Edoxaban Versus Warfarin in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and History of Liver Disease

Anticoagulation for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation and treatment of venous thromboembolism and portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis: guidance from the SSC of the ISTH

While advanced liver disease was previously considered to be an acquired bleeding disorder, there is increasing recognition of an associated prothrombotic state with patients being at higher risk of atrial fibrillation (AF) and stroke and venous thromboembolism (VTE) including portal vein thrombosis (PVT). We review the available literature on epidemiology, pathophysiology, and risk factors and provide guidance on anticoagulant management of these conditions in adults with cirrhosis. In patients with Child-Pugh A or B cirrhosis and AF, we recommend anticoagulation with standard-dose direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in accordance with cardiology guideline recommendations for patients without liver disease. In those with Child-Pugh C cirrhosis, there is inadequate evidence with respect to the benefit and risk of anticoagulation for stroke prevention in AF. In patients with cirrhosis and acute deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, we recommend anticoagulation and suggest use of either a DOAC or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH)/vitamin K antagonist (VKA) in Child-Pugh A or B cirrhosis and LMWH alone (or as a bridge to VKA in patients with a normal baseline international normalized ratio) in Child-Pugh C cirrhosis. We recommend anticoagulation for patients with cirrhosis and symptomatic PVT. We suggest anticoagulation for those with asymptomatic, progressing PVT and recommend continuing extended anticoagulation for liver transplant candidates with PVT.

Perioperative Management of Traditional and Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Hip Fracture Patients

Hip fractures are an increasingly common injury in the senior population and almost always require surgical fixation or prosthetic replacement. These surgeries, according to the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, are considered high-risk for bleeding, especially in a population fraught with comorbidities and often presenting on anticoagulation medications. Direct oral anticoagulants represent a class of drugs that have been becoming more popular in use in this population, with many benefits over the historically used Warfarin. There are recommendations for preoperative discontinuation and postoperative resumption of these medications, which can be more readily managed for elective surgeries. However, there is a paucity of literature detailing best practice guidelines for the perioperative management of direct oral anticoagulants when a patient presents with a hip fracture. This review article summary of the periprocedural management of DOACs for hip surgery was developed by examining the American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines, Perioperative Guidelines on Antiplatelet and Anticoagulant Agents written by anesthesiologists, various retrospective studies, and drug labels for pharmacokinetic data. These recommendations should be used as a guideline, along with the collaboration of multidisciplinary hospital teams during inpatient admission, to manage these complex patients.

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.

Assessing Safety of Anticoagulation for Atrial Fibrillation in Patients with Cirrhosis: A Real-World Outcomes Study

AIMS

In patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and stroke risk factors, randomized trials have demonstrated that anticoagulation decreases the risk of ischemic stroke. However, all trials to date have excluded patients with significant liver disease, leaving guidelines to extrapolate recommendations. We aim to evaluate the impact of anticoagulation on safety events in patients with AF and cirrhosis.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this retrospective cohort study, we obtained de-identified health record data to extract anticoagulation strategy, comorbidities, prescriptions, lab values, and procedures for a cohort of patients with cirrhosis who develop AF. After selecting a propensity matched population to match patients with various anticoagulation strategies, we tracked data on outcomes for death, transfusion requirements, hospital and ICU admissions. After propensity score weighting and multivariable adjustment, anticoagulation strategy was associated with increased hospital admission count (OR = 1.74 per admission, P < .001), binary risk of hospital admission (OR = 1.54, P = .010) and risk of ICU admission (OR = 1.41, P = .047). We detected no significant differences in mortality, transfusion of blood products, or average length of stay. Direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) prescriptions were associated with increased binary risk of hospital admission compared to warfarin prescriptions. In a third comparison, DOAC strategy alone was associated with increased hospital admission count (OR = 1.41 per admission, P < .001) and binary risk of hospital admission (OR = 1.52, P = .038) compared to no anticoagulation strategy.

CONCLUSION

Anticoagulation strategy in patients with cirrhosis and AF was associated with increased rate of hospital admission and ICU admission but not associated with increased risk of mortality or transfusion requirement.

Phenotype-directed clinically driven low-dose direct oral anticoagulant for atrial fibrillation

Clinically-driven dose reduction of direct oral anticoagulants in individuals with atrial fibrillation is prevalent worldwide. However, a paucity of evidence to tailor dose selection remained as clinical unmet need. Current doses of anticoagulant were determined largely by landmark clinical trials, in which the enrolled subjects were carefully selected and without major comorbidities. Our study reviewed the relevant real-world studies in specific patient phenotypes, including renal and hepatic diseases, elderly, low body weight, Asians and presence of concomitant drug-drug interactions. Thorough investigations toward the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants in reduced doses will facilitate substituting current universal approach with individualized prescriptions.

Anticoagulation for Atrial Fibrillation in Patients with Decompensated Liver Cirrhosis: Bold and Brave?

Atrial fibrillation is frequently diagnosed in patients with liver cirrhosis, especially in those with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis or alcoholic etiology. Anticoagulant treatment is recommended for thromboembolic protection in patients with atrial fibrillation. Considering the impaired coagulation balance in liver cirrhosis, predisposing patients to bleed or thrombotic events, the anticoagulant treatment is still a matter of debate. Although patients with liver cirrhosis were excluded from the pivotal studies that confirmed the efficacy and safety of the anticoagulant treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation, data from real-life cohorts demonstrated that the anticoagulant treatment in patients with liver cirrhosis could be safe. This review aimed to evaluate the recent data regarding the safety and efficacy of anticoagulant treatment in patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis. Direct oral anticoagulants are safer than warfarin in patients with compensated liver cirrhosis. In Child-Pugh class C liver cirrhosis, direct oral anticoagulants are contraindicated. New bleeding and ischemic risk scores should be developed especially for patients with liver cirrhosis, and biomarkers for bleeding complications should be implemented in clinical practice to personalize this treatment in a very difficult population represented by decompensated liver cirrhosis patients.

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.

Safety of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with liver disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), such as apixaban, edoxaban, rivaroxaban, or dabigatran, are an effective treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF) and deep venous thromboembolism. We hope to evaluate the safety of DOACs versus warfarin/low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in improving bleeding events in patients with different severity of the liver disease.

METHODS

We systematically searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase databases for studies reporting the effects of DOACs in patients with liver cirrhosis. A random-effects model or fixed-effects model was selected to pool risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

A total of 18 studies involving 41,447 participants was included in this meta-analysis. Compare with warfarin/ LMWH, the use of DOACs significantly reduced the incidence of all bleeding (RR: 0.76; 95%CI: 0.66 to 0.87), major bleeding (RR: 0.51; 95%CI: 0.28 to 0.91), intracranial hemorrhage (RR: 0.50; 95%CI: 0.31 to 0.81), and gastrointestinal bleeding (RR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.60 to 0.97), and all-cause death in patients with liver disease (RR: 0.77; 95%CI: 0.62 to 0.95). Similar results were observed in atrial fibrillation patients with liver disease and cirrhosis subgroups. Furthermore, the pooled estimates of the Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) class indicated that DOACs reduced the incidence of all bleeding (RR: 0.61; 95%CI: 0.45 to 0.82), gastrointestinal bleeding (RR 0.55; 95%CI: 0.37 to 0.83), and all-cause death (RR: 0.62; 95%CI: 0.49 to 0.79) in patients with mild to moderate cirrhosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates that DOACs significantly reduce the risk of bleeding in patients with liver disease compared with warfarin/LMWH.

Antiplatelet Medications Are Associated With Bleeding and Decompensation Events Among Patients With Cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

In an aging population with cardiovascular comorbidities, anticoagulant (AC), antiplatelet (AP), and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use are increasing. It remains unclear whether these agents pose increased bleeding risk in cirrhosis. This study aimed to assess the association between these medications and bleeding and portal hypertension complications in cirrhosis.

METHODS

The IMS PharMetrics database was used to identify privately insured adults diagnosed with cirrhosis from 2007 to 2015, stratified as compensated or decompensated based on the presence of portal hypertensive complications 1 year before cirrhosis diagnosis. Bleeding or decompensation outcomes were assessed 6 to 18 months after cirrhosis diagnosis using a landmark analysis design. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression modeling assessed associations between AC, AP, and NSAID drug exposures and outcomes adjusting for covariates.

RESULTS

A total of 18,070 cirrhosis patients were analyzed; 57% male; 74% ages 50 to 64 years; 34% with a prior decompensation. Overall, 377 (2%) had claims for ACs; 385 (2%) APs; and 1231 (7%) NSAIDs. APs were associated with increased bleeding [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR)=1.31; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.00, 1.72] and decompensation events (aHR=1.44; 95% CI: 1.06, 1.95) in a 9-month landmark analysis. NSAIDs were significantly associated with bleeding events (aHR=1.29; 95% CI: 1.06, 1.57) on 3-month landmark analysis. No statistically significant associations were seen between ACs and bleeding or decompensation outcomes in adjusted analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

AP use was associated with increased bleeding and decompensation events among privately insured patients with cirrhosis. NSAID use was associated with significant early bleeding, but not decompensations. Lastly ACs were not associated with bleeding or decompensation outcomes.

Edoxaban versus Warfarin in high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation: A comprehensive analysis of high-risk subgroups

BACKGROUND

To compare the efficacy and safety of edoxaban vs warfarin in high-risk subgroups.

METHODS

ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 was a multicenter randomized, double-blind, controlled trial in 21,105 patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) within 12 months and CHADS₂ score >2 randomized to higher-dose edoxaban regimen (HDER) 60 mg/reduced 30 mg, lower-dose edoxaban regimen (LDER) 30 mg/reduced 15 mg, or warfarin, and followed for 2.8 years (median). The primary outcome for this analysis was the net clinical outcome (NCO), a composite of stroke/systemic embolism events, major bleeding, or death. Multivariable risk-stratification analysis was used to categorize patients by the number of high-risk features.

RESULTS

The annualized NCO rates in the warfarin arm were highest in patients with malignancy (19.2%), increased fall risk (14.0%), and very-low body weight (13.5%). The NCO rates increased with the numbers of high-risk factors in the warfarin arm: 4.5%, 7.2%, 9.9% and 14.6% in patients with 0 to 1, 2, 3, and >4 risk factors, respectively (P_trend <0.001). Versus warfarin, HDER was associated with significant reductions of NCO in most of the subgroups: elderly, patients with moderate renal dysfunction, prior stroke/TIA, of Asian race, very-low body weight, concomitant single antiplatelet therapy, and VKA-naïve. With more high-risk features (0->4+), the absolute risk reductions favoring edoxaban over warfarin increased: 0.3%->2.0% for HDER; 0.4%->3.4% for LDER vs warfarin (P = .065 and P < .001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

While underuse of anticoagulation in high-risk patients with AF remains common, substitution of effective and safer alternatives to warfarin, such as edoxaban, represents an opportunity to improve clinical outcomes.

High incidence of major bleeding with off-label use of edoxaban

In clinical practice, edoxaban is sometimes prescribed for off-label use based on the hypothesis that it is as safe and effective as warfarin. However, there is limited safety information on off-label use due to lack of clinical trial. We aimed to analyze the tolerability of off-label use of edoxaban and to identify patient characteristics associated with major bleeding as adverse effects. Patients under edoxaban treatment between January 2017 and December 2017 were enrolled in this retrospective cohort study. The incidence of major bleeding with off-label use compared with on-label use was analyzed using by log-rank test. Univariate and multivariate regression analysis were undertaken to detect independent variables with significant odds ratio that associated with major bleeding. After the exclusion criteria were applied, the patients were divided into two groups: off-label group (n = 30) and on-label group (n = 161). Incidence of major bleeding was found to be higher in the off-label group (13.3%) than in the on-label group (3.7%) (p<0.05). Multivariate adjustment showed that the off-label use or portal vein thrombosis and patients with history of major bleeding has significantly higher incidence of major bleeding. We demonstrated that off-label use of edoxaban may be a significant risk factor for major bleeding.

2021 Focused update of the 2017 consensus guidelines of the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS) on stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation

The consensus of the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS) on stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) has been published in 2017 which provided useful clinical guidance for cardiologists, neurologists, geriatricians, and general practitioners in Asia-Pacific region. In these years, many important new data regarding stroke prevention in AF were reported. The Practice Guidelines subcommittee members comprehensively reviewed updated information on stroke prevention in AF, and summarized them in this 2021 focused update of the 2017 consensus guidelines of the APHRS on stroke prevention in AF. We highlighted and focused on several issues, including the importance of AF Better Care (ABC) pathway, the advantages of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) for Asians, the considerations of use of NOACs for Asian patients with AF with single 1 stroke risk factor beyond gender, the role of lifestyle factors on stroke risk, the use of oral anticoagulants during the "coronavirus disease 2019" (COVID-19) pandemic, etc. We fully realize that there are gaps, unaddressed questions, and many areas of uncertainty and debate in the current knowledge of AF, and the physician's decision remains the most important factor in the management of AF.

Warfarin compared with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in subjects with liver disease and atrial fibrillation: A meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Many concerns were raised about the outcome of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants compared with warfarin in subjects with atrial fibrillation and liver disease. However, the reported relationship between their efficacy and safety was variable. This meta-analysis was performed to evaluate this relationship.

METHODS

A systematic literature search up to July 2020 was performed and six studies included 50 074 subjects with atrial fibrillation and liver disease at the baseline with 32 229 non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant consumers and 18 920 warfarin consumers. They were reporting relationships between non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants and warfarin in subjects with atrial fibrillation and liver disease. Odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was calculated to evaluate the prognostic role of the efficacy and safety of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants compared with warfarin in subjects with atrial fibrillation and liver disease subjects using the dichotomous method with a random or fixed-effect model.

RESULTS

Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants consumption was significantly related to lower all-cause mortality in subjects with atrial fibrillation and liver disease (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.81-0.99, P = .03); lower intracranial haemorrhage (OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.55- 0.82, P < .001) and low stroke and system embolism (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.68-0.86, P < .001) compared with warfarin consumption. However, non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants consumption was not significantly related to lower major bleeding in subjects with atrial fibrillation and liver disease (OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.52-1.02, P = .06); and gastrointestinal bleeding (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.58-1.49, P = .77) compared with warfarin consumption.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this meta-analysis, non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant consumption may have an independent lower risk relationship with all-cause mortality, intracranial haemorrhage, and stroke and system embolism compared with warfarin consumption in subjects with atrial fibrillation and liver disease. This relationship forces us to recommend non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant use in subjects with atrial fibrillation and liver disease for better outcomes and to avoid any possible complications. Further studies are required.

Edoxaban in Cardiovascular Disease Management: Review

In the past decade, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have transformed the world of anti-thrombotic therapy. Edoxaban is the most recently approved DOAC. Though intended for use primarily in stroke prevention, it has found applications in various other conditions including thromboembolic and peripheral arterial disease. This review aims to provide a detailed outline of the growing indications, evidence for use in special populations, pharmacogenetics, and side effect profile of edoxaban.

Use of NOACS in high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation in Saudi Arabia: Perspectives on improving patient care

BACKGROUND

Despite the widespread and increasing use of NOACs in Saudi Arabia, there is a lack of contemporary guidance specific to the region. In particular, guidance on NOAC use in high-risk patients who are more likely to experience bleeding with oral anticoagulant therapy is needed. There is an unmet need for a review of contemporary evidence coupled with expert insights on safe and effective NOAC use in high-risk patients with AF in Saudi Arabia.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This article provides a detailed review of contemporary literature on NOAC use in high-risk patients with AF. Additionally, key gaps in the literature are identified and expert insights are shared to guide effective management of patients and the significance of local data is evaluated with respect to challenges in optimizing the use of NOACs.

CONCLUSIONS

This article provides information that complements and expands on existing reviews and guidelines on NOAC use in patients with AF, with a focus on challenges specific to the Saudi Arabian context with the potential to make a positive contribution to the medical community in Saudi Arabia and in other nations.

Anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation and liver disease: a pooled-analysis of > 20000 patients

AIMS

Anticoagulation for atrial-fibrillation (AF) patients with liver-disease represents a clinical dilemma. We sought to evaluate the efficacy/safety of different anticoagulation, i.e. vitamin-K-antagonist (VKA) and non-VKA oral-anticoagulants (NOACs) in such patient group.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This was a pooled-analysis enrolling up-to-date clinical data. Two subsets: subset A (VKA vs. Non-Anticoagulation) and subset B (NOACs vs. VKA) were pre-specified. The study outcomes were ischemic-stroke(IS)/thromboembolism(TE), major-bleeding (MB), intracranial-bleeding (ICB), gastrointestinal-bleeding (GIB) and all-cause mortality.A total of 20,042 patients' data were analyzed (subset A: N = 10275, subset B: N = 9767). Overall mean age: 71±11 years, mean CHA2DS2-VASc score: 4.0±1.8, mean HAS-BLED score: 3.6±1.2. The majority of the patients had Child-Pugh category (A-B). As compared with Non-Anticoagulation, VKA seemed to reduce the risk of IS/TE (OR: 0.60, P = 0.05), but heighten the risk of all-bleeding-events including MB (OR: 2.81, P = 0.01), ICB (OR: 1.60, P = 0.01), and GIB (OR: 3.32, P = 0.01). When compared with VKA, NOACs had similar efficacy in reducing the risk of IS/TE (OR: 0.82, P = 0.64), significantly lower risk of MB (OR: 0.54, P = 0.0003) and ICB (OR: 0.35, P < 0.0001), and trend towards reduced risk of GIB (OR: 0.72, P = 0.12) and all-cause mortality (OR: 0.79, P = 0.35). The favorable effects were maintained in subgroups of individual NOAC.

CONCLUSIONS

VKA appears to reduce the risk of IS/TE but increase all-bleeding-events. NOACs have similar effect in reducing the risk of IS/TE and have significantly lower risk of MB and ICB as compared with VKA. NOACs seem to be associated with better clinical outcome than VKA in patients with mild-moderate liver disease.

Safety of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with mild to moderate cirrhosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To evaluate major bleeding in cirrhosis with use of traditional anticoagulation or direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), using a standardized definition. Anticoagulation in patients with cirrhosis is often a clinical conundrum for providers as the necessary balance between thrombotic and bleeding risk is complicated by end organ damage. Recent meta-analyses have sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with liver disease. These recent analyses are limited by various bleeding definitions, broad inclusion criteria, and few indications for anticoagulation. We sought to conduct a meta-analysis using a validated definition for major bleeding and compare rates between traditional anticoagulation and DOACs in patients with cirrhosis. Articles were eligible for inclusion if the international society on thrombosis and hemostasis (ISTH) definition of a major bleed was the primary safety outcome. Additionally, only articles including patients with cirrhosis and receiving treatment with anticoagulation for an indication for stroke prevention or venous thromboembolism were eligible. Eligible articles needed a DOAC comparator group against traditional anticoagulant medication. Seven studies met inclusion criteria and compiled data for 683 patients in the meta-analysis. Pooled trial analysis demonstrated no statistically significant difference in the primary outcome of ISTH major bleeding (OR 0.55, 95%CI 0.28-1.07, I² 0%). Individual secondary outcomes of all bleeding, intracerebral hemorrhage, or gastrointestinal bleeding also demonstrated no significant difference between DOACs and traditional anticoagulation. Use of DOACs in patients with mild to moderate cirrhosis carries similar risk to use of traditional anticoagulation.

Direct oral anticoagulants and advanced liver disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are recommended for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) or for treatment of deep vein thrombosis, although some concerns about safety and efficacy were raised on the use of these drugs in patients with advanced liver disease (ALD). We want to investigate the association of DOACs use with the bleeding and ischaemic risk.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We performed a systematic review and metanalysis of clinical studies retrieved from PubMed (via MEDLINE) and Cochrane (CENTRAL) databases addressing the impact of DOACs therapy on bleeding events including intracranial haemorrhage (ICH), gastrointestinal and major bleeding. Secondary end points were all-cause death, ischaemic stroke/systemic embolism (IS/SE) and recurrence/progression of vein thrombosis (rDVT).

RESULTS

12 studies were included in the meta-analysis: a total of 43 532 patients with ALD or cirrhosis, of whom 27 574 (63.3%) were on treatment with DOACs and 15 958 were in warfarin/low molecular weight heparin. DOACs reduced the incidence of major bleeding by 61% (pooled Hazard Ratio [HR] 0.39, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0.21-0.70), ICH by 52% (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.40-0.59), while no difference in the reduction of any and gastrointestinal bleeding were observed. DOACs reduced also rDVT by 82% (HR 0.18, 95%CI 0.06-0.57), but did not reduce death and IS/SE. No difference was shown according to oesophageal varices and Child Pugh score in the meta-regression analysis between warfarin/heparin and DOACs performed on each outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

DOACs are associated with a lower incidence of bleeding and may be an attractive therapeutic option in patients with cirrhosis.

2020 Clinical Update in Liver Transplantation

The gold standard treatment of end-stage liver disease continues to be liver transplantation (LT). The challenges of LT require skilled anesthesiologists to anticipate physiologic changes associated with end-stage liver disease and surgical considerations that affect multiple organ systems. While on the waiting list, patients may be placed on new anticoagulation medications that can confound already complex coagulopathy in LT patients. Pain management often is an afterthought for such a complex procedure, but appropriate medications can help control pain while limiting opioid medications. Surgical stress and medications for immunosuppression can affect perioperative glucose management in ways that have implications for patient and graft survival. The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic in 2020 provided a new challenge for anesthesiologists. The uncertainty of the novel respiratory virus challenged providers beyond just LT patients.

The 2020 Canadian Cardiovascular Society/Canadian Heart Rhythm Society Comprehensive Guidelines for the Management of Atrial Fibrillation

The Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) atrial fibrillation (AF) guidelines program was developed to aid clinicians in the management of these complex patients, as well as to provide direction to policy makers and health care systems regarding related issues. The most recent comprehensive CCS AF guidelines update was published in 2010. Since then, periodic updates were published dealing with rapidly changing areas. However, since 2010 a large number of developments had accumulated in a wide range of areas, motivating the committee to complete a thorough guideline review. The 2020 iteration of the CCS AF guidelines represents a comprehensive renewal that integrates, updates, and replaces the past decade of guidelines, recommendations, and practical tips. It is intended to be used by practicing clinicians across all disciplines who care for patients with AF. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) system was used to evaluate recommendation strength and the quality of evidence. Areas of focus include: AF classification and definitions, epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical evaluation, screening and opportunistic AF detection, detection and management of modifiable risk factors, integrated approach to AF management, stroke prevention, arrhythmia management, sex differences, and AF in special populations. Extensive use is made of tables and figures to synthesize important material and present key concepts. This document should be an important aid for knowledge translation and a tool to help improve clinical management of this important and challenging arrhythmia.

Dabigatran, the oral anticoagulant of choice at discharge in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and COVID-19 infection: the ANIBAL protocol

Atrial fibrillation is a frequent complication among patients with severe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) infection. Both direct and indirect mechanisms through COVID-19 have been described to explain this relationship. COVID-19 infection increases the risk of developing both arterial and venous thrombotic complications through systemic coagulation activation, leading to increased mortality. Chronic oral anticoagulation is essential to reduce the thromboembolic risk among AF patients. Switching to low-molecular-weight heparin has been recommended during hospitalization for COVID-19 infection. Of note, at discharge, the prescription of direct oral anticoagulants may offer some advantages over vitamin K antagonists. However, oral anticoagulants should only be prescribed after the consideration of drug-drug interactions with antiviral therapies as well as of the risk of hepatotoxicity, which is common among individuals with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Not all anticoagulants have the same risk of hepatotoxicity; dabigatran has shown a good efficacy and safety profile and could have a lower risk of hepatotoxicity. Furthermore, its metabolism by cytochrome P450 is absent and it has a specific reversal agent. Therefore, dabigatran may be considered as a first-line choice for oral anticoagulation at discharge after COVID-19 infection. In this review, the available information on the antithrombotic management of AF patients at discharge after COVID-19 infection is updated. In addition, a practical algorithm, considering renal and liver function, which facilitates the anticoagulation choice at discharge is presented.

[Direct Oral Anticoagulant Edoxaban in Patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation: Results of Direct Comparison with Warfarin]

This review analyzes results of a large prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 that compared efficacy and safety of warfarin, a vitamin K antagonist, and edoxaban, an oral inhibitor of activated coagulation factor X. The review addresses important practical aspects of using edoxaban in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.

Efficacy and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Liver Disease: a Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Liver disease is associated with increased bleeding risk. The efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) is a subject of contention in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with liver disease.

METHODS

Electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library) were searched to retrieve studies on the efficacy and safety of DOACs versus warfarin in AF patients with liver disease from January 1980 to April 2020. A meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Six studies involving 41,859 patients were included. Compared with warfarin, DOACs demonstrated significant reduction in ischemic stroke (HR, 0.68; 95% CI (0.54-0.86)), major bleeding (0.74 (0.59-0.92)), and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) (0.48 (0.40-0.58)), with no significant effect on gastrointestinal bleeding (P = 0.893) in AF patients with liver disease. Similar results were observed in regular-dose, reduced-dose, and active liver disease subgroups, albeit Asian patients had a slight reduction in major bleeding (P = 0.055). Furthermore, the pooled estimates of individual DOAC subgroups indicated that dabigatran and apixaban led to greater safety in major bleeding (P < 0.001), ICH (P < 0.001), and gastrointestinal bleeding (P < 0.005) in these patients. The same trends were observed in AF patients with cirrhosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that DOACs significantly reduce the risk of ischemic stroke, major bleeding, and ICH, with no significant effect on the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding in AF patients with liver disease compared with warfarin.

Real-world use of nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant in atrial fibrillation patients with liver disease: A meta-analysis

Several studies have investigated the effectiveness and safety of nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) vs vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and liver disease. Herein, we conducted a meta‐analysis to compare the effect of NOACs with VKAs in patients with AF and liver disease. We also conducted a subsidiary analysis to compare the risk of liver injury between NOACs and VKA in AF patients. We systematically searched the PubMed and Embase databases from January 2009 to May 2020 for the relevant studies. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were selected and pooled using a random‐effects model. A total of six cohorts were included. Compared with VKA use, the use of NOACs was associated with reduced risks of stroke or systemic embolism (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.49‐0.93), all‐cause death (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.63‐0.75), and intracranial bleeding (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.40‐0.59), whereas the outcomes of major bleeding (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.51‐1.01) and gastrointestinal bleeding (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.51‐1.36) were not significantly different between groups in AF patients with liver disease. Moreover, compared with VKA use, the use of NOACs was associated with a reduced risk of liver injury (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.61‐0.84) in AF patients. Compared with VKAs, the use of NOACs was associated with reduced risks of stroke or systemic embolism, all‐cause death, and intracranial bleeding in AF patients with liver disease, and associated with a reduced risk of liver injury in AF patients.

Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Advanced Liver Disease: An Exploratory Meta-Analysis

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have had a positive impact in preventing cardioembolic stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who were associated with lower bleeding complications; however, data on subjects with concomitant advanced liver diseases (ALDs) are poor. This meta‐analysis evaluates bleeding and thromboembolic complications in patients with coexisting AF and ALD who were treated with DOACs or vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). We performed a meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies identified by the PubMed and Embase databases using a combination of the following keywords: “direct oral anticoagulants,” “advanced liver disease,” “cirrhosis,” “bleeds,” “stroke.” No time restriction was applied to the research. Two physicians reviewed data on outcome measures and assessed the quality rating. The main outcome was major bleeding, and the secondary outcomes were bleedings (all, intracranial, and gastrointestinal) and ischemic strokes. A total of four studies (one prospective, three retrospective) were identified involving 3,483 subjects with AF and ALD; of these, 1,547 were on VKAs and 1,936 on DOACs. Advanced liver disease was defined as liver cirrhosis or fibrosis‐4 score >3.25. Compared to VKA use, DOAC use was associated with reduced risk for major bleedings (hazard ratio [HR], 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44‐0.77; P < 0.001), total bleedings (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.36‐0.55; P < 0.05), intracranial hemorrhage (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.32‐0.80; P < 0.004), and gastrointestinal bleedings (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.42‐0.88; P < 0.008). Efficacy analysis showed no significant difference between VKA‐ and DOAC‐treated patients (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.58‐1.15; P = 0.31). Conclusion: In patients with AF and ALD, the safety and efficacy profile of DOACs did not appear to differ from those with AF without ALD.

Non-vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Liver Disease: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The effect of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and liver disease remains largely unresolved. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of NOACs with warfarin in this population.

METHODS

We systematically searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase databases for studies reporting the comparisons of NOACs with warfarin in patients with AF and liver disease. A random-effects model was selected to pool the risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

A total of six studies with 41,954 participants were included in this meta-analysis. In AF patients with liver disease, compared with warfarin use, the use of NOACs was associated with reduced risks of all-cause death (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.66-0.93), major bleeding (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.53-0.88), and intracranial hemorrhage (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.41-0.59), but had comparable risks of stroke or system embolism (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.57-1.12) and gastrointestinal bleeding (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.61-1.34). In AF patients with cirrhosis, NOACs significantly reduced the risks of major bleeding (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.37-0.76), gastrointestinal bleeding (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.38-0.84), and intracranial hemorrhage (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.31-0.97) compared with warfarin.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on current publications, the use of NOACs is at least non-inferior to warfarin in patients with AF and liver disease.

Safety of direct-acting oral anticoagulants relative to warfarin in a matched cohort of liver transplant recipients

Despite increasingly widespread utilization of direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs), there remains limited experience with the use of these agents following liver transplantation. We performed a single-center, retrospective review of liver transplant recipients prescribed DOACs or warfarin between January 2014 and January 2018. Patients receiving DOACs were matched with warfarin-treated controls based on discrete clinical parameters and followed from the time of anticoagulant prescription, until treatment discontinuation or study conclusion. The primary endpoint for this review was the incidence of clinically relevant major or non-major bleeding among the treatment groups. Twenty-seven patients prescribed DOACs were identified for inclusion in the review, of which 20 could be matched with suitable warfarin controls. At the conclusion of the study, warfarin-treated patients had a significantly higher incidence of clinically relevant bleeding (45% vs 15%; P = .01). No statistically significant differences were found in the rate of new or recurrent thrombotic events. Multivariable logistic regression demonstrated that warfarin treatment was associated with a significantly higher odds of a bleeding event compared to treatment with a DOAC (OR = 6.9; 95% CI, 1.1-44.6). DOAC use appears relatively safe compared with warfarin in select liver transplant recipients. Patient-specific factors still bear consideration when selecting between the various anticoagulant options.