scholarly journals Dabigatran versus vitamin k antagonist: an observational across-cohort comparison in acute coronary syndrome patients with atrial fibrillation

2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 465-473 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Gaubert ◽  
N. Resseguier ◽  
M. Laine ◽  
L. Bonello ◽  
L. Camoin-Jau ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (02) ◽  
pp. 081-087
Author(s):  
Surya Dharma

AbstractIn atrial fibrillation (AF), oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy with either vitamin K antagonist or non–vitamin K antagonist is used to prevent thromboembolic complications. In patients who presented with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and were treated by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor reduces major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) and stent thrombosis. Consequently, in patients with AF who presented with ACS and were treated by PCI, the combination of OAC and DAPT, the so-called triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT) is needed to improve the outcome of the patients. However, the use of TAT increases the risk of bleeding. Several randomized clinical trials and a meta-analysis evaluated the use of TAT and double antithrombotic therapy (DAT) in this population, and DAT is defined as patients who receive combination of one antiplatelet and OAC. In general, the studies demonstrated a reduction in bleeding event in patients who received DAT as compared with TAT, with similar incidence of thromboembolic complications and MACE. To date, there is no established consensus or guideline for the most appropriate combination of antithrombotic agents in patients with AF and ACS who undergo PCI. Tailoring the treatment for each individual is likely the best approach to determine the balance of bleeding risk and ischemic events before starting antithrombotic therapy. Future trials with adequate sample size are needed to find the most appropriate combination of antiplatelet and OAC in patients with AF who presented with ACS and treated by PCI.


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shujuan Zhao ◽  
Xuejiao Hong ◽  
Haixia Cai ◽  
Mingzhou Liu ◽  
Bing Li ◽  
...  

Combined antithrombotic regimens for atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with coronary artery disease, particularly for those who have acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and/or are undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), presents a great challenge in the real-world clinical scenario. Conventionally, a triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT), which consists of combined oral anticoagulant therapy to prevent systemic embolism or stroke along with dual antiplatelet therapy to prevent coronary arterial thrombosis (CAT), is used. However, TAT has been associated with a significantly increased risk of bleeding. With the emergence of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs), randomized controlled trials have demonstrated a better risk-to-benefit ratio of dual antithrombotic therapy (DAT) in combination of a NOAC and with a P2Y12 inhibitor than vitamin K antagonist-based TAT. The results of these studies have impacted the recommendations of current international guidelines, which favor a DAT with a NOAC and P2Y12 inhibitor (especially clopidogrel) in this clinical setting. Additionally, aspirin can be administered during the periprocedural period, while the treatment duration of TAT should be as short as possible. In this article, we summarize the up-to-date evidence regarding antithrombotic regimens for AF patients with PCI or ACS, with a specific focus on the optimal approach and critical discussions of key scientific data and future developments for antithrombotic management in these patients.


Author(s):  
Ziad Hijazi ◽  
John H. Alexander ◽  
Zhuokai Li ◽  
Daniel M. Wojdyla ◽  
Roxana Mehran ◽  
...  

Background: In the AUGUSTUS trial, apixaban resulted in less bleeding and fewer hospitalizations than vitamin K antagonists (VKA), and aspirin caused more bleeding than placebo in patients with atrial fibrillation and acute coronary syndrome or percutaneous coronary intervention treated with a P2Y 12 inhibitor. We evaluated the risk-benefit balance of antithrombotic therapy according to kidney function. Methods: In 4456 patients, the CKD-EPI formula was used to calculate baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). The effect of apixaban vs. VKA and aspirin vs. placebo was assessed across kidney function categories using Cox models. The primary outcome was ISTH major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding. Secondary outcomes included death or hospitalization and ischemic events (death, stroke, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis [definite or probable], or urgent revascularization). Creatinine clearance below 30 mL/min was an exclusion criterion in the AUGUSTUS trial. Results: Overall, 30%, 52%, and 19% had an eGFR of >80, >50 to 80, and 30-50 mL/min/1.73m 2 , respectively. During 6-months follow-up a total of 543 primary outcomes of bleeding, 1125 death or hospitalizations, and 282 ischemic events occurred. Compared with VKA, patients assigned apixaban had lower rates for all 3 outcomes across most eGFR categories without significant interaction. The absolute risk reduction with apixaban was most pronounced in those with an eGFR of 30-50 mL/min/1.73m 2 for bleeding events with rates of 13.1% vs. 21.3%; HR (95% CI) 0.59 (0.41-0.84). Patients assigned aspirin had a higher risk of bleeding in all eGFR categories with an even greater increase among those with eGFR >80 mL/min/1.73m 2 : 16.6% vs. 5.6%; HR 3.22 (2.19-4.74); p for interaction=0.007). The risk of death or hospitalization and ischemic events were comparable with aspirin and placebo across eGFR categories with HR ranging from 0.97 (0.76-1.23) to 1.28 (1.02-1.59) and from 0.75 (0.48-1.17) to 1.34 (0.81-2.22), respectively. Conclusions: The safety and efficacy of apixaban was consistent irrespective of kidney function, as compared with warfarin, and in accordance with the overall trial results. The risk of bleeding with aspirin was consistently higher across all kidney function categories. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov Unique Identifier: NCT02415400


PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. e0259251
Author(s):  
Simone Rivolo ◽  
Manuela Di Fusco ◽  
Carlos Polanco ◽  
Amiee Kang ◽  
Devender Dhanda ◽  
...  

Background/Objective AUGUSTUS trial demonstrated that, for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) having acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), an antithrombotic regimen with apixaban and P2Y12 resulted in less bleeding, fewer hospitalizations, and similar ischemic events than regimens including a vitamin K antagonist (VKA), aspirin, or both. This study objective was to evaluate long-term health and economic outcomes and the cost-effectiveness of apixaban over VKA, as a treatment option for patients with AF having ACS/PCI. Methods A lifetime Markov cohort model was developed comparing apixaban versus VKA across multiple treatment strategies (triple [with P2Y12 + aspirin] or dual [with P2Y12] therapy followed by monotherapy [apixaban or VKA]; triple followed by dual and then monotherapy; dual followed by monotherapy). The model adopted the Spanish healthcare perspective, with a 3-month cycle length and costs and health outcomes discounted at 3%. Results Treatment with apixaban resulted in total cost savings of €883 and higher life years (LYs) and quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs) per patient than VKA (net difference, LYs: 0.13; QALYs: 0.11). Bleeding and ischemic events (per 100 patients) were lower with apixaban than VKA (net difference, –13.9 and –1.8, respectively). Incremental net monetary benefit for apixaban was €3,041, using a willingness-to-pay threshold of €20,000 per QALY. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, apixaban was dominant in the majority of simulations (92.6%), providing additional QALYs at lower costs than VKA. Conclusions Apixaban was a dominant treatment strategy than VKA from both the Spanish payer’s and societal perspectives, regardless of treatment strategy considered.


Author(s):  
N. N. Kryukov ◽  
E. V. Sayutina ◽  
A. M. Osadchuk ◽  
M. A. Osadchuk

Patients with atrial fibrillation have a high risk of developing stroke and death, which requires constant anticoagulant support. In this regard, the physician faces the difficult task of selecting the appropriate oral anticoagulant for patient with individual risk factors and comorbidities. Currently, three non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants or directly acting oral anticoagulants have been registered in the Russia, which in large randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were compared with warfarin in the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism. The present article analyzes the data of RCTs, postmarketing studies of oral anticoagulants, and presents groups of patients for whom these drugs are preferred. The choice of oral anticoagulants for the prevention of stroke in the following subgroups of patients with atrial fibrillation is discussed: patients with one stroke risk factor (CHA2DS2VASc1 in men or 2 in women), patients of different age groups, patients with concomitant coronary artery disease/acute coronary syndrome, a history of stroke, patients with chronic kidney disease, patients with a high risk of gastrointestinal bleeding, and a group of patients with concomitant arterial hypertension and chronic heart failure. We compared the efficacy and safety of oral non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants or directly acting oral anticoagulants with vitamin K antagonists in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation.


2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vincenzo Russo ◽  
Anna Rago ◽  
Riccardo Proietti ◽  
Emilio Attena ◽  
Carmen Rainone ◽  
...  

Background. Combination of dual antiplatelet (DAPT) and oral anticoagulation therapy is required to decrease cardioembolic stroke and stent thrombosis risk in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We compared the safety and efficacy of dabigatran etexilate with vitamin K antagonist (VKA), in combination with DAPT (aspirin plus clopidogrel) treatment in AF patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stenting for ACS. Methods. Consecutive nonvalvular AF patients who received twice-daily dabigatran 110 mg (n = 389) or VKA (n = 510) and DAPT were included. Primary endpoints were major bleeding (safety) and the composite of ischemic stroke, systemic embolism, and myocardial infarction (efficacy). The secondary efficacy endpoint was hospitalization for cardiovascular disease. Results. After propensity score matching, comparative treatment groups comprised 175 dabigatran recipients and 175 VKA recipients. The cumulative incidence of major bleeding was lower in the dabigatran group (2.3%) compared with the VKA group (10.3%) with a hazard ratio (HR) of 4.81 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.6–14.2, p < 0.005]. The cumulative incidence of thromboembolic events with dabigatran was slightly higher (8.0%) than with VKA (6.85%), but not statistically significantly so (0.8, 0.39–1.8; p = 0.6). Cumulative incidence of hospitalization for cardiovascular disease was lower with dabigatran (10.3%) compared with VKA (20.6%) treatment (2.2, 1.25–3.8; p < 0.006). Conclusion. Dabigatran at the dose used for stroke prevention appears safer than VKA and maintains a similar efficacy profile, when used with DAPT, in AF patients who have undergone PCI with stenting for ACS.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document