Anticoagulation Use and Clinical Outcomes After Major Bleeding on Dabigatran or Warfarin in Atrial Fibrillation

Pharmacoepidemiology evaluation of bumetanide as a potential candidate for drug repurposing for Alzheimer's disease

INTRODUCTION

Bumetanide, a loop diuretic, was identified as a candidate drug for repurposing for Alzheimer's disease (AD) based on its effects on transcriptomic apolipoprotein E signatures. Cross-sectional analyses of electronic health records suggest that bumetanide is associated with decreased prevalence of AD; however, temporality between bumetanide exposure and AD development has not been established.

METHODS

We evaluated Medicare claims data using Cox proportional hazards regression to evaluate the association between time-dependent use of bumetanide and time to first AD diagnosis while controlling for patient characteristics. Multiple sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the robustness of the findings.

RESULTS

We sampled 833,561 Medicare beneficiaries, 60.8% female, with mean (standard deviation) age of 70.4 (12). Bumetanide use was not significantly associated with AD risk (hazard ratio 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 0.99-1.10).

DISCUSSION

Using a nationwide dataset and a retrospective cohort study design, we were not able to identify a time-dependent effect of bumetanide lowering AD risk.

HIGHLIGHTS

Bumetanide was identified as a candidate for repurposing for Alzheimer's disease (AD). We evaluated the association between bumetanide use and risk of AD. We used Medicare data and accounted for duration of bumetanide use. Bumetanide use was not significantly associated with risk of AD.

Anticoagulant in atrial fibrillation patients with prior intracranial haemorrhage: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The benefit of resuming anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with prior intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) and which anticoagulant to choose are controversial.

SUMMARY OF REVIEW

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library were searched from their inception until 13 February 2022. Thirteen eligible articles (17 600 participants) were collected, including 11 real-world studies (n=17 296) and 2 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (n=304). Compared with no anticoagulants, oral anticoagulation (OAC) was not associated with an increased risk of ICH recurrence (HR 0.85 (95% CI 0.57 to 1.25), p=0.41), but with a significantly increased risk of major bleeding (HR 1.66 (95% CI 1.20 to 2.30), p<0.01). Meanwhile, OAC was associated with a reduced risk of ischaemic stroke/systemic thromboembolism (IS/SE) (HR 0.54 (95% CI 0.42 to 0.70), p<0.01) and all-cause death (HR 0.38 (95% CI 0.28 to 0.52), p<0.01) compared with no anticoagulants. Furthermore, compared with warfarin, non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) were associated with a significant reduction of ICH recurrence (HR 0.64 (95% CI 0.49 to 0.85), p<0.01), while the risk of IS/SE and all-cause mortality were comparable between warfarin and NOACs.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with AF with prior ICH, OAC is associated with a significant reduction in IS/SE and all-cause mortality without increasing ICH recurrence, but may increase major bleeding risk. Compared with warfarin, NOACs had a better safety profile and comparable efficacy. Further larger RCTs are warranted to validate these findings.

Oral anticoagulant switching in patients with atrial fibrillation: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Oral anticoagulants (OACs) prevent stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Several factors may cause OAC switching.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the phenomenon of OAC switching in patients with AF, including all available evidence; frequency and patterns of switch, clinical outcomes, adherence, patient-reported outcomes, reasons for switch, factors associated with switch and evidence gaps.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science, up to January 2022.

RESULTS

Of the 116 included studies, 2/3 examined vitamin K antagonist (VKA) to direct-acting OAC (DOAC) switching. Overall, OAC switching was common and the definition of an OAC switch varied across. Switching from VKA to dabigatran was the most prevalent switch type, but VKA to apixaban has increased in recent years. Patients on DOAC switched more to warfarin than to other DOACs. OAC doses involved in the switches were hardly reported and patients were often censored after the first switch. Switching back to a previously taken OAC (frequently warfarin) occurred in 5%-21% of switchers.The risk of ischaemic stroke and gastrointestinal bleeding in VKA to DOAC switchers compared with non-switchers was conflicting, while there was no difference in the risk of other types of bleeding. The risk of ischaemic stroke in switchers from DOAC versus non-switchers was conflicting. Studies evaluating adherence found no significant changes in adherence after switching from VKA to DOAC, however, an increase in satisfaction with therapy were reported. Reasons for OAC switch, and factors associated with OAC switch were mostly risk factors for stroke and bleeding. Clinical outcomes, adherence and patient-reported outcomes were sparse for switches from DOACs.

CONCLUSIONS

OAC switching is common in patients with AF and patients often switch back to an OAC they have previously been on. There are aspects of OAC switching that have received little study, especially in switches from DOACs.

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.

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.

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.

Burden of major gastrointestinal bleeding among oral anticoagulant-treated non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients

BACKGROUND

Gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is the most common type of major bleeding associated with oral anticoagulant (OAC) treatment. Patients with major bleeding are at an increased risk of a stroke if an OAC is not reinitiated.

METHODS

Non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients initiating OACs were identified from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Medicare data and four US commercial claims databases. Patients who had a major GI bleeding event (hospitalization with primary diagnosis of GI bleeding) while on an OAC were selected. A control cohort of patients without a major GI bleed during OAC treatment was matched to major GI bleeding patients using propensity scores. Stroke/systemic embolism (SE), major bleeding, and mortality (in the CMS population) were examined using Cox proportional hazards models with robust sandwich estimates.

RESULTS

A total of 15,888 patients with major GI bleeding and 833,052 patients without major GI bleeding were included in the study. Within 90 days of the major GI bleed, 58% of patients discontinued the initial OAC treatment. Patients with a major GI bleed had a higher risk of stroke/SE [hazard ratio (HR): 1.57, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.42-1.74], major bleeding (HR: 2.79, 95% CI: 2.64-2.95), and all-cause mortality (HR: 1.29, 95% CI: 1.23-1.36) than patients without a major GI bleed.

CONCLUSION

Patients with a major GI bleed on OAC had a high rate of OAC discontinuation and significantly higher risk of stroke/SE, major bleeding, and mortality after hospital discharge than those without. Effective management strategies are needed for patients with risk factors for major GI bleeding.

Long-term clinical outcomes after major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation: the Fushimi AF registry

AIMS

Oral anticoagulants reduce the risk of ischaemic stroke but may increase the risk of major bleeding in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. Little is known about the clinical outcomes of patients after a major bleeding event. This study assessed the outcomes of AF patients after major bleeding.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The Fushimi AF Registry is a community-based prospective survey of the AF patients in Fushimi-ku, Kyoto, Japan. Analyses were performed on 4304 AF patients registered by 81 institutions participating in the Fushimi AF Registry. We investigated the demographics and outcomes of AF patients who experienced major bleeding during follow-up period. During the median follow-up of 1307 days, major bleeding occurred in 297 patients (6.9%). Patients with major bleeding were older than those without (75.6 vs. 73.4 years; P < 0.01). They were more likely to have pre-existing heart failure (33.7% vs. 26.7%; P < 0.01), history of major bleeding (7.7% vs. 4.0%; P < 0.01), and higher mean HAS-BLED score (2.05 vs.1.73; P < 0.01). On landmark analysis, ischaemic stroke or systemic embolism occurred in 17 patients (3.6/100 person-years) after major bleeding and 227 patients (1.7/100 person-years) without major bleeding, with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 1.93 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.06-3.23; P = 0.03]. All-cause mortality occurred in 97 patients with major bleeding (20.0/100 person-years) and 709 (5.1/100 person-years) patients without major bleeding [HR 2.73 (95% CI, 2.16-3.41; P < 0.01)].

CONCLUSION

In this community-based cohort, major bleeding is associated with increased risk of subsequent all-cause mortality and thromboembolism in the long-term amongst AF patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/index.htm. Unique identifier: UMIN000005834. (last accessed 22 October 2020).

Endoscopic diagnosis and management of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (NVUGIH): European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2021

1: ESGE recommends in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (UGIH) the use of the Glasgow-Blatchford Score (GBS) for pre-endoscopy risk stratification. Patients with GBS ≤ 1 are at very low risk of rebleeding, mortality within 30 days, or needing hospital-based intervention and can be safely managed as outpatients with outpatient endoscopy.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 2: ESGE recommends that in patients with acute UGIH who are taking low-dose aspirin as monotherapy for secondary cardiovascular prophylaxis, aspirin should not be interrupted. If for any reason it is interrupted, aspirin should be re-started as soon as possible, preferably within 3-5 days.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends that following hemodynamic resuscitation, early (≤ 24 hours) upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy should be performed. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 4: ESGE does not recommend urgent (≤ 12 hours) upper GI endoscopy since as compared to early endoscopy, patient outcomes are not improved. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 5: ESGE recommends for patients with actively bleeding ulcers (FIa, FIb), combination therapy using epinephrine injection plus a second hemostasis modality (contact thermal or mechanical therapy). Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 6: ESGE recommends for patients with an ulcer with a nonbleeding visible vessel (FIIa), contact or noncontact thermal therapy, mechanical therapy, or injection of a sclerosing agent, each as monotherapy or in combination with epinephrine injection. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 7 : ESGE suggests that in patients with persistent bleeding refractory to standard hemostasis modalities, the use of a topical hemostatic spray/powder or cap-mounted clip should be considered. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 8: ESGE recommends that for patients with clinical evidence of recurrent peptic ulcer hemorrhage, use of a cap-mounted clip should be considered. In the case of failure of this second attempt at endoscopic hemostasis, transcatheter angiographic embolization (TAE) should be considered. Surgery is indicated when TAE is not locally available or after failed TAE. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 9: ESGE recommends high dose proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy for patients who receive endoscopic hemostasis and for patients with FIIb ulcer stigmata (adherent clot) not treated endoscopically. (A): PPI therapy should be administered as an intravenous bolus followed by continuous infusion (e. g., 80 mg then 8 mg/hour) for 72 hours post endoscopy. (B): High dose PPI therapies given as intravenous bolus dosing (twice-daily) or in oral formulation (twice-daily) can be considered as alternative regimens.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 10: ESGE recommends that in patients who require ongoing anticoagulation therapy following acute NVUGIH (e. g., peptic ulcer hemorrhage), anticoagulation should be resumed as soon as the bleeding has been controlled, preferably within or soon after 7 days of the bleeding event, based on thromboembolic risk. The rapid onset of action of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACS), as compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), must be considered in this context.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

Cost-Effectiveness of Direct Non-Vitamin K Oral Anticoagulants Versus Vitamin K Antagonists for the Management of Patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation Based on Available "Real-World" Evidence: The Italian National Health System Perspective

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The increasing availability of real-world evidence (RWE) about safety and effectiveness of direct non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for the management of atrial fibrillation (AF) offers the opportunity to better understand the clinical and economic implications of DOACs versus vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). The objective of this study was to compare the economic implications of DOACs and VKAs using data from real-world evidence in patients with AF.

METHODS

A Markov model simulating the lifetime course of patients diagnosed with non-valvular AF was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of DOACs (i.e., rivaroxaban, dabigatran and apixaban) versus VKAs from the Italian National Health System (INHS) perspective. The model was made up of data from the literature and a meta-analysis of RWE on the incidence of stroke/systemic embolism (SE), major bleeding (MB), intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) and all-cause mortality (ACM); direct costs included drug costs, costs for drug monitoring, and management of events from official national lists. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were used to assess the robustness of the results.

RESULTS

Results from the meta-analysis showed that apixaban had a high probability of being the most effective for stroke/SE, MB and ACM. Despite their higher acquisition costs, the cost-effectiveness analysis showed all DOACs involved a saving when compared with VKAs, with per-patient savings ranging between €4647 (rivaroxaban) to €6086 (apixaban). Moreover, all DOACs indicated a gain both in quality-adjusted life-years and life-years. According to PSA, findings related to apixaban were consistent, while for dabigatran and rivaroxaban PSA revealed a higher degree of uncertainty.

CONCLUSIONS

The beneficial effect of DOACs on containing events showed in RWE had the potential to offset drug-related costs, thus improving the sustainability of treatment for non-valvular AF in daily clinical practice.

Incidence and outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation and major bleeding complications: from the TREAT-AF study

PURPOSE

Optimal stroke prevention strategies for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who experience a major bleed are poorly defined. We sought to estimate the effectiveness and safety of oral anticoagulation (OAC) represcription after an OAC contraindication.

METHODS

TREAT-AF is a retrospective cohort study of patients with newly diagnosed AF (2004-2012), treated in the Veterans Health Administration. From this cohort, we identified patients with a contraindication to OAC after AF diagnoses, defined as incident intracranial bleeding, non-intracranial bleeding requiring hospitalization, or unrepaired cerebral aneurysm or aortic dissection. We used multivariate Cox proportional hazards to estimate the association of OAC prescription in the 90 days following OAC contraindication to ischemic stroke and rebleeding.

RESULTS

Among 167,190 patients with newly diagnosed AF (70 ± 11 years, 1.7% female, CHA₂DS₂-VASc 2.7 ± 1.7), 19,285 patients (11.5%) had an incident bleed (n = 18,342) or an unrepaired cerebral aneurysm or aortic dissection (n = 943). For OAC-contraindicated patients with a CHA₂DS₂-VASc ≥2 (N = 16,194), OAC was represcribed in 4075 patients (25%) and was associated with a higher risk of non-intracranial bleeding (HR 1.49; 95% CI 1.37-1.61; p < 0.0001) but no difference in intracranial bleeding. There was a trend toward decreased stroke risk (HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.71-1.02; p 0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

Development of contraindication to OAC after diagnosis of AF is common (11.5%), with most events requiring hospitalization. OAC reinitiation was associated with non-intracranial bleeding risk, with a trend toward reduced stroke risk. These data suggest that stroke prevention approaches after major bleeding events could be beneficial if bleeding risk can be successfully mitigated.

Comparative effectiveness and safety of oral anticoagulants for atrial fibrillation: A retrospective cohort study

Oral anticoagulants (OACs) are high-priority medications, frequently used with clinically important benefit and serious harm. Our objective was to compare the safety and effectiveness of direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) versus warfarin in a population where anticoagulation management and DOACs were readily available. A retrospective cohort study of all adults living in British Columbia with a diagnosis of atrial fibrillation and a first prescription for an OAC was conducted. Co-primary outcomes were ischemic stroke and systemic embolism, and major bleeding. Secondary outcomes included a net clinical outcome composite and analysis of discontinuation, switching, and key subgroups. We estimated the effects of treatment using time-to-event models with high-dimensional propensity score adjustment to control confounding. After adjustment for prescribing bias, a cohort (n = 20,113, 43.8% female, mean age 72.4 years) with a mean follow-up of 18.1 months showed that patients taking warfarin tended to be poorer, sicker, and less likely to have a cardiologist prescriber. Outcome event rates were not significantly different for DOACs compared to warfarin [adjusted rate ratio of 1.15 (0.91, 1.46) for systemic embolism, 0.94 (0.82, 1.08) for major bleeding, and 0.98 (0.90, 1.06) for net clinical outcome]. Only the effect of age on net clinical outcome met our strict criteria for predicting which group might be superior. Switch of drug class was associated with increased risk of events (p < 0.003). In this population, we found no difference in important clinical outcomes between warfarin and DOACs. Switching compared to not switching was associated with harm.

Adherence to Anticoagulation and Risk of Stroke Among Medicare Beneficiaries Newly Diagnosed with Atrial Fibrillation

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study was to compare the risk of stroke in atrial fibrillation (AF) with adherent use of oral anticoagulation (OAC), non-adherent use, and non-use of OAC.

METHODS

Using 2013-2016 Medicare claims data, we identified patients newly diagnosed with AF in 2014-2015 and collected prescriptions filled for OAC in the 12 months after AF diagnosis (n = 39,272). We categorized participants each day into three time-dependent exposures: adherent use (≥ 80% of the previous 30 days covered with OAC), non-adherent use (0-80% covered with OAC), and non-use (0%). We constructed Cox proportional hazards models to estimate the association between time-dependent exposures and time to stroke, adjusting for demographics and clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

The sample included 39,272 patients. Study participants spent 35.0% of the follow-up period in the adherent use exposure category, 10.9% in the non-adherent category, and 54.0% in the non-use category. OAC adherent use [hazard ratio (HR) 0.62; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52-0.74] and non-adherent use (HR 0.74; 95% CI 0.57-0.95) were associated with lower hazards of stroke than non-use. Adherent use of DOAC (HR 0.54; 95% CI 0.42-0.69) and warfarin (HR 0.70; 95% CI 0.56-0.89) was associated with lower risk of stroke than non-use, but the risk of stroke did not statistically differ between DOAC and warfarin adherent use (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.56-1.04).

DISCUSSION

Although adherence to OAC reduces stroke risk by nearly 40%, newly diagnosed AF patients in Medicare adhere to OAC on average only one third of the first year after AF diagnosis.

Risk of Major Gastrointestinal Bleeding With New vs Conventional Oral Anticoagulants: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

There is controversy over whether use of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) associates with increased risk of major gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) compared with conventional therapies (such as vitamin K antagonists or anti-platelet agents). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of data from randomized controlled trials and high-quality real-world studies.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov Website databases (through Oct 12, 2018) for randomized controlled trials and high-quality real-world studies that reported major GIB events in patients given NOACs or conventional therapy. Relative risks (RRs) for randomized controlled trials and adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) for real-world studies were calculated separately using random-effects models.

RESULTS

We analyzed data from 43 randomized controlled trials (183,752 patients) and 41 real-world studies (1,879,428 patients). The pooled major rates of GIB for patients on NOACs (1.19%) vs conventional treatment (0.92%) did not differ significantly (RR from randomized controlled trials, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.91-1.31 and aHR from real-world studies, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.94-1.10; P_interaction=.52). Rivaroxaban, but not other NOACs, was associated with an increased risk for major GIB (RR from randomized controlled trials, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.17-1.65 and aHR from real-world studies, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.04-1.23; P_interaction = .06). Analyses of subgroups, such as patients with different indications, dosage, or follow-up time, did not significantly affect results. Meta-regression analysis failed to detect any potential confounding to impact the primacy outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

In a systematic review and meta-analysis of data from randomized controlled trials and real-world studies, we confirmed that there is no significant difference in risk of major GIB between patients receiving NOACs vs conventional treatment. Rivaroxaban users had a 39% increase in risk for major GIB.

Restarting of anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation after major bleeding: A meta-analysis

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Benefits and risks of restarting oral anticoagulants (OACs) in patients with atrial fibrillation after major bleeding remain unknown. A meta-analysis was performed to systematically evaluate the effects of restarting OACs on thromboembolism and bleeding events in these patients.

METHODS

Relevant studies were obtained via systematically search of PubMed, Cochrane's Library and Embase databases. A randomized-effect model was used to pool the results. Subgroup analyses according to the types of OACs and sites of reoccurred bleeding were performed.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Seven retrospective cohort studies with 12 197 patients were included. Restarting OACs was associated with reduced risk of thromboembolism (risk ratio [RR]: 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.42-0.87; P = .007). Subgroup analyses showed that restarting warfarin reduced risk of thromboembolism (RR = 0.59, P = .05), but not for the new oral anticoagulants (NOACs; RR = 1.37, P = .18). Moreover, restarting OACs did not affect the risk of reoccurred bleeding (RR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.74-1.30, P = .89). Similar results were found for warfarin and NOACs, as well as for reoccurred intracranial haemorrhage or gastrointestinal bleeding. In addition, restarting OACs was associated with significantly reduced risk of all-cause mortality (RR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.33-0.52, P < .001). Consistent results were found for warfarin and NOACs.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Restarting of OACs after major bleeding in AF patients may be associated with reduced risks of thromboembolism and mortality without increasing reoccurrence of bleeding.

When to withhold oral anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation - an overview of frequent clinical discussion topics

Stroke prevention with oral anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation predisposes for bleeding. As a result, in select patient groups anticoagulation is withheld because of a perceived unfavorable risk-benefit ratio. Reasons for withholding anticoagulation can vary greatly between clinicians, often leading to discussion in daily clinical practice on the best approach. To guide clinical decision-making, we have reviewed available evidence on the most frequently reported reasons for withholding anticoagulation: previous bleeding, frailty and age, and an overall high bleeding risk.

Prise en charge hémostatique des hémorragies cérébrales sous anticoagulants oraux

L’hématome intracrânien spontané a un pronostic clinique sévère. Le devenir des patients dépend de l’efficacité de la prise en charge initiale. L’importance du saignement, le volume de l’hématome et son évolution sont les facteurs principaux qui contrôlent mortalité et morbidité. Les traitements anticoagulants oraux, antivitamines K (AVK) et anticoagulants oraux directs (AOD), favorisent l’expansion de l’hématome. La correction rapide de l’hémostase permet le contrôle partiel de l’hématome. Alors que la réversion des AVK par les concentrés de complexe prothrombinique (CCP) a fait l’objet de recommandations bien diffusées, l’attitude thérapeutique reste peu codifiée avec les AOD, alliant l’utilisation de l’idarucizumab pour le dabigatran et des CCP pour les anti-Xa qui n’ont, pour l’instant, pas d’antidote.

Trajectories of Oral Anticoagulation Adherence Among Medicare Beneficiaries Newly Diagnosed With Atrial Fibrillation

Background

Only 50% of atrial fibrillation (AF) patients recommended for oral anticoagulation (OAC) use these medications, and less than half of them adhere to OAC. In a cohort of Medicare beneficiaries newly diagnosed with AF, we identified groups of patients with similar trajectories of OAC use and adherence, and evaluated patient characteristics affecting group membership.

Methods and Results

We selected continuously enrolled Medicare Part D beneficiaries with first AF diagnosis in 2014 to 2015 (n=34 898). We calculated the proportion of days covered with OAC over the first 12 months after diagnosis and identified OAC adherence trajectories using group‐based trajectory models. We constructed multinomial logistic regression models to evaluate how demographics, system‐level factors, and clinical characteristics were associated with group membership. We identified 4 trajectories of OAC adherence: patients who never used OAC (43.8%), late OAC initiators (7.6%), early OAC discontinuers (8.9%), and continuously adherent patients (40.1%). Predictors such as sex, black race, residence in the South, or HAS‐BLED score were associated with not only OAC use, but also the timing of initiation and the likelihood of discontinuation. For example, HAS‐BLED score ≥4 was associated with a higher likelihood of not using OAC (odds ratio 1.35; 95% CI, 1.14–1.62), of late initiation (1.55; 95% CI, 1.11–2.05), and of early discontinuation (odds ratio 1.35; 95% CI, 1.01–1.84).

Conclusions

We identified 4 distinct trajectories of OAC adherence after first AF diagnosis, with <45% of newly diagnosed AF patients belonging to the trajectory group characterized by continuous OAC adherence. Trajectories were associated not only with demographic and clinical characteristics but also with regional factors.

Reversal of Anticoagulants in Critical Care

There has seen an increase in anticoagulant consumption worldwide over the past few decades. With this widespread utilization of anticoagulants, clinicians are increasingly likely to encounter situations where anticoagulants would need to be withheld. This includes emergency and elective procedures or surgeries as well as major or minor bleeding as a direct result of over anticoagulation or consequent to other intercurrent illnesses such as sepsis or trauma with multiorgan failure, where the anticoagulant may contribute to coagulation abnormalities. Clinicians are required to have a thorough understanding of the indications for anticoagulant prescription, drug interactions and monitoring, indications and options of reversal of anticoagulation and management of bleeding in the situations described above. Once the acute process is managed, the ongoing need and timing of reinitiation of anticoagulation is also crucial. This article provides an overview on the indications for reversal of anticoagulation, the agents used for reversal and the timing of reinitiation of anticoagulants.

American Society of Hematology 2018 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: optimal management of anticoagulation therapy

BACKGROUND

Clinicians confront numerous practical issues in optimizing the use of anticoagulants to treat venous thromboembolism (VTE).

OBJECTIVE

These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians and other health care professionals in their decisions about the use of anticoagulants in the management of VTE. These guidelines assume the choice of anticoagulant has already been made.

METHODS

ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline development process, including updating or performing systematic evidence reviews. The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment.

RESULTS

The panel agreed on 25 recommendations and 2 good practice statements to optimize management of patients receiving anticoagulants.

CONCLUSIONS

Strong recommendations included using patient self-management of international normalized ratio (INR) with home point-of-care INR monitoring for vitamin K antagonist therapy and against using periprocedural low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) bridging therapy. Conditional recommendations included basing treatment dosing of LMWH on actual body weight, not using anti-factor Xa monitoring to guide LMWH dosing, using specialized anticoagulation management services, and resuming anticoagulation after episodes of life-threatening bleeding.

Asia-Pacific working group consensus on non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: an update 2018

Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding remains an important emergency condition, leading to significant morbidity and mortality. As endoscopic therapy is the 'gold standard' of management, treatment of these patients can be considered in three stages: pre-endoscopic treatment, endoscopic haemostasis and post-endoscopic management. Since publication of the Asia-Pacific consensus on non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) 7 years ago, there have been significant advancements in the clinical management of patients in all three stages. These include pre-endoscopy risk stratification scores, blood and platelet transfusion, use of proton pump inhibitors; during endoscopy new haemostasis techniques (haemostatic powder spray and over-the-scope clips); and post-endoscopy management by second-look endoscopy and medication strategies. Emerging techniques, including capsule endoscopy and Doppler endoscopic probe in assessing adequacy of endoscopic therapy, and the pre-emptive use of angiographic embolisation, are attracting new attention. An emerging problem is the increasing use of dual antiplatelet agents and direct oral anticoagulants in patients with cardiac and cerebrovascular diseases. Guidelines on the discontinuation and then resumption of these agents in patients presenting with NVUGIB are very much needed. The Asia-Pacific Working Group examined recent evidence and recommends practical management guidelines in this updated consensus statement.

Non-Vitamin K Oral Anticoagulants Associated Bleeding and Its Antidotes

Oral anticoagulant-associated intracerebral hemorrhage (OAC-ICH) accounts for nearly 20% of all ICH. The number of patients with an indication for oral anticoagulant therapy (OAT) increases with increasing age. OAT became less complicate with the introduction of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOAC) OAT because of easier handling, favorable risk-benefit profile, reduced rates of ICH compared to vitamin K antagonists and no need for routine coagulation testing. Consequently, despite a better safety profile of NOAC the number of patients with OAC-ICH will increase. The mortality and complication rates of OAC-ICH are high and therefore they are the most feared complication of OAT. Immediate normalization of coagulation is the main goal and therefore knowledge of pharmacodynamics and coagulation status is essential. Laboratory measurements of anticoagulant activity in NOAC patients is challenging as specific tests are not widely available. More accessible tests such as the prothrombin time and activated partial thromboplastin time have important limitations. In dabigatran-associated ICH 5 g Idarucizumab should be administered. In rivaroxaban and apixaban-associated ICHs administration of andexanet alpha should be considered. Prothrombin complex concentrate may be considered if andexanet alpha is not available or in case of an ICH associated with edoxaban.

Effectiveness and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants and Warfarin, Stratified by Stroke Risk in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

The objective of the study was to examine how the comparative effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and warfarin differ across subgroups of patients with atrial fibrillation defined by stroke risk (CHA2DS2-VASc score ≤3, 4 to 5, ≥6). Using Medicare claims data, we identified patients newly diagnosed with atrial fibrillation in 2013 to 2014 who initiated warfarin (n=12,354), apixaban (n=2,358), dabigatran (n=1,415), or rivaroxaban (n=5,139), and categorized them according to their CHA2DS2-VASc score (≤3, 4 to 5, ≥6). Primary outcomes included the combined risk of ischemic stroke, other thromboembolic event and death, and the risk of bleeding. We constructed Cox proportional hazard models that included terms for treatment, CHA2DS2-VASc subgroup, and the interaction between them, and controlled for demographics and a comprehensive list of clinical characteristics. We found that DOACs were generally more effective than warfarin, but this effect was most pronounced in the lowest risk subgroup. Specifically, the hazard ratio for the primary effectiveness outcome with apixaban compared with warfarin was 0.46 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.32 to 0.65) for CHA2DS2-VASc ≤3, 0.71 (95% CI 0.61 to 0.86) for 4 to 5, and 0.86 (95% CI 0.74 to 1.01) for ≥6 (p value for interaction = 0.005). The comparative safety profile of DOACs versus warfarin did not change with CHA2DS2-VASc score. In conclusion, DOACs are more effective than warfarin, but this effect is more pronounced in patients with lower risk of stroke. Further research is needed to validate these findings in other patient cohorts and uncover their underlying mechanisms.

Resuming anticoagulants after anticoagulation-associated intracranial haemorrhage: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the adverse outcomes following resumption of anticoagulation in patients with anticoagulation-associated intracranial haemorrhage (ICH).

DESIGN

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis in this clinical population. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement was followed, and two authors independently assessed eligibility of all retrieved studies and extracted data.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, from inception to February 2017.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA AND OUTCOMES

Randomised controlled trials or cohort studies that recruited adults who received oral anticoagulants at the time of ICH occurrence and survived after the acute phase or hospitalisation were searched. Primary outcomes, including long-term mortality, recurrent ICH and thromboembolic events. Secondary outcomes were the frequency of resuming anticoagulant therapy and related factors.

RESULTS

We included 12 cohort studies (no clinical trials) involving 3431 ICH participants. The pooled frequency of resuming anticoagulant therapy was 38% (95% CI 32% to 44%), but this was higher in participants with prosthetic heart valves, subarachnoid haemorrhage or dyslipidaemia. There was no evidence that resuming anticoagulant therapy was associated with higher long-term mortality (pooled relative risk (RR) 0.60, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.19; p=0.14) or ICH recurrence (pooled RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.80; p=0.57). Resumption of anticoagulation was associated with significantly fewer thromboembolic events (pooled RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.42; p<0.001). In a subgroup of patients with atrial fibrillation, resuming anticoagulant therapy was associated with fewer long-term mortality (pooled RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.37, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on these observational studies, resuming anticoagulant therapy after anticoagulation-associated ICH has beneficial effects on long-term complications. Clinical trials are needed to substantiate these findings.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42017063827.

Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) is bleeding that develops in the oesophagus, stomach or proximal duodenum. Peptic ulcers, caused by Helicobacter pylori infection or use of NSAIDs and low-dose aspirin (LDA), are the most common cause. Although the incidence and mortality associated with NVUGIB have been decreasing owing to considerable advances in the prevention and management of NVUGIB over the past 20 years, it remains a common clinical problem with an annual incidence of ∼67 per 100,000 individuals in the United States in 2012. NVUGIB is a medical emergency, and mortality is in the range ∼1-5%. After resuscitation and initial assessment, early (within 24 hours) diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopy together with intragastric pH control with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) form the basis of treatment. With a growing ageing population treated with antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant medications, the clinical management of NVUGIB is complex as the risk between gastrointestinal bleeding events and adverse cardiovascular events needs to be balanced. The best clinical approach includes identification of risk factors and prevention of bleeding; available strategies include continuous treatment with PPIs or H. pylori eradication in those at increased risk of developing NVUGIB. Treatment with PPIs and/or use of cyclooxygenase-2-selective NSAIDs should be implemented in those patients at risk of NVUGIB who need NSAIDs and/or LDA.

Restarting oral anticoagulant therapy after major bleeding in atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Use of oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy in atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with an inherited risk of bleeding. Benefits and risks of OAC restarting after a major bleeding are still uncertain. We aimed to assess effectiveness and safety of restarting OAC in AF patients after a major bleeding event.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of all studies reporting data about AF patients that sustained a major bleeding, reporting data on restarting or not restarting OAC therapy.

RESULTS

A total of seven studies were included, involving 5685 patients. No significant difference was found in "any stroke" occurrence between OAC restarters and non-restarters (odds ratio [OR]: 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.37-1.51), with a significant 46% relative risk reduction (RRR) (p < 0.00001) for "any thromboembolism" in OAC restarters, with consistent results when the index bleeding event was an intracranial or gastrointestinal bleeding. A significantly higher risk of recurrent major bleeding was seen (OR: 1.85, 95% CI: 1.48-2.30), but no difference in risk for recurrence of index event. OAC restarters had a 10.8% absolute risk reduction for all-cause death (OR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.24-0.60); p < 0.00001). Net clinical benefit (NCB) analysis demonstrated that restarting OAC therapy after a major bleeding was significantly associated with a clinical advantage (NCB: 0.11, 95% CI: 0.09-0.14; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Restarting OAC therapy after a major bleeding event in AF was associated with a positive clinical benefit when compared to non-restarting OAC, with a significant reduction in any thromboembolism and all-cause mortality.

Outcomes of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Newly Recommended for Oral Anticoagulation Under the 2014 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology/Heart Rhythm Society Guideline

BACKGROUND

In March 2014, the American Heart Association updated their guidelines for the management of oral anticoagulation (OAC) in atrial fibrillation, recommending OAC for all patients with CHA₂DS₂-VASc ≥2. Previously, only patients with CHADS₂ ≥2 were recommended for anticoagulation. This study compared effectiveness and safety outcomes of OAC among patients who would receive OAC using the 2014 guidelines but not the 2011 guidelines.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Using claims data from a 5% sample of 2013-2014 Medicare beneficiaries, we identified patients with initially diagnosed atrial fibrillation between 2013 and 2014 and selected those who would receive OAC under the 2014 guidelines but not the 2011 guidelines (those with CHA₂DS₂-VASc score ≥2 or CHADS₂ score <2). Patients were categorized according to their use of OAC after first atrial fibrillation diagnosis (2937 users and 2914 nonusers). Primary outcomes included the composite of ischemic stroke, systemic embolism and death, and any bleeding event. Cox proportional hazard models were constructed to compare the risk of primary outcomes between the 2 groups, while controlling for patient demographic and clinical characteristics. There was no difference in the combined risk of stroke, systemic embolism, and death between the treatment groups (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.20). The risk of bleeding was higher for patients receiving OAC than for patients not receiving OAC (hazard ratio, 1.70, 95% confidence interval, 1.46-1.97).

CONCLUSIONS

The benefit of OAC is not well defined in this patient population, and new studies that minimize residual confounding are needed to fully understand the risk/benefit of OAC in patients with atrial fibrillation and low to moderate stroke risk.

Comparison of the Effectiveness and Safety of Apixaban, Dabigatran, Rivaroxaban, and Warfarin in Newly Diagnosed Atrial Fibrillation

No studies have performed direct pairwise comparisons of the effectiveness and safety of warfarin and the new oral anticoagulants (NOACs) apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban. Using 2013 to 2014 claims from a 5% random sample of Medicare beneficiaries, we identified patients newly diagnosed with atrial fibrillation who initiated apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, warfarin, or no oral anticoagulation therapy in 2013 to 2014. Outcomes included the composite of ischemic stroke, systemic embolism (SE) and death, any bleeding event, gastrointestinal bleeding, intracranial bleeding, and treatment persistence. We constructed Cox proportional hazard models to compare outcomes between each pair of treatment groups. The composite risk of ischemic stroke, SE, and death was lower for NOACs than for warfarin: hazard ratio (HR) 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76 to 0.98 for apixaban; 0.73, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.86 for dabigatran; and 0.82, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.89 for rivaroxaban, all compared with warfarin. There were no differences in effectiveness across NOACs. The risk of any bleeding was lower with apixaban than with warfarin, but higher with rivaroxaban than with warfarin. Apixaban (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.79) and dabigatran (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.92) were associated with lower bleeding risk than rivaroxaban. Treatment persistence was highest for apixaban (82%), and lowest for dabigatran and warfarin (64%) (p value <0.001). Compared with warfarin, NOACs are more effective in preventing stroke but their risk of bleeding varies, with rivaroxaban having higher risk than warfarin. Altogether, apixaban had the most favorable effectiveness, safety, and persistence profile.