Anticoagulants In Catheter Ablation Research Articles

Comparison of phenprocoumon with direct oral anticoagulants in catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation.

In patients undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF), direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are as effective and safe as the vitamin K antagonist (VKA) warfarin. Phenprocoumon has a different pharmacokinetic profile compared with warfarin and is the most used VKA in Germany. The aim of the study was to compare DOAC with phenprocoumon. In this retrospective single-centre cohort study, 1735 patients who underwent 2219 consecutive catheter ablations for AF between January 2011 and May 2017 were included. All patients were in-hospital for at least 48 h after catheter ablation. The primary outcome was defined as peri-procedural thrombo-embolic events. The secondary outcome was any bleeding according to the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH). The mean age of the patients was 63.3 years. Phenprocoumon was prescribed in 929 (42%) of the cases, and in 697 (31%) dabigatran, 399 (18%) rivaroxaban, and 194 (9%) apixaban. During hospitalization, 37 (1.6%) thrombo-embolic events occurred, including 23 transient ischaemic attacks (TIAs). Compared with the use of phenoprocoumon, the use of DOAC was significantly associated with a lower thrombo-embolic risk [16 (1.2%) vs. 21 (2.2%), odds ratio (OR)], 0.5 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.2-0.9], P = 0.04. No statistically significant association with bleeding risk was observed [phenprocomoun: 122 (13%); DOAC: 163 (12.6%); OR 0.9 (95% CI 0.7-1.2); P = 0.70]. Interruption of oral anticoagulation (OAC) was associated with an increased risk for thrombo-embolic complications [OR 2.2 (1.1-4.3); P = 0.031], and bleeding [OR 2.5 (95% CI 1.8-3.2), P = 0.001]. In patients undergoing catheter ablation for AF, the use of DOAC was associated with a reduced risk of thrombo-embolic events compared with phenprocoumon. Non-interrupted oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy was associated with a reduced risk of peri-procedural thrombo-embolic and any bleeding complications.

Meta-analysis of controlled studies on minimally interrupted vs. continuous use of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation.

AimsAt present, there are no guideline recommendations for minimally interrupted use of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (mi-NOAC) during catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation (AF). Current evidence is predominantly based on observational studies, with continuous use of vitamin K antagonist in the control arm. This quantitative summary reflects the first high-level evidence on contemporary regimens, with continuous NOAC use (c-NOAC) as the current gold standard.Methods and resultsMeta-analysis (Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science) on prospective, controlled studies comparing contemporary mi-NOAC (without bridging) with c-NOAC. Net adverse clinical events (major bleeding, thrombo-embolic events) were the primary outcome. In addition, we analysed total bleeding, minor bleeding, and silent cerebral embolism. Eight studies (six randomized, two observational) with 2168 patients were summarized. The primary endpoint occurred in 1.0% (18/1835): 1.1% (11/1005) vs. 0.8% (7/830) for the mi-NOAC and c-NOAC groups, respectively; odds ratio (OR) 1.20 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49–2.92, P = 0.64]. The OR for total bleeding on mi-NOAC was 1.26 (95% CI 0.97–1.63, P = 0.07). ORs for minor bleeding and silent cerebral embolism were 1.17 (95% CI 0.80–1.70, P = 0.34) and 2.62 (95% CI 0.54–12.61, P = 0.12), respectively.ConclusionThis synopsis provides a quantitative synthesis of high-level evidence on a contemporary strategy of mi-NOAC in CA for AF, and overall clinical outcomes were not different from continuous NOAC use. Despite preprocedural interruption, there was no sign of lower bleeding rates. Additional higher volume datasets are warranted for more precise treatment effect estimations of this everyday alternative anticoagulation strategy in AF ablation.

Lower Major Bleeding Rates with Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation: an Updated Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies.

Catheter ablation (CA) of atrial fibrillation (AF) is an important rhythm control strategy for patients with drug-refractory AF. We aimed to perform an updated meta-analysis of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) vs vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) as uninterrupted anticoagulation in patients undergoing AF ablation to assess safety and efficacy of DOAC, after the publication of recent data on edoxaban in CA of AF. We performed a meta-analysis of RCTs enrolling patients undergoing AF ablation. We assessed Mantel-Haenszel pooled estimates of risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs for thromboembolic events, major bleeding (MB), and non-major bleeding (NMB). A total of 2118 patients have been included in the analysis. Compared with patients receiving VKA, patients receiving DOACs had a lower, although non-significant, risk of thromboembolic events (RR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.09-1.76; P = 0.23). MB rates in patients treated with DOACs were statistically significantly lower than VKA (RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.39-0.93, P = 0.02). The incidence of NMB was not significantly different (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.83-1.57, p n.s.). In a meta-analysis of RCTs, an uninterrupted DOACs strategy for CA of AF appears to be superior to uninterrupted VKA in terms of safety; a non-significant trend favoring DOACs in terms of efficacy is also evident.

P4750Uninterrupted and minimally-interrupted direct oral anticoagulant therapy in patients undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation. An updated meta-analysis

Abstract Background Adequate anticoagulation in catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) is crucial in preventing both thromboembolic events and life-threatening bleeding. As clinicians gain more experience and reassurance with data from clinical trials, the usage of Direct Oral Anticoagulants (DOAC) in patients undergoing catheter ablation of AF has rapidly increased over the last years. The purpose of this updated meta-analysis was to assess the latest evidence and compare the safety and efficacy of uninterrupted and minimally interrupted periprocedural DOAC anticoagulation protocols with uninterrupted Vitamin K Antagonists (VKA) in this setting. Methods Randomized or prospective controlled observational studies comparing DOACs to VKAs were identified with multiple databases (Embase, PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus). Uninterrupted and minimally interrupted DOAC (single dose of dabigatran or apixaban withheld) were distinguished, VKA therapy was always uninterrupted. The primary outcomes were stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA), major bleeding, and net clinical benefit. Results 32 studies were included in the final analysis, encompassing a total of 19.437 patients. The incidence of thromboembolic events was rare (less than 0.2%), with no significant difference between groups. Occurrence of major bleeding and net clinical benefit were significantly improved in patients assigned to uninterrupted DOAC treatment compared to VKAs (1.5% vs 2.2%, POR: 0.74, CI: 0.56–0.98, I2=0,0% and 1.7% vs 2.4%, POR: 0.76; CI: 0.59–0.99, I2=0,0%, respectively). Net clinical benefit Conclusion This updated meta-analysis, based on a large database, showed that DOAC therapy is equally effective as VKA in preventing stroke and TIA. Minimally-interrupted DOAC therapy is a non-inferior peri-procedural anticoagulation strategy, however, uninterrupted DOAC therapy showed superiority when compared to VKA regarding major, life-threatening bleeding. Our findings showed that uninterrupted periprocedural DOAC therapy is a safe and preferable alternative to VKAs in patients undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation. Acknowledgement/Funding This study was supported by an Economic Development and Innovation Operative Programme Grant (GINOP 2.3.2-15-2016-00048).

Peri-procedural Anticoagulation in Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation: A Review.

Catheter ablation for rhythm control in atrial fibrillation has been recognized as an established treatment. Patients with atrial fibrillation suffer from an increased risk of thromboembolic events. Long-term stroke risk and mortality have been shown to be reduced after catheter ablation, still the procedure per se is associated with an additive peri-procedural thromboembolic risk. Maintenance of the thrombotic - bleeding equilibrium in such patients during interventional procedures is compelling. Lack of data from randomized studies along with the recent introduction of novel oral anticoagulants in clinical practice has resulted in a wide variance of antithrombotic treatment approaches. Procedural interruption of anticoagulants, switching of anticoagulation scheme (i.e. from novel oral anticoagulants to vitamin K antagonists), bridging with heparin, timing of re-initiation of therapy and/or utilization of novel oral anticoagulants have all been points of dispute. In the present review we present the available data regarding optimal peri-procedural anticoagulation strategies in patients undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation.

Report of periprocedural oral anticoagulants in catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: The Japanese Catheter Ablation Registry of Atrial Fibrillation (J-CARAF)

BackgroundTo obtain a perspective of the current status of catheter ablation for the cure of atrial fibrillation, the Japanese Heart Rhythm Society conducted a nationwide survey: the Japanese Catheter Ablation Registry of Atrial Fibrillation. In this report, we aimed to evaluate the periprocedural use of direct oral anticoagulants with respect to thromboembolic or bleeding complications. MethodsUsing an online questionnaire, the Japanese Heart Rhythm Society requested electrophysiology centers in Japan to register the relevant data of patients who underwent atrial fibrillation ablation over selected five-months from 2011 to 2014. We compared the clinical profiles and the ablation data, including the incidence of pericardial effusion, major bleeding, and ischemic stroke among patients with periprocedural use of warfarin or a direct oral anticoagulant. ResultsA total of 204 institutions reported data on 6200 atrial fibrillation ablation sessions. We analyzed data obtained from 4698 subjects (Age 63.2±10.6yr; 73.9% male, 26.1% female) who were administered warfarin or a direct oral anticoagulant, at least up to the day before atrial fibrillation ablation. Warfarin was administered to 54.7% of patients. Dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban were used in 21.9%, 12.9%, and 10.6% of patients, respectively. Clinical profiles of apixaban-treated patients were similar to those of warfarin-treated patients; they were different from the clinical profiles of patients treated with dabigatran or rivaroxaban. There were 104 complications in 103 subjects (2.2%). Complications were more frequent in older patients (65.3±8.6yr vs. 63.1±10.7yr; P=0.012), patients on chronic hemodialysis (4.9% vs. 1.1%; P=0.001), or those treated with warfarin (66.0% vs. 54.4%; P=0.019). Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that age (OR, 1.02; 95% CI: 1.00–1.04; P=0.035), chronic hemodialysis (OR, 4.40; CI: 1.68–11.50; P=0.003), and assistance by 3-D mapping system (OR, 0.30; CI: 0.16–0.57; P<0.001) were significantly related to the incidence of complications, while periprocedural direct oral anticoagulant was not a predictive factor for complication. ConclusionsCompared with uninterrupted warfarin, the choice of a direct oral anticoagulant as a periprocedural oral anticoagulant did not significantly change the incidence of serious complications.

Efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban compared with vitamin K antagonists for peri-procedural anticoagulation in catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Rivaroxaban is increasingly used in patients undergoing catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF). In the absence of large controlled trials, a comprehensive meta-analysis of the literature appears to be the best way to obtain reliable evidence on rare peri-procedural outcomes such as thromboembolic or bleeding events. We aimed to provide a detailed analysis of currently available data on safety and efficacy of peri-procedural rivaroxaban in patients undergoing AF ablation. We performed a systematic search of the English language literature for studies comparing peri-procedural rivaroxaban therapy with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) and reporting detailed data on bleeding and/or thromboembolic complications. The Peto odds ratio (POR) was used to pool data into a fixed-effect meta-analysis. A total of 7400 patients undergoing catheter ablation were included in 15 observational and 1 randomized studies of which 1994 were receiving rivaroxaban and 5406 VKA. The risk of thromboembolism trended to be lower in the rivaroxaban group [4/1954 vs. 19/5219, POR 0.40, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.16–1.01, P = 0.052]. Major bleeding events occurred in 23 of 1994 cases (1.15%) in the rivaroxaban and 90 of 5406 (1.66%) in the VKA group (POR 0.74, 95% CI, 0.46–1.21, P = 0.23). A total of 87 minor bleeding events were reported in 1753 patients (4.96%) in the rivaroxaban group and in 165 of 4009 patients (4.12%) in the VKA group (POR 0.84, 95% CI 0.63-1.11, p = 0.22). In patients undergoing AF ablation, rivaroxaban appears to be an effective and safe alternative to VKA.

Early Experience of Novel Oral Anticoagulants in Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation: Efficacy and Safety Comparison to Warfarin.

PurposeCompared with warfarin, novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are convenient to use, although they require a blanking period immediately before radiofrequency catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF). We compared NOACs and uninterrupted warfarin in the peri-procedural period of AF ablation.Materials and MethodsWe compared 141 patients treated with peri-procedural NOACs (72% men; 58±11 years old; 71% with paroxysmal AF) and 281 age-, sex-, AF type-, and history of stroke-matched patients treated with uninterrupted warfarin. NOACs were stopped 24 hours before the procedure and restarted on the same procedure day after hemostasis was achieved.ResultsWe found no difference in the CHA2DS2-VASc (p=0.376) and HAS-BLED scores (p=0.175) between the groups. The preprocedural anticoagulation duration was significantly shorter in the NOAC group (76.3±110.7 days) than in the warfarin group (274.7±582.7 days, p<0.001). The intra-procedural total heparin requirement was higher (p<0.001), although mean activated clotting time was shorter (350.0±25.0 s vs. 367.4±42.9 s, p<0.001), in the NOAC group than in the warfarin group. There was no significant difference in thromboembolic events (1.4% vs. 0%, p=0.111) or major bleeding (1.4% vs. 3.9%, p=0.235) between the NOAC and warfarin groups. Minor stroke occurred in two cases within 10 hours of the procedure (underlying CHA2DS2-VASc scores 0 and 1) in the NOAC group.ConclusionPre-procedural anticoagulation duration was shorter and intra-procedural heparin requirement was higher with NOAC than with uninterrupted warfarin during AF ablation. Although the peri-procedural thromboembolism and bleeding incidences did not differ, minor stroke occurred in two cases in the NOAC group.

Meta-Analysis of Efficacy and Safety of New Oral Anticoagulants Compared With Uninterrupted Vitamin K Antagonists in Patients Undergoing Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation

Anticoagulation in catheter ablation (CA) of atrial fibrillation (AF) is of paramount importance for prevention of thromboembolic events, and recent studies favor uninterrupted vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of new oral anticoagulants (NOACs) to uninterrupted VKAs for anticoagulation in CA by performing a meta-analysis. PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases were searched for studies comparing NOACs with uninterrupted VKAs in patients who underwent CA for AF from January 1, 2000, to August 31, 2015. Odds ratio (OR) and Peto's OR (POR) were used to report for event rates >1% and <1%, respectively. A total of 11,686 patients with AF who underwent CA in 25 studies were included in this analysis. There was no significant difference between NOACs and uninterrupted VKAs in occurrence of stroke or transient ischemic attacks (POR 1.35, 95% CI 0.62 to 2.94) and major bleeding (POR 0.87, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.31), which were consistent in subgroup analysis of interrupted and uninterrupted NOACs. A lower risk of minor bleeding was observed with NOACs (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.00), and no major differences were observed for the risk of thromboembolic events, cardiac tamponade or pericardial effusion requiring drainage, and groin hematoma. NOACs, whether interrupted preprocedure or not, were associated with equal rates of stroke or TIA and major bleeding complications and less risk of minor bleeding compared with uninterrupted VKAs in CA for AF.

POSSIBILITY OF NOVEL ORAL ANTICOAGULANTS USAGE DURING ABLATION IN ATRIAL FIBRILLATION

The review provides the data on contemporary approaches to anticoagulant therapy during catheter radiofrequency ablation of atrial fibrillation. The opportunities are discussed for various types of periprocedural use of warfarin, and the results mentioned for the efficacy and safety of novel oral anticoagulants in catheter ablation.

Safety and efficacy of interrupted dabigatran for peri-procedural anticoagulation in catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To examine the safety (defined as bleeding risk) and efficacy (defined as prevention of thromboembolic events) of interrupted dabigatran for peri-procedural anticoagulation in catheter ablation (CA) of atrial fibrillation (AF) in comparison with warfarin. Reviewers independently searched literature databases from January 2010 through April 2013 for studies comparing the safety and efficacy of dabigatran and warfarin in CA of AF and extracted pre-defined data. The Mantel-Haenszel method was used to pool data of bleeding and thromboembolism outcomes into random and fixed effect model meta-analyses, respectively. Odds ratios (ORs), and risk difference (RD) analysis when studies reported no events in either arm, were used to generate an overall effect estimate of both outcomes. Publication bias and heterogeneity were assessed by contour funnel plot and the I(2) test, respectively. Nine citations, including 3036 patients (1073 dabigatran), met the inclusion criteria. There was no significant difference between interrupted dabigatran and warfarin therapy in CA of AF in occurrence of bleeding [dabigatran 58 (5.4%), warfarin 103 (5.2%); OR 0.92 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55-1.45); χ(2) = 13.03-P = 0.11; I(2) = 39%] or thromboembolism [dabigatran 5 (0.4%), warfarin 2 (0.1%); OR 2.15 (95% CI-0.58-7.98); χ(2) = 2.14, P = 0.54; I(2) = 0%; RD 0.00 (95% CI-0.00 to 0.01); χ(2) = 3.37, P = 0.81; I(2) = 0%]. Analysis of pre-defined subgroups (published articles vs. abstracts), sensitivity analyses (interrupted warfarin, USA studies, and Japanese studies) and fixed effect model analyses showed similar results. Heterogeneity was mild in the bleeding outcome analysis and zero in thromboembolism. There was no evidence of publication bias in either meta-analysis. Meta-analysis of currently available studies showed no significant difference in bleeding and thromboembolism between interrupted dabigatran and warfarin therapy in CA of AF. Dabigatran appears to be safe and effective for peri-procedural anticoagulation in CA of AF.

Uninterrupted Warfarin for Periprocedural Anticoagulation in Catheter Ablation of Typical Atrial Flutter: A Safe and Cost‐Effective Strategy

Many patients undergoing catheter ablation of atrial flutter (AFL) require periprocedural anticoagulation. We compared a strategy of conversion to low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) periprocedure to uninterrupted warfarinization in a nonrandomized, case-controlled study. One hundred and one consecutive patients requiring periprocedural anticoagulation for catheter ablation of typical AFL were studied. The first 51 patients underwent conversion to LMWH (enoxaparin 1 mg/kg bd) with a warfarin pause (LMWH group), the subsequent 50 continued with uninterrupted oral anticoagulation (Warfarin group). Primary endpoint was a composite of major and minor bleeding complications and groin symptoms. Fewer patients in the Warfarin group reached the primary endpoint (36.0% vs 56.8%, P = 0.013). Four patients in the LMWH group but no patient in the Warfarin group required hospital admission for bleeding-related complications. Cost analysis showed mean cost per patient of anticoagulation with LMWH to be pounds sterling 100.9 (95% CI 94.46-107.30) compared to pounds sterling 10.23 (4.49-15.97) in the Warfarin group (P < 0.0001). Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) was performed prior to ablation in 11 patients in the Warfarin group and in 3 patients in the LMWH (P = 0.019). When TEE costs were included, costs were pounds sterling 125.00 ($188.25) (96.80-153.60) for the LMWH strategy and pounds sterling 108.5 ($163.40) (54.92-162.1) for the Warfarin group (P < 0.0001). Catheter ablation of typical AFL without interruption of warfarin appears safer and more cost-effective than periprocedural conversion to LMWH. It could be used as a routine anticoagulation strategy for the ablation of right-sided arrhythmias.