The optimal management of patients on oral anticoagulation undergoing coronary artery stenting

2014 ◽  
Vol 112 (12) ◽  
pp. 1080-1087 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Faxon ◽  
Juhani Airaksinen ◽  
Axel Schlitt ◽  
Francisco Marìn ◽  
Deepak Bhatt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Vitamin K ◽  
Oral Anticoagulation ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Initial Period ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Antiplatelet Agent ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Individual Risk ◽  
Coronary Syndrome

SummaryEven 10 years after the first appearance in the literature of articles reporting on the management of patients on oral anticoagulation (OAC) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with stent (PCI-S), this issue is still controversial. Nonetheless, some guidance for the everyday management of this patient subset, accounting for about 5–8 % of all patients referred for PCI-S, has been developed. In general, a period of triple therapy (TT) of OAC, with either vitamin K–antagonists (VKA) or non-vitamin K–antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOAC), aspirin, and clopidogrel is warranted, followed by the combination of OAC, and a single antiplatelet agent for up to 12 months, and then OAC alone. The duration of the initial period of TT is dependent on the individual risk of thromboembolism, and bleeding, as well as the clinical context in which PCI-S is performed (elective vs acute coronary syndrome), and the type of stent implanted (bare-metal vs drug-eluting). In this article, we aim to provide a comprehensive, ata- glance, overview of the management strategies, which are currently suggested for the peri-procedural, medium-term, and long-term periods following PCI-S in OAC patients. While acknowledging that most of the evidence has been obtained from patients on OAC because of atrial fibrillation, and with warfarin being the most frequently used VKA, we refer in this overview to the whole population of OAC patients undergoing PCI-S. We refer to the whole population of patients on OAC undergoing PCI-S also when OAC is carried out with NOAC rather than VKA, pointing out, when appropriate, the particular management issues.Note: The review process for this paper was fully handled by Christian Weber, Editor-in-Chief.

Antithrombotische Therapie bei akutem Koronarsyndrom und Vorhofflimmern

2020 ◽  
Vol 145 (14) ◽  
pp. 978-986
Author(s):  
Harald Darius
Keyword(s):  
Triple Therapy ◽  
Vitamin K ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Antiplatelet Agent ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Bleeding Complications ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Coronary Stent Implantation ◽  
Number Of Patients

AbstractThe number of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is increasing due to the aging of the population. In addition, the number of patients with AF and an indication for oral anticoagulation (OAC) for the prevention of strokes increases, who are in need for a dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with acetyl salicylic acid (ASA) plus a P2Y12-Inhibitor because of an acute coronary syndrome and/or coronary stent implantation. These patients did receive a triple therapy (TT) for 3–12 months in the past. Triple therapy never has been studied for efficacy or safety, however, the rate of bleeding complications in comparison to OAC or DAPT is significantly higher.Registries and smaller trials showed that dual therapy with an OAC plus a single platelet inhibitor may be sufficient to prevent strokes and stent thromboses/myocardial infarctions. Four prospective randomized trials involving all four NOACs (Non-Vitamin K oral anticoagulants) approved for stroke prevention in AF have been undertaken. The NOACs plus one antiplatelet agent were tested versus vitamin K-antagonists plus DAPT. In the meantime, the trials involving rivaroxaban (PIONEER AF-PCI), dabigatran (RE-DUAL PCI), apixaban (AUGUSTUS), and edoxaban (ENTRUST-AF-PCI) have been published. The current status is that a NOAC plus a single antiplatelet agent, mostly clopidogrel, is superior to TT with respect to the bleeding complications, without any obvious and statistically significant disadvantage for stroke rates or cardiac ischemic events. The international guidelines already recommend to treat with a NOAC and one antiplatelet agent instead of TT in case the patients bleeding risk is prevailing. Thus, TT seems not to be indicated anymore for most patients with AF and ACS or PCI.

scholarly journals Stroke prevention for non-valvular atrial fibrillation: how to make the right choice of directly acting oral anticoagulants?

2019 ◽  
pp. 94-102
Author(s):  
N. N. Kryukov ◽  
E. V. Sayutina ◽  
A. M. Osadchuk ◽  
M. A. Osadchuk
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Vitamin K ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonist ◽  
Individual Risk ◽  
Stroke Risk Factor ◽  
Coronary Syndrome

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.

Spectrophotometric Assays of Prothrombin in Plasma of Patients Using Oral Anticoagulants

1979 ◽  
Vol 42 (04) ◽  
pp. 1296-1305 ◽  
Author(s):  
R M Bertina ◽  
W van der Marel-van Nieuwkoop ◽  
E A Loeliger
Keyword(s):  
Prothrombin Time ◽  
Vitamin K ◽  
Oral Anticoagulation ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Factor Xa ◽  
Factor V ◽  
Anticoagulant Treatment ◽  
Factor Ii ◽  
K Deficiency

SummaryTwo spectrophotometric assays for prothrombin have been developed and compared with a one stage coagulant and an immunological assay. One of these assays (called the XAPC assay) uses a combination of factor Xa, phospholipid, Ca2+ and factor V as activator of prothrombin, and measures only normal prothrombin. The second (the ECAR assay) uses Echis carinatus venom as activator. This assay measures both normal prothrombin and PIVKA II (protein induced by vitamin K antagonists/absence). Combination of the results obtained by the XAPC and ECAR assays provides rapid and reliable information on the degree of “subcarboxylation” of prothrombin (oral anticoagulation, vitamin K deficiency).For patients on long term anticoagulant treatment the prothrombin time (Thrombotest) shows better correlation with the ratio prothrombin/prothrombin plus PIVKA II (XAPC/ ECAR) than with the factor II concentration. For patients starting the anticoagulant treatment there is no correlation between the Thrombotest time and the XAPC/ECAR ratio.It seems doubtful that (a) spectrophotometric factor II assay(s) will be as useful as the prothrombin time in the control of oral anticoagulation.

scholarly journals Antithrombotic strategy in patients with atrial fibrillation and acute coronary syndrome

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
I Almeida ◽  
H Santos ◽  
M Santos ◽  
H Miranda ◽  
J Chin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Vitamin K ◽  
Antithrombotic Therapy ◽  
De Novo ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
Antiplatelet Agent ◽  
P2y12 Inhibitors ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Short Period ◽  
St Elevation

Abstract Background Atrial fibrillation (AF) is frequent in patients admitted with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). The development of this arrhythmia occurs in 2–21% of patients with non ST-elevation ACS and 21% of ST-elevation ACS. According with the most recent European guidelines, a short period up to 1 week of triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT) is recommended, followed by dual antithrombotic therapy (DAT) using a NOAC and a single antiplatelet agent, preferably clopidogrel. Objective To compare the antithrombotic strategy (DAT vs TAT) used and its prognostic value in patients with AF and ACS. Methods Retrospective analysis of patients' data admitted with ACS in a multicentric registry between 10/2010–09/2019. TAT was defined as the prescription of dual antiplatelet therapy and one anticoagulant and DAT as one antiplatelet and one anticoagulant. Survival and rehospitalization were evaluated through Kaplan-Meier curve. Results 1067 patients were included, mean age 67±14 years, 72.3% male. Patients who developed de novo AF during hospitalization due to ACS were older (75±12 vs 66±14 years, p<0.001) and with higher prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors and cardiovascular disease. AF was more often in patients with ST elevation ACS (53.4%). During hospitalization, AF patients were more often medicated with aspirin, glycoprotein inhibitor, heparin, fondaparinux and vitamin K antagonists. No difference was found regarding P2Y12 inhibitors. AF patients presented more often obstructive coronary disease (normal coronaries 5.4 vs 8.5%, p<0.001) so they were more often submitted to PCI (79.5 vs 70.9%, p<0.001). AF patients presented with higher rates of adverse in-hospital events as re-infarction, heart failure, shock, ventricular arrhythmias, cardiac arrest, stroke, major bleeding and death (p<0.001). At discharge, AF patients were less prescribed with aspirin or ticagrelor, but the rate of clopidogrel prescription was higher, such as vitamin K antagonists or any of the new anticoagulants. In the AF group, 21.5% patients were discharged with TAT and 30.3% with DAT. Concerning patients discharged with TAT, 1-year follow-up revealed no significant differences in mortality (p=0.578), re-admission for cardiovascular causes (p=0.301) and total re-admission rates (p=0.291). Patients discharged with DAT had similar mortality (p=0.623) and re-admission for cardiovascular causes rates (p=0.138), but significant differences were identified regarding total re-admissions (p=0.024). Conclusions In patients with ACS and de novo AF, a low percentage of patients was discharged with oral anticoagulation (51.8%). In those whose anticoagulation was initiated, DAT was the preferred strategy. 1-year outcomes were not different between the antithrombotic strategy, except for all cause re-admission. FUNDunding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.

scholarly journals Optimization of Pharmacotherapy with Direct Oral Anticoagulants: the Need to Choose the Right Dosage Regimen

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 593-603
Author(s):  
A. I. Kochetkov ◽  
O. D. Ostroumova
Keyword(s):  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
International Normalized Ratio ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
High Efficacy ◽  
Drug Label ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Number Of Patients

In recent years, there has been a persistent trend towards the more frequent prescription of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) compared with vitamin K antagonists due to the extensive body of evidence showing their high safety and efficacy, which in some cases exceed those of warfarin, and also by reason of there is no necessity for regular monitoring of international normalized ratio. However, the question of the reasonable and rational prescription of DOACs becomes relevant, including issues of their dosing, especially as a result of increasing in the number of patients with a complex cardiovascular risk profile and multimorbidity. In these terms, apixaban stands high among the DOAC class, and its high efficacy and safety both in full dose and reasonably reduced dosage has been proved, including older patients, patients with chronic kidney disease, coronary artery disease, with history of acute coronary syndrome and individuals undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. This DOAC has strict indications to reduce the dose, they are specified in the drug label, and in such cases a reduced dose should be prescribed, in these clinical conditions the effectiveness and safety of apixaban is also proven. The favorable apixaban pharmacokinetic properties, consisting in low renal clearance, lack of clinically relevant interaction with food and the linear smooth effect on the blood coagulation components without episodes of hypo- and hypercoagulation, are the most important components of high efficacy and safety of this DOAC. The optimal efficacy and safety coupling of apixaban is reflected in the exclusively high patients’ adherence to the treatment confirmed by evidence-based medicine data, and therefore there is no necessity for additional procedures to maintain adherence. All the aforementioned facts allow us to recommend apixaban for widespread use in patients requiring anticoagulant therapy for optimal prevention of systemic thromboembolism and minimizing the associated risk of bleeding.

Prevalence of Atrial Fibrillation and use of Oral Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome

Kardiologiia ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 59 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
O. A. Baturina ◽  
D. A. Andreev ◽  
N. A. Ananicheva ◽  
M. Yu. Gilyarov ◽  
D. A. Sychev ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Acute Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Antiplatelet Agent ◽  
Antiplatelet Agents ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Thromboembolic Complications ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary

Purpose:To assess the prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF) and use of antithrombotic agents in adult patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).Materials and Methods.We consecutively enrolled all ACS patients (n=1155) who were hospitalized in two Moscowbased percutaneous coronary intervention centers (each center performs over 500 PCIs a year) between October 2017 and February 2018. AF was diagnosed in 204 patients (17.7%). The risk of thromboembolic complications was assessed using the CHA2DS2-VASc Score. The risk of hemorrhagic complications was assessed using the HAS-BLED Score. The data were processed using StatSoft Statistica 10.0 and IBM SPSS Statistics v.23 software.Results. The prevalence of diagnosed AF was 13.6%, while the prevalence of undiagnosed AF was 4.1%. Of the 179 discharged patients with AF, only 2 had a low risk of ischemic stroke (IS). One hundred and fifty patients (83.8%) eligible for oral anticoagulant therapy received oral anticoagulants. Patients with diagnosed AF were administered oral anticoagulants (OACs) significantly more often than patients with undiagnosed AF [125 (91.9%) vs. 25 (58.1%), р<0.001]. Novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) were administered four times more often than vitamin K antagonists [120 (80.0%) vs. 29 (19.3%), р<0.001]. Rivaroxaban was used in 51.3% of cases. Of the 29 patients treated with warfarin, only 3 (10.3%) achieved the target international normalized ratio (INR) at discharge. Of the 107 patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), 77 patients (80%) received an OAC and two antiplatelet agents (with 74% receiving this three-agent therapy for one month), 11 patients (10.3%) received an OAC and an antiplatelet agent, and 18 patients (16.8%) received two antiplatelet agents. The only antiplatelet agent used as part of the three-agent therapy was clopidogrel. The three-agent therapy without PCI was administered in 43.1% of cases.Conclusion.We found that the prevalence of AF in patients with ACS was high. The fact that doctors administered NOACs suggests that they are aware of the need to use these agents to prevent thromboembolic complications in AF patients.

scholarly journals Care of the surgical patient—part 2: oral anticoagulants

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (21) ◽  
pp. 1242-1246
Author(s):  
Claire Ford ◽  
Matthew Robertson
Keyword(s):  
Vitamin K ◽  
Perioperative Care ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Surgical Patient ◽  
Care Continuum

Part two of this series on the care of the surgical patient introduces readers to some of the additional risks associated with patients who are undergoing surgery and taking oral anticoagulants. It explores the use of vitamin K antagonists and heparin. Some of the management strategies and additional considerations that need to be addressed during the perioperative care continuum will also be discussed.

High platelet reactivity – the challenge of prolonged anticoagulation therapy after ACSI

2013 ◽  
Vol 109 (05) ◽  
pp. 799-807 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc A. Brouwer ◽  
Freek W. A. Verheugt ◽  
Jeroen Focks
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Vitamin K ◽  
Adjunctive Therapy ◽  
Platelet Reactivity ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
Antiplatelet Agent ◽  
Anticoagulation Therapy ◽  
High Platelet Reactivity ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
The Impact

SummaryDespite dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), one-year event rates after acute coronary syndrome (ACS) vary from 9–12%. The development of novel oral anticoagulants (NOAC) without a need for monitoring has initiated renewed interest for prolonged adjunctive anticoagulation. Importantly, the cornerstone of treatment after ACS consists of long-term DAPT. In that context, the NOACs have only been tested as adjunctive therapy. Of all new agents, only rivaroxaban –in a substantially lower dose than used for atrial fibrillation– has been demonstrated to improve outcome, albeit at the cost of bleeding. In selected cases, adjunctive therapy with dose-adjusted vitamin-K antagonists (international normalized ratio [INR] 2.0–3.0) can be considered as well. These two strategies of prolonged anticoagulation can be considered in case of ‘high platelet reactivity’, i.e. in patients at high risk of recurrent thrombotic events despite DAPT. Both during admission and after discharge for ACS, the use of NOACs in doses indicated for atrial fibrillation is strictly contra-indicated in patients on DAPT. In case of post-discharge anticoagulation therapy for atrial fibrillation, patients should preferably receive vitamin-K antagonists (INR 2.0–3.0), with discontinuation of one antiplatelet agent as soon as clinically justifiable. Importantly, the impact of prolonged anticoagulation (low-dose rivaroxaban, vitamin-K antagonists) as adjunctive to DAPT after ACS has not been addressed with the most potent antiplatelet agents (prasugrel, ticagrelor) and merits further study. Despite the potential indication of prolonged oral anticoagulation as adjunctive treatment, it remains to be established whether anticoagulation therapy could also be an alternative for either aspirin or thienopyridine treatment in selected ACS patients on DAPT.

Use of oral anticoagulants in combination with antiplatelet(s) in atrial fibrillation

Heart ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 104 (11) ◽  
pp. 912-920 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caroline Sindet-Pedersen ◽  
Laila Staerk ◽  
Morten Lamberts ◽  
Thomas Alexander Gerds ◽  
Jeffrey S Berger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Vitamin K ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Temporal Trends ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
International Normalized Ratio ◽  
Exposure Variable ◽  
History Of ◽  
Study Population

ObjectivesTo investigate temporal trends in the use of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in combination with aspirin and/or clopidogrel in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) following acute myocardial infarction (MI) and/or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).MethodsUsing Danish nationwide registries, all patients with AF who survived 30 days after discharge from MI and/or PCI between 22 August 2011 and 30 September 2016 were identified.ResultsA total of 2946 patients were included in the study population, of whom 1967 (66.8%) patients were treated with VKA in combination with antiplatelet(s) (VKA+aspirin n=477, VKA+clopidogrel n=439, VKA+aspirin+clopidogrel n=1051) and 979 (33.2%) patients were treated with NOAC in combination with antiplatelet(s) (NOAC+aspirin n=252, NOAC+clopidogrel n=218, NOAC+aspirin+clopidogrel n=509). The overall study population had a median age of 76 years [IQR: 69–82] and consisted of 1995 (67.7%) men. Patients with MI as inclusion event accounted for 1613 patients (54.8%). Patients with high CHA2DS2-VASc score(congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75 years (2 points), diabetes mellitus, history of stroke/transient ischemic attack/systemic thromboembolism (2 points), vascular disease, age 65-75 years, and female sex) accounted for 132 2814 (95.5%) of patients, and patients with high HAS-BLED score (hypertension, abnormal renal/liver function, history of stroke, history of bleeding, age >65 years, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug usages, or alcohol abuse, leaving out labile international normalized ratio (not available), and use of antiplatelets (exposure variable)) accounted for 934 (31.7%) of patients. There was an increase from 10% in 2011 to 52% in 2016 in the use of NOACs in combination with antiplatelet(s).ConclusionFrom 2011 to 2016, the use of NOAC in combination with antiplatelet(s) increased in patients with AF following MI/PCI and exceeded the use of VKA in combination with antiplatelet(s) by 2016.

scholarly journals Novel Oral Anticoagulants Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bryan Q. Abadie ◽  
Christopher P. Cannon ◽  
Matthew A. Cavender
Keyword(s):  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Secondary Prevention ◽  
Coronary Revascularization ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Novel Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
P2y12 Inhibitors ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary

Antiplatelet and anticoagulant medications are the cornerstone of therapy for patients with acute coronary syndrome and have also been shown to reduce recurrent cardiovascular events in patients with stable coronary disease. Whereas antiplatelet medications have been the preferred therapy for long-term secondary prevention, the development of novel oral anticoagulants has renewed interest in the use of anticoagulation to prevent atherosclerotic events. In patients with atrial fibrillation or other indications for anticoagulation, recent clinical trials have shown the benefit of double therapy with full-dose novel oral anticoagulants and P2Y12 inhibitors compared with regimens with vitamin K antagonists. In patients without an indication for anticoagulation, the use of low doses of the factor Xa inhibitor, rivaroxaban, has shown benefit. Clinicians have many pharmacological options when treating patients following percutaneous coronary intervention. This review discusses the evidence for the use of novel oral anticoagulants, with an emphasis on patient selection, choice of therapy, and appropriate dosing of anticoagulant and antiplatelet agents, in secondary prevention strategies for atherosclerosis following coronary revascularization for patients with and without a traditional indication for anticoagulation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document