-
JACC. Advances Sep 2023Data on the association between atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) are controversial.
BACKGROUND
Data on the association between atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) are controversial.
OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this study was to investigate the risk of VTE in patients with AF according to the time from AF diagnosis.
METHODS
Systematic review of MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (EBSCO host), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (2020) in the Cochrane Library, and World Health Organization Global Index Medicus databases and meta-analysis of observational studies. The risk of VTE, deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) was analyzed according to the time of AF onset: 1) short (≤3 months); 2) medium (≤6 months); and 3) long (>6 months) time groups.
RESULTS
Eight studies were included with 4,170,027 patients, of whom 650,828 with AF. In the short-term group, AF was associated with the highest risk of either PE (HR: 9.62; 95% CI: 7.07-13.09; I = 0%) or DVT (HR: 6.18; 95% CI: 4.51-8.49, I = 0%). Even if to a lesser extent, AF was associated with a higher risk of VTE (HR: 3.69; 95% CI: 1.65-8.27; I = 79%), DVT (HR: 1.75; 95% CI: 1.43-2.14; I = 0%), and PE (HR: 4.3; 95% CI: 1.61-11.47; I = 68%) in the up to 6 months and long-term risk group >6 months groups (HR: 1.39; 95% CI: 1.00-1.92; I = 72%) and PE (HR: 1.08; 95% CI: 1.00-1.16; I = 0%).
CONCLUSIONS
The risk of VTE is highest in the first 3 to 6 months after AF diagnosis and decreases over time. The early initiation of anticoagulation in patients with AF may reduce the risk of VTE.
PubMed: 38939492
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacadv.2023.100555 -
CJC Open May 2024Ongoing debate remains regarding optimal antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and coronary artery disease. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Ongoing debate remains regarding optimal antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and coronary artery disease.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to synthesize randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the following: (i) dual-pathway therapy (DPT; oral anticoagulant [OAC] plus antiplatelet) vs triple therapy (OAC and dual-antiplatelet therapy) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and (iii) OAC monotherapy vs DPT at least 1 year after PCI or ACS. Following a 2-stage process, we identified systematic reviews published between 2019 and 2022 on these 2 clinical questions, and we updated the most comprehensive search for additional RCTs published up to October 2022. Outcomes of interest were major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), death, stent thrombosis, and major bleeding. We estimated risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Based on 6 RCTs (n = 10,435), DPT reduced major bleeding (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.52-0.73) and increased stent thrombosis (RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.02-2.36), vs triple therapy after PCI or medically-managed ACS, with no significant differences in MACE and death. In 2 RCTs (n = 2905), OAC monotherapy reduced major bleeding (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.49-0.91) vs DPT in AF patients with remote PCI or ACS, with no significant differences in MACE or death.
CONCLUSIONS
In patients with AF and coronary artery disease, using less-aggressive antithrombotic treatment (DPT after PCI or ACS, and OAC alone after remote PCI or ACS) reduced major bleeding, with an increase in stent thrombosis with recent PCI. These results support a minimalist yet personalized antithrombotic strategy for these patients.
PubMed: 38846448
DOI: 10.1016/j.cjco.2024.01.001 -
American Journal of Cardiovascular... May 2024GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) have emerged as an effective therapeutic class for weight loss. However, the efficacy of these agents in reducing cardiovascular...
BACKGROUND
GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) have emerged as an effective therapeutic class for weight loss. However, the efficacy of these agents in reducing cardiovascular endpoints among patients living with obesity or overweight is unclear.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing GLP-1 RAs versus placebo in patients with obesity or overweight. We searched PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases. A random-effects model was used to calculate risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS
A total of 13 RCTs were included, with 30,512 patients. Compared with placebo, GLP-1 RAs reduced systolic blood pressure (MD - 4.76 mmHg; 95% CI - 6.03, - 3.50; p < 0.001; I = 100%) and diastolic blood pressure (MD - 1.41 mmHg; 95% CI - 2.64, - 0.17; p = 0.03; I = 100%). GLP-1 RA significantly reduced the occurrence of myocardial infarction (RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.61, 0.85; p < 0.001; I = 0%). There were no significant differences between groups in unstable angina (UA; RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.65, 1.07; p = 0.16; I = 0%), stroke (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.74, 1.12; p = 0.38; I = 0%), atrial fibrillation (AF; RR 0.49; 95% CI 0.17, 1.43; p = 0.19; I = 22%), and deep vein thrombosis (RR 0.30; 95% CI 0.06, 1.40; p = 0.13; I = 0%).
CONCLUSIONS
In patients living with obesity or overweight, GLP-1 RA reduced systolic and diastolic blood pressure and the occurrence of myocardial infarction, with a neutral effect on the occurrence of UA, stroke, AF, and deep vein thrombosis.
REGISTRATION
PROSPERO identifier number CRD42023475226.
PubMed: 38734847
DOI: 10.1007/s40256-024-00647-3 -
Annals of Hematology May 2024Rivaroxaban is a new direct oral anticoagulant, and the same dose is recommended for older and young patients. However, recent real-world studies show that older... (Review)
Review
Rivaroxaban is a new direct oral anticoagulant, and the same dose is recommended for older and young patients. However, recent real-world studies show that older patients may need dose adjustment to prevent major bleeding. At present, the evidence for dose adjustment in older patients is extremely limited with only a few reports on older atrial fibrillation patients. The aim of this study was to review the morbidity data of adverse events and bleeding events across all indications for older and young patients treated with the same dose of rivaroxaban to provide some support for dosage adjustment in older patients. The PubMed, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials, Cochrane and Web of Science databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between January 1, 2005, and October 10, 2023. The primary outcomes were the morbidity of bleeding events and efficacy-related adverse events. Summary estimates were calculated using a random effects model. Eighteen RCTs were included in the qualitative analysis. The overall morbidity of primary efficacy endpoints was higher in older patients compared to the young patients (3.37% vs. 2.60%, χ = 5.24, p = 0.022). Similarly, a higher morbidity of bleeding was observed in older patients compared to the young patients (4.42% vs. 6.03%, χ = 13.22, p < 0.001). Among all indications, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism and atrial fibrillation were associated with the highest incidence of bleeding in older patients, suggesting that these patients may be most need dose adjustment. Patients older than 75 years may require extra attention to prevent bleeding. The same dose of rivaroxaban resulted in higher bleeding morbidity and morbidity of efficacy-related adverse events in older patients compared to the young patients. An individualized dose adjustment may be preferred for older patients rather than a fixed dose that fits all.
PubMed: 38710878
DOI: 10.1007/s00277-024-05767-z -
Thrombosis Research Jun 2024Recommendations about proper anticoagulation in obese patients, body mass index (BMI) > 30 kg/m2, are not yet clearly defined. Obese patients were included in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Obese patients with atrial fibrillation are more efficiently protected from thrombosis under warfarin or xabans compared to non-obese patients; a systematic review and Meta-analysis of six randomized controlled trials.
INTRODUCTION
Recommendations about proper anticoagulation in obese patients, body mass index (BMI) > 30 kg/m2, are not yet clearly defined. Obese patients were included in randomized controlled trials comparing new anticoagulants (NOACs) with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation or thromboembolism.
METHODS
We performed a medline search entering proper criteria and finally 6 post-hoc analysis of RCTs, reporting outcome according to BMI, were included in this meta-analysis. Two major outcomes were considered end points in our meta-analysis; thrombosis, including ischemic cerebral events (transient or not) and venous thrombosis (DVD) /pulmonary embolism (PE) and bleeding, including major bleeding and clinically relevant non-major bleeding.
RESULTS
In the NOACs treated group, thrombosis occurred less frequently in obese vs non-obese patients; RR and 95 % CI 0,75 (0,58-0,97), p = 0,03, while low heterogeneity was observed (I 40 %). In the warfarin treated subgroup there was statistically significant difference with less thrombotic events occurring in the obese vs non-obese patients; RR and (95 % CI) 0,80 (0,66-0,98), p = 0,03, and heterogeneity was low (I = 24 %). This protective effect called the obesity paradox is limited to obese patients anticoagulated for non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF); RR (95 % CI) was 0,70 (0,58-0,85) p = 0,03 and I = 24 %. Bleeding events were similar under both NOACs and warfarin in obese vs non-obese analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
Obese patients anticoagulated for NVAF with either standard dose of xabans or INR guided warfarin are more efficiently protected against thrombosis compared to non-obese patients.
Topics: Humans; Atrial Fibrillation; Warfarin; Obesity; Anticoagulants; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Thrombosis; Hemorrhage; Factor Xa Inhibitors
PubMed: 38696925
DOI: 10.1016/j.thromres.2024.04.022 -
Postepy W Kardiologii Interwencyjnej =... Mar 2024Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most commonly observed arrhythmia in the world and its prevalence increases with age. The main and most severe complication of AF is... (Review)
Review
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most commonly observed arrhythmia in the world and its prevalence increases with age. The main and most severe complication of AF is ischemic stroke. Oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy is the standard of care for stroke prevention in the high risk population. Initiation of this treatment is associated with a substantial risk of bleeding complications. Moreover, there is a group of patients who cannot tolerate OAC. In patients with AF the left atrial appendage (LAA) is the main source of thrombus formation. Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) has become an important non-pharmacological intervention for stroke prevention in patients with non-valvular AF. The procedure aims to reduce the risk of thromboembolism without increasing the risk of bleeding. Over the last few years, the safety and long-term efficacy of the procedure in specific populations have increased and more patients are being treated. The Watchman device is the most studied device in this field. Randomized controlled trials demonstrated non-inferiority of percutaneous left atrial appendage closure using the WATCHMAN 2.5 device to OAC (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA, USA). The new generation device, WATCHMAN FLX, was introduced and its use was associated with fewer safety events and a higher success rate of effective appendage closure. Nevertheless, several unsolved problems remain, including device-related thrombosis, the post-LAAC antithrombotic regimen, and peri-device leakage. This review will focus on LAAC with the Watchman device for stroke prevention in AF patients. Current status, available literature, clinical safety and efficacy will be summarized.
PubMed: 38616940
DOI: 10.5114/aic.2024.136406 -
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders Mar 2024Approximately 90% of intracardial thrombi originate from the left atrial appendage in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients. Even with anticoagulant therapy, left...
BACKGROUND
Approximately 90% of intracardial thrombi originate from the left atrial appendage in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients. Even with anticoagulant therapy, left atrial appendage thrombus (LAAT) still occurs in 8% of patients. While left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) could be a promising alternative, the current consensus considers LAAT a contraindication to LAAC. However, the feasibility and safety of LAAC in patients with LAAT have yet to be determined.
METHODS
This systematic review synthesizes published data to explore the feasibility and safety of LAAC for patients with LAAT.
RESULTS
This study included a total of 136 patients with LAATs who underwent successful LAAC. The Amulet Amplatzer device was the most frequently utilized device (48.5%). Among these patients, 77 (56.6%) had absolute contraindications to anticoagulation therapy. Cerebral protection devices were utilized by 47 patients (34.6%). Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is the primary imaging technique used during the procedure. Warfarin and novel oral anticoagulants were the main anticoagulant medications used prior to the procedure, while dual antiplatelet therapy was primarily used post-procedure. During a mean follow-up period of 13.2 ± 11.5 months, there was 1 case of fatality, 1 case of stroke, 3 major bleeding events, 3 instances of device-related thrombus, and 8 cases of peri-device leakage.
CONCLUSIONS
This review highlights the preliminary effectiveness and safety of the LAAC procedure in patients with persistent LAAT. Future large-scale RCTs with varied LAAT characteristics and LAAC device types are essential for evidence-based decision-making in clinical practice.
Topics: Humans; Atrial Fibrillation; Left Atrial Appendage Closure; Atrial Appendage; Anticoagulants; Stroke; Thrombosis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38515032
DOI: 10.1186/s12872-024-03843-w -
The American Journal of Cardiology May 2024Left atrial or left atrial appendage thrombosis (LAT) is contraindicated for cardiac ablation (CA) or cardioversion (CV) of atrial fibrillation (AF). This study was... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Atrial Thrombosis Prevalence Before Cardioversion or Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Vitamin K Antagonists.
Left atrial or left atrial appendage thrombosis (LAT) is contraindicated for cardiac ablation (CA) or cardioversion (CV) of atrial fibrillation (AF). This study was aimed to compare the frequency of LAT detected by transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) before CA or CV in patients with AF treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) or vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochran Library databases from inception through July 13, 2023 to select studies reporting data on LAT identification before CA or CV using TEE in patients with AF treated with DOACs or VKAs. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence interval were calculated with a random-effects model. Studies retrieved were 50 (38 observational), 29 on CA, 15 on CV, and 6 on both procedures (17,096 patients on DOACs and 13,666 on VKAs). The overall prevalence of LAT was smaller in DOACs than in VKAs, with an OR of 0.66 (0.52 to 0.84), confirmed at sensitivity analysis and in most subgroups. This finding was consistent for the 3 most reported DOACs: the pooled OR for LAT was 0.68 (0.50 to 0.90) in apixaban, 0.67 (0.51 to 0.88) in dabigatran, 0.61 (0.43 to 0.89) in rivaroxaban, and 1.10 (0.74 to 1.64) in edoxaban (not significant). In conclusion, in this large meta-analysis in patients with AF, the prevalence of LAT by TEE evaluation performed before CV or CA appears lower in those treated with DOACs than in those on VKAs. Additional research may help in better understanding differences between these classes of anticoagulant drugs in the setting of protection against AF-related left atrial thrombotic formation.
Topics: Humans; Atrial Fibrillation; Electric Countershock; Prevalence; Anticoagulants; Thrombosis; Heart Diseases; Catheter Ablation; Vitamin K; Administration, Oral; Stroke
PubMed: 38458580
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2024.02.042 -
Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis Apr 2024Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are the mainstay of treatment for venous thromboembolism (VTE) and non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF), with or without an...
BACKGROUND
Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are the mainstay of treatment for venous thromboembolism (VTE) and non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF), with or without an underlying cancer. Patients with cancer have a 2-3-fold increase in risk for bleeding complications compared to non-cancer patients taking anticoagulant therapy, however the incidence of bleeding for urogenital and gynecological cancers on DOACs are uncertain.
AIMS
To assess the bleeding risk associated with the use of DOACs in patients with urogenital and/or gynecological cancers.
METHOD
We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies to address the safety of DOACs for VTE and AF when used in patients with urogenital and/or gynecological malignancy. The primary outcomes assessed were major and clinically relevant non-major (CRNMB) bleeding, with minor bleeding considered as a secondary outcome. MEDLINE, EMBASE and COCHRANE Central Registry of Controlled Trials were searched up to and including Oct 28, 2022. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022370981). Studies were independently assessed for inclusion and data extracted in duplicate.
RESULT
Seven studies met our inclusion criteria (Fig. 1): 2 RCTs and 5 prospective cohort studies. A total of 676 patients treated with DOACs were included, 628 (92.8%) had VTE and 48 (7.1%) had AF. In patients with VTE treated with DOACs, the pooled major bleeding rate was 2.1%, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.9-3.3% (Fig. 2). Pooled estimates could not be determined for AF patients given small event and patient numbers.
CONCLUSION
Major bleeding rates in urogenital and/or gynecological cancer patients treated with DOACs are similar to that of the general cancer population.
Topics: Humans; Anticoagulants; Venous Thromboembolism; Incidence; Hemorrhage; Neoplasms; Administration, Oral
PubMed: 38429468
DOI: 10.1007/s11239-024-02956-5 -
PloS One 2024In patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), mechanical occlusion of the left atrial appendage (LAA) using a permanently implanted device may be an... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Safety and efficacy of percutaneous Watchman 2.5 device versus Amplatzer Amulet for left atrial appendage closure in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and study-level meta-analysis.
INTRODUCTION
In patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), mechanical occlusion of the left atrial appendage (LAA) using a permanently implanted device may be an effective alternative to oral anti-coagulants (OAC). To facilitate left atrial appendage closure (LAAC), multiple percutaneous devices have been proposed. Watchman Generation 2.5 and Amplatzer Amulet are the two most popular used devices for preventing stroke in patients with NVAF. We sought to compare safety and efficacy outcomes between Watchman 2.5 and Amplatzer Amulet in patients undergoing LAAC procedure.
METHODS
We carried out a comprehensive and systematic search of the databases PubMed and Scopus, for all studies that compared the safety and efficacy of Watchman 2.5 and Amplatzer Amulet devices, from inception, till June 2023. We performed the statistical analysis using Review Manager (V.5.4.1 Cochrane Collaboration, London, United Kingdom). The safety outcomes of interest included device success, device-related thrombus, device embolization perioperatively and at follow-up, perioperative pericardial perfusion events, and perioperative cardiac tamponade events. Efficacy outcomes were all-cause mortality perioperatively and at follow-up, cardiovascular (CV) mortality at follow-up, stroke, major and minor bleeding events at follow-up, transient ischemic attack (TIA) in follow-up period, thromboembolic events in follow-up period, and peri-device leakage in perioperative period. All data was analysed using a random-effects model, and presented as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs).
RESULTS
Regarding safety outcomes, device success was non-significantly reduced in Watchman group when compared with Amulet (RR 0.99, p = 0.57; I2 = 34%). In contrast, device-related thrombus was non-significantly increased in Watchman 2.5 group in comparison to Amulet (RR 1.44, p = 0.11; I2 = 0%). There was no significant difference between the devices in terms of device embolization in the perioperative (RR 0.36, p = 0.38; I2 = 22%) and follow-up (RR 2.24, p = 0.13; I2 = 0%) periods. Likewise, there was no significant difference in the risks of pericardial effusion (RR 0.98, p = 0.98; I2 = 0%), and cardiac tamponade (RR 0.65, p = 0.76; I2 = 62%) perioperatively. Regarding efficacy outcomes, no significant difference was observed in all-cause mortality between devices perioperatively (RR 0.51, p = 0.32; I2 = 0%) and at follow-up (RR 1.08, p = 0.56; I2 = 0%). CV-mortality was non-significantly reduced in Watchman group when compared with Amulet (RR 0.57, p = 0.20; I2 = 0%). The Amulet device was not superior to the Watchman device in terms of stroke at follow-up (RR 1.13, p = 0.63; I2 = 0%). Sub-group analysis showed comparable ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke events between two devices. Furthermore, at follow-up, there was no significant difference in major (RR 1.06, p = 0.63; I2 = 0%) and minor bleeding events (RR 1.81, p = 0.17; I2 = 0%) between the two devices. No difference was observed for trans-ischemic attack (RR 1.89, p = 0.24; I2 = 0%) and thromboembolic events (RR 0.96, p = 0.96; I2 = 0%) at follow-up. No significant difference was observed between devices for peri-device leakage in perioperative period (RR 2.16, p = 0.05; I2 = 0%).
CONCLUSION
The data suggested that LAAC is safe and efficacious procedure irrespective of device used, with generally low complication rates. Watchman generation 2.5 remains non-superior to Amplatzer Amulet in terms of safety and efficacy outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Atrial Fibrillation; Left Atrial Appendage Closure; Cardiac Tamponade; Treatment Outcome; Atrial Appendage; Stroke; Thrombosis; Cardiac Catheterization
PubMed: 38354181
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0295804