Tratamiento anticoagulante en pacientes con insuficiencia cardiaca por disfunción sistólica y ritmo sinusal: análisis del registro REDINSCOR

Ischaemic stroke in the absence of documented atrial fibrillation: is there who could benefit from anticoagulant therapy?

About 25% of ischaemic strokes are of cryptogenic origin and a significant proportion of them has a certain embolic nature, and for these patients the term embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS) has been coined. In the absence of subclinical atrial fibrillation (AF) identifiable through prolonged electrocardiogram monitoring, atrial cardiomyopathy, demonstrable through non-invasive cardiac imaging, aortic plaques and heart failure with preserved sinus rhythm, have been recognized among the potential causes of ESUS. In patients with ESUS, randomized clinical trials performed so far have failed to demonstrate a benefit of therapy with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). However, it is possible that in patients in whom the presence of atrial cardiomyopathy is ascertained there may be a benefit of anticoagulant therapy in secondary prevention after ESUS. In patients with aortic plaques associated with a thrombotic component and in those with heart failure and preserved sinus rhythm in the absence of AF but with a high congestive heart failure, hypertension age, diabetes, stroke, vascular disease (CHA2DS2-VASc) score, the decision on anticoagulant therapy with DOACs could be made in the individual patient even in the absence of evidence from clinical trials.

What Are Drivers of Readmission for Readmission-Requiring Venous Thromboembolic Events After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty? An Analysis of 544,443 Cases

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a potential postoperative complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA). These events present with a range of severity, and some require readmission. The present study aimed to identify unexplored risk factors for severe VTE that lead to hospital readmission.

METHODS

The Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality's National Readmissions Database was retrospectively queried for all patients who underwent primary THA (January 2016 to December 2018). Study population included patients who were readmitted for VTE within 90 days after an elective THA. Bivariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed using patient demographics, insurance status, elective nature of the surgery, healthcare institution characteristics, and baseline comorbidities.

RESULTS

Higher risk of readmission for VTE was evident among elderly (71-80 years vs <40 years: odds ratio [OR] 1.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3-2.2, P = .0002), male patients (OR 1.2, 95% CI 1.2-1.3). Nonelective THAs were associated with markedly higher odds of readmission for VTE (OR 20.5, 95% CI 18.9-22.2), peripheral vascular disease (OR 1.2, 95% CI 1.1-1.4), lymphoma (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.1-2.1), metastatic cancer (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.4-2.2), obesity (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.4-1.6), and fluid-electrolyte imbalance (OR 1.1, 95% CI 1.0-1.2). Home health care (OR 0.8, 95% CI 0.7-0.8) and discharge to skilled nursing facility (OR 0.7, 95% CI 0.7-0.8) had lower odds of readmission for VTE vs unsupervised home discharge, while insurance type was not a significant driver(P > .05).

CONCLUSION

One in 135 THA patients is likely to experience a VTE requiring readmission after THA. Male patients, age >70 years, and specific baseline comorbidities increase such risk. Furthermore, discharge to a supervised setting mitigated the risk of VTE requiring readmission compared to unsupervised discharge. As VTE prophylaxis protocols continue to evolve, these patients may require optimized perioperative care pathways to mitigate VTE complications.

Antithrombotics in heart failure

Heart failure is a common clinical condition associated with high morbidity and mortality rate despite significant improvements in pharmacotherapy and implementation of medical procedures. Patients with heart failure are at an increased risk of developing arterial and venous thrombosis, which contribute to the high rate of adverse events and fatal outcomes. Many heart failure patients routinely receive antithrombotic therapy due to the presence of a specific indication for its use, like ischemic heart disease or atrial fibrillation. However, there is no solid evidence to support the routine use of antithrombotic agents in all heart failure patients. This article reviews the evidence for using antithrombotic therapy in heart failure patients.

Thromboembolism and antithrombotic therapy for heart failure in sinus rhythm: an executive summary of a joint consensus document from the ESC Heart Failure Association and the ESC Working Group on Thrombosis

Chronic heart failure (HF) with either reduced or preserved left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction is common and remains an extremely serious disorder with a high mortality and morbidity. Many complications related to heart failure can be related to thrombosis. Epidemiological and pathophysiological data also link HF to an increased risk of thrombosis, leading to the clinical consequences of sudden death, stroke, systemic thromboembolism and/or venous thromboembolism. This executive summary of a joint consensus document of the Heart Failure Association (EHFA) of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the ESC Working Group on Thrombosis reviews the published evidence, summarises 'best practice', and puts forward consensus statements that may help to define evidence gaps and assist management decisions in everyday clinical practice. In HF patients with atrial fibrillation, oral anticoagulation is clearly recommended, and the CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores should be used to determine the likely risk-benefit ratio (thromboembolism prevention versus risk of bleeding) of oral anticoagulation. In HF patients with reduced LV ejection fraction who are in sinus rhythm there is no evidence of an overall benefit of vitamin K antagonists (e.g. warfarin) on mortality, with risk of major bleeding. Whilst there is the potential for a reduction in ischaemic stroke, there is currently no compelling reason to routinely use warfarin for these patients. Risk factors associated with increased risk of thromboembolic events should be identified and decisions regarding use of anticoagulation individualised. Patient values and preferences are important determinants when balancing the risk of thromboembolism against bleeding risk. Novel oral anticoagulants that offer a different risk-benefit profile compared with warfarin may appear as an attractive therapeutic option, but this would need to be confirmed in clinical trials.