Aspirin-omitted dual antithrombotic therapy in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome or undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: results of a meta-analysis

The bidirectional association between atrial fibrillation and myocardial infarction

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction (MI) and vice versa. This bidirectional association relies on shared risk factors as well as on several direct and indirect mechanisms, including inflammation, atrial ischaemia, left ventricular remodelling, myocardial oxygen supply-demand mismatch and coronary artery embolism, through which one condition can predispose to the other. Patients with both AF and MI are at greater risk of stroke, heart failure and death than patients with only one of the conditions. In this Review, we describe the bidirectional association between AF and MI. We discuss the pathogenic basis of this bidirectional relationship, describe the risk of adverse outcomes when the two conditions coexist, and review current data and guidelines on the prevention and management of both conditions. We also identify important gaps in the literature and propose directions for future research on the bidirectional association between AF and MI. The Review also features a summary of methodological approaches for the study of bidirectional associations in population-based studies.

Current Perspectives on Antithrombotic Therapy for the Treatment of Acute Coronary Syndrome

Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is one of the leading causes of death worldwide. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the treatment of choice for ACS as this procedure reduces the morbidity and mortality rates of patients in clinical trials and daily practice. However, patients with a history of prior ACS who undergo PCI are still at high risk for recurrent major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Because the antithrombotic drugs reduce the rate of MACE and minimize stent-related complications such as target vessel failure or stent thrombosis, the utilization of these agents is the cornerstone treatment for secondary prevention of ACS patients after PCI. Unfortunately, using the antithrombotic agents may be associated with bleeding complications, including major or fatal bleeding. Therefore, premature discontinuation of antithrombotic regimens regarding the hemorrhagic events is sometimes inevitable and possibly leads to fatal complications such as stent thrombosis. To minimize the bleeding issues, shorten antithrombotic regimens have been proposed, which theoretically offers improved safety. Nevertheless, inappropriate withdrawal of antithrombotic drugs may increase the rate of ischemic events. On the other hand, an unnecessary prolonged antithrombotic regimen may cause avoidable bleeding. Balancing the risk of bleeding against the benefits of using antithrombotic drugs is therefore challenging especially for the patients who contain both bleeding and ischemic risks such as ACS patients who are concomitant using the anticoagulants. Currently, the treatment paradigms are shifting from the “one size fits all approach” toward the “tailored approach”. This means that the antithrombotic regimens can be adjustable individually. As a result, various clinical risk scoring systems have been established to help physicians with their decision-making. However, besides the development of these dedicated scoring tools, clinical judgment for balancing the safety versus the efficacy before deciding on the antithrombotic plan is still imperative.

Carotid Artery Stenting in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: Direct Oral Anticoagulants, Brief Double Antiplatelets, and Testing Strategy

Carotid endarterectomy is usually preferred over carotid artery stenting (CAS) for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). We present our experience with short-course periprocedural triple antithrombotic therapy in 32 patients aged >18 years with nonvalvular AF undergoing CAS. There were no deaths, cardiac events, embolic strokes, hyperperfusion syndrome, intracranial hemorrhage, or stent thrombosis within 30 days. Transient intraprocedural hemodynamic instability in 15/32 (47%) and prolonged instability in 4/32 (13%) was managed conservatively. At a mean 16-month follow-up, there were no new neurological events or deterioration. Mean stenosis was reduced from 78.0% ± 9.7% to 17.3% ± 12.2%. This retrospective study included patients AF who were symptomatic (minor stroke (NIHSS ≤ 5)/TIA) with ICA stenosis >50%, or asymptomatic under DOAC therapy with carotid stenosis >80%, who underwent CAS from 6/2014–10/2020. Patients received double antiplatelets and statins. Antiplatelet therapy effectiveness was monitored. Stenting was performed when P2Y12 reaction units (PRU) were <150. DOACs were discontinued 48 h before angioplasty; one 60 mg dose of subcutaneous enoxaparin was administered in lieu. DOAC was restarted 12–24 h after intervention. Patients were discharged under DOAC and one nonaspirin antiplatelet. 32 patients on DOAC were included (26 male, mean age 71). 19 (59.4%) presented with stroke (ICA stenosis-related in 14); 13 (40.6%) were asymptomatic. Stents were deployed under filter protection following pre-angioplasty; post-angioplasty was performed at least once in 12 patients (37.5%). Our experience suggests that CAS can be safely performed in selected patients with CAS and AF requiring DOAC. The role of CAS in AF patients under DOAC warrants study in rigorous trials.

Aspirin versus P2Y12 inhibitors with anticoagulation therapy for atrial fibrillation

OBJECTIVE

Patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and atrial fibrillation (AF) can be treated with multiple antithrombotic therapies including antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapies; however, this has the potential to increase bleeding risk. Here, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of P2Y₁₂ inhibitors and aspirin in patients also receiving anticoagulant therapy.

METHODS

We evaluated patients from the Atrial Fibrillation and Ischaemic Events with Rivaroxaban in Patients with Stable Coronary Artery Disease (AFIRE) trial who received rivaroxaban plus an antiplatelet agent; the choice of antiplatelet agent was left to the physician's discretion. The primary efficacy and safety end points, consistent with those of the AFIRE trial, were compared between P2Y₁₂ inhibitors and aspirin groups. The primary efficacy end point was a composite of stroke, systemic embolism, myocardial infarction, unstable angina requiring revascularisation or death from any cause. The primary safety end point was major bleeding according to the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 1075 patients were included (P2Y₁₂ inhibitor group, n=297; aspirin group, n=778). Approximately 60% of patients were administered proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and there was no significant difference in PPI use in the groups. There were no significant differences in the primary end points between the groups (efficacy: HR 1.31; 95% CI 0.88 to 1.94; p=0.178; safety: HR 0.79; 95% CI 0.43 to 1.47; p=0.456).

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant differences in cardiovascular and bleeding events in patients with AF and stable CAD taking rivaroxaban with P2Y₁₂ inhibitors or aspirin in the chronic phase.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

UMIN000016612; NCT02642419.

Oral anticoagulation and outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction: Insights from the Hungarian Myocardial Infarction Registry

INTRODUCTION

Anticoagulation reduces the risk of stroke and embolization and is recommended in most patients with atrial fibrillation. Patients after coronary intervention and acute coronary syndromes require antiplatelet treatment. Although oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy may interfere with the outcome of patients after coronary intervention, its exact impact remains unclear. Importantly, risk-benefit relations may be considerably different after myocardial infarction.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Data of patients registered from the Hungarian Myocardial Infarction Registry, a mandatory nationwide program for hospitals treating patients with myocardial infarction, were processed. Patients registered between 01.2014. and 12.2017 were included. All-cause mortality, the composite of cardiac events (MACE), and transfusion were compared between patients receiving OAC treatment and a propensity score (PS) matched control group. Subgroup analyses of different anticoagulation and antiplatelet strategies were performed with propensity weighted Cox proportional hazards' models to estimate risk during the first year after the index event.

RESULTS

From 30 681 patients 1875 cases received OAC treatment and had apparently worse prognosis. After PS-matching, however, we found no difference regarding mortality (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.91 95% CI 0.77-1.09, P = .303), MACE (HR: 0.92 95% CI 0.78-1.09, P = .335) or transfusion (HR: 1.21, 95% CI 0.97-1.49, P = .086). In PS-adjusted analyses for the OAC group, patients who received aspirin were associated with lower mortality (HR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.60-0.997, P = .048) and MACE (HR:0.73, 95% CI 0.58-0.92, P = .008) compared to those without aspirin.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with acute myocardial infarction, the prognosis of OAC-treated patients was comparable to the PS matched control; however, the omission of aspirin therapy was associated with unfavorable outcomes.

Aspirin Actions in Treatment of NSAID-Exacerbated Respiratory Disease

Non-steroidal Anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID)-exacerbated respiratory disease (N-ERD) is characterized by nasal polyposis, chronic rhinosinusitis, adult-onset asthma and hypersensitive reactions to cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) inhibitors. Among the available treatments for this disease, a combination of endoscopic sinus surgery followed by aspirin desensitization and aspirin maintenance therapy has been an effective approach. Studies have shown that long-term aspirin maintenance therapy can reduce the rate of nasal polyp recurrence in patients with N-ERD. However, the exact mechanism by which aspirin can both trigger and suppress airway disease in N-ERD remains poorly understood. In this review, we summarize current knowledge of aspirin effects in N-ERD, cardiovascular disease, and cancer, and consider potential mechanistic pathways accounting for the effects of aspirin in N-ERD.