A Delphi consensus on the management of oral anticoagulation in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation in Spain: ACOPREFERENCE study

ACcurate COnsensus Reporting Document (ACCORD) explanation and elaboration: Guidance and examples to support reporting consensus methods

BACKGROUND

When research evidence is limited, inconsistent, or absent, healthcare decisions and policies need to be based on consensus amongst interested stakeholders. In these processes, the knowledge, experience, and expertise of health professionals, researchers, policymakers, and the public are systematically collected and synthesised to reach agreed clinical recommendations and/or priorities. However, despite the influence of consensus exercises, the methods used to achieve agreement are often poorly reported. The ACCORD (ACcurate COnsensus Reporting Document) guideline was developed to help report any consensus methods used in biomedical research, regardless of the health field, techniques used, or application. This explanatory document facilitates the use of the ACCORD checklist.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

This paper was built collaboratively based on classic and contemporary literature on consensus methods and publications reporting their use. For each ACCORD checklist item, this explanation and elaboration document unpacks the pieces of information that should be reported and provides a rationale on why it is essential to describe them in detail. Furthermore, this document offers a glossary of terms used in consensus exercises to clarify the meaning of common terms used across consensus methods, to promote uniformity, and to support understanding for consumers who read consensus statements, position statements, or clinical practice guidelines. The items are followed by examples of reporting items from the ACCORD guideline, in text, tables and figures.

CONCLUSIONS

The ACCORD materials - including the reporting guideline and this explanation and elaboration document - can be used by anyone reporting a consensus exercise used in the context of health research. As a reporting guideline, ACCORD helps researchers to be transparent about the materials, resources (both human and financial), and procedures used in their investigations so readers can judge the trustworthiness and applicability of their results/recommendations.

Influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients receiving oral anticoagulants for the treatment of non-valvular atrial fibrillation

Background

Frequent monitoring of patients declined during the COVID-19 pandemic, harming patients with chronic diseases who critically needed correct monitoring. We evaluated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) receiving treatment with vitamin K antagonists (VKA) or non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOAC) in clinical practice in Spain.

Methods

This observational, retrospective study analyzed prevalent patients treated with NOAC/VKA on 14/03/2019 (pre-COVID-19 period) and 14/03/2020 (COVID-19 period), who were followed up to 12 months. The study also considered incident patients who started treatment with NOAC/VKA between 15/03/2019 and 13/03/2020 (pre-COVID-19 period) and from 15/03/2020 to 13/03/2021 (COVID-19 period). Demographic characteristics, comorbidities, effectiveness, treatment patterns, and healthcare resource utilization were considered.

Results

Prevalent patients amounted to 12,336 and 13,342 patients, whereas 1,612 and 1,602 incident patients were included in the pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 periods, respectively. Prevalent patients treated with VKA had more strokes, thromboembolism, and major bleeding compared to those receiving NOAC, particularly during the COVID-19 period. NOAC patients had a 12 % lower risk of death than those on treatment with VKA (Hazard ratio = 0.88 [95 % CI: 0.81 - 0.95], p = 0.033). In addition, VKA patients were less persistent after 12 months than NOAC patients (pre-COVID-19 period: 52.1 % vs. 78.9 %, p < 0.001; COVID-19 period: 49.2 % vs. 80.3 %, p < 0.001), and required more healthcare visits and hospitalizations than those on treatment with NOAC.

Conclusion

Compared to VKA, NOAC seems to have reduced the incidence of severe events and the use of healthcare resources for NVAF, particularly during the pandemic.

Consensus statement of the Spanish Society of Neurology on the treatment of multiple sclerosis and holistic patient management in 2023

The last consensus statement of the Spanish Society of Neurology's Demyelinating Diseases Study Group on the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS) was issued in 2016. Although many of the positions taken remain valid, there have been significant changes in the management and treatment of MS, both due to the approval of new drugs with different action mechanisms and due to the evolution of previously fixed concepts. This has enabled new approaches to specific situations such as pregnancy and vaccination, and the inclusion of new variables in clinical decision-making, such as the early use of high-efficacy disease-modifying therapies (DMT), consideration of the patient's perspective, and the use of such novel technologies as remote monitoring. In the light of these changes, this updated consensus statement, developed according to the Delphi method, seeks to reflect the new paradigm in the management of patients with MS, based on the available scientific evidence and the clinical expertise of the participants. The most significant recommendations are that immunomodulatory DMT be started in patients with radiologically isolated syndrome with persistent radiological activity, that patient perspectives be considered, and that the term "lines of therapy" no longer be used in the classification of DMTs (> 90% consensus). Following diagnosis of MS, the first DMT should be selected according to the presence/absence of factors of poor prognosis (whether epidemiological, clinical, radiological, or biomarkers) for the occurrence of new relapses or progression of disability; high-efficacy DMTs may be considered from disease onset.

Expert Consensus on Comprehensive Early Rhythm Control in Addition to Guideline-Based Care for Atrial Fibrillation: A Modified Delphi Survey

Atrial fibrillation (AF) practice guidelines recommend a rhythm-control strategy to improve symptoms and quality of life, noting the side effects of antiarrhythmic drugs and catheter ablation. Emerging evidence indicates that comprehensive early rhythm control with antiarrhythmic drugs or catheter ablation is associated with a lower risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes versus the usual care. Using an online modified Delphi survey approach, perspectives and expert consensus among electrophysiologists were examined through a series of ranking and likelihood questions around treatment decision-making on (1) the use of comprehensive early rhythm-control strategies in patients with AF based on guidelines and emerging research and (2) treatment selection factors. A panel of 17 electrophysiologists reached a consensus on using early rhythm control (median 90, interquartile range 14) based on the view that early intervention improved cardiovascular outcomes (mean rank 1.6 of 3, 82% within 1 SD) and symptoms (1.8 of 3, 41%). AF-related symptoms were identified as the most important in making a treatment initiation decision (1.1 of 7, 88%), followed by AF type (2.5 of 7, 82%). Participants were most likely to initiate treatment at AF symptom onset (median 80; interquartile range 6). In making treatment selection decisions, participants ranked short-term/long-term safety (1.9 of 7, 88%) and efficacy (1.8 of 7, 53%) as the top 2 considerations. In conclusion, experts were in favor of early rhythm control; however, additional research is needed to address the role that early rhythm-control strategies play in current AF treatment management algorithms.

A Delphi consensus on the management of anticoagulation in the COVID-19 pandemic: the MONACO study

Background

During the COVID-19 pandemic, guideline documents on the management of anticoagulation were rapidly published. However, these documents did not follow a structured methodology, and significant differences existed between the guidelines. The aim of this expert consensus was to provide recommendations on the clinical management of oral anticoagulation in patients in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

A two-round Delphi study was conducted using an online survey. In the first round, panellists expressed their level of agreement with the items on a 9-point Likert scale. Items were selected if they received approval from ≥66.6% of panellists and if they were agreed by the scientific committee. In the second round, panellists revaluated those items that did not meet consensus in the first round.

Results

A total of 147 panellists completed the first round, and 144 of them completed the second round. Consensus was reached on 161 items included in five dimensions. These dimensions addressed: (I) management of anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) without mechanical valves or moderate/severe mitral stenosis during COVID-19 infection; (II) thromboprophylaxis in patients hospitalised for COVID-19; (III) management of anticoagulation at hospital discharge/after COVID-19; (IV) anticoagulation monitoring in the COVID-19 pandemic setting; and (V) role of telemedicine in the management and follow-up of patients with AF in the COVID-19 pandemic setting.

Conclusions

These areas of collective agreement could specially guide clinicians in making decisions regarding anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19 during hospitalisation and at discharge, where results from clinical trials are still limited and, in some cases, conflicting.

Oral Anticoagulant Use and Appropriateness in Elderly Patients with Atrial Fibrillation in Complex Clinical Conditions: ACONVENIENCE Study

Non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) is the most common arrhythmia in older patients. Although direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOAC) are the antithrombotic treatment of choice, irrespective of age, certain factors may limit their use. The aim of the ACONVENIENCE study was to consult the opinion of a multidisciplinary panel of experts on the appropriateness of using OACs in elderly patients (>75 years) with NVAF associated with certain complex clinical conditions. A consensus project was performed on the basis of a systematic review of the literature, and application of a two-round Delphi survey. The agreement of 79 panellists on 30 Delphi-type statements was evaluated, and their opinion on the appropriateness of different oral anticoagulants in 16 complex clinical scenarios was assessed. A total of 27 consensus statements were agreed upon, including all statements addressing anticoagulation in older patients and in patients at high risk of bleeding complications, and most of those addressing frailty, dementia, risk of falling, and complex cardiac situations. It was almost unanimously agreed upon that advanced age should not influence the anticoagulation decision. Apixaban was the highest-rated therapeutic option in 14/16 situations, followed by edoxaban. There is a high degree of agreement on anticoagulation in older patients with NVAF. Age should not be the single limiting factor when prescribing OACs, and the decision should be made based on net clinical benefit and a comprehensive geriatric assessment. Apixaban, followed by edoxaban, was considered the most appropriate treatment in the various complex clinical situations examined.

Assessment and Mitigation of Bleeding Risk in Atrial Fibrillation and Venous Thromboembolism: Executive Summary of a European and Asia-Pacific Expert Consensus Paper

While there is a clear clinical benefit of oral anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) in reducing the risks of thromboembolism, major bleeding events (especially intracranial bleeds) may still occur and be devastating. The decision for initiating and continuing anticoagulation is often based on a careful assessment of both thromboembolism and bleeding risk. The more common and validated bleeding risk factors have been used to formulate bleeding risk stratification scores, but thromboembolism and bleeding risk factors often overlap. Also, many factors that increase bleeding risk are transient and modifiable, such as variable international normalized ratio values, surgical procedures, vascular procedures, or drug-drug and food-drug interactions. Bleeding risk is also not a static "one-off" assessment based on baseline factors but is dynamic, being influenced by aging, incident comorbidities, and drug therapies. In this executive summary of a European and Asia-Pacific Expert Consensus Paper, we comprehensively review the published evidence and propose a consensus on bleeding risk assessments in patients with AF and VTE, with a view to summarizing "best practice" when approaching antithrombotic therapy in these patients. We address the epidemiology and size of the problem of bleeding risk in AF and VTE, and review established bleeding risk factors and summarize definitions of bleeding. Patient values and preferences, balancing the risk of bleeding against thromboembolism, are reviewed, and the prognostic implications of bleeding are discussed. We propose consensus statements that may help to define evidence gaps and assist in everyday clinical practice.

Assessment and mitigation of bleeding risk in atrial fibrillation and venous thromboembolism: A Position Paper from the ESC Working Group on Thrombosis, in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association, the Association for Acute CardioVascular Care and the Asia-Pacific Heart Rhythm Society

Whilst there is a clear clinical benefit of oral anticoagulation (OAC) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) in reducing the risks of thromboembolism, major bleeding events (especially intracranial bleeds) may still occur and be devastating. The decision to initiate and continue anticoagulation is often based on a careful assessment of both the thromboembolism and bleeding risk. The more common and validated bleeding risk factors have been used to formulate bleeding risk stratification scores, but thromboembolism and bleeding risk factors often overlap. Also, many factors that increase bleeding risk are transient and modifiable, such as variable international normalized ratio values, surgical procedures, vascular procedures, or drug-drug and food-drug interactions. Bleeding risk is also not a static 'one off' assessment based on baseline factors but is dynamic, being influenced by ageing, incident comorbidities, and drug therapies. In this Consensus Document, we comprehensively review the published evidence and propose a consensus on bleeding risk assessments in patients with AF and VTE, with the view to summarizing 'best practice' when approaching antithrombotic therapy in these patients. We address the epidemiology and size of the problem of bleeding risk in AF and VTE, review established bleeding risk factors, and summarize definitions of bleeding. Patient values and preferences, balancing the risk of bleeding against thromboembolism are reviewed, and the prognostic implications of bleeding are discussed. We propose consensus statements that may help to define evidence gaps and assist in everyday clinical practice.

Clinical Impact of the Time in Therapeutic Range on Early Hospital Readmission in Patients with Acute Heart Failure Treated with Oral Anticoagulation in Internal Medicine

Background and objectives: Patients with heart failure (HF) often present with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and require oral anticoagulation with coumarin anticoagulants such as acenocoumarol. The objective of this study was to evaluate the relationship between time in therapeutic range (TTR) and the risk of early readmission. Materials and Methods: A retrospective descriptive study was carried out on hospitalized patients with a diagnosis of HF between 2014 and 2018 who had adverse effects due to oral anticoagulation with acenocoumarol (underdosing, overdosing, or hemorrhage). Clinical, analytical, therapeutic, and prognostic variables were collected. TTR is defined as the duration of time in which the patient’s International Normalized Ratio (INR) values were within a desired range. Early readmission was defined as readmission within 30 days after hospital discharge. Patients were divided into two groups depending on whether or not they had a TTR less than 60% (TTR < 60%) over the 6 months prior to the adverse event. Results: In the cohort of 304 patients, the mean age was 82 years, 59.9% of the patients were female, and 54.6% had a TTR < 60%. Patients with TTR < 60% had a higher HAS-BLED score (4.04 vs. 2.59; p < 0.001) and INR (6 vs. 5.31; p < 0.05) but lower hemoglobin (11.67 vs. 12.22 g/dL; p < 0.05). TTR < 60% was associated with early readmission after multivariate analysis (OR: 2.05 (CI 95%: 1.16–3.61)). They also had a higher percentage of hemorrhagic events and in-hospital mortality but without reaching statistical significance. Conclusions: Patients with HF and adverse events due to acenocoumarol often have poor INR control, which is independently associated with a higher risk of early readmission.

Patients with perceived high-bleeding risk and computerized decision support for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: an AF-ALERT substudy : Piazza: outcomes of high-bleeding risk AF patients

A perceived increased risk of bleeding is one of the most frequent reasons for withholding anticoagulation for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF). We previously conducted a randomized controlled trial of alert-based computerized decision support to increase prescription of anticoagulation in hospitalized patients with AF. To determine the clinical characteristics and outcomes of those patients whose inpatient health care providers received a computer alert, we analyzed all 248 patients in the alert group. Patients for whom providers elected to omit anticoagulation and provided a rationale of a perceived high risk of bleeding were compared with those who were not designated as high-risk. Perceived high risk of bleeding was the most common reason (77%) for omitting anticoagulation. Median HAS-BLED scores were similar in these patients compared with those who were not deemed to have an increased bleeding risk (3 vs. 3, p = 0.44). Despite being categorized as too high-risk for bleeding to receive antithrombotic therapy at the time of the alert, nearly 12% of these patients were ultimately prescribed anticoagulation by 90 days. The frequency of major and clinically-relevant non-major bleeding was similar between the groups. The frequency of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or systemic embolic event was similar in both groups (10.2% vs. 12.4%, p = 0.59). In conclusion, a perceived high risk of bleeding was the most common reason for omission of anticoagulation in patients with AF after a computerized alert. Perceived high risk of bleeding was not reflected in a higher HAS-BLED score.Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02339493 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02339493 In a randomized controlled trial of computerized decision support to increase prescription of antithrombotic therapy in hospitalized patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), a perceived high risk of bleeding was the most common reason (77%) for omitting antithrombotic therapy after an on-screen alert. Median HAS-BLED scores were similar in these patients compared with those who were not deemed to have an increased bleeding risk (3 vs. 3, p = 0.44). Despite being categorized as too high-risk for bleeding to receive antithrombotic therapy for stroke prevention at the time of the alert, nearly 12% of these patients were ultimately prescribed anticoagulation over the ensuing 90 days.

Cost-effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonist in atrial fibrillation: A study protocol using Real-World Data from Catalonia (FantasTIC Study)

BACKGROUND

Anticoagulant therapy is used for stroke prevention and proved to be effective and safe in the long term. The study aims to analyse the cost-effectiveness relationship of using of direct-acting oral anticoagulants vs vitamin K antagonists to prevent ischaemic stroke in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, including all the active ingredients marketed in Spain, prescribed for 2 years in the Primary Care service of the Institut Català de la Salut.

METHODS

Population-based cohort study, in which the cost of the 2 treatment groups will be evaluated. Direct costs (pharmacy, primary care, emergency and hospitalization) and indirect costs (lost productivity) will be included from a social perspective. Effectiveness (assessed as the occurrence of a health event, the 1 of primary interest being stroke) will be determined, with a 2-year time horizon and a 3% discount rate. The average cost of the 2 groups of drugs will be compared using a regression model to determine the factors with the greatest influence on determining costs. We will carry out a univariate ('one-way') deterministic sensitivity analysis.

DISCUSSION

We hope to provide relevant information about direct and indirect costs of oral anticoagulants, which, together with aspects of effectiveness and safety, could help shape the consensual decision-making of evaluating bodies.