Thromboembolism and bleeding complications in anticoagulated patients with atrial fibrillation and native aortic or mitral valvular heart disease: a descriptive nationwide cohort study

Transcatheter Structural Heart Disease Interventions and Concomitant Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: A State of the Art Review

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia in patients with valvular heart disease, and it can be associated with adverse patient outcomes. However, the need for anticoagulation to counterbalance AF-associated stroke risk may further lead to suboptimal outcomes via increasing bleeding events, especially in high-risk individuals. Because the vast majority of thrombi occur in the left atrial appendage, left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is an established procedure for preventing ischemic stroke in patients with AF, while limiting anticoagulation-related bleeding events. Thus, the concept of combining an index procedure for structural heart disease (SHD) with LAAO seems promising for preventing future stroke events. A combined procedure has been described in aortic stenosis (transcatheter aortic valve implantation + LAAO), mitral regurgitation (transcatheter edge-to-edge repair + LAAO), and atrial septal defects (patent foramen ovale/atrial septal defect + LAAO). Evidence shows that a combined procedure can be safely performed in a "1-stop shop" fashion, without increased rates of procedural adverse events, with the potential to limit bleeding risk and provide prophylaxis against stroke events. This review analyses indications and clinical evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of combined SHD+LAAO procedures, while also providing insights into gaps in knowledge and future directions for the evolution of this field.

Aortic Stenosis and Outcomes in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: A Nationwide Cohort Study

Background Patients with aortic stenosis (AS) have been underrepresented in the trials evaluating direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in atrial fibrillation (AF). We aimed to assess whether AS impacts outcomes in patients with AF and estimate the effects of DOACs versus warfarin in patients with AF and AS. Methods and Results The registry-based FinACAF (Finnish Anticoagulation in Atrial Fibrillation) study covered all patients with AF diagnosed during 2007 to 2018 in Finland. Hazard ratios (HRs) of first-ever gastrointestinal bleeding, intracranial bleeding, any bleeding, ischemic stroke, and death were estimated with cause-specific hazards regression adjusted for anticoagulant exposure variables. We identified 183 946 patients (50.5% women; mean age, 71.7 [SD, 13.5] years) with incident AF without prior bleeding or ischemic stroke, of whom 5231 (2.8%) had AS. The crude incidence rate of all outcomes was higher in patients with AS than in patients without AS. After propensity score matching, AS was associated with the hazard of any bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding, and death but not with intracranial bleeding or ischemic stroke (adjusted HRs, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.25-1.48], 1.63 [95% CI, 1.43-1.86], 1.32 [95% CI, 1.26-1.38], 0.96 [95% CI, 0.78-1.17], and 1.11 [95% CI, 0.99-1.25], respectively). Among patients with AS, DOACs were associated with a lower risk of ischemic stroke when compared with warfarin, while bleeding and mortality did not differ between DOACs and warfarin. Conclusions AS is associated with substantially higher risk of gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with AF. DOACs may be more effective in preventing ischemic stroke than warfarin in patients with AF and AS. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04645537.

Outcomes of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Valvular Heart Disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are increasingly used for the treatment and prevention of thromboembolic events in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF). Evidence regarding their role in patients with AF and concurrent valvular heart disease (VHD) continues to evolve.

RECENT FINDINGS

Post hoc analyses of randomized clinical trials suggest that DOACs are non-inferior to warfarin for the prevention of stroke or systemic embolism in patients with AF and VHD. Emerging evidence from observational data showed a favorable benefit-risk profile for DOACs compared to warfarin in patients with AF and VHD. DOACs are an attractive option for the treatment of patients with AF and VHD who cannot tolerate or have contraindications to warfarin therapy. Future studies are needed to evaluate their effectiveness, safety, and examine variability in the direction and magnitude of treatment effects in selected VHD subgroups.

Mitral Regurgitation and Body Mass Index Increase the Predictability of Perioperative Bleeding in Anticoagulated Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation

Background

Catheter ablation (CA) effectively restores sinus rhythm in atrial fibrillation (AF) but causes a short-term fluctuation in the coagulation state. Potential risk factors and better management during this perioperative period remain understudied.

Methods

We consecutively included 940 patients with nonvalvular AF who received CA at Fuwai Hospital, Beijing, China. Patients were divided into two groups according to their bleeding status during 3 months' anticoagulation. Any adverse events related to bleeding in the 3 months were evaluated. The HAS-BLED score and ABC-bleeding score, as well as other potential factors, were explored to predict bleeding risk.

Results

In this observational study, 8.0% and 0.9% of the whole population suffered from bleeding and thromboembolic events, respectively. After adjusting for known factors related to bleeding, mitral regurgitation (MR, p for trend <0.001) and body mass index (BMI, odds ratio (OR) = 0.920, 95% CI 0.852–0.993, p = 0.033) were the most significant ones. C-indexes of the HAS-BLED score and ABC-bleeding score for bleeding were 0.558 (0.492–0.624) and 0.585 (0.515–0.655), respectively. The incorporation of MR and BMI significantly improved the predictive value based on HAS-BLED score (C-index = 0.650, 95% CI 0.585–0.715, p = 0.004) and ABC-bleeding score (C-index = 0.671, 95% CI 0.611–0.731, p < 0.001). The relative risk of mild-moderate MR was 4.500 (95% CI 1.625–12.460) in patients with AF having HAS-BLED = 1 and 4.654 (95% CI 1.496–14.475) in HAS-BLED ≥ 2, while it was not observed in patients with HAS-BLED = 0 (p = 0.722).

Conclusion

More severe MR and lower BMI are associated with a higher incidence of perioperative bleeding, which helps improve the predictability of increased individual bleeding risk of a patient with nonvalvular AF who has received CA therapy and oral anticoagulants.

Effectiveness and Safety of NOAC Versus Warfarin in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Aortic Stenosis

Background

Guideline recommendations on the use of non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with aortic stenosis are based on studies including a low number of patients with aortic stenosis. The aim of this study was to estimate the effects of NOAC versus warfarin on thromboembolism and major bleeding among AF patients with aortic stenosis.

Methods and Results

We emulated a target trial using observational data from Danish nationwide registries between 2013 and 2018. Thromboembolism was defined as a hospital diagnosis of ischemic stroke and/or systemic embolism, and major bleeding was defined as a hospital diagnosis of intracranial bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding, or major or clinically relevant bleeding in other anatomic sites. Treatment effect estimates were based on an intention‐to‐treat and per‐protocol approach. A total of 3726 patients with AF and aortic stenosis claimed a prescription for either a NOAC (2357 patients) or warfarin (1369 patients) and met the eligibility criteria for the trial. During 3 years of follow‐up, the adjusted hazard ratios for thromboembolism and major bleeding were 1.62 (95% CI, 1.08–2.45) and 0.73 (0.59–0.91) for NOAC compared with warfarin in the intention‐to‐treat analyses. Similar results were observed in the per‐protocol analyses.

Conclusions

In this observational study, we observed a higher risk of thromboembolism but a lower risk of major bleeding for treatment with NOACs compared with warfarin in patients with AF and aortic stenosis. This observation needs confirmation in large randomized trials in these commonly encountered patients.

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.

Prognostic implications of valvular heart disease in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Valvular heart disease (VHD) in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) is a puzzling clinical entity. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic effect of significant VHD (sVHD) among patients with non-valvular AF.

METHODS

This is a post-hoc analysis of the MISOAC-AF trial (NCT02941978). Consecutive inpatients with non-valvular AF who underwent echocardiography were included. sVHD was defined as the presence of at least moderate aortic stenosis (AS) or aortic/mitral/tricuspid regurgitation (AR/MR/TR). Cox regression analyses with covariate adjustments were used for outcome prediction.

RESULTS

In total, 983 patients with non-valvular AF (median age 76 [14] years) were analyzed over a median follow-up period of 32 [20] months. sVHD was diagnosed in 575 (58.5%) AF patients. sVHD was associated with all-cause mortality (21.6%/yr vs. 6.5%/yr; adjusted HR [aHR] 1.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.17-2.06; p = 0.02), cardiovascular mortality (16%/yr vs. 4%/yr; aHR 1.70, 95% CI 1.09-2.66; p = 0.02) and heart failure-hospitalization (5.8%/yr vs. 1.8%/yr; aHR 2.53, 95% CI 1.35-4.63; p = 0.02). The prognostic effect of sVHD was particularly evident in patients aged < 80 years and in those without history of heart failure (p for interaction < 0.05, in both subgroups). After multivariable adjustment, moderate/severe AS and TR were associated with mortality, while AS and MR with heart failure-hospitalization.

CONCLUSION

Among patients with non-valvular AF, sVHD was highly prevalent and beared high prognostic value across a wide spectrum of clinical outcomes, especially in patients aged < 80 years or in the absence of heart failure. Predominantly AS, as well as MR and TR, were associated with worse prognosis.

Effectiveness and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin in Patients With Valvular Atrial Fibrillation : A Population-Based Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are increasingly used in place of warfarin, but evidence about their effectiveness and safety in patients with valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) remains limited.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness and safety of DOACs compared with warfarin in patients with valvular AF.

DESIGN

New-user retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study.

SETTING

U.S.-based commercial health care database from 1 January 2010 to 30 June 2019.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults with valvular AF who were newly prescribed DOACs or warfarin.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary effectiveness outcome was a composite of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism. The primary safety outcome was a composite of intracranial or gastrointestinal bleeding.

RESULTS

Among a total of 56 336 patients with valvular AF matched on propensity score, use of DOACs (vs. warfarin) was associated with lower risk for ischemic stroke or systemic embolism (hazard ratio [HR], 0.64 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.70]) and major bleeding events (HR, 0.67 [CI, 0.63 to 0.72]). The results for the effectiveness and safety outcomes remained consistent for apixaban (HRs, 0.54 [CI, 0.47 to 0.61] and 0.52 [CI, 0.47 to 0.57], respectively) and rivaroxaban (HRs, 0.74 [CI, 0.64 to 0.86] and 0.87 [CI, 0.79 to 0.96], respectively); with dabigatran, results were consistent for the major bleeding outcome (HR, 0.81 [CI, 0.68 to 0.97]) but not for effectiveness (HR, 1.03 [CI, 0.81 to 1.31]).

LIMITATION

Relatively short follow-up; inability to ascertain disease severity.

CONCLUSION

In this comparative effectiveness study using practice-based claims data, patients with valvular AF who were new users of DOACs had lower risks for ischemic stroke or systemic embolism and major bleeding than new users of warfarin. These data may be used to guide risk-benefit discussions regarding anticoagulant choices for patients with valvular AF.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

None.

Thromboembolic and bleeding outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation and valvular heart disease: A descriptive nationwide cohort study

AIMS

The risks of thromboembolism and bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and valvular heart disease (VHD) are sparsely described. We described the risk of events in non-anticoagulated and anticoagulated patients with AF and VHD according to the evaluated heart valves, rheumatic or artificial valve classification (EHRA classification), EHRA Type 1 and Type 2 VHD, and within subgroups of EHRA Type 1 and Type 2 VHD.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Cohort study of AF patients with coexisting VHD, identified in nationwide Danish registries from 2000 to 2018. Risk of thromboembolism and bleeding after 1 year of follow-up were calculated in each group. We identified 28 770 incident AF patients with VHD. Not surprisingly, we observed the highest risks of thromboembolism in the non-anticoagulated AF patients with EHRA Type 1 and Type 2 VHD (4.9% vs 2.6% and 3.2% vs 1.9%) and the highest risks of bleeding in the anticoagulated AF patients with EHRA Type 1 and Type 2 VHD (6.6% vs 4.3% and 6.1% vs 4.9%). However, within the subgroups of AF patients with EHRA Type 1 and Type 2 VHD, we observed a large proportion of non-anticoagulated patients (32.9%-49.2%), despite a CHA₂ DS₂ -VASc score of 2≤ in the majority of these patients (81.9%-95.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

When using data reflecting contemporary clinical practice, we observed markedly different risks of thromboembolism and bleeding in EHRA Type 1 and Type 2 VHD. Additionally, we observed a potential underuse of oral anticoagulation within the subgroups of AF patients with EHRA Type 1 and Type 2 VHD, underlining need for further attention on this patient group.

Atrial Fibrillation and Mitral Regurgitation: Clinical Performance of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in a Real-World Setting

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia and is frequently present in patients with mitral regurgitation (MR). Currently, there is a lack of real-world evidence specifically addressing the clinical performance of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with AF and concomitant MR. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to assess the efficacy and safety profile of DOACs therapy in patients with AF and MR.

METHODS

Data for this study were sourced from the Atrial Fibrillation Research Database in the Department of Cardiology at Monaldi Hospital. The database was queried for AF patients with MR who were prescribed DOACs therapy. The primary safety outcome was defined as the annual incidence rate of major bleeding events and the primary effectiveness outcome as the annual incidence rate of all events classified as ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attacks, and systemic embolisms.

RESULTS

Consecutive AF patients with concomitant mild to severe MR who received DOACs therapy (n = 259) were included. Patients were dichotomized in 2 groups according to MR severity: a mild-to-moderate group (MR 1-2+; n = 151) and a moderate-to-severe group (MR 3-4+; n = 108). The incidence rate of major bleedings was significantly higher in MR 3-4+ group (3.92%) compared with the MR 1-2+ group (1.18%; hazard ratio [HR]: 3.2; 95% CI: 1.4-7.3; P = .0059). The incidence rate of thromboembolic events between MR 3-4+ group (0.66%) and MR 1-2+ group (0.62%) was not significantly different (HR: 0.75; P = .823).

CONCLUSIONS

In the present study, there was no difference in the efficacy profile of DOACs between AF patients with mild-to-moderate and moderate-to-severe MR. Considering the increased bleeding risk, a close and careful follow-up should be warranted for patients with moderate-to-severe MR.