Citations

Background: Patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) on dialysis were excluded from clinical trials of direct oral anticoagulants for atrial fibrillation (AF). Recent data have raised concerns regarding the safety of dabigatran and rivaroxaban, but apixaban has not been evaluated despite current labeling supporting its use in this population. The goal of this study was to determine patterns of apixaban use and its associated outcomes in dialysis-dependent patients with ESKD and AF. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries included in the United States Renal Data System (October 2010 to December 2015). Eligible patients were those with ESKD and AF undergoing dialysis who initiated treatment with an oral anticoagulant. Because of the small number of dabigatran and rivaroxaban users, outcomes were only assessed in patients treated with apixaban or warfarin. Apixaban and warfarin patients were matched (1:3) based on prognostic score. Differences between groups in survival free of stroke or systemic embolism, major bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding, intracranial bleeding, and death were assessed using Kaplan–Meier analyses. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs were derived from Cox regression analyses. Results: The study population consisted of 25 523 patients (45.7% women; 68.2±11.9 years of age), including 2351 patients on apixaban and 23 172 patients on warfarin. An annual increase in apixaban prescriptions was observed after its marketing approval at the end of 2012, such that 26.6% of new anticoagulant prescriptions in 2015 were for apixaban. In matched cohorts, there was no difference in the risks of stroke/systemic embolism between apixaban and warfarin (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.69–1.12; P =0.29), but apixaban was associated with a significantly lower risk of major bleeding (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.59–0.87; P <0.001). In sensitivity analyses, standard-dose apixaban (5 mg twice a day; n=1034) was associated with significantly lower risks of stroke/systemic embolism and death as compared with either reduced-dose apixaban (2.5 mg twice a day; n=1317; HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.37–0.98; P =0.04 for stroke/systemic embolism; HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.45–0.92; P =0.01 for death) or warfarin (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.42–0.97; P =0.04 for stroke/systemic embolism; HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.46–0.85; P =0.003 for death). Conclusions: Among patients with ESKD and AF on dialysis, apixaban use may be associated with a lower risk of major bleeding compared with warfarin, with a standard 5 mg twice a day dose also associated with reductions in thromboembolic and mortality risk.

Background: Identification of people with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) who are at risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) and require a prophylactic implantable cardioverter defibrillator is challenging. In 2014, the European Society of Cardiology proposed a new risk stratification method based on a risk prediction model (HCM Risk-SCD) that estimates the 5-year risk of SCD. The aim was to externally validate the 2014 European Society of Cardiology recommendations in a geographically diverse cohort of patients recruited from the United States, Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. Methods: This was an observational, retrospective, longitudinal cohort study. Results: The cohort consisted of 3703 patients. Seventy three (2%) patients reached the SCD end point within 5 years of follow-up (5-year incidence, 2.4% [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.9–3.0]). The validation study revealed a calibration slope of 1.02 (95% CI, 0.93–1.12), C-index of 0.70 (95% CI, 0.68–0.72), and D-statistic of 1.17 (95% CI, 1.05–1.29). In a complete case analysis (n= 2147; 44 SCD end points at 5 years), patients with a predicted 5-year risk of <4% (n=1524; 71%) had an observed 5-year SCD incidence of 1.4% (95% CI, 0.8–2.2); patients with a predicted risk of ≥6% (n=297; 14%) had an observed SCD incidence of 8.9% (95% CI, 5.96–13.1) at 5 years. For every 13 (297/23) implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantations in patients with an estimated 5-year SCD risk ≥6%, 1 patient can potentially be saved from SCD. Conclusions: This study confirms that the HCM Risk-SCD model provides accurate prognostic information that can be used to target implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy in patients at the highest risk of SCD.

Dysrhythmias and Death in BiMVPIntroductionBileaflet mitral valve prolapse (BiMVP) is common among survivors of otherwise unexplained sudden cardiac death, but prognostic implications of BiMVP are unknown. This study evaluated whether patients with BiMVP are at higher risk for ventricular dysrhythmias, ICD placement, or death compared to controls with either single‐leaflet mitral valve prolapse (SiMVP) or no mitral valve prolapse (MVP).Methods and ResultsThis retrospective, matched cohort study included 18,786 patients who underwent echocardiography at Mayo Clinic between June 1990 and September 2014. The study included three cohorts: BiMVP, SiMVP, and controls without MVP. We assessed rates of ventricular dysrhythmias, ICD placement, and all‐cause mortality between groups. BiMVP was associated with higher rates of ventricular tachycardia compared to SiMVP and controls (adjusted HR 1.48 [1.14–1.92], P = 0.003 and 1.40 [1.04–1.88], P = 0.026, respectively); however, there were no statistically significant differences in rates of ventricular fibrillation/cardiac arrest or ICD placement between groups. BiMVP was associated with a lower rate of all‐cause mortality compared to SiMVP and controls (adjusted HR 0.86 [0.79–0.94], P = 0.0008, and 0.55 [0.50–0.60], P < 0.0001, respectively).ConclusionAlthough BiMVP is associated with ventricular tachycardia, it is not associated with an increased risk of cardiac arrest/ventricular fibrillation or ICD implantation and is, paradoxically, associated with a better survival compared to SiMVP or matched controls. The findings suggest that, despite its association with ventricular tachycardia, BiMVP in the absence of other risk factors does not seem to portend a poor prognosis at the population level.

Background There is significant practice variation in oral anticoagulation ( OAC ) use following catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation. It is not clear whether the risk of cardioembolism increases after discontinuation of OAC following catheter ablation. Methods and Results We identified 6886 patients within a large national administrative claims database who underwent catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation between January 1, 2005, and September 30, 2014. We assessed the effect of time off of OAC by CHA 2 DS 2 ‐ VAS c score (after adjusting for other comorbidities) on risk of cardioembolism, using Cox proportional hazards models. There was an increase in the use of non–vitamin K OAC after ablation from 0% in 2005 to 69.8% in 2014. OAC discontinuation was high, with only 60.5% and 31.3% of patients remaining on OAC at 3 and 12 months, respectively. The rate of discontinuation was higher in low‐risk patients (82% versus 62.5% at 12 months for CHA 2 DS 2 ‐ VAS c 0–1 versus ≥2, respectively; P <0.001). Stroke occurred in 1.4% of patients with CHA 2 DS 2 ‐ VAS c ≥2 and 0.3% of those with CHA 2 DS 2 ‐ VAS c 0 or 1 over the study follow‐up. The risk of cardioembolism in the first 3 months after ablation was increased among those with any time off OAC (hazard ratio 8.06 [95% CI 1.53–42.3], P <0.05). The risk of cardioembolism beyond 3 months was increased with OAC discontinuation among high‐risk patients (hazard ratio 2.48 [95% CI 1.11–5.52], P <0.05) but not low‐risk patients. Conclusion The overall risk of stroke in postablation patients is low; however, OAC discontinuation after ablation is common and is associated with increased risk of cardioembolism for all patients within the first 3 months and for high‐risk patients in the long term. Continuing OAC for at least 3 months in all patients and indefinitely in high‐risk patients appears to be the safest strategy.

Background Atrial fibrillation ( AF ) is a common sequela of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy ( HCM ), but evidence on its prevalence, risk factors, and effect on mortality is sparse. We sought to evaluate the prevalence of AF , identify clinical and echocardiographic correlates, and assess its effect on mortality in a large high‐risk HCM population. Methods and Results We identified HCM patients who underwent evaluation at our institution from 1975 to 2012. AF was defined by known history (either chronic or paroxysmal), electrocardiogram, or Holter monitoring at index visit. We examined clinical and echocardiographic variables in association with AF . The effect of AF on overall and cause‐specific mortality was evaluated with multivariate Cox proportional hazards models. Of 3673 patients with HCM , 650 (18%) had AF. Patients with AF were older and more symptomatic ( P <0.001). AF was less common among patients with obstructive HCM phenotype and was associated with larger left atria, higher E/e’ ratios, and worse cardiopulmonary exercise tolerance (all P values<0.001). During median (interquartile range) follow‐up of 4.1 (0.2 to 10) years, 1069 (29%) patients died. Patients with AF had worse survival compared to those without AF ( P <0.001). In multivariate analysis adjusted for established risk factors of mortality in HCM , the hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for the effect of AF on overall mortality was 1.48 (1.27 to 1.71). AF did not have an effect on sudden or nonsudden cardiac death. Conclusions In this large referral HCM population, approximately 1 in 5 patients had AF . AF was a strong predictor of mortality, even after adjustment for established risk factors.