Safety and efficacy of triple antithrombotic therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients needing long-term anticoagulation

Efficacy and Safety of the Use of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation and Concomitant Aspirin Therapy: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) as the first-choice therapy in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation because these drugs have several benefits over the vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). It is unknown whether these benefits remain when NOACs have to be combined with aspirin therapy. To assess the efficacy and safety of NOACs compared with VKAs in patients with atrial fibrillation and concomitant aspirin therapy, we conducted a systematic review and study-based meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

A systematic electronic literature search was done in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL Register of Controlled Trials for studies including published data of patients ≥18 years of age with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, randomized to either VKAs or NOACs, or receiving aspirin therapy at any time during the study that report all-cause stroke or systemic embolism, vascular death, myocardial infarction, major bleeding, or intracranial hemorrhage as an outcome. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each outcome were extracted from the individual studies and pooled with random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

This study-based meta-analysis was restricted to the subgroups of patients on aspirin therapy (n=21 722) from 4 randomized controlled trials comparing VKAs and NOACs (n=71 681) in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. In this meta-analysis including patients on mainly low-dose aspirin, NOACs were found to be more effective (outcome of stroke or systemic embolism: HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.67-0.91; vascular death: HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.76-0.93) and as safe as VKAs with respect to major bleeding (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.69-1.01). NOACs were safer with respect to the reduction of intracranial hemorrhage (HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.26-0.56).

CONCLUSIONS

This study-based meta-analysis shows that it may be both safer and more effective to use NOACs compared with VKAs to treat patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and concomitant aspirin therapy.

Antiplatelet and Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing Coronary Stenting

Stroke prevention is the main priority in the management cascade of atrial fibrillation. Most patients require long-term oral anticoagulation (OAC) and may require percutaneous coronary intervention. Prevention of recurrent cardiac ischemia and stent thrombosis necessitate dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for up to 12 months. Triple antithrombotic therapy with OAC plus DAPT of shortest feasible duration is warranted, followed by dual antithrombotic therapy of OAC and antiplatelet agent, and OAC alone after 12 months. Because of elevated risk of hemorrhagic complications, new-generation drug-eluting stents, lower-intensity OAC, radial access, and routine use of gastric protection with proton pump inhibitors are recommended.

New-onset atrial fibrillation after recent coronary stenting: Warfarin or non-vitamin K-antagonist oral anticoagulants to be added to aspirin and clopidogrel? A viewpoint

The antithrombotic management of patients on oral anticoagulation (OAC), with either warfarin or non-vitamin K-antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs), undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with stent (PCI-S) has been recently addressed in a joint European consensus document. In accordance, triple therapy (TT) of OAC, aspirin and clopidogrel should generally be given as the initial therapy. More uncertainty exists over whether warfarin or a NOAC should be added in patients already on dual antiplatelet therapy of aspirin and clopidogrel (DAPT) after recent PCI-S. Upon review of available data, it appears that the risk of major bleeding of TT as compared to DAPT is similar with either warfarin or a NOAC. In particular, TT consistently appears associated to an approximately 2.5 fold increase in the risk of major bleeding. Because of the higher convenience, NOACs might be considered the preferred OAC to be added to DAPT. Given the reported different safety profiles of the various NOACs on the incidence of major, and gastrointestinal, bleeding, the NOACs, and the dose, showing the greatest safety in this regard should be selected. In accordance, dabigatran 110 mg and apixaban 2.5mg twice daily appear as the most valuable options in patients who are not and who are respectively, at increased risk of bleeding. As an alternative, apixaban 5mg twice daily might be considered in patients at risk of bleeding not increased, whereas rivaroxaban 15 mg once daily may be considered in the presence of increased risk of bleeding (essentially when related to moderate renal impairment).

Dual antiplatelet therapy in the anticoagulated patient undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention risks, benefits, and unanswered questions

A commonly encountered scenario is the patient with atrial fibrillation (AF) on oral anticoagulation (OAC) who either develops an acute coronary syndrome or has to undergo percutaneous coronary intervention with stent placement. In such patients, separate indications suggest combining OAC and dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). This approach, however, increases the risk of bleeding as well as thromboembolic risk if bleeding does not occur. For optimal clinical results, the risks and benefits of all possible treatment options should be determined based on the best available data. This review provides an overview of the most recent data regarding the optimal treatment of AF patients with an indication for combined treatment with OAC and DAPT.