Abraham, Neena S.

INTRODUCTION: The periprocedural management of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) using a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) undergoing elective gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopic procedure remains uncertain. We investigated the safety of a standardized periprocedural DOAC management strategy. METHODS: The Periprocedural Anticoagulation Use for Surgery Evaluation cohort study enrolled adult patients receiving a DOAC (apixaban, rivaroxaban, or dabigatran) for AF scheduled for an elective procedure or surgery. This analysis addresses patients undergoing digestive endoscopy. Standardized periprocedural management consisted of DOAC interruption 1 day preendoscopy with resumption 1 day after procedure at low-moderate risk of bleeding or 2 days in case of a high bleeding risk. Thirty-day outcomes included GI bleeding, thromboembolic events, and mortality. RESULTS: Of 556 patients on a DOAC (mean [SD] age of 72.5 [8.6] years; 37.4% female; mean CHADS 2 score 1.7 [1.0]), 8.6% were also on American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) and 0.7% on clopidogrel. Most of the patients underwent colonoscopies (63.3%) or gastroscopies (14.0%), with 18.9% having both on the same procedural day. The mean total duration of DOAC interruption was 3.9 ± 1.6 days. Four patients experienced an arterial thromboembolic event (0.7%, 0.3%–1.8%) within 24.2 ± 5.9 days of DOAC interruption. GI bleeding events occurred in 2.5% (1.4%–4.2%) within 11.1 ± 8.1 days (range: 0.6; 25.5 days) of endoscopy, with major GI bleeding in 0.9% (0.4%–2.1%). Three patients died (0.5%; 0.2%–1.6%) 15.6–22.3 days after the endoscopy. DISCUSSION: After a contemporary standardized periprocedural management strategy, patients with AF undergoing DOAC therapy interruption for elective digestive endoscopy experienced low rates of arterial thromboembolism and major bleeding.

Background This study aimed to compare percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) with non‐vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants among patients with atrial fibrillation. Methods and Results Using a US administrative database, 562 850 patients with atrial fibrillation were identified, among whom 8397 were treated with LAAO and 554 453 were treated with non‐vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants between March 13, 2015 and December 31, 2018. Propensity score overlap weighting was used to balance baseline characteristics. The primary outcome was a composite end point of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism, major bleeding, and all‐cause mortality. The mean age was 76.4±7.6 years; 280 097 (49.8%) were female. Mean follow‐up was 1.5±1.0 years. LAAO was associated with no significant difference in the risk of the primary composite end point (hazard ratio [HR], 0.93 [0.84–1.03]), or the secondary outcomes including ischemic stroke/systemic embolism (HR, 1.07 [0.81–1.41]), and intracranial bleeding (HR, 1.08 [0.72–1.61]). LAAO was associated with a higher risk of major bleeding (HR, 1.22 [1.05–1.42], P =0.01) and a lower risk of mortality (HR, 0.73 [0.64–0.84], P <0.001). The lower risk of mortality associated with LAAO was most pronounced in patients with a prior history of intracranial bleeding. Conclusions In comparison to non‐vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants, LAAO was associated with no significant difference in the risk of the composite outcome and a lower risk of mortality, which suggests LAAO might be a reasonable option in select patients with atrial fibrillation. The observation of higher bleeding risk associated with LAAO highlights the need to optimize postprocedural antithrombotic regimens as well as systematic efforts to assess and address bleeding predispositions.

Introduction: OAC are recommended for AF patients with CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc ≥2 in men or ≥3 in women (high-risk group), may be considered in patients with CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc 1 in men or 2 in women (medium-risk group), and are reasonable to omit in patients with CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc 0 in men or 1 in women (low-risk group). Furthermore, NOACs are recommended over warfarin in most AF patients. This study aimed to investigate AF stroke prevention treatment patterns in patients managed in routine practice, in particular, the under-use of OAC in the high-risk group and over-use in the low-risk group. Methods: Adult patients with AF were identified using de-identified claims for commercial and Medicare Advantage enrollees in the OptumLabs Data Warehouse. Prescription fills were assessed within 90 days of a patient’s AF encounter between 1/1/2016-12/31/2020. Patients with other indications for OAC, such as VTE, recent joint replacement, prior mechanical or bioprosthetic valve replacement, rheumatic mitral stenosis, and patients who underwent LAAO were excluded. Results: Among the 339,197 AF patients, 4.4%, 8.0%, and 87.6% were in the low-, medium-, and high-risk groups, respectively. The mean age was 51.2 ±10.5 yr, 59.9 ±9.4 yr, and 75.1 ±8.8 yr. In the low-risk group, 29.6% were treated with OAC, whereas in the high-risk group, 40.3% were not treated with any antithrombotic therapy and 7.5% used thienopyridine only. Although 71% of patients on OAC were on a NOAC, the proportion of patients on NOAC decreased from 91% in the low-risk group to 69% in the high-risk group. Conclusions: There are potentially both under-use of guideline-recommended stroke prevention therapies in the high-risk patients and over-use in the low-risk group. Because patients at a high risk of stroke are also at a high risk of major and intracranial bleeding who might benefit from NOACs, the decreased use of NOAC in high-risk patients might highlight the need for future quality improvement efforts.

AbstractWe conducted systematic reviews of predefined clinical questions and used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach to develop recommendations for the periendoscopic management of anticoagulant and antiplatelet drugs during acute gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding and the elective endoscopic setting. The following recommendations target patients presenting with acute GI bleeding: For patients on warfarin, we suggest against giving fresh frozen plasma or vitamin K; if needed, we suggest prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) compared with fresh frozen plasma administration; for patients on direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), we suggest against PCC administration; if on dabigatran, we suggest against the administration of idarucizumab, and if on rivaroxaban or apixaban, we suggest against andexanet alfa administration; for patients on antiplatelet agents, we suggest against platelet transfusions; and for patients on cardiac acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) for secondary prevention, we suggest against holding it, but if the ASA has been interrupted, we suggest resumption on the day hemostasis is endoscopically confirmed. The following recommendations target patients in the elective (planned) endoscopy setting: For patients on warfarin, we suggest continuation as opposed to temporary interruption (1–7 days), but if it is held for procedures with high risk of GI bleeding, we suggest against bridging anticoagulation unless the patient has a mechanical heart valve; for patients on DOACs, we suggest temporarily interrupting rather than continuing these; for patients on dual antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention, we suggest temporary interruption of the P2Y12 receptor inhibitor while continuing ASA; and if on cardiac ASA monotherapy for secondary prevention, we suggest against its interruption. Evidence was insufficient in the following settings to permit recommendations. With acute GI bleeding in patients on warfarin, we could not recommend for or against PCC administration when compared with placebo. In the elective periprocedural endoscopy setting, we could not recommend for or against temporary interruption of the P2Y12 receptor inhibitor for patients on a single P2Y12 inhibiting agent. We were also unable to make a recommendation regarding same-day resumption of the drug vs 1–7 days after the procedure among patients prescribed anticoagulants (warfarin or DOACs) or P2Y12 receptor inhibitor drugs because of insufficient evidence.

We conducted systematic reviews of predefined clinical questions and used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach to develop recommendations for the periendoscopic management of anticoagulant and antiplatelet drugs during acute gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding and the elective endoscopic setting. The following recommendations target patients presenting with acute GI bleeding: For patients on warfarin, we suggest against giving fresh frozen plasma or vitamin K; if needed, we suggest prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) compared with fresh frozen plasma administration; for patients on direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), we suggest against PCC administration; if on dabigatran, we suggest against the administration of idarucizumab, and if on rivaroxaban or apixaban, we suggest against andexanet alfa administration; for patients on antiplatelet agents, we suggest against platelet transfusions; and for patients on cardiac acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) for secondary prevention, we suggest against holding it, but if the ASA has been interrupted, we suggest resumption on the day hemostasis is endoscopically confirmed. The following recommendations target patients in the elective (planned) endoscopy setting: For patients on warfarin, we suggest continuation as opposed to temporary interruption (1–7 days), but if it is held for procedures with high risk of GI bleeding, we suggest against bridging anticoagulation unless the patient has a mechanical heart valve; for patients on DOACs, we suggest temporarily interrupting rather than continuing these; for patients on dual antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention, we suggest temporary interruption of the P2Y 12 receptor inhibitor while continuing ASA; and if on cardiac ASA monotherapy for secondary prevention, we suggest against its interruption. Evidence was insufficient in the following settings to permit recommendations. With acute GI bleeding in patients on warfarin, we could not recommend for or against PCC administration when compared with placebo. In the elective periprocedural endoscopy setting, we could not recommend for or against temporary interruption of the P2Y 12 receptor inhibitor for patients on a single P2Y 12 inhibiting agent. We were also unable to make a recommendation regarding same-day resumption of the drug vs 1–7 days after the procedure among patients prescribed anticoagulants (warfarin or DOACs) or P2Y 12 receptor inhibitor drugs because of insufficient evidence.

Introduction: Medicines don’t work in those who don’t take them. Although novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are more convenient than warfarin due to fewer drug-drug interactions and less need for laboratory monitoring, their considerable costs and lack of regular interactions with the healthcare system may also contribute to poor adherence. Little is known about the persistence and adherence in the era of NOACs, nor how such behaviors are associated with the risk of ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA) among patients of varying baseline risk. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis using a large U.S. commercial insurance database, and identified 61,646 patients with atrial fibrillation who initiated one of OACs (warfarin, dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban) between October 2010 and September 2014. We defined discontinuation as being off OACs for at least 3 months and adherence as the proportion of days covered of at least 80%. Cox proportional hazard models was used to examine whether the time that patients were off OACs, including both the gaps between medication fills and the time of discontinuation, increased the risk of ischemic stroke and TIA. Results: Approximately 1 in 3 patients discontinued OACs within one year after initiation and 1 in 10 switched to another OAC. The estimated likelihood of adherence was 0.77 during the time when patients were on their first-line medications. Apixaban had the highest continuation rate (65% at 1 year), while rivaroxaban had the best adherence (predicted probability of adherence 0.83). The event rate of stroke was 1.6 per 100 person years. Patients with high baseline risk (CHA2DS2-VASc ≥2) were more likely to have a stroke when they were off OACs for 1-3 months (HR=1.47, p<0.01), 3-6 months (HR=1.78, p<0.001) and ≥6 months (HR=2.16, p<0.001), compared to off OACs for less than a week. No significant effect was found among low-risk patients (CHA2DS2-VASc 0 or 1). Switching to another OAC was related to 22% increased risk of stroke (p=0.05). Conclusions: Despite their greater convenience relative to warfarin, discontinuation and nonadherence to NOACs is high. Lack of persistence and adherence was associated with increased risk of ischemic stroke and TIA among patients with elevated baseline risk.