Lower Risk Of Major Bleeding Research Articles

Comparative safety and effectiveness of oral anticoagulants in key subgroups of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and at high risk of gastrointestinal bleeding: A cohort study based on the French National Health Data System (SNDS).

Risk factors and comorbidities can complicate management of non-valvular atrial fibrillation. We describe and compare real-world safety and effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs; apixaban, rivaroxaban, dabigatran) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in subgroups of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation at high risk for gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, utilizing data from a national quasi-exhaustive French database. Anticoagulant-naïve adults with non-valvular atrial fibrillation with ≥1 gastrointestinal bleeding risk factor, initiating anticoagulant treatment January 2016-December 2019, and covered by the French national health data system were eligible. The following subgroups were evaluated: patients age ≥75 years, receiving concomitant medications, HAS-BLED score ≥3, and chronic kidney disease stage 3-4. Outcomes included major bleeding and stroke/systemic embolism. Patient characteristics were balanced using propensity score matching. A total of 314,184 patients were identified; characteristics were similar for propensity score-matched subgroups in VKA/DOAC and DOAC/DOAC comparisons. DOACs showed lower risk of major bleeding versus VKAs in all subgroups evaluated (p<0.0001 for all). Apixaban showed lower risk of major bleeding and gastrointestinal bleeding versus rivaroxaban in all subgroups (p≤0.05 for all) and versus dabigatran in elderly patients, patients with HAS-BLED score ≥3, and those receiving concomitant medications (p<0.05 for all). Stroke/systemic embolism risk was lower with apixaban versus rivaroxaban in elderly patients, those with HAS-BLED ≥3, and those receiving concomitant medications; risks were similar for other comparisons. DOACs were associated with improved safety and effectiveness when compared to VKAs among subgroups of non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients at high risk of gastrointestinal bleeding. Apixaban was associated with lower risks of major bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding, and stroke/systemic embolism versus rivaroxaban as well as lower risk of major bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding bleed and similar risk of stroke/systemic embolism versus dabigatran among several of these patient subgroups.

Meta-analysis of longitudinal comparison of transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients at low to intermediate surgical risk.

Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) is the commonly used approach for aortic valve replacement (AVR) in patients with aortic stenosis at low or intermediate surgical risk. However, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has emerged as an alternative to SAVR for AVR. This meta-analysis aims to assess the comparative efficacy and safety of TAVR versus SAVR in low-to-intermediate surgical risk patients by analyzing temporal trends in the outcomes of TAVR and SAVR at various follow-up intervals, providing a more detailed understanding. A thorough literature search was performed across PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from their inception up to May 2024 to identify eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Clinical outcomes were evaluated using a random-effects model to pool risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs. A total of 17 studies reporting data at different follow-ups for nine trials were included (n=9092). No statistically significant difference was observed between TAVR and SAVR for reducing all-cause death at 30 days, 1 year, and 2 years but significantly increased risk with TAVR at 5 years or longer follow-up (RR=1.13, 95% CI: 1.03-1.23). However, TAVR was associated with a significantly decreased risk for cardiac death at 1-year follow-up (RR=0.79, 95% CI: 0.64-0.96) and comparable risk for cardiac death at 30 days, 2 years, and 5 years or longer follow-up when compared with SAVR. No statistically significant difference was observed between TAVR and SAVR for reducing the risk of myocardial infarction (MI) at 30 days, 1 year, 2 years, and 5 years or longer follow-up.TAVR was associated with a significantly lower risk of major bleeding events at 30 days (RR=0.38, 95% CI: 0.21-0.67); lower risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) at 30 days (RR=0.38, 95% CI: 0.26-0.54) and 1 year (RR=0.58, 95% CI: 0.41-0.82) and lower risk of new onset or worsening atrial fibrillation (AF) at 30 days (RR=0.25, 95% CI: 0.18-0.34), 1 year (RR=0.26, 95% CI: 0.16-0.41) and 2 years (RR=0.32, 95% CI: 0.20-0.49) when compared with SAVR. However, TAVR was associated with a significantly increased risk of permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) at 30 days (RR: 2.62, 95% CI: 1.40-4.91), at 1 year (RR: 2.19, 95% CI: 1.24-3.87), at 2 years (RR: 2.74, 95% CI: 1.31-5.71), and beyond 5 years (RR: 1.95, 95% CI: 1.20-3.15). TAVR was also associated with a significantly increased risk of prosthetic valve thrombosis at 2 years (RR=2.70, 95% CI: 1.08-6.71), though no significant association was observed at 30 days, 1 year, or 5 years. Similarly, no significant differences were observed in aortic-valve reintervention rates at 30 days, 2 years, or 5 years, but TAVR showed a significantly increased risk at 1 year (RR=1.98, 95% CI: 1.21-3.24). TAVR was associated with a significantly increased risk of major vascular complications at 30 days (RR=2.37, 95% CI: 1.38-4.04) and a significantly increased risk of TIA at 2 years (RR: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.02-2.00, I2=0%). The risk of hospitalizations was comparable between the groups. TAVR and SAVR demonstrated comparable rates of all-cause death up to 2 years of follow-up. However, at 5 years or longer follow-up, TAVR was associated with a higher risk of all-cause death. While TAVR showed certain procedural advantages, such as a lower risk of major bleeding, AKI, and new-onset or worsening AF, the choice between TAVR and SAVR in patients with low or intermediate surgical risk should consider long-term outcomes, with SAVR potentially being more favorable due to better survival observed on longer follow-up durations.

Comparative safety and effectiveness of oral anticoagulants in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and high risk of gastrointestinal bleeding: A nationwide French cohort study.

This observational study compared effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs; apixaban, rivaroxaban, dabigatran) or vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) at high risk for gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB). Anticoagulant-naïve adults with NVAF with ≥1 GIB risk factor, initiating anticoagulant treatment January 2016-December 2019, and covered by the French national health data system were eligible. Outcomes included major bleeding (MB) and stroke/systemic embolism (SE). Patient characteristics were balanced using propensity score matching. A total of 314,184 patients were identified with 162,150 (51.5%) in the apixaban cohort, 88,427 (28.1%) in the rivaroxaban cohort, 16,465 (5.2%) in the dabigatran cohort, and 47,142 (15.0%) in the VKA cohort (mean age 79.0 years, standard deviation 10.5; 51.0% female). A total of 45,124 apixaban-VKAs, 38,737 rivaroxaban-VKAs, 16,415 dabigatran-VKAs, 88,414 apixaban-rivaroxaban, 16,464 apixaban-dabigatran, and 16,459 rivaroxaban-dabigatran pairs were retained after propensity score matching. Apixaban had lower risk of MB versus dabigatran (hazard ratio [HR], 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63-0.83) and rivaroxaban (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.59-0.66). Apixaban had lower risk of GIB versus dabigatran (HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.37-0.56) and rivaroxaban (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.49-0.59). Risk of GIB was similar with dabigatran versus rivaroxaban (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.89-1.24). Apixaban had lower risk of stroke/SE versus rivaroxaban (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.84-0.96), while risk was similar versus dabigatran (HR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.9-1.3). All DOACs had lower risk of MB and stroke/SE versus VKAs (p<0.001 for all). DOACs had improved safety and effectiveness from bleeding and stroke/SE, respectively, versus VKAs among patients with NVAF at high risk for GIB. Apixaban was associated with lower MB and GIB risk versus other DOACs. For stroke/SE, apixaban was associated with reduced risk versus rivaroxaban and similar risk versus dabigatran.

Gender and racial differences in outcomes among patients with NVAF treated with oral anticoagulants: a real-world evaluation of Medicare beneficiaries

Abstract Introduction Anticoagulation therapies are essential component of disease management for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs), such as apixaban, rivaroxaban, and dabigatran have shown greater benefit in reducing stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and bleeding risk compared to warfarin. However, few studies have assessed whether the beneficial effects of DOACs are consistent across gender and race. Purpose To assess the association between apixaban use and the risk of stroke/SE and major bleeding (MB) compared to warfarin, rivaroxaban, and dabigatran; and to determine whether the associations differ by gender and race. Methods Adult patients with AF diagnosis who initiated warfarin or a DOAC between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2019 were identified using Medicare claims databases. Patients were classified into warfarin, apixaban, dabigatran, or rivaroxaban cohorts based on index prescription. Inverse Probability Treatment Weighting Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess the association between DOAC therapy initiation and risk of stroke/SE and MB, overall and among gender and race. Results Among a total of 1,079,540 included patients, 486,257 (45.04%) were in the apixaban cohort, 46,920 (4.35%) in the dabigatran cohort, 267,991 (24.82%) in the rivaroxaban cohort, and 278,372 (25.79%) in the warfarin cohort. Overall, the risks of stroke/SE and MB were lower for apixaban when compared with warfarin (stroke/SE: HR: 0.69 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.65-0.74], MB: 0.59 [95% CI: 0.57-0.60]), rivaroxaban (stroke/SE: 0.88 [95% CI: 0.84-0.92], MB: 0.60 [95% CI: 0.58-0.61]) and dabigatran(stroke/SE: 0.88 [95% CI: 0.80-0.95], MB: 0.76 [95% CI: 0.72-0.80]). Among 140,587 females, the risk was lower for apixaban as compared with warfarin (stroke/SE: 0.72 [95% CI: 0.67-0.78], MB: 0.60 [95% CI: 0.58-0.62]) and rivaroxaban (stroke/SE: 0.88 [95% CI: 0.83-0.93], MB: 0.59 [95% CI: 0.57-0.61]), but similar risk of stroke/SE was noted for apixaban compared to dabigatran (stroke/SE: 0.98 [95% CI: 0.86-1.11]). Among 137,785 males, the risk of stroke/SE and MB were lower for apixaban compared with warfarin, rivaroxaban, and dabigatran. Among 16,288 Black patients, the risk was lower for apixaban as compared with warfarin (stroke/SE: 0.72 [95% CI: 0.63-0.83] MB: 0.59 [95% CI: 0.54-0.65]), also lower risk of MB was noted for apixaban as compared with rivaroxaban (MB: 0.56 [95% CI: 0.5-0.62]), but a similar risk of stroke/SE was noted compared to rivaroxaban and dabigatran, and similar risk of MB was noted compared to dabigatran. Among 247,642 White patients, the risk of stroke/SE and MB were lower for apixaban compared with warfarin, rivaroxaban, and dabigatran. All the results along with comparisons are displayed in the accompanying figures. Conclusion Apixaban demonstrated lower risk of stroke/SE and major bleeding when compared to warfarin, rivaroxaban, and dabigatran across most race and gender subgroups.Figure 1_Risk of stroke/SEFigure 2_Risk of Major Bleeding

Adherence to the ABC pathway improves prognosis in patients with AF: preliminary findings from an updated meta-analysis of 360,000 patients

Abstract Background With the increasing complexity of patients with Atrial Fibrillation (AF), the ‘Atrial Fibrillation Better Care’ (ABC) pathway was proposed to streamline a holistic approach for the comprehensive management of patients with AF. The ABC pathway is based on three main pillars: ‘A’ Avoid stroke (through optimal anticoagulant use); ‘B’ Better symptom control; and ‘C’ Cardiovascular and Comorbidity management optimization. Such a holistic and integrated approach is currently recommended by international guidelines, including the ones from the European Society of Cardiology (ESC); a previous meta-analysis showed sub-optimal adherence to such approach in real-world cohorts, with an overall reduction in the risk of major outcomes in patients treated according to the ABC pathway. We hereby performed an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the current evidence on the implementation of the ABC pathway in patients with AF. Methods We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis according to PRISMA Guidelines. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for all studies reporting data on the prevalence of ABC pathway adherent management in patients with AF, and/or the association between ABC pathway management and the incidence of major outcomes, including all-cause death, cardiovascular death, thromboembolism, and major bleeding. Data on the prevalence of ABC pathway management were pooled using a generalized linear mixed model; number of events and total number of patients were pooled using a random-effect model. Pooled estimates were reported as odds ratios (OR) and 95% Confidence Intervals (95%CI); heterogeneity was estimated using the restricted maximum-likelihood estimator, and the Inconsistency index (I2) was also reported. Results 4,059 articles were retrieved from the literature search; after duplicates removal, title and abstract screening and full-text evaluation, 16 studies were included, for a total of more than 360,000 patients. Pooled prevalence of adherence to the ABC pathway was 28.5% (95%CI: 21.1-37.3%, I2=100%; Figure 1). Adherence to the ABC pathway was associated with a significant lower risk of all-cause death (pooled OR: 0.47, 95%CI: 0.40-0.56, I2=97%), cardiovascular death (pooled OR: 0.43, 95%CI: 0.33-0.56, I2=95%) and stroke (pooled OR: 0.61, 95%CI: 0.47-0.79, I2=91%; Figure 1). Patients treated adherent to the ABC pathway also showed a lower risk of major bleeding (pooled OR: 0.77, 95%CI: 0.66-0.90, I2=85%). Conclusions In this updated systematic review and meta-analysis, adherence to the ABC pathway was found in less than one-third of patients with AF. Implementation of the ABC pathway was associated with lower risk of all major adverse events in patients with AF, including all-cause death, and thromboembolic and bleeding events. These data further reinforce the need for routine implementation of the ABC pathway for the management of AF in clinical practice.Figure 1

Assessment of bleeding events in patients receiving DOACs with or without statins to treat venous thromboembolism: insights from the RIETE registry

ObjectiveTo evaluate the impact of coadministering statins with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) on the risk of major bleeding events in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE).DesignObservational cohort analysis based on a...

Predicting Individual Treatment Effects to Determine Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Stent Implantation.

After coronary stent implantation, prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) increases bleeding risk, requiring personalization of DAPT duration. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a machine learning model to predict optimal DAPT duration after contemporary drug-eluting stent implantation in patients with coronary artery disease. The One-Month DAPT, RESET (Real Safety and Efficacy of 3-Month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Following Endeavor Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent Implantation), and IVUS-XPL (Impact of Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance on Outcomes of Xience Prime Stents in Long Lesion) trials provided a derivation cohort (n=6568). Using the X-learner approach, an individualized DAPT score was developed to determine the therapeutic benefit of abbreviated (1-6 months) versus standard (12-month) DAPT using various predictors. The primary outcome was major bleeding; the secondary outcomes included 1-year major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events and 1-year net adverse clinical events. The risk reduction with abbreviated DAPT (3 months) in the individualized DAPT-determined higher predicted benefit group was validated in the TICO (Ticagrelor Monotherapy After 3 Months in the Patients Treated With New Generation Sirolimus-Eluting Stent for Acute Coronary Syndrome) trial (n=3056), which enrolled patients with acute coronary syndrome treated with ticagrelor. The validation cohort comprised 1527 abbreviated and 1529 standard DAPT cases. Major bleeding occurred in 25 (1.7%) and 45 (3.0%) patients in the abbreviated and standard DAPT groups, respectively. The individualized DAPT score identified 2582 (84.5%) participants who would benefit from abbreviated DAPT, which was significantly associated with a lower major bleeding risk (absolute risk difference [ARD], 1.26 [95% CI, 0.15-2.36]) and net adverse clinical events (ARD, 1.59 [95% CI, 0.07-3.10]) but not major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (ARD, 0.63 [95% CI, -0.34 to 1.61]), compared with standard DAPT in the higher predicted benefit group. Abbreviated DAPT had no significant difference in clinical outcomes of major bleeding (ARD, 1.49 [95% CI, -1.74 to 4.72]), net adverse clinical events (ARD, 2.57 [95% CI, -1.85 to 6.99]), or major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (ARD, 1.54 [95% CI, -1.26 to 4.34]), compared with standard DAPT in the individualized DAPT-determined lower predicted benefit group. Machine learning using the X-learner approach identifies patients with acute coronary syndrome who may benefit from abbreviated DAPT after drug-eluting stent implantation, laying the groundwork for personalized antiplatelet therapy.

Risk of Major Bleeding, Stroke/Systemic Embolism, and Death Associated With Different Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Severe Chronic Kidney Disease.

Patients with atrial fibrillation and severe chronic kidney disease have higher risks of bleeding, thromboembolism, and mortality. However, optimal anticoagulant choice in these high-risk patients remains unclear. Using deidentified electronic health records from the Optum Labs Data Warehouse, adults with atrial fibrillation and severe chronic kidney disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/min per 1.73 m2) initiating warfarin, apixaban, or rivaroxaban between 2011 and 2021 were included. Using inverse probability of treatment weighting, adjusted risks of major bleeding, stroke/systemic embolism, and death were compared among agents. A total of 6794 patients were included (mean age, 78.5 years; mean estimated glomerular filtration rate, 24.7 mL/min per 1.73 m2; 51% women). Apixaban versus warfarin was associated with a lower risk of major bleeding (incidence rate, 1.5 versus 2.9 per 100 person-years; subdistribution hazard ratio [sub-HR], 0.53 [95% CI, 0.39-0.70]), and similar risks for stroke/systemic embolism (incidence rate, 1.9 versus 2.4 per 100 person-years; sub-HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.59-1.09]) and death (incidence rate, 4.6 versus 4.5 per 100 person-years; HR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.82-1.29]). Rivaroxaban versus warfarin was associated with a higher risk of major bleeding (incidence rate, 4.9 versus 2.9 per 100 person-years; sub-HR, 1.65 [95% CI, 1.10-2.48]), with no difference in risks for stroke/systemic embolism and death. Apixaban versus rivaroxaban was associated with a lower risk of major bleeding (sub-HR, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.36-0.78]). These real-world findings are consistent with potential safety advantages of apixaban over warfarin and rivaroxaban for patients with atrial fibrillation and severe chronic kidney disease. Further randomized trials comparing individual oral anticoagulants are warranted.

Sex differences and long-term clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A SWEDEHEART study

Previous studies on the impact of sex differences after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) have shown conflicting results. The aim was to analyze the risk of long-term mortality, heart failure hospitalization, myocardial infarction, stroke, bleeding and aortic valve reintervention in females versus males after TAVR. This nationwide, population-based cohort study included all patients who underwent TAVR in Sweden between 2008 and 2022 from the SWEDEHEART register. Additional baseline and outcome data were gathered from other national health data registers. Regression standardization was used to adjust for differences between the sexes. Of 10,475 patients, 4,886 (47%) were female and 5,589 (53%) were male. The mean age was 81 years. The cumulative incidence of mortality at 1, 5, and 10 years was 8% vs. 10%, 38% vs. 45%, and 75% vs. 82% for females and males, respectively. After regression standardization, the risk of all-cause mortality was lower for females (absolute difference at 10 years of 6.4%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.4%-8.4%). The mean follow up was 3.1 years (maximum 14.1 years). Females also had a lower risk of major bleeding than males (absolute survival difference at 10 years of 4.0%, 95% CI 1.9%-6.2%), but there was no difference in the risk of heart failure, myocardial infarction, stroke, or reintervention between the sexes. Females had a higher survival rate and a lower bleeding risk than males after TAVR. Sex-specific factors are important to consider in the management of patients after TAVR.

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.

Informing the United States Medicare Drug Price Negotiation for Apixaban and Rivaroxaban: Methodological Considerations for Value Assessments Many Years After Launch

ObjectivesTo demonstrate how health technology assessment methods can be used to support Medicare’s price negotiations for apixaban and rivaroxaban. MethodsFollowing the statutory outline of evidence that will be considered by Medicare, we conducted a systematic literature review, network meta-analyses, and decision analyses to evaluate the health outcomes and costs associated with apixaban and rivaroxaban compared with warfarin and dabigatran for patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Our methods inform discussions about the therapeutic impact of apixaban and rivaroxaban and suggest price premiums above their therapeutic alternatives over a range of cost-effectiveness thresholds. ResultsNetwork meta-analyses found apixaban resulted in a lower risk of major bleeding compared with warfarin and dabigatran and a lower risk of stroke/systemic embolism compared with warfarin but not compared with dabigatran. Rivaroxaban resulted in a lower risk of stroke/systemic embolism versus warfarin but not dabigatran, and there was no difference in major bleeding. Decision-analytic modeling of apixaban suggested annual price premiums up to $4350 above the price of warfarin and up to $530 above the price for dabigatran at cost-effectiveness thresholds up to $200 000 per equal value of life-years gained. Analyses of rivaroxaban showed an annual price premium of up to $3920 above warfarin and no premium above that paid for dabigatran. ConclusionsAlthough health technology assessment is typically performed near the time of regulatory approval, with modifications, we produced comparative clinical and relative cost-effectiveness findings to help guide negotiations on a “fair” price for drugs on the market for over a decade.

Evaluating the safety and effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulants compared with warfarin in very elderly patients with atrial fibrillation with and without low bodyweight

BackgroundLimited data exist on the safety and effectiveness of using direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with atrial fibrillation aged 80 years or more with and without low bodyweight (LBW). ObjectivesWe aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of using DOACs in this population compared with warfarin. MethodsThis retrospective active comparator new-user cohort study included veteran patients with atrial fibrillation who were newly initiated on either warfarin or DOACs between January 1, 2015, and January 1, 2021. The primary outcome was incidence of major bleeding and ischemic stroke. All outcomes were compared between treatment groups in 2 propensity score–matched cohorts of patients aged 80 years older with (AW) and without LBW (age-only cohort). Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs). ResultsMatched AW and age-only cohorts included 493 and 11 909 patients, respectively, in each of the DOAC and warfarin exposure groups. Greater than 90% were male, with a mean age of ∼87 years. The rate of major bleeding was lower in the DOAC group compared with warfarin in both the AW (aHR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.46-0.87) and age-only cohorts (aHR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.49-0.77). A significantly lower rate of ischemic stroke occurred in the DOAC group compared with warfarin in the AW cohort (aHR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.45-0.84) and age-only cohort (aHR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.58-0.68). ConclusionDOAC use was associated with lower risk of major bleeding and ischemic stroke compared with warfarin in patients aged 80 years or older with and without LBW.

Procedural Outcomes With Femoral, Radial, Distal Radial, and Ulnar Access for Coronary Angiography: A Network Meta-Analysis.

Radial artery access for coronary angiography or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) reduces the risk of death, bleeding, and vascular complications and is preferred over femoral artery access, leading to a class 1 indication by clinical practice guidelines. However, alternate upper extremity access such as distal radial and ulnar access are not mentioned in the guidelines despite randomized trials. We aimed to evaluate procedural outcomes with femoral, radial, distal radial, and ulnar access sites in patients undergoing coronary angiography or PCI. PubMed, EMBASE, and clinicaltrials.gov databases were searched for randomized clinical trials that compared at least 2 of the 4 access sites in patients undergoing PCI or angiography. Primary outcomes were major bleeding and access site hematoma. Intention-to-treat mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis was performed. From 47 randomized clinical trials that randomized 38 924 patients undergoing coronary angiography or PCI, when compared with femoral access, there was a lower risk of major bleeding with radial access (odds ratio [OR], 0.46 [95% CI, 0.35-0.59]) and lower risk of access site hematoma with radial (OR, 0.34 [95% CI, 0.24-0.48]), distal radial (OR, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.20-0.56]), and ulnar (OR, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.31-0.83]) access. However, when compared with radial access, there was higher risk of hematoma with ulnar access (OR, 1.48 [95% CI, 1.03-2.14]). Data from randomized trials support guideline recommendation of class 1 for the preference of radial access over femoral access in patients undergoing coronary angiography or PCI. Moreover, distal radial and ulnar access can be considered as a default secondary access site before considering femoral access. URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/; Unique identifier: 42024512365.

Mechanical or biological prosthesis for aortic valve replacement in patients aged 45 to 74 years

ObjectiveThe selection of valve prostheses for patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement remains controversial. In this study, we compared the long-term outcomes of patients undergoing aortic valve replacement with biological or mechanical aortic valve prostheses. MethodsWe evaluated late results among 5762 patients aged 45 to 74 years who underwent biological or mechanical aortic valve replacement with or without concomitant coronary artery bypass from 1989 to 2019 at 4 medical centers. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to compare late survival; the age-dependent effect of prosthesis type on long-term survival was evaluated by an interaction term between age and prosthesis type. Incidences of stroke, major bleeding, and reoperation on the aortic valve after the index procedure were compared between prosthesis groups. ResultsOverall, 61% (n = 3508) of patients received a bioprosthesis. The 30-day mortality rate was 1.7% (n = 58) in the bioprosthesis group and 1.5% (n = 34) in the mechanical group (P = .75). During a mean follow-up of 9.0 years, the adjusted risk of mortality was higher in the bioprosthesis group (hazard ratio, 1.30, P < .001). The long-term survival benefit associated with mechanical prosthesis persisted until 70 years of age. Bioprosthesis (vs mechanical prosthesis) was associated with a similar risk of stroke (P = .20), lower risk of major bleeding (P < .001), and higher risk of reoperation (P < .001). ConclusionsCompared with bioprostheses, mechanical aortic valves are associated with a lower adjusted risk of long-term mortality in patients aged 70 years or less. Patients aged less than 70 years undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement should be informed of the potential survival benefit of mechanical valve substitutes.

Comparative effectiveness and safety of apixaban and rivaroxaban in older patients with atrial fibrillation: A population-based cohort study

BackgroundThere are no clinical trials with a head-to-head comparison between the 2 most commonly used oral anticoagulants (apixaban and rivaroxaban) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). The comparative efficacy and safety between these drugs remain unclear, especially in older patients who are at the highest risk for stroke and bleeding. ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to compare the risk of major bleeding and thromboembolic events between apixaban and rivaroxaban in older patients with AF. 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. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding, and the primary efficacy outcome was thromboembolic events. Secondary outcomes included any bleeding. Rates and hazard ratios (HRs) were adjusted for baseline comorbidities with inverse probability of treatment weighting. ResultsThis study included 42,617 patients with AF treated with apixaban and 30,725 patients treated with rivaroxaban. After inverse probability of treatment weighting using the propensity score, patients in the apixaban and rivaroxaban groups were well balanced for baseline values of demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and medications; both groups had a similar mean age of 77.4 years, and 49.9% were female. At 1 year, the apixaban group had a lower risk for both major bleeding with an absolute risk reduction at 1 year of 1.1% (2.1% vs 3.2%; HR 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59–0.71]) and any bleeding (8.1% vs 10.9%; HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.69–0.77), with no difference in the risk for thromboembolic events (2.2% vs 2.2%; HR 1.02; 95% CI 0.92–1.13). ConclusionIn patients with AF, 66 years or older, treatment with apixaban was associated with lower risk for major bleeding, with no difference in the risk for thromboembolic events compared with rivaroxaban.

Pleiotropic Effects of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Chronic Heart Failure and Atrial Fibrillation: Machine Learning Analysis.

Oral anticoagulant therapy (OAT) for managing atrial fibrillation (AF) encompasses vitamin K antagonists (VKAs, such as warfarin), which was the mainstay of anticoagulation therapy before 2010, and direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs, namely dabigatran etexilate, rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban), approved for the prevention of AF stroke over the last thirteen years. Due to the lower risk of major bleeding associated with DOACs, anticoagulant switching is a common practice in AF patients. Nevertheless, there are issues related to OAT switching that still need to be fully understood, especially for patients in whom AF and heart failure (HF) coexist. Herein, the effective impact of the therapeutic switching from warfarin to DOACs in HF patients with AF, in terms of cardiac remodeling, clinical status, endothelial function and inflammatory biomarkers, was assessed by a machine learning (ML) analysis of a clinical database, which ultimately shed light on the real positive and pleiotropic effects mediated by DOACs in addition to their anticoagulant activity.

Safety and efficacy of low-molecular-weight heparin in patients with acute venous thromboembolism postthrombolytic therapy as compared to unfractionated heparin: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is a proven treatment for patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) with a lower risk of VTE recurrence and lower rates of major hemorrhage compared to unfractionated heparin (UFH) and have largely replaced its use in many indications, but its use around thrombolysis remains controversial. AIM: This study aims to evaluate the currently available evidence on LMWH use in postthrombolysis as compared to UFH. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Embase and MEDLINE were searched between 1992 and 2022, in addition to other sources. We included experimental and observational studies that assessed the use of LMWH as compared to UFH in patients with massive and submissive pulmonary embolism (PE) in the acute postthrombolysis phase. Data were pooled to estimate odds ratios (ORs), with 95% confidence intervals for VTE recurrence, bleeding complications and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: Three studies were included in this systematic review: one randomized controlled trial, one prospective, and one retrospective study. A total of 299 patients were treated with UFH, and 227 patients were treated with LMWH. Patients treated with LMWH had a statistically significant lower risk of major bleeding with OR 0.41 (0.17, 0.97) P = 0.04 and 30-day mortality with OR 0.44 (0.23, 0.85) P = 0.01. On the other hand, though the risk of VTE recurrence and clinically relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB) were lower, this was not statistically significant with OR of 0.18 (0.03, 1.07) P = 0.06 for VTE recurrence, and OR of 0.75 (0.39, 1.42) P = 0.38 for CRNMB. CONCLUSION: In patients with massive and submissive PE postthrombolysis, LMWH is a reasonable option for anticoagulation with lower risk of VTE recurrence, bleeding complications and 30-day mortality when compared to UFH. However, this conclusion is largely influenced by observational data and the very limited evidence available. Certainly, more studies are needed to evaluate this clinical question.

#430 Risk factors for major bleeding in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and CKD G3-G5D on oral anticoagulants

Abstract Background and Aims We previously published a register-based cohort study comparing direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) and warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) GFR category 3-5 (G3-G5) including patients on dialysis (G5D) (1). This study showed that DOAC was associated with lower risk of major bleeding but similar risk of ischemic stroke compared to warfarin. Bleedings were however more common than strokes, especially in advanced CKD (G5-G5D) where the risk of major bleeding was up to 10 times higher than the risk of stroke. Subsequently, the stroke- and bleeding risk in patients with AF and advanced CKD must be carefully evaluated when deciding on whether to prescribe oral anticoagulants (OAC) or not. Available stroke- and bleeding scoring systems do not perform well in CKD (2, 3). This study aims to present risk factors associated with major bleeding in a Swedish cohort of OAC-treated patients with CKD G3-G5D. Method Data was collected from high quality Swedish healthcare registers including Swedish Renal Registry and Auricula, a register for atrial fibrillation and oral anticoagulants and the National Patient Register. Patients with eGFR&amp;lt;60 ml/min/1.73m2 and non-valvular atrial fibrillation and either DOAC (apixaban, rivaroxaban, edoxaban and dabigatran) or warfarin treatment between 2009-2018 where included. DOAC treatment periods were collected from the Swedish Prescribed Drug Register (PDR), starting from dispense date covering assumed standard pill use and an additional 30 days grace period. Warfarin treatment periods were collected directly from Auricula. An undefined treatment was a period of no OAC or a period of warfarin from PDR not matching a treatment period in Auricula. All periods of OAC treatment with either DOAC or warfarin were evaluated in a multivariate Cox regression model regarding the risk of major bleeding requiring inpatient care. Time-dependent covariates adjusted for in the model were age, sex, years from study start, GFR category, congestive heart failure, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, excessive alcohol use, liver disease, vascular disease, previous gastrointestinal bleeding, intracranial bleeding, other bleeding, ischemic stroke/ transient ischemic attack (TIA), myocardial infarction, PCI and exposures (DOAC, warfarin and periods of undefined treatment). Results Of 2453 included patients, 59% had warfarin (time in therapeutic range, TTR, 67%) and 41% DOAC at inclusion, predominantly apixaban (81% of DOAC users). The mean age was 77 years, 28.3% had G3, 45.4% G4, 9.1% G5 and 17.3% G5D (Table 1). Mean follow up was 2.2 years. During follow up 424 major bleedings occurred yielding 8.9 (95% confidence interval 8.1-9.8) bleedings per 100 patient-years. Table 2 shows effect estimates of each covariate on the outcome major bleeding. Covariates, besides warfarin, associated with increased risk of major bleeding were GFR category, G5/5D versus G3, hazard ratio 1.92 (95% CI 1.43-2.56), previous GI bleeding, 1.77 (1.39-2.25) and previous other bleeding 1.33 (1.09-1.62). Other factors associated with major bleeding were congestive heart failure 1.36 (1.11-1.68), male sex 1.28 (1.03-1.60) and vascular disease, 1.35 (1.01-1.79). Conclusion Patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and CKD G3-G5D on OAC are at high risk of major bleeding. Previous major bleeding and kidney failure are strongly associated with major bleeding, this reiterates the results of many previous studies. The present study also shows an association between OAC-associated major bleeding in CKD and male sex, congestive heart failure and vascular disease. Similar associations have been showed in non-CKD cohorts previously but is inadequately studied in CKD. Knowledge about risk factors for major bleeding on OAC in advanced CKD is essential when deciding on when to anticoagulate or not.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in low-risk tricuspid or bicuspid aortic stenosis: the NOTION-2 trial.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become the first choice to treat older patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS). This study aimed to compare TAVI with surgery in low-risk patients ≤75 years of age, including both tricuspid and bicuspid AS. The Nordic Aortic Valve Intervention (NOTION)-2 trial enrolled and 1:1 randomized low-risk patients aged ≤75 years with severe symptomatic AS to TAVI or surgery. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality, stroke, or rehospitalization (related to the procedure, valve, or heart failure) at 12 months. A total of 370 patients were enrolled with a mean age of 71.1 years and a median Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score of 1.1%. A total of 100 patients had bicuspid AS. The 1-year incidence of the primary endpoint was 10.2% in the TAVI group and 7.1% in the surgery group [absolute risk difference 3.1%; 95% confidence interval (CI), -2.7% to 8.8%; hazard ratio (HR) 1.4; 95% CI, 0.7-2.9; P = .3]. Patients with TAVI, when compared to surgery, had lower risk of major bleeding and new-onset atrial fibrillation and higher risk of non-disabling stroke, permanent pacemaker implantation, and moderate or greater paravalvular regurgitation. The risk of the primary composite endpoint was 8.7% and 8.3% in patients with tricuspid AS (HR 1.0; 95% CI, 0.5-2.3) and 14.3% and 3.9% in patients with bicuspid AS (HR 3.8; 95% CI, 0.8-18.5) treated with TAVI or surgery, respectively (P for interaction = .1). Among low-risk patients aged ≤75 years with severe symptomatic AS, the rate of the composite of death, stroke, or rehospitalization at 1 year was similar between TAVI and surgery. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation outcomes in young bicuspid AS patients warrant caution and should be further investigated. (NOTION-2, ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02825134). ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02825134.

In-hospital and readmission outcomes of patients with cancer admitted for pulmonary embolism treated with or without catheter-based therapy

BackgroundCancer patients are at risk of pulmonary embolism (PE). Catheter-based therapies (CBT) are novel reperfusion options for PE though data in patients with cancer is lacking. Study design and methodsPatients with intermediate- or high-risk PE were identified using the National Readmission Database (NRD) from 2017 to 2020. Primary outcome were in-hospital death and 90-day readmission. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital bleeding, 90-day readmission for venous thromboembolism (VTE)-related or right heart failure-related reasons and bleeding. Propensity scores were estimated using logistic regression and inverse-probability treatment weighting (IPTW) was utilized to compare outcomes between CBT and no CBT as well as CBT versus systemic thrombolysis. ResultsA total of 7785 patients were included (2511 with high-risk PE) of whom 1045 (13.4%) were managed with CBT. After IPTW, CBT was associated with lower rates of index hospitalization death (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.83–0.96) and 90-day readmission (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.69–0.81) but higher rates of in-hospital bleeding (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.03–1.20) which was predominantly post-procedural bleeding. CBT was associated with lower risk of major bleeding (20.8% vs 24.8%; OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.68–0.94) compared with systemic thrombolysis. InterpretationAmong patients with cancer with intermediate or high-risk PE, CBT was associated with lower in-hospital death and 90-day readmission. CBT was also associated with decreased risk of index hospitalization major bleeding compared with systemic thrombolysis. Prospective, randomized trials with inclusion of patients with cancer are needed to confirm these findings.