Search

A common dilemma facing physicians treating patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the management of oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy, because there is also an indication for dual antiplatelet therapy in these patients. The purpose of this study was therefore to evaluate anticoagulation patterns in this patient population in an attempt to identify patterns of risk factors that may influence OAC prescribing habits. This retrospective study entailed a review of a total of 4,648 patients from two academic hospitals who underwent PCI between 2008 and 2016. We ultimately included 211 patients who had AF and an indication for OAC. Chart review revealed patients' risk factors, CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc and HAS-BLED scores, and antithrombotic regimens. Only 105 (49.8%) patients who met the indications for OAC were actually placed on OAC post-PCI. There was no significant relationship between discharge on OAC and HAS-BLED score (t = 0.14; p = 0.44) or CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score (t = 0.76; p = 0.22). Patients younger than 65 years of age were prescribed more triple therapy (56% versus 33%; p < 0.01) or any OAC (69% versus 41%; p < 0.01) on discharge in comparison with patients 65 years of age or older. The older patient group had a significantly higher average CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score (4.4 versus 3.2; p < 0.01) and a higher average HAS-BLED score (2.8 versus 2.4; p < 0.01). Ultimately, this study indicated that less than half of AF patients with an indication for OAC were placed on OAC post-PCI. There was no association between discharge on OAC and CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score, HAS-BLED score, or any other individual risk factor, with the exception of age., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest for the published content., (Copyright: © 2019 Innovations in Cardiac Rhythm Management.)

Objectives: Clinician utilization of the 2013 cholesterol lowering guidelines remains variable and unknown. We sought to examine statin prescribing patterns and compare rates among specialists who treat high-risk cardiovascular patients admitted to the hospital., Methods: We retrospectively (via chart review) examined four specialty groups: (i) Cardiology, (ii) Cardiovascular or Vascular (CV) Surgery, (iii) Neurology, and (iv) Internal Medicine. Adult patients were included based on a discharge diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome, coronary artery bypass graft surgery, carotid endarterectomy, acute ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack, or high-risk chest pain. Prescribing patterns were evaluated 6 months and 18 months after the release of the 2013 guidelines. High-intensity statin was defined as atorvastatin 40-80 mg or rosuvastatin 20-40 mg per day., Results: 632 patients were included in our study. The following percentages of patients were discharged on high-intensity statin (6 months; 18 months): (i) Cardiology (80%; 85%), (ii) CV Surgery (52%, 65%), (iii) Neurology (59%; 66%), and (iv) Internal Medicine (45%; 48%). Among the four groups, Cardiology was the most likely to discharge patients on high-intensity statin (p < 0.001) in 2014 and in 2015. Cardiology, CV Surgery, and Neurology significantly increased the percentage of patients on high-intensity statin from pre-admission to time of discharge in both years., Conclusion: High-intensity statin therapy is underutilized among high-risk cardiovascular patients admitted to the hospital. Variations exist in prescribing patterns of different specialties who manage high-risk populations. This data can be used to test quality improvement interventions to improve rates of high-intensity statin utilization among high-risk patients prior to hospital discharge.