scholarly journals Persistence of oral anticoagulants in japanese patients with atrial fibrillation: non-vitamin k antagonist oral anticoagulant versus warfarin

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tsuyoshi Shiga
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Vitamin K ◽  
Oral Anticoagulant ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Japanese Patients ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonist

scholarly journals Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (24) ◽  
pp. 2371-2388
Author(s):  
Aristeidis H Katsanos ◽  
Hooman Kamel ◽  
Jeff S. Healey ◽  
Robert G. Hart
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Vitamin K ◽  
Stroke Prevention ◽  
Oral Anticoagulant ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonist ◽  
Bleeding Complications ◽  
Secondary Stroke Prevention

Ischemic strokes related to atrial fibrillation are highly prevalent, presenting with severe neurologic syndromes and associated with high risk of recurrence. Although advances have been made in both primary and secondary stroke prevention for patients with atrial fibrillation, the long-term risks for stroke recurrence and bleeding complications from antithrombotic treatment remain substantial. We summarize the major advances in stroke prevention for patients with atrial fibrillation during the past 30 years and focus on novel diagnostic and treatment approaches currently under investigation in ongoing clinical trials. Non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants have been proven to be safer and equally effective compared with warfarin in stroke prevention for patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants are being investigated for the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation and rheumatic heart disease, for the treatment of patients with recent embolic stroke of undetermined source and indirect evidence of cardiac embolism, and in the prevention of vascular-mediated cognitive decline in patients with atrial fibrillation. Multiple clinical trials are assessing the optimal timing of non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant initiation after a recent ischemic stroke and the benefit:harm ratio of non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation and history of previous intracranial bleeding. Ongoing trials are addressing the usefulness of left atrial appendage occlusion in both primary and secondary stroke prevention for patients with atrial fibrillation, including those with high risk of bleeding. The additive value of prolonged cardiac monitoring for subclinical atrial fibrillation detection through smartphone applications or implantable cardiac devices, together with the optimal medical management of individuals with covert paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, is a topic of intensive research interest. Colchicine treatment and factor XIa inhibition constitute 2 novel pharmacologic approaches that might provide future treatment options in the secondary prevention of cardioembolic stroke attributable to atrial fibrillation.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants vs. Warfarin in Japanese Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

2015 ◽  
Vol 79 (2) ◽  
pp. 339-345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keitaro Senoo ◽  
Yee Cheng Lau ◽  
Mikhail Dzeshka ◽  
Deirdre Lane ◽  
Ken Okumura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Vitamin K ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Japanese Patients ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonist ◽  
Efficacy And Safety

scholarly journals Oral anticoagulation therapy use in patients with atrial fibrillation after the introduction of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants: findings from the French healthcare databases, 2011–2016

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. e026645 ◽  
Author(s):  
Géric Maura ◽  
Cécile Billionnet ◽  
Jérôme Drouin ◽  
Alain Weill ◽  
Anke Neumann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Antiplatelet Therapy ◽  
Vitamin K ◽  
Stroke Prevention ◽  
Oral Anticoagulant ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Anticoagulation Therapy ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonist ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Patterns Of Use

ObjectivesTo describe (i) the trend in oral anticoagulant (OAC) use following the introduction of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) therapy for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients and (ii) the current patterns of use of NOAC therapy in new users with AF in France.Design(i) Repeated cross-sectional study and (ii) population-based cohort study.SettingFrench national healthcare databases (50 million beneficiaries).Participants(i) Patients with identified AF in 2011, 2013 and 2016 and (ii) patients with AF initiating OAC therapy in 2015–2016.Primary and secondary outcome measures(i) Trend in OAC therapy use in patients with AF and (ii) patterns of use of NOAC therapy in new users with AF.ResultsBetween 2011 and 2016, use of OAC therapy moderately increased (+16%), while use of antiplatelet therapy decreased (−22%) among all patients with identified AF. In 2016, among the 1.1 million AF patients, 66% used OAC therapy and were more likely to be treated by vitamin K antagonist (VKA) than NOAC therapy, including patients at higher risk of stroke (63.5%), while 33% used antiplatelet therapy. Among 192 851 new users of OAC therapy in 2015–2016 with identified AF, NOAC therapy (66.3%) was initiated more frequently than VKA therapy, including in patients at higher risk of stroke (57.8%). Reduced doses were prescribed in 40% of NOAC new users. Several situations of inappropriate use at NOAC initiation were identified, including concomitant use of drugs increasing the risk of bleeding (one in three new users) and potential NOAC underdosing.ConclusionsOAC therapy use in patients with AF remains suboptimal 4 years after the introduction of NOACs for stroke prevention in France and improvement in appropriate prescribing regarding NOAC initiation is needed. However, NOAC therapy is now the preferred drug class for initiation of OAC therapy in patients with AF, including in patients at higher risk of stroke.

scholarly journals Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Non–Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation Patients

Stroke ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wengen Zhu ◽  
Zi Ye ◽  
Shilan Chen ◽  
Dexi Wu ◽  
Jiangui He ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Vitamin K ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Oral Anticoagulant ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonist ◽  
Systemic Embolism ◽  
Inverse Variance

Background and Purpose: Several observational studies have compared the effect of the non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants to each other in patients with atrial fibrillation. However, confounding by indication is a major problem when comparing non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant treatments in some of these studies. This meta-analysis was conducted to compare the effectiveness and safety between non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant and non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant by only including the propensity score matching studies. Methods: We systematically searched the PubMed and Ovid databases until May 2020 to identify relevant observational studies. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs of the reported outcomes were collected and then pooled by a random-effects model complemented with an inverse variance heterogeneity or quality effects model. Results: A total of 17 retrospective cohort studies were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with dabigatran use, the use of rivaroxaban was significantly associated with increased risks of stroke or systemic embolism (HR, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.05–1.29]) and major bleeding (HR, 1.32 [95% CI, 1.24–1.41]), whereas the use of apixaban was associated with a reduced risk of major bleeding (HR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.67–0.90]) but not stroke or systemic embolism (HR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.56–1.28]). Compared with rivaroxaban use, the use of apixaban was associated with a decreased risk of major bleeding (HR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.54–0.73]) but not stroke or systemic embolism (HR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.67–1.04]). Reanalyses with the inverse variance heterogeneity or quality effects model produced similar results as the random-effects model. Conclusions: Current observational comparisons with propensity score matching methods suggest that apixaban might be a better choice compared with dabigatran or rivaroxaban for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation patients.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document