Grosse GM, Hüsing A, Stang A, Kuklik N, Brinkmann M, Nabavi D, Sparenberg P, Weissenborn K, Gröschel K, Royl G, Poli S, Michalski D, Eschenfelder CC, Weimar C, and Diener HC
Background: The optimal timing of initiating or resuming anticoagulation after acute ischemic stroke (AIS) or transient ischemic attack (TIA) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is debated. Dabigatran, a non-vitamin K oral anticoagulant (NOAC), has shown superiority against vitamin K antagonists (VKA) regarding hemorrhagic complications., Aims: In this registry study, we investigated the initiation of dabigatran in the early phase after AIS or TIA., Methods: PRODAST (Prospective Record of the Use of Dabigatran in Patients with Acute Stroke or TIA) is a prospective, multicenter, observational, post-authorization safety study. We recruited 10,039 patients at 86 German stroke units between July 2015 and November 2020. A total of 3,312 patients were treated with dabigatran or VKA and were eligible for the analysis that investigates risks for major hemorrhagic events within 3 months after early (⩽ 7 days) or late (> 7 days) initiation of dabigatran or VKA initiated at any time. Further endpoints were recurrent stroke, ischemic stroke, TIA, systemic embolism, myocardial infarction, death, and a composite endpoint of stroke, systemic embolism, life-threatening bleeding and death., Results: Major bleeding event rates per 10,000 treatment days ranged from 1.9 for late administered dabigatran to 4.9 for VKA. Early or late initiation of dabigatran was associated with a lower hazard for major hemorrhages as compared to VKA use. The difference was pronounced for intracranial hemorrhages with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0.47 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.10-2.21) for early dabigatran use versus VKA use and an adjusted HR of 0.09 (95% CI: 0.00-13.11) for late dabigatran use versus VKA use. No differences were found between early initiation of dabigatran versus VKA use regarding ischemic endpoints., Conclusions: The early application of dabigatran appears to be safer than VKA administered at any time point with regards to the risk of hemorrhagic complications and in particular for intracranial hemorrhage. This result, however, must be interpreted with caution in view of the low precision of the estimate., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: H-CD has received honoraria for participation in clinical trials, contribution to advisory boards or oral presentations from: Abbott, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Novo-Nordisk, Pfizer, Portola, and WebMD Global. Boehringer Ingelheim provided financial support for research projects. H-CD received research grants from the German Research Council (DFG) and German Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). H-CD serves as editor of Neurologie up2date, Info Neurologie & Psychiatrie and Arzneimitteltherapie, as co-editor of Cephalalgia, and on the editorial board of Lancet Neurology and Drugs. GR received speaker’s honoraria and reimbursement for congress traveling and accommodation from Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo and Pfizer. SP received research support from BMS/Pfizer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, European Union, German Federal Joint Committee Innovation Fund, and German Federal Ministry of Education and Research, Helena Laboratories and Werfen as well as speakers’ honoraria/consulting fees from Alexion, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, BMS/Pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo, Portola, and Werfen (all outside the submitted work). KG received support by Alexion Pharma Germany GmbH, Abbott Medical GmbH, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer Pharma GmbH, Springer Medizin Verlag GmbH. CCE is an employee of Boehringer Ingelheim. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest related to the content of the presented work.