Striking a balance between the risks and benefits of anticoagulation bridge therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation: clinical updates and remaining controversies

Interrupted versus uninterrupted anticoagulation therapy for catheter ablation in adults with arrhythmias

BACKGROUND

The management of anticoagulation therapy around the time of catheter ablation (CA) procedure for adults with arrhythmia is critical and yet is variable in clinical practice. The ideal approach for safe and effective perioperative management should balance the risk of bleeding during uninterrupted anticoagulation while minimising the risk of thromboembolic events with interrupted therapy.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and harms of interrupted versus uninterrupted anticoagulation therapy for catheter ablation (CA) in adults with arrhythmias.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and SCI-Expanded on the Web of Science for randomised controlled trials on 5 January 2021. We also searched three registers on 29 May 2021 to identify ongoing or unpublished trials. We performed backward and forward searches on reference lists of included trials and other systematic reviews and contacted experts in the field. We applied no restrictions on language or publication status.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing uninterrupted anticoagulation with any modality of interruption with or without heparin bridging for CA in adults aged 18 years or older with arrhythmia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors conducted independent screening, data extraction, and assessment of risk of bias. A third review author resolved disagreements. We extracted data on study population, interruption strategy, ablation procedure, thromboembolic events (stroke or systemic embolism), major and minor bleeding, asymptomatic thromboembolic events, cardiovascular and all-cause mortality, quality of life (QoL), length of hospital stay, cost, and source of funding. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.  MAIN RESULTS: We identified 12 studies (4714 participants) that compared uninterrupted periprocedural anticoagulation with interrupted anticoagulation. Studies performed an interruption strategy by either a complete interruption (one study) or by a minimal interruption (11 studies), of which a single-dose skipped strategy was used (nine studies) or two-dose skipped strategy (two studies), with or without heparin bridging. Studies included participants with a mean age of 65 years or greater, with only two studies conducted in relatively younger individuals (mean age less than 60 years). Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) was the primary type of AF in all studies, and seven studies included other types of AF (persistent and long-standing persistent). Most participants had CHADS2 or CHADS2-VASc demonstrating a low-moderate risk of stroke, with almost all participants having normal or mildly reduced renal function. Ablation source using radiofrequency energy was the most common (seven studies). Ten studies (2835 participants) were conducted in East Asian countries (Japan, China, and South Korea), while the remaining two studies were conducted in the USA. Eight studies were conducted in a single centre. Postablation follow-up was variable among studies at less than 30 days (three studies), 30 days (six studies), and more than 30 days postablation (three studies). Overall, the meta-analysis showed high uncertainty of the effect between the interrupted strategy compared to uninterrupted strategy on the primary outcomes of thromboembolic events (risk ratio (RR) 1.76, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.33 to 9.46; I2 = 59%; 6 studies, 3468 participants; very low-certainty evidence). However, subgroup analysis showed that uninterrupted vitamin A antagonist (VKA) is associated with a lower risk of thromboembolic events without increasing the risk of bleeding. There is also uncertainty on the outcome of major bleeding events (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.59 to 2.05; I2 = 6%; 10 studies, 4584 participants; low-certainty evidence). The uncertainty was also evident for the secondary outcomes of minor bleeding (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.46 to 2.22; I2 = 87%; 9 studies, 3843 participants; very low-certainty evidence), all-cause mortality (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.21; 442 participants; low-certainty evidence) and asymptomatic thromboembolic events (RR 1.45, 95% CI 0.85 to 2.47; I2 = 56%; 6 studies, 1268 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There was a lower risk of the composite endpoint of thromboembolic events (stroke, systemic embolism, major bleeding, and all-cause mortality) in the interrupted compared to uninterrupted arm (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.81; 1 study, 442 participants; low-certainty evidence). In general, the low event rates, different comparator anticoagulants, and use of different ablation procedures may be the cause of imprecision and heterogeneity observed.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis showed that the evidence is uncertain to inform the decision to either interrupt or continue anticoagulation therapy around CA procedure in adults with arrhythmia on outcomes of thromboembolic events, major and minor bleeding, all-cause mortality, asymptomatic thromboembolic events, and a composite endpoint of thromboembolic events (stroke, systemic embolism, major bleeding, and all-cause mortality).  Most studies in the review adopted a minimal interruption strategy which has the advantage of reducing the risk of bleeding while maintaining a lower level of anticoagulation to prevent periprocedural thromboembolism, hence low event rates on the primary outcomes of thromboembolism and bleeding. The one study that adopted a complete interruption of VKA showed that uninterrupted VKA reduces the risk of thromboembolism without increasing the risk of bleeding. Hence, future trials with larger samples, tailored to a more generalisable population and using homogeneous periprocedural anticoagulant therapy and ablation source are required to address the safety and efficacy of the optimal management of anticoagulant therapy prior to ablation.

Anticoagulation Bridge Therapy in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: Recent Updates Providing a Rebalance of Risk and Benefit

In 2011 we reviewed clinical updates and controversies surrounding anticoagulation bridge therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Since then, options for oral anticoagulation have expanded with the addition of four direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) agents available in the United States. Nonetheless, vitamin K antagonist (VKA) therapy continues to be the treatment of choice for patients who are poor candidates for a DOAC and for whom bridge therapy remains a therapeutic dilemma. This literature review identifies evidence and guideline and consensus statements from the last 5 years to provide updated recommendations and insight into bridge therapy for patients using a VKA for AF. Since our last review, at least four major international guidelines have been updated plus a new consensus document addressing bridge therapy was released. Prospective trials and one randomized controlled trial have provided guidance for perioperative bridge therapy. The clinical trial data showed that bridging with heparin is associated with a significant bleeding risk compared with not bridging; furthermore, data suggested that actual perioperative thromboembolic risk may be lower than previously estimated. Notably, patients at high risk for stroke have not been adequately represented. These findings highlight the importance of assessing thrombosis and bleeding risk before making bridging decisions. Thrombosis and bleeding risk tools have emerged to facilitate this assessment and have been incorporated into guideline recommendations. Results from ongoing trials are expected to provide more guidance on safe and effective perioperative management approaches for patients at high risk for stroke.

Short-Term Risk of Bleeding During Heparin Bridging at Initiation of Vitamin K Antagonist Therapy in More Than 90 000 Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Managed in Outpatient Care

Background

Several studies have recently examined the risks of bleeding and of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism associated with perioperative heparin bridging anticoagulation in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. However, few studies have investigated bridging risks during vitamin K antagonist initiation in outpatient settings.

Methods and Results

A retrospective cohort study was conducted on individuals starting oral anticoagulation between January 2010 and November 2014 for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation managed in outpatient care and identified from French healthcare insurance. Bleeding and ischemic stroke and systemic embolism events were identified from the hospitalization database. Adjusted hazard ratios with 95% CI were estimated using Cox models during the first and 2 following months of anticoagulation. Of 90 826 individuals, 30% had bridging therapy. A total of 318 (0.35%) cases of bleeding and 151 (0.17%) ischemic stroke and systemic embolism cases were identified during the first month of follow‐up and 231 (0.31%) and 122 (0.16%) during the 2 following months, respectively. At 1 month of follow‐up, the incidence of bleeding was higher in the bridged group compared with the nonbridged group (0.47% versus 0.30%; P<0.001), and this increased risk persisted after adjustment for covariates (hazard ratio=1.60; 95% CI, 1.28–2.01). This difference disappeared after the first month of treatment (0.93; 0.70–1.23). No significant difference in the occurrence of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism was observed either at 1 month of follow‐up or later.

Conclusions

At vitamin K antagonist initiation for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation managed in ambulatory settings, bridging therapy is associated with a higher risk of bleeding and a similar risk of arterial thromboembolism compared with no bridging therapy.

Hospital length of stay of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients who were administered Rivaroxaban versus Warfarin with and without pretreatment parenteral anticoagulants therapies

BACKGROUND

Warfarin has been the only anticoagulant used for decades to prevent strokes and systemic embolisms in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients. Compared with rivaroxaban, warfarin has a narrow therapeutic range and many genetic and food-drug interactions that could potentially prolong hospital length of stay (LOS).

OBJECTIVE

To compare hospital LOS between NVAF patients who were administered rivaroxaban versus warfarin with and without pretreatment of parenteral anticoagulant agents in a population of rivaroxaban-treated patients.

METHODS

A retrospective matched-cohort analysis was conducted using the Premier Perspective Comparative Hospital Database from November 2010 to September 2012. Adult patients were included in the study if they had a hospitalization for NVAF. Rivaroxaban users were matched with up to 4 warfarin users based on propensity score analyses. Patients with and without pretreatment of parenteral anticoagulant agents were evaluated separately. Hospital LOS was compared between treatment groups using generalized estimating equations.

RESULTS

The matched cohorts' characteristics were well balanced. Among the matched rivaroxaban and warfarin users who were administered parenteral agents, the mean age of the cohorts was 70 years and 47% of patients were female, whereas in the sample of patients who were not administered parenteral agents, the mean age was 72 years and 50% of patients were female. In the sample of patients who were administered parenteral agents, rivaroxaban users had significantly shorter hospital LOS (LOS difference: 1.38 days, P < 0.001) compared with warfarin users among rivaroxaban-treated patients. No significant difference in LOS was found in the sample of patients who were not administered parenteral anticoagulant agents (P = 0.169).

CONCLUSION

In the study sample of NVAF patients who were administered parenteral anticoagulant agents, rivaroxaban was associated with a significantly shorter hospital LOS compared with warfarin. The difference in LOS was not statistically significant in the sample of patients who were not administered parenteral anticoagulant agents.

[Perioperative management of atrial fibrillation]

Atrial fibrillation is a frequent complication in the perioperative period. When it appears there is an increased risk of perioperative morbidity due to stroke, thromboembolism, cardiac arrest, myocardial infarction, anticoagulation haemorrhage, and hospital readmissions. The current article focuses on the recommendations for the management of perioperative atrial fibrillation based on the latest Clinical Practice Guidelines on atrial fibrillation by the European Society of Cardiology and the Spanish Society of Cardiology. This article pays special attention to the preoperative management, as well as to the acute perioperative episode. For this reason, the latest recommendations for the control of cardiac frequency, antiarrhythmic treatment and anticoagulation are included.

Patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing total joint arthroplasty increase hospital burden

BACKGROUND

More than 3 million people in the United States have atrial fibrillation, most of whom are being managed with anticoagulation therapy for life. The goal of the present study was to examine the effect of chronic anticoagulation therapy on patients with atrial fibrillation who undergo total joint arthroplasty.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all patients undergoing aseptic primary or revision total joint arthroplasty at our facility from March 2007 to August 2011. One hundred and sixty-one patients with atrial fibrillation (Group A) were compared with 161 matched controls (Group B). A total of 112 hips and 210 knees underwent 239 primary arthroplasties and eighty-three revisions. The groups were compared with use of conditional logistic regression (with matching on the basis of the involved joint [hip or knee], type of procedure [revision or primary], age, and sex) with regard to the length of hospital stay, postoperative hemoglobin levels, transfusion requirements, and readmissions.

RESULTS

The preoperative length of stay (1.7 versus 0.2 days; p < 0.0001), postoperative length of stay (4.6 versus 3.2 days; p = 0.0002), and total length of stay (6.3 versus 3.4 days; p < 0.0001) were significantly longer for patients with atrial fibrillation (Group A). Hemoglobin levels were lower (but not significantly so) for Group A at baseline (13.1 versus 13.8 mg/dL), on Postoperative Day 2 (10.1 versus 10.6 mg/dL), on Postoperative Day 3 (9.8 versus 10.2 mg/dL), on Postoperative Day 4 (9.6 versus 10.1 mg/dL), on Postoperative Day 5 (9.7 versus 9.9 mg/dL), and at discharge (9.9 versus 10.3 mg/dL). Group A had a significantly higher prevalence of blood transfusion (15.5% versus 3.7%; p = 0.0005) and periprosthetic joint infection (5.6% versus 0.62%; p = 0.0196). A diagnosis of atrial fibrillation (odds ratio, 4.09; 95% confidence interval, 2.05 to 8.18; p < 0.0001) significantly increased the odds of total joint arthroplasty complication and the need for hospital readmission.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with preoperative atrial fibrillation undergoing total joint arthroplasty had an increased length of hospital stay, increased transfusion requirements, and an increased risk of periprosthetic joint infection and unplanned hospital readmission.

Trends in the management of atrial fibrillation: A neurologist's perspective

Cardiac embolism, primarily from atrial fibrillation (AF), is implicated in a quarter of all ischemic strokes. In the setting of AF, contraindications to traditional therapies can create a clinical dilemma when choosing an agent for secondary stroke prophylaxis. Newer horizons in the medical and surgical management of AF have helped us choose from a wide variety of available therapies, the best possible management. In this article, we review the current trends in AF management including newer oral anticoagulants as well as surgical devices from a neurologist's view.