hemoglobin concentration of ≥ 10 g/dL is desirable.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5: ESGE recommends that, in patients with major acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding, colonoscopy should be performed sometime during their hospital stay because there is no high quality evidence that early colonoscopy influences patient outcomes.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. 6 : ESGE recommends that patients with hemodynamic instability and suspected ongoing bleeding undergo computed tomography angiography before endoscopic or radiologic treatment to locate the site of bleeding.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 7 : ESGE recommends withholding vitamin K antagonists in patients with major lower gastrointestinal bleeding and correcting their coagulopathy according to the severity of bleeding and their thrombotic risk. In patients with hemodynamic instability, we recommend administering intravenous vitamin K and four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC), or fresh frozen plasma if PCC is not available.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 8 : ESGE recommends temporarily withholding direct oral anticoagulants at presentation in patients with major lower gastrointestinal bleeding.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 9: ESGE does not recommend withholding aspirin in patients taking low dose aspirin for secondary cardiovascular prevention. If withheld, low dose aspirin should be resumed, preferably within 5 days or even earlier if hemostasis is achieved or there is no further evidence of bleeding.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 10: ESGE does not recommend routinely discontinuing dual antiplatelet therapy (low dose aspirin and a P2Y12 receptor antagonist) before cardiology consultation. Continuation of the aspirin is recommended, whereas the P2Y12 receptor antagonist can be continued or temporarily interrupted according to the severity of bleeding and the ischemic risk. If interrupted, the P2Y12 receptor antagonist should be restarted within 5 days, if still indicated.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

Post PCI severe gastrointestinal bleeding in the setting of idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura: a treatment dilemma

Gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is a serious complication encountered commonly in patients on chronic anticoagulation and/or antiplatelet agents. There is a lack of guidelines on how to manage antiplatelet/anticoagulant therapy in patients with thrombocytopenia and GI bleeding. This poses a clinical dilemma when a clinician encounters serious GI bleeding in clinical practice. We present a patient with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and chronic thrombocytopenia who suffered severe GI bleeding less than 2 weeks after a percutaneous coronary intervention while being treated with dual antiplatelet therapy and oral anticoagulation.