Search

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) represent the cornerstone therapy for cardioembolic events prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). In practice, the choice of one DOAC over another is guided by the decision-making process of the physician, which considers specific patient and drug characteristics. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical features and long-term outcomes of a real-world population treated with DOACs, where the use of the 4 different DOACs is quite equal. We conducted a retrospective observational, single-center, multidisciplinary study enrolling consecutive NVAF patients treated with one of the 4 DOACs. From an initial number of 753 patients, we excluded 72 patients because of loss to follow-up, at the end we enrolled 681:174 (23%) treated with dabigatran, 175 (23%) with apixaban, 190 (25%) with rivaroxaban, and 214 (29%) with edoxaban. Patients treated with apixaban were significantly older, more women represented (p <0.001), and with a higher cardioembolic and bleeding risk (p <0.001). Dabigatran was preferred in patients with liver failure (p = 0.008), whereas Apixaban and Edoxaban were chosen in chronic kidney disease (p = 0.002). At 3-year follow-up, 20 patients (2.7%) experienced a systemic thromboembolic event without significant differences in the 4 DOACs. In the same period, an International Society of Thrombosis and Hemostasis classification major bleeding event occurred in 26 patients (3.6%), more statistically correlated to edoxaban (6.1%) (p = 0.038). Thromboembolic events or major bleeding were higher in the edoxaban group (10%) compared with the others (p = 0.014). In our single-center real-world experience, the choice of the DOAC for a patient with NVAF was tailored to specific clinical features and drug pharmacokinetics of the patient. As a result, a small number of adverse events were observed., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: LAAO is an emerging option for thromboembolic event prevention in patients with NVAF. We previously reported data on comparison between LAAO and DOAC at two-year follow-up in NVAF patients at HBR (HAS-BLED ≥3)., Aims: Limited data are available on long term follow-up. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DOACs versus LAAO indication after 5 years., Methods: We enrolled 193 HBR treated with LAAO and 189 HBR patients with DOACs. At baseline, LAAO group had higher HAS-BLED (4.2 vs 3.3, p < 0.001) and lower CHADS-VASc (4.3 vs. 4.7, p = 0.005). After 1:1 PSM, 192 patients were included (LAAO n = 96; DOACs n = 96)., Results: At 5-year follow-up the rate of the combined safety and effectiveness endpoint (ISTH major bleeding and thromboembolic events) was significantly higher in LAAO group (p = 0.042), driven by a higher number of thromboembolic events (p = 0.047). The rate of ISTH-major bleeding events was similar (p = 0.221). After PSM no significant difference in the primary effectiveness (LAAO 13.3% vs DOACs 9.5%, p = 0.357) and safety endpoint (LAAO 7.5% vs DOACs 7.5%; p = 0.918) were evident. Overall bleeding rate was significantly higher in DOACs group (25.0% vs 13.7%, p = 0.048), while a non-significant higher number of TIA was reported in LAAO group (5.4% vs 1.1%, p = 0.098). All-cause and cardiovascular mortality were higher in LAAO group at both unmatched and matched analysis., Conclusion: We confirmed safety and effectiveness of both DOAC and LAAO in NVAF patients at HBR, with no significant differences in thromboembolic events or major bleeding were at 5-year follow-up. The observed increased mortality after LAAO warrants further investigations in RCTs., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Contrast-enhanced computed tomography is the reference-standard imaging technique to assess left atrial appendage (LAA) morphology. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of two-dimensional and new three-dimensional (3D) transesophageal echocardiographic rendering modalities in assessing LAA morphology., Methods: Seventy consecutive patients who underwent both computed tomography and transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) were retrospectively enrolled. The traditional LAA morphology classification system (LAAcs; chicken wing, cauliflower, cactus, and windsock) and a new simplified LAAcs based on the LAA bend angle were used for the analysis. LAA morphology was independently assessed by two trained readers using three different modalities: two-dimensional TEE, 3D TEE with multiplanar reconstruction, and a new 3D transesophageal echocardiographic rendering modality with improved transparency (Glass). The new LAAcs and traditional LAAcs were compared in terms of intra- and interrater reliability., Results: With the new LAAcs, two-dimensional TEE was fairly accurate in identifying LAA morphology (κ = 0.43, P < .05), with moderate interrater (κ = 0.50, P < .05) and substantial intrarater (κ = 0.65, P < .005) agreement. Three-dimensional TEE showed higher accuracy and reliability: 3D TEE with multiplanar reconstruction had almost perfect accuracy (κ = 0.85, P < .001) and substantial (κ = 0.79, P < .001) interrater reliability, while 3D TEE with Glass had substantial accuracy (κ = 0.70, P < .001) and almost perfect (κ = 0.84, P < .001) interrater reliability. Intrarater agreement was almost perfect for both 3D transesophageal echocardiographic modalities (κ = 0.85, P < .001). Accuracy was considerably lower when the traditional LAAcs was used, with 3D TEE with Glass being the most reliable technique (κ = 0.75, P < .05). The new LAAcs showed higher inter- and intrarater reliability compared with the traditional LAAcs (interrater, κ = 0.85 vs κ = 0.49; intrarater, κ = 0.94 vs κ = 0.68; P < .05)., Conclusions: Three-dimensional TEE is an accurate, reliable, and feasible alternative to computed tomography in assessing LAA morphology with the new LAAcs. The new LAAcs shows higher reliability rates than the traditional one., (Copyright © 2023 American Society of Echocardiography. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (nvAF) who experienced a cardioembolic (CE) event despite adequate oral anticoagulation (OAC) are at high risk of recurrence, and further prevention strategies are deemed necessary. The present study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of off-label use of left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) in this subset of patients., Methods: Seventy-five consecutive patients with nvAF who experienced a CE event despite adequate OAC therapy were retrospectively enrolled from two Italian centers. Patients were divided according to the treatment strategy following the index event: DOAC group (49 patients who continued OAC therapy with DOACs) and LAAC group (26 patients who underwent LAAC procedure). 1:1 propensity-score matching between the two groups was performed. LAAC group was made up of two subgroups according to the post-procedural pharmacological regimen: 1) dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for 3 months followed by indefinite single antiplatelet therapy (LAAC+SAPT); or 2) aspirin plus DOAC for 3 months followed by indefinite DOAC therapy (LAAC+DOAC). The primary endpoint was a composite of CE event, major bleeding, or procedure-related major complication., Results: During a median follow-up of 3.4 years (IQR: 2.0-5.3), LAAC was a predictor of primary endpoint-free survival (HR=0.28, 95% CI: 0.08-0.97; P=0.044); within LAAC group, no procedure-related major complication occurred. Moreover, a trend toward a lower rate of both CE events and major bleedings was observed in LAAC group, particularly in the subgroup LAAC+DOAC., Conclusions: LAAC is a reasonable therapeutic option in nvAF patients who suffered a CE event despite adequate OAC therapy.

Background: Limited real-world data are available regarding the comparison about safety and efficacy of DOACs prescription in very elderly patients (≥85 years) with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Concern about the risk of bleeding with anticoagulation in very older patients still represents an important challenge for clinicians. The aim of this study was to evaluate the different prevalence of major bleeding and thromboembolic events between very elderly NVAF patients (≥85 years) compared to those non very elderly (<85 years)., Methods: Single center multidisciplinary registry including NVAF patients treated with DOACs. Primary safety endpoint was 2-year rate of major bleeding. Primary efficacy endpoint was 2-year rate of thromboembolic events. Event-free survival curves among groups were compared using Cox-Mantel Test., Results: 908 NVAF consecutive patients were included, of these, 805 patients were <85 years (89%) and 103 patients were very elderly patients with ≥85 years (11%). Compared to patients <85 years, those very elderly have higher CHA2DS2-VASc Score (P=0.001), higher rate of hypertension (P=0.001), diabetes mellitus (P=0.030), previous bleeding events (P<0.001), previous stroke/TIA/SE (P≤0.001), heart failure (P≤0.001), and lower creatinine clearance (P<0.001). In terms of safety endpoints (overall ISTH-major bleeding) no significative difference between two groups (P=0.952) were observed up to 2-year follow-up. Systemic thromboembolic event (primary efficacy endpoint) was significantly higher in patients with ≥85 years (P=0.027). The incidence of all-cause death was significantly higher in very elderly patients (P<0.001)., Conclusions: This single center registry, showed that the use of DOACs in very elderly NVAF was safe and is a therapeutic option to be pursued for stroke prevention especially for those who are at high risk of ischemic events.

Background: Left atrial appendage (LAA) thrombosis increases the risk of stroke and its management has to be assessed. The aim of the present study is to evaluate short and long-term safety and efficacy of a standardized approach of percutaneous LAA closure (LAAC) routinely using a cerebral protection device (CPD) in patients with LAA thrombosis or sludge (LAAT)., Methods: We prospectively enrolled 14 consecutive patients with atrial fibrillation complicated by LAAT presenting in a high-volume tertiary center. In seven patients (50%) LAAT was found after anticoagulant withdrawal for severe bleedings and in the remaining half LAAT was found despite appropriate anticoagulant therapy. All patients were treated with a standardized interventional approach of LAAC routinely using a CPD and guided by transoesophageal echocardiography., Results: Mean age was 68 ± 14 years and nine patients (64%) were male. Mean CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc and HAS-BLED scores were 3.3 ± 1.6 and 2.3 ± 1.1, respectively. Six patients (42.8%) presented organized thrombi while eight LAA sludge (57.1%). In 13 patients (92.8%) CPD was positioned through a right radial arterial access. Procedural success was achieved in all patients. In one patient we assisted to embolization of the thrombus during deployment of the device in the absence of neurological consequences. During a mean follow up of 426 ± 307 days, one patient died for non-cardiac cause while no embolic event or major bleeding were reported., Conclusion: In an unselected cohort, LAAC with the systematic use of CPD was a feasible, safe and effective therapeutic option for LAAT both acutely and after long-term follow-up., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Aims: To investigate the decline of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) treated with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) or non-VKA oral anticoagulants (NOACs)., Methods: Multicentre prospective cohort study including 1667 patients with nonvalvular AF. The eGFR was assessed by the CKD-EPI formula at baseline and during follow-up. The primary endpoint of the study was the median annual decline of eGFR according to VKA (n = 743) or NOAC (n = 924) use. As secondary endpoints, we analysed the transition to eGFR <50 mL/min/1.73 m 2 and the eGFR class worsening., Results: Median age was 73.7 ± 9.1 years and 43.3% were women. VKA-treated patients showed an eGFR decline of -2.11 (interquartile range [IQR] -5.68/-0.62), which was -0.27 (IQR -9.00/4.54, P < 0.001 vs VKAs), -1.21 (IQR -9.98/4.02, P = 0.004 vs VKAs) and -1.32 (IQR -8.70/3.99, P = 0.003 vs VKAs) in patients on dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban, respectively. Transition to eGFR <50 mL/min/1.73 m 2 was lower in dabigatran- and apixaban-treated patients: odds ratio (OR) 0.492, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.298-0.813, P = 0.006 and OR 0.449, 95% CI 0.276-0.728, P = 0.001, respectively. A lower rate of eGFR class worsening was found in all groups of NOACs compared to VKAs. No difference between full and reduced dose of NOAC was found. Subgroup analysis showed that the association between NOAC and eGFR changes was markedly reduced in diabetic patients., Conclusion: Patients prescribed NOACs showed a lower decline of renal function compared to those prescribed VKAs. This effect was partially lost in patients with diabetes., (© 2020 The British Pharmacological Society.)

Background: Limited real-world data are available regarding the outcome of patients treated with inappropriate dose of nonvitamin-K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs)., Objective: To assess the prevalence and factors associated with inappropriate dose prescription of NOACs and to evaluate adverse events that come from this inappropriate prescription., Methods: Single-center multidisciplinary registry including nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients treated with NOACs. Based on guidelines criteria for dose reduction, two subcohorts were defined as treated with appropriate or inappropriate NOACs dose. Primary efficacy endpoint was 2-year rate of thromboembolic events. Primary safety endpoint was 2-year rate of major bleeding. Event-free survival curves among groups were compared using Cox-Mantel test., Results: A total of 760 nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients were included; 32% patients were treated with dabigatran, 34% with apixaban, 24% with rivaroxaban and 10% with edoxaban. An inappropriate dose was prescribed in 96 patients (12.6%), and in most cases (68%) it was too low. Rivaroxaban (15%) and apixaban (18.5%) were the most frequently prescribed with an inappropriate dose. Patients treated with an inappropriate dose were elderly people, with low-creatinine clearance value, who had experienced previous bleeding and with a high CHADS2 VASc score. In 2 years, a trend for higher numbers of thromboembolic events (5.2 vs. 3.3%, P = 0.348) and less major bleeding (2.1 vs. 4.2%, P = 0.316) has been observed in patients with inappropriate NOACs prescriptions., Conclusion: Nearly 13% of patients were treated with an inappropriate dose of NOACs, in this single-center study. A trend for higher numbers of thromboembolic events was observed in these patients. The results should be considered as hypothesis generating.

Aims: A significant number of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) are ineligible for non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) due to previous major bleeding or because they are at high bleeding risk (HBR). In this setting the indication for percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAO) is a valuable alternative. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of NOACs versus LAAO indication in NVAF patients at HBR (HAS-BLED ≥3)., Methods and Results: All consecutive patients who underwent successful LAAO (n=193) and those treated with NOACs (n=189) (dabigatran, apixaban or rivaroxaban) were included. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was used to match LAAO and NOACs patients. At baseline, patients in the LAAO group had higher HAS-BLED (4.2% vs 3.3%, p<0.001) and lower CHADS-VASc (4.3% vs 4.7%, p=0.005) scores. After 1:1 PSM, 192 patients were enrolled in the final analysis (LAAO n=96; NOACs n=96). At two-year follow-up, no significant differences in thromboembolic (7.3% vs 6.3%, p=0.966) and ISTH major bleeding event rates (6.7% vs 4.8% p=0.503) were found between the two unmatched groups. All-cause death was significantly higher in the LAAO group (18.7% vs 10.6%; p=0.049). After PSM, all-cause death, thromboembolic and ISTH major bleeding event rates were similar between the groups. Significant independent predictors of all-cause death were dialysis (HR 5.65, 95% CI: 2.16-14.85, p<0.001) and age (HR 1.08, 95% CI: 1.05-1.13, p<0.001)., Conclusions: In NVAF patients at HBR, LAAO and NOACs performed similarly in terms of thromboembolic and major bleeding events up to two-year follow-up. Our findings warrant further investigation in randomised trials and therefore can be considered as hypothesis-generating.

Patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) are at increased risk of stroke and bleeding. Although direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) trials excluded patients with severe CKD, a growing portion of CKD patients have been starting DOACs and limited data from real-world outcome in this high-risk setting are available. The INSigHT registry included 632 consecutive NVAF patients that started apixaban (256 patients, 41%), dabigatran (245, 39%) and rivaroxaban (131, 20%) between 2012 and 2015. Based on creatinine clearance, two sub-cohorts were defined: (1) non-CKD group (CrCl 60-89 mL/min, 413 patients) and (2) CKD group (15-59 ml/min, 219). Compared to non-CKD patients, those with CKD, were at higher ischemic (CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc 4.5 vs 2.9, p < 0.001) and hemorrhagic risk (HAS-BLED 2.4 vs 1.8, p < 0.001). At 2-year follow-up, the overall ISTH-major bleeding and thromboembolic event rates were 5.2% and 2.3% and no significant difference between non-CKD and CKD patients for both efficacy and safety endpoints were observed. In non-CKD patients, the 2-year ISTH-major bleeding rates were higher in rivaroxaban group (HR 2.9, 95% CI 1.1-7.3; p = 0.047) while dabigatran showed non-significant excess in thromboembolic events (HR 4.3, 95% CI 0.9-20.8; p = 0.068). In CKD patients, a significantly higher rate of thromboembolic events was observed in rivaroxaban (HR 6.3, 95% CI 1.1-38.1; p = 0.044). This real-world, non-insurance database registry shows remarkable 2-year safety and efficacy profile of DOACs even in patients with moderate to severe CKD. Head to head differences between DOACs are exploratory, hypothesis generating and warrant further investigation in larger studies.