Lower Rates Of Major Bleeding Research Articles

Effect of apixaban versus vitamin K antagonist and aspirin versus placebo on days alive and out of hospital: An analysis from AUGUSTUS

Clinical trials of antithrombotic agents typically use separate time-to-event analyses for bleeding and ischemic events, but this framework has limitations. Days alive and out of hospital (DAOH) is an alternative that may provide additional insight. We assessed the utility of DAOH as a clinical trial endpoint among patients with atrial fibrillation and acute coronary syndrome or percutaneous coronary intervention METHODS: AUGUSTUS, a randomized clinical trial, compared apixaban with warfarin and aspirin with placebo in 4614 patients with atrial fibrillation and acute coronary syndrome or percutaneous coronary intervention. We used Poisson regression with a robust variance estimate to compare DAOH by treatment group. Mean (SD) DAOH was 168 (31); median (IQR) was 177 (169-180); 75% of patients neither died nor were hospitalized. Mean (SD) DAOH was 169 (28) with apixaban + placebo, 168 (29) with apixaban + aspirin, 168 (33) with warfarin + placebo, and 167 (33) with warfarin + aspirin. There were no significant differences in the rate ratio for DAOH for apixaban vs. warfarin (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.99-1.01) or aspirin vs. placebo (RR 1.00, 95% CI 1.00-1.01). Compared with warfarin, apixaban increased the proportion of patients who neither died nor were hospitalized during follow-up (76.8 vs. 73.3%; OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.73-0.95). In this analysis of AUGUSTUS, there was no difference in DAOH by treatment arm. These findings contrast with time-to-event analyses, which showed lower rates of major bleeding and hospitalization with apixaban and placebo. DAOH may not be very a useful measure of effects of antithrombotic therapies in this population. clinicaltrials.gov; NCT02415400; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02415400.

Anticoagulation Alone vs Anticoagulation Plus Aspirin or DAPT Following Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion

BackgroundThe prevalence of and outcomes associated with different antithrombotic strategies after left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) are not well described. ObjectivesThis study sought to evaluate patterns of antithrombotic medication strategies at discharge following LAAO with the Watchman FLX device in real-world practice and to compare the risk of adverse events among the different antithrombotic regimens. MethodsThe authors evaluated patients in the NCDR (National Cardiovascular Data Registry) LAAO Registry who underwent LAAO with the second-generation LAA closure device between 2020 and 2022. They grouped patients by mutually exclusive discharge antithrombotic strategies and compared the rates of adverse events at 45 days and 6 months using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression. ResultsAmong 53,878 patients undergoing successful LAAO with the second-generation LAA closure device, the most common antithrombotic discharge regimens were direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) plus aspirin (48.3%), DOAC alone (22.6%), dual antiplatelet therapy (8.1%), warfarin plus aspirin (7.7%), and DOAC plus P2Y12 inhibitor (4.9%). In multivariate analysis, DOAC alone had a lower rate of major adverse events and major bleeding at 45 days of follow-up compared with DOAC plus aspirin (major adverse events: HR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.68-0.91; major bleeding: HR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.60-0.80). These differences persisted at 6 months. Warfarin without aspirin also showed lower rates of major bleeding at both time points. No differences were seen in stroke/transient ischemic attack or device-related thrombus. ConclusionsIn real-world U.S. practice, discharge on DOAC alone or warfarin alone was associated with a lower rate of adverse events compared with DOAC plus aspirin.

Apixaban vs rivaroxaban in patients with atrial fibrillation at high or low bleeding risk: A population-based cohort study

BackgroundDespite many atrial fibrillation (AF) patients being at risk of bleeding, very limited data are available on bleeding rates of different direct oral anticoagulants based on the spectrum of bleeding risk. ObjectiveWe aimed to compare the risk of major bleeding and thromboembolic events with apixaban vs rivaroxaban for AF patients stratified by bleeding risk. MethodsWe conducted a population-based, retrospective cohort study of all adult patients (66 years or older) with AF in Ontario, Canada, who were treated with apixaban or rivaroxaban between April 1, 2011, and March 31, 2020. Bleeding risk was estimated by the HAS-BLED score, with high bleeding risk defined as a score of ≥3. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding, and the primary efficacy outcome was thromboembolic events. Comparisons were adjusted for baseline comorbidities by inverse probability of treatment weighting. ResultsThis study included 18,156 AF patients with high bleeding risk and 55,186 AF patients with low bleeding risk. Apixaban use was more common in patients with high bleeding risk; 63% of high-risk patients used apixaban compared with 56% of low-risk patients. Apixaban users had lower rates of major bleeding in high-risk patients (2.9% vs 4.2% per year; hazard ratio [HR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.58–0.81) and in low-risk patients (1.8% vs 2.9% per year; HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.56–0.70) compared with rivaroxaban. There were no differences in rates of thromboembolic events, 3.1% vs 3.0% per year (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.86–1.22) in high-risk patients and 1.9% vs 1.9% per year (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.89–1.14) in low-risk patients. ConclusionIn older AF patients with high or low bleeding risk, treatment with apixaban was associated with lower rates of major bleeding with no difference in risk for thromboembolic events compared with rivaroxaban.

A comparison of simplified or conventional antithrombotic regimens after left atrial appendage closure in patients at high bleeding risk: the PLATEBRISK study.

Antithrombotic treatment (ATT) post-left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) remains controversial. Furthermore, most of the patients undergoing LAAO are at a very high bleeding risk. This study aimed to compare a simplified versus conventional ATT after LAAO in very high bleeding risk patients. This is a multicentre, retrospective study including very high bleeding risk patients, according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) definition, who underwent LAAO. These included patients at >4% risk of BARC 3 to 5 bleeding or >1% risk of intracranial bleeding after the procedure. Two groups were established based on the discharge ATT. The simplified group included single antiplatelet treatment or no treatment, and the conventional group comprised dual antiplatelet treatment or anticoagulation (combined or not with antiplatelet therapy). A total of 1,135 patients were included. The mean CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores were 4.5±1.5 and 3.7±1.0, respectively. There were no differences in the composite endpoint (death, stroke, transient ischaemic attack, device-related thrombus or major bleeding) between the 2 groups (hazard ratio [HR] 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59-1.11; p=0.188). Although the rate of major bleeding during the first year was numerically lower in the simplified group, it did not reach statistical significance (HR 0.67, 95% CI: 0.41-1.10; p=0.104). Nonetheless, patients with previous major bleeding presented a significantly lower rate of major bleeding when using the simplified treatment (HR 0.61, 95% CI: 0.36-0.99; p=0.049). In patients with very high bleeding risk, a simplified ATT after LAAO seems to be as effective as conventional protocols. Furthermore, patients with a history of major bleeding experienced a lower risk of major bleeding with the simplified ATT.

Safety and efficacy of anticoagulant treatment in patients with ovarian vein thrombosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

BackgroundThe role of anticoagulation in ovarian vein thrombosis (OVT) is uncertain. ObjectivesWe aimed to evaluate safety and efficacy of anticoagulant treatment in OVT patients. MethodsA systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases up to April 2024. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials and observational studies enrolling at least 10 adult patients with objectively diagnosed OVT and treated with any anticoagulants. The protocol was prospectively registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021270883). ResultsWe included 17 observational studies (621 anticoagulated and 376 nonanticoagulated OVT patients); 9 studies enrolled mainly pregnancy/puerperium-related OVT. Most patients received heparins alone (45.7%) or proceeded to vitamin K antagonists (39.2%). The average treatment duration was ≤3 months in 8 studies (47.1%), >3 to ≤6 months in 6 studies (35.3%), and >6 months in 3 studies (17.6%). In treated patients, mortality rate was 2.43% (95% CI, 0.54%-5.41%; I2 = 53.8%; 12/406 patients; 13 studies), major bleeding was 1.27% (95% CI, 0.48%-2.38%; I2 = 2.5%; 7/583 patients; 15 studies), recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) was 3.49% (95% CI, 1.12%-6.95%; I2 = 63.5%; 22/482 patients; 15 studies), and vessel recanalization was 89.4% (95% CI, 74.6%-98.6%; I2 = 80.6%; 163/184 patients; 8 studies). The rate of recurrent VTE in untreated patients was 8.65% (95% CI, 2.61%-17.35%); however, the difference compared with treated patients was not statistically significant (risk ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.36-1.37). At subgroup analyses, the rates of major bleeding and recurrent VTE were 0.80% (95% CI, 0.0-2%.17%) and 3.81% (95% CI, 0.42%-9.63%) in pregnancy/puerperium-related OVT, respectively, and 1.12% (95% CI, 0.32%-2.34%) and 1.78% (95% CI, 0.62%-3.46%), respectively, when analyzing only full-text studies. ConclusionThere is paucity of literature regarding OVT. Our results suggest that anticoagulation is associated with low rates of major bleeding and recurrent VTE.

The evolution of TAVI performance overtime: an overview of systematic reviews

BackgroundTranscatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a well-established treatment for high and intermediate-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). Recent studies have demonstrated non-inferiority of TAVI compared to surgery in low-risk patients. In the past decade, numerous literature reviews (SLRs) have assessed the use of TAVI in different risk groups. This is the first attempt to provide an overview of SRs (OoSRs) focusing on secondary studies reporting clinical outcomes/process indicators. This research aims to summarize the findings of extant literature on the performance of TAVI over time.MethodsA literature search took place from inception to April 2024. We searched MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library for SLRs. SLRs reporting at least one review of clinical indicators were included. Subsequently, a two-step inclusion process was conducted: [1] screening based on title and abstracts and [2] screening based on full-text papers. Relevant data were extracted and the quality of the reviews was assessed.ResultsWe included 33 SLRs with different risks assessed via the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score. Mortality rates were comparable between TAVI and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement (SAVR) groups. TAVI is associated with lower rates of major bleeding, acute kidney injury (AKI) incidence, and new-onset atrial fibrillation. Vascular complications, pacemaker implantation, and residual aortic regurgitation were more frequent in TAVI patients.ConclusionThis study summarizes TAVI performance findings over a decade, revealing a shift to include both high and low-risk patients since 2020. Overall, TAVI continues to evolve, emphasizing improved outcomes, broader indications, and addressing challenges.

P2Y12 monotherapy versus standard dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements None. Introduction Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the recommended therapy for lowering the ischemic risk among patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). However, the increased incidence of bleeding is a major concern. Monotherapy with a P2Y12 inhibitor after short-term DAPT to reduce adverse cardiovascular events and bleeding rates has not been fully established and remains uncertain. This meta-analysis aims to determine the effectiveness of P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after short-term DAPT in reducing cardiovascular and bleeding events. Methods A comprehensive search of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining the use of short-term DAPT followed by P2Y12 monotherapy in patients with ACS who underwent PCI was conducted. Outcome measures for all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and bleeding rates were analyzed using a random-effects model via Review Manager V5.4. Results A total of six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 36,724 subjects were analyzed. There were no significant differences in all-cause mortality (RR 0.89 [95% CI: 0.78-1.02], I² = 0%, p = 0.10) and myocardial infarction (RR 1.00 [95% CI: 0.88-1.14], I² = 0%, p = 0.72) between the P2Y12 inhibitor group and dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) group. There was a lower rate of major bleeding in the P2Y12 group compared to the DAPT group (RR 0.65 [95% CI: 0.49-0.88], I² = 76%, p = 0.002). The major sources of substantial heterogeneity are due to different intervals of de-escalation and baseline risk factors prior to PCI in each study. Conclusion P2Y12 monotherapy has similar rates of all-cause mortality and myocardial infarction. However, early de-escalation leads to a lower incidence of bleeding. P2Y12 monotherapy showed a 35% decreased risk of bleeding compared to the DAPT strategy. This suggests that P2Y12 monotherapy is a preferable antiplatelet strategy in patients undergoing PCI, especially in the high-risk bleeding population.

Periprocedural Anticoagulation Management of Patients Undergoing Colonoscopy with Polypectomy.

Introduction/Objective Colonoscopy with polypectomy is an integral component of colorectal cancer screening. There are limited data and consensus on periprocedural anticoagulation management, especially regarding bleeding risk with uninterrupted anticoagulation and thromboembolic risk with interruption. Our aim was to determine the incidence of bleeding and thromboembolic complications among colon screening participants undergoing colonoscopy following implementation of a novel patient care pathway for standardized periprocedural anticoagulation management. Methods We conducted a retrospective study including all participants (age 50-74) on an oral anticoagulant (e.g., vitamin K antagonists, direct oral anticoagulants) referred to the British Columbia Colon Screening Program for colonoscopy following abnormal fecal immunochemical test in a 6-month period (March-August 2022). Data relating to their specific periprocedural anticoagulant management and colonoscopy results including method of polypectomy were obtained. Primary outcomes were major bleeding and arterial or venous thromboembolic events from time of oral anticoagulant interruption until 14 days of postcolonoscopy. Secondary outcomes included nonmajor and minor bleeding, acute coronary syndrome, emergency room visit, hospital admission, and death due to any cause. Results Over the 6-month period, 162 participants completed standardized periprocedural anticoagulation management, colonoscopy ± polypectomy, and 14-day follow-up. One (0.6%) had a major bleeding event and one (0.6%) had an arterial thromboembolic event. Conclusions A novel patient care pathway for standardized periprocedural anticoagulation management with a multidisciplinary team is associated with low rates of major bleeding and thrombotic complications after colonoscopy with polypectomy.

Outcomes of venous thromboembolism in patients with inherited thrombophilia treated with direct oral anticoagulants: insights from the RIETE registry.

While direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are frequently used to treat venous thromboembolism (VTE), the outcomes of patients with inherited thrombophilia (IT) receiving DOACs for VTE remain understudied. We used data from the international RIETE registry to compare the rates of VTE recurrences, major bleeding, and mortality during anticoagulant treatment in VTE patients with and without IT, grouped by the use of DOACs or standard anticoagulant therapy. Among 103,818 enrolled patients, 21,089 (20.3%) were tested for IT, of whom 8422 (39.9%) tested positive: Protein C deficiency 294, Protein S deficiency 726, Antithrombin deficiency 240, Factor V Leiden 2248, Prothrombin gene mutation 1434, combined IT 3480. Overall, 14,189 RIETE patients (6.2% with IT) received DOACs, and 89,629 standard anticoagulation (8.4% with IT), mostly with heparins followed by vitamin K antagonists. Proportions of patients receiving DOACs did not differ between IT-positive and IT-negative patients. Rates of VTE recurrence on anticoagulant treatment were highest in patients with AT deficiency (P < 0.01). Rates of on-treatment major bleeding and all-cause mortality were lowest among patients with Factor V Leiden (FVL) or PT G20210A mutations, compared with patients who tested negative. Patients with IT who received DOACs had lower rates of major bleeding than those receiving standard anticoagulation. Excluding FVL and Protein S deficiency, patients with IT had lower rates of VTE recurrence with DOACs than with standard anticoagulation. DOACs are equally safe and effective in VTE patients with IT, with lower bleeding rates than those on standard anticoagulation.

Lower rate of major bleeding in very high risk patients undergoing left atrial appendage occlusion: A propensity score–matched comparison with direct oral anticoagulant

BackgroundLong-term oral anticoagulation is the mainstay therapy for thromboembolic (TE) prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation. However, left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) could be a safe alternative to direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with a very high TE risk profile. ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of LAAO vs DOACs in patients with atrial fibrillation at very high stroke risk (CHA2DS2-VASc [congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥ 75 years, diabetes mellitus, prior stroke or transient ischemic attack or thromboembolism, vascular disease, age 65–74 years, sex category] score ≥ 5). MethodsData from patients with CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥ 5 were extracted from a prospective multicenter database. To attenuate the imbalance in covariates between groups, propensity score matching was used (covariates: CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED [hypertension, abnormal renal or liver function, stroke, bleeding, labile international normalized ratio, elderly, drugs or alcohol] scores), which resulted in a matched population of 277 patients per group. The primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, TE events, and clinically relevant bleeding during follow-up. ResultsOf 2381 patients, 554 very high risk patients were included in the study (mean age 79 ± 7 years; CHA2DS2-VASc score 5.8 ± 0.9; HAS-BLED score 3.0 ± 0.9). The mean follow-up duration was 25 ± 11 months. A higher incidence of the composite end point was documented with DOACs compared with LAAO (14.9 events per 100 patient-years in the DOAC group vs 9.4 events per 100 patient-years in the LAAO group; P = .03). The annualized clinically relevant bleeding risk was higher with DOACs (6.3% vs 3.2%; P = .04), while the risk of TE events was not different between groups (4.1% vs 3.2%; P = .63). ConclusionIn high-risk patients, LAAO had a similar stroke prevention efficacy but a significantly lower risk of clinically relevant bleeding when compared with DOACs. The clinical benefit of LAAO became significant after 18 months of follow-up.

Bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin in patients with myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BackgroundBivalirudin is an alternative accepted therapy to unfractionated heparin for patients with myocardial infarction (MI) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We aimed in this meta-analysis to compare bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin in patients with MI undergoing PCI. MethodsWe have screened PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov (inception through January 8th, 2023) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin in patients with MI undergoing PCI. The DerSimonian and Laird method was used for estimation of tau2 to calculate the risk ratio (RR) and 95 % confidence interval (CI). ResultsTen RCTs with a total of 40,069 participants were included in our analysis. Bivalirudin as compared with unfractionated heparin was associated with significant decrease in major bleeding (RR 0.64 [0.52 to 0.79]; p < 0.01; I2 = 69 %) and cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.79 [0.67 to 0.92]; p < 0.01; I2 = 0 %). There was no significant difference between bivalirudin and unfractionated heparin groups in terms of major adverse cardiovascular events (RR 1.02 [0.91 to 1.14]; p = 0.73; I2 = 52 %), all-cause mortality (RR 0.89 [0.77 to 1.04]; p = 0.15; I2 = 23 %), MI (RR 1.02 [0.87 to 1.19]; p = 0.80; I2 = 36 %), stent thrombosis (RR 1.12 [0.52 to 2.40]; p = 0.77; I2 = 82 %), or stroke (RR 0.97 [0.73 to 1.29]; p = 0.85; I2 = 0 %). ConclusionOur meta-analysis suggests that bivalirudin compared with unfractionated heparin in patients with MI undergoing PCI was associated with lower rates of major bleeding and cardiovascular mortality without a significant difference in major adverse cardiovascular events, all-cause mortality, MI, stroke, or stent thrombosis.

Safety and efficacy of apixaban versus low-molecular weight heparin or vitamin-K antagonists for venous thromboembolism treatment in patients with severe renal failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis

IntroductionChronic kidney disease is an independent risk factor for venous thromboembolism (VTE). Traditionally, Low Molecular Weight Heparin (LMWH) followed by warfarin has been the conventional therapy for VTE treatment. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), including apixaban, have shown several advantages over the traditional therapy in individuals with normal kidney function. This meta-analysis aims to review the safety and efficacy of apixaban compared to warfarin or LMWH for the treatment of VTE in severe renal failure. MethodWe conducted literature search in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Retrospective observational studies involving clinical effectiveness and safety outcomes of apixaban compared to warfarin in adult patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <30 mL/min/m2 or on dialysis were included. ResultsEight studies were included in the analysis. Significant reduction in VTE recurrence observed in apixaban compared to warfarin (RR, 0.65; 95 % CI, 0.43–0.98; P = 0.04; I2 = 78 %). No significant difference in all-cause mortality between apixaban and warfarin (RR, 0.99; 95 % CI, 0.91–1.07; P = 0.74; I2 = 0 %). Apixaban showed a significantly lower rate of major bleeding (RR, 0.72; 95 % CI, 0.62–0.84; P < 0.0001; I2 = 34 %) and minor bleeding events (RR, 0.42; 95 % CI, 0.21–0.86; P = 0.02; I2 = 10 %) compared to warfarin. No significant difference observed in clinically relevant non-major bleeding between apixaban and warfarin (RR, 0.81; 95 % CI, 0.65–1.00; P = 0.05; I2 = 67 %). ConclusionApixaban was favored over warfarin for treating VTE in severe renal failure, reducing VTE recurrence and bleeding risk. No differences were observed in all-cause mortality and CRNMB events. More evidence is required due to limited RCTs and prospective studies.

Periprocedural antithrombotic strategies in acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: Have we discarded bivalirudin too soon?

BackgroundPublication of the BRIGHT-4 trial results has restimulated discussion about the optimal periprocedural antithrombotic strategy for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). It is possible that variation in the infusion duration, may contribute to observed differences in safety-efficacy profiles of bivalirudin in this clinical setting. MethodsUp to December 2022, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing bivalirudin (either administered peri-procedurally or accompanied by postprocedural infusion) and heparin, both with or without GPI, were searched and entered in a frequentist network meta-analysis. Co-primary endpoints were trial-defined major adverse composite events (MACE) and major bleeding. Incident rate ratios (IRR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI) were estimated. Results10 RCTs (N = 57,137 patients/month) were included. As compared to heparin, prolonged bivalirudin infusion resulted in lower rates of major bleeding (IRR 0.58, 95 % CI 0.36–0.91), but there was no differences in MACE rates between these strategies. With regard to NACE, prolonged bivalirudin infusion yielded lower risk (IRR 0.86, 95 % CI 0.77–0.96), whereas both bivalirudin and heparin increased risk when coupled with GPI (IRR 1.24, 95 % CI 1.01–1.51 and IRR 1.24, 95 % CI 1.06–1.44, respectively). Both these combination strategies also increased minor bleeding rates (IRR 1.49, 95 % CI 1.16–1.93 and IRR 1.58, 95 % CI 1.29–1.95, respectively, for bivalirudin and heparin). Results were consistent across several sensitivity analyses. ConclusionIn patients with ACS undergoing PCI, procedural bivalirudin administration followed by prolonged infusion results in lower major bleeding rates, but there does not appear to be a difference in observed MACE.

A-41 | Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Procedural Unfractionated Heparin Without Activated Clotting Time Guidance: A Unique Opportunity to Assess Thrombotic and Bleeding Events

Rates of major bleeding and intraprocedural thrombotic events (IPTE) in the setting of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using weight-adjusted unfractionated heparin (UFH) without activated clotting time (ACT) monitoring are not known. We reviewed 2748 consecutive patients who underwent coronary angiography at our tertiary care university hospital between January 2017 and December 2020. All patients who underwent PCI with weight-adjusted UFH without ACT guidance were considered for further analysis. Major bleeding complications occurring within 48 hours of PCI were collected from patients’ medical records. IPTE were collected independently by two interventional Cardiologist after review of coronary angiograms. There were 718 patients included in the analysis (65.4±12.2 years old; 81.3% male). In total, 45 patients (7.8%) experienced a major bleed or IPTE. The most common IPTE were slow/no reflow (1.5%) and coronary artery dissection with decreased flow (1.1%). Other IPTE occurred in <1% of cases. Major bleeding occurred in 11 patients (1.5%), of whom 8 required blood transfusion and 3 required vascular intervention. Bleeding complications were more common with femoral compared with radial access (6.6% vs 0.2%, P<0.001). Weight-adjusted UFH use during PCI without ACT monitoring was related to low rates of major bleeding or IPTE.

COMPARISON OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF RADIAL VERSUS FEMORAL ACCESS FOR DIAGNOSTIC AND THERAPEUTIC PROCEDURES IN PATIENTS WITH PERIPHERAL ARTERIAL DISEASE

Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is a medical condition in which the blood vessels outside the heart and brain were affected. The study's main objective is to compare the effectiveness of radial versus femoral access for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in patients with peripheral arterial disease. The research article aimed to compare the effectiveness of radial and femoral access for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in patients with the peripheral arterial disease (PAD). The study was conducted in two hospitals in Peshawar, Pakistan - Hayatabad Medical Complex and Lady Reading Hospital. The study duration was from January 2020 to December 2020. A total of 384 patients were enrolled in the study, with 192 randomly assigned to the radial access group and 192 to the femoral access group. The study found that RA was associated with a significantly lower risk of major bleeding and access site complications compared to FA. Specifically, the incidence of major bleeding was 1.56% in the radial access group and 5.73% in the femoral access group (p=0.02), and the incidence of access site complications was 2.6% in the radial access group, 8.3% in the femoral access group (p=0.01). In conclusion, our study suggests that radial access is a safe and effective alternative to femoral access for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in patients with peripheral arterial disease. Radial access is associated with lower rates of major bleeding and access site complications, particularly for diagnostic procedures, and may offer advantages such as faster patient ambulation and improved patient comfort.

Bleeding related to oral anticoagulants: Trends in US emergency department visits, 2016-2020

BackgroundClinical trials suggest lower rates of major bleeding with direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) than with warfarin, but anticoagulant-related bleeding remains one of the most common outpatient adverse drug events. MethodsWe estimated the number of emergency department (ED) visits and subsequent hospitalizations for oral anticoagulant-related bleeding in 2016–2020 based on active surveillance in a nationally representative, size-stratified probability sample of 60 U.S. hospitals. We estimated rates of ED visits using a nationally-projected retail prescription dispensing database. ResultsBased on 19,557 cases, oral anticoagulant-related bleeding resulted in an estimated 1,270,259 (95 % Confidence Interval [CI], 644,686-1,895,832) ED visits for the five years 2016–2020, of which 47.8 % (95 % CI, 40.6 %–55.0 %) resulted in hospitalization. Oral anticoagulant-related bleeding resulted in an estimated 230,163 (95% CI, 109,598-350,728) ED visits in 2016 and 301,433 (95% CI, 138,363-464,503) in 2020. During 2016–2020, ED visits for DOAC-related bleeding increased by an average of 27.9 % (95 % CI, 24.0 %–32.0 %; p < .001) per year, while ED visits for warfarin-related bleeding decreased by an average of 8.8 % (95 % CI, −10.7 % to −7.0 %; p = .001) per year. The estimated rate of bleeding visits per 100 patients dispensed oral anticoagulants at least once in 2016–2020 was highest for patients aged ≥ 80 years (13.1; 95 % CI, 6.2–20.0) and lowest for those aged <45 years (4.0; 95 % CI, 2.6–5.5); it was 5.9 visits per 100 patients dispensed DOACs [95 % CI, 2.5–9.2] and 13.0 visits per 100 patients dispensed warfarin [95 % CI, 7.4–18.7]. ConclusionsAlthough the rates of ED visits for anticoagulant-related bleeding may be lower for DOACs than for warfarin, persistently large numbers of patients requiring ED visits for anticoagulant-related bleeding despite increased use of DOACs and declining use of warfarin suggest that efforts to improve appropriate prescribing and monitoring of anticoagulants remain important.

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Oral Anticoagulants by Dementia Status in Older Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

The development of an optimal stroke prevention strategy, including the use of oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy, is particularly important for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who are living with dementia, a condition that increases the risk of adverse outcomes. However, data on the role of dementia in the safety and effectiveness of OACs are limited. To assess the comparative safety and effectiveness of specific OACs by dementia status among older patients with AF. This retrospective comparative effectiveness study used 1:1 propensity score matching among 1 160 462 patients 65 years or older with AF. Data were obtained from the Optum Clinformatics Data Mart (January 1, 2013, to June 30, 2021), IBM MarketScan Research Database (January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2020), and Medicare claims databases maintained by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (inpatient, outpatient, and pharmacy; January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2017). Data analysis was performed from September 1, 2021, to May 24, 2022. Apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin. Composite end point of ischemic stroke or major bleeding events over the 6-month period after OAC initiation, pooled across databases using random-effects meta-analyses. Among 1 160 462 patients with AF, the mean (SD) age was 77.4 (7.2) years; 50.2% were male, 80.5% were White, and 7.9% had dementia. Three comparative new-user cohorts were established: warfarin vs apixaban (501 990 patients; mean [SD] age, 78.1 [7.4] years; 50.2% female), dabigatran vs apixaban (126 718 patients; mean [SD] age, 76.5 [7.1] years; 52.0% male), and rivaroxaban vs apixaban (531 754 patients; mean [SD] age, 76.9 [7.2] years; 50.2% male). Among patients with dementia, compared with apixaban users, a higher rate of the composite end point was observed in warfarin users (95.7 events per 1000 person-years [PYs] vs 64.2 events per 1000 PYs; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.5; 95% CI, 1.3-1.7), dabigatran users (84.5 events per 1000 PYs vs 54.9 events per 1000 PYs; aHR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2-2.0), and rivaroxaban users (87.4 events per 1000 PYs vs 68.5 events per 1000 PYs; aHR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1-1.5). In all 3 comparisons, the magnitude of the benefits associated with apixaban was similar regardless of dementia diagnosis on the HR scale but differed substantially on the rate difference (RD) scale. The adjusted RD of the composite outcome per 1000 PYs for warfarin vs apixaban users was 29.8 (95% CI, 18.4-41.1) events in patients with dementia vs 16.0 (95% CI, 13.6-18.4) events in patients without dementia. The corresponding adjusted RD estimates of the composite outcome were 29.6 (95% CI, 11.6-47.6) events per 1000 PYs in patients with dementia vs 5.8 (95% CI, 1.1-10.4) events per 1000 PYs in patients without dementia for dabigatran vs apixaban users and 20.5 (95% CI, 9.9-31.1) events per 1000 PYs in patients with dementia vs 15.9 (95% CI, 11.4-20.3) events per 1000 PYs in patients without dementia for rivaroxaban vs apixaban users. The pattern was more distinct for major bleeding than for ischemic stroke. In this comparative effectiveness study, apixaban was associated with lower rates of major bleeding and ischemic stroke compared with other OACs. The increased absolute risks associated with other OACs compared with apixaban were greater among patients with dementia than those without dementia, particularly for major bleeding. These findings support the use of apixaban for anticoagulation therapy in patients living with dementia who have AF.

Perioperative Outcomes of Patients with Bleeding Disorders Undergoing Major Surgery at an Academic Hemophilia Treatment Center.

Persons with bleeding disorders (PwBD) are at high risk for bleeding with invasive procedures. However, the risk of bleeding in PwBD undergoing major surgery and outcomes of patients managed perioperatively at a hemophilia treatment center (HTC) are not well described. We performed a retrospective review of surgical outcomes among PwBD undergoing major surgery between January 1st, 2017 and December 31st, 2019 at the Cardeza Foundation Hemophilia and Thrombosis Center in Philadelphia, PA. The primary outcome was postoperative bleeding, assessed according to the ISTH-SSC's 2010 definition. Secondary outcomes included use of unplanned postoperative hemostatic therapy, LOS, and 30-day readmission rate. Results were compared to non-PwBD population from a surgical database, matched for surgery, age, and sex. During the study period, 50 PwBD underwent 63 major surgeries. The most common diagnoses were VWD (64%) and hemophilia A (20.0%). The most common surgical procedure category was orthopedic (33.3%), predominantly arthroplasties. Postoperatively,4.8% of procedures were complicated by major bleeding and 1.6% by non-major bleeding. The mean LOS was 1.65 days, and 30-day readmission rate was 1.6%. In comparison to matched, non-PwBD patients in a national surgical database undergoing the same procedures, study patients had a similar rate of bleeding complications per procedure (5.0% vs 1.04% P = .071, Fisher's exact test). PwBD undergoing major surgeries have low rates of major bleeding when receiving comprehensive care at an HTC. Bleeding and hospital readmission rates were similar to non-PwBD baseline in a large database.

Reduced Mortality With Antiplatelet Therapy Deescalation After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Meta-Analysis.

Antiplatelet therapy deescalation has been suggested as an alternative to standard treatment with potent dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for 1 year in low bleeding risk patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention to mitigate the increased risk of bleeding. Whether this strategy preserves the ischemic and survival benefits of potent DAPT is uncertain. We performed a pairwise meta-analysis in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention treated with either 1-year standard potent DAPT versus deescalation therapy (potent DAPT for 1-3 months followed by either reduced potency DAPT or ticagrelor monotherapy for up to 1 year). Randomized trials comparing standard DAPT versus deescalation therapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention were searched through MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane databases, and proceedings of international meetings. The primary end point was 1-year all-cause mortality. The meta-analysis included 6 trials in which 20 837 patients were randomized to potent DAPT for 1 to 3 months followed by deescalation therapy for up to 1 year (n=10 392) or standard potent DAPT for 1 year (n=10 445). Deescalation therapy was associated with lower 1-year rates of all-cause mortality compared with standard therapy (odds ratio, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.59-0.95]; P=0.02). Deescalation therapy was also associated with lower rates of major bleeding (odds ratio, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.48-0.72]; P<0.0001), with no significant difference in major adverse cardiac events (major adverse cardiovascular events; odds ratio, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.77-1.04]; P=0.14). In low bleeding risk patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, compared with 1-year of potent DAPT, antiplatelet therapy deescalation therapy after 1 to 3 months was associated with decreased mortality and major bleeding with similar rates of major adverse cardiovascular events.

Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin for Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Patients With Nephrotic Syndrome: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Evidence supporting venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with nephrotic syndrome (NS) is limited to case reports. The purpose of this study was to compare bleeding and thromboembolic events in this population. A retrospective cohort study was conducted in adults with NS initiated on a DOAC or warfarin for VTE prophylaxis between January 2013 and July 2021 within the Ochsner Health System. Patients with study drug exposure within the preceding 7 days, acute VTE within the preceding 6 months, or ≤7 days of study drug exposure were excluded. The primary outcome was the composite rate of major bleeding and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. Secondary outcomes included time to major bleeding and rate of new thromboembolic events. This study was approved by the Ochsner Health System Institutional Review Board. Twenty-five DOAC and 19 warfarin patients were included. The primary outcome occurred in 8% vs 26.3% (P = 0.21) of patients treated with a DOAC or warfarin, respectively, and was driven by major bleeding (4% vs 21%, P = 0.25). Other secondary outcomes were similar between cohorts. The study was limited by a small sample size. Use of DOACs for VTE prophylaxis resulted in a nonstatistically significant, but clinically relevant lower rate of major bleeding compared to warfarin. This study provides comparative data showing safe and effective use of DOACs in patients with NS. Prospective, randomized studies are needed to confirm results.