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.
Competing Interests: The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: ASM is an employee of Atrys Health SA, who was paid consultant to BMS in connection with this manuscript. DVL, JSM, MICA and AE are employees of Bristol Myers Squibb and have BMS stocks. JCC and ODS declare to have received fees as coordinator investigators of this study by Bristol Myers Squibb.
(© 2024 The Authors.)