Oral Anticoagulant Treatment In Patients Research Articles

Effect of direct oral anticoagulants on bleeding during and after cataract surgery

PurposeTo assess the risk for intraoperative and postoperative ocular bleeding associated with direct oral anticoagulant treatment in patients undergoing phacoemulsification surgery.MethodsConsecutive patients had phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation while taking uninterrupted direct oral anticoagulants (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or apixaban). Gender and age-matched patients without antithrombotic therapy were used as the control group. Patients were examined one week postoperatively. Intraoperative and postoperative hemorrhagic and non-hemorrhagic complications were assessed.ResultsForty patients (56 eyes) on direct oral anticoagulants and 120 patients (172 eyes) without anticoagulation, at a mean age of 77 years, had phacoemulsification. There was no significant difference between the groups in the rate of intraoperative and postoperative bleeding. One eye (1.8%) in the treatment group and 3 eyes (1.7%) in the control group had hyphema (p = 0.72). No patient had thromboembolic event during or after surgery.ConclusionsCataract surgery was safely performed while continuing direct oral anticoagulation.

Baseline characteristics and outcomes of extended oral anticoagulant treatment in patients with venous thrombosis: a retrospective cohort study in France

Abstract Background Guidelines recommend anticoagulant (AC) extended treatment for patients with unprovoked VTE or VTE provoked by permanent risk factors (ESC 2019, CHEST 2021). A recent observational study has shown that apixaban extended treatment (>6 months) vs no extended treatment in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE), regardless of risk factors, is associated with decreased risk of recurrent VTE (rVTE), with no increase in major bleeding. A better safety profile for patients receiving apixaban vs those receiving vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) was also observed. Purpose To describe characteristics of patients with VTE receiving AC extended treatment (>6months) vs those receiving acute treatment only (<6 months). Outcomes among patients receiving extended treatment with apixaban and VKAs were also reported. Methods The presence of risk factors were assessed in a nationwide retrospective cohort study of AC treatment-naïve adult patients (identified via the French national health data system: SNDS) with VTE, who were prescribed VKAs or apixaban from 2013 to 2018. Descriptive statistics for patients receiving AC extended treatment vs those receiving only acute treatment are presented. Risk of bleeding (based on principal diagnoses of hospital stays), rVTE (based on principal diagnosis of hospital stays and specified procedures), and all-cause mortality were assessed 18 months following the initiation of extended treatment using inverse probability treatment weighted (IPTW) analysis to balance baseline socio-demographic and clinical characteristics. Results 21,215 VTE patients who initiated AC treatment were included: 10,775 VKAs (41.5% acute vs 58.5% extended treatment) and 10,440 apixaban (44.5% acute vs and 55.5% extended treatment). A higher proportion of apixaban and VKA patients with permanent risk factors (apixaban: 57.7%; VKAs: 57.7%) or unprovoked VTE (apixaban: 56.8%; VKAs: 59.7%) received extended treatment vs acute treatment only. Table 1 shows the adverse clinical outcomes assessed during extended treatment in IPTW balanced cohorts. Compared to patients treated with VKAs (n=6151), patients treated with apixaban (n=5682) had lower rates of rVTE (1.89 vs 2.84 per 100 person-years), bleeding (1.11 vs 1.69 per 100 person-years) and all-cause mortality (2.70 vs 6.74 per 100 person-years). Conclusions A slightly higher proportions of patients with permanent VTE risk factors and unprovoked VTE received extended treatment compared to acute treatment. Consistent with guidelines, there persists a need to increase these rates when clinically indicated to improve patient outcomes. Clinical event rates were numerically lower for apixaban compared to VKAs, which suggests clinical benefit for apixaban. However, more robust confirmatory analyses are required.

OC 74.4 Prevalence and Predictors of Non-Adherence to Direct Oral Anticoagulant Treatment in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation, a Historical Cohort Study

OC 74.4 Prevalence and Predictors of Non-Adherence to Direct Oral Anticoagulant Treatment in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation, a Historical Cohort Study

Prevalence and Predictors of Nonadherence to Direct Oral Anticoagulant Treatment in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation.

Background For most patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF), direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are preferred over vitamin K antagonists. However, there is concern that the lack of monitoring may impair therapy adherence and therefore the anticoagulant effect. Objective To assess 1-year DOAC nonadherence in patients with AF and a treatment indication of at least 1 year in the Dutch health care setting, and to identify predictors of nonadherence. Methods We performed a near-nationwide historical cohort study in patients with a novel DOAC indication for AF. Data were obtained from a pharmacy database, covering 65% of all outpatient prescriptions dispensed in the Netherlands. The 1-year nonadherence was assessed by the proportion of days covered; the threshold was set at <80%. Robust Poisson regression analyses were performed to identify predictors of nonadherence. Results A total of 46,211 patients were included and the 1-year nonadherence was 6.5%. We identified male sex (risk ratio [RR] 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.15-1.33), younger age (age ≥60 to <70 years: RR: 1.15, 95% CI: 1.00-1.33, age <60 years: RR: 2.22, 95% CI: 1.92-2.57; reference age ≥85 years), a reduced DOAC dose (RR: 1.10, 95% CI: 1.00-1.22), a twice-daily dosing regimen (RR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.12-1.30), and treatment with apixaban (RR: 1.16, 95% CI: 1.06-1.26, reference rivaroxaban) or dabigatran (RR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.14-1.37) as independent predictors of 1-year nonadherence. Conclusion One-year nonadherence to DOACs was low yet relevant in patients with AF newly prescribed a DOAC. Understanding the predictors for nonadherence may help identify patients at risk.

Oral anticoagulant treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation early after valvular intervention: a nationwide cohort study

Abstract Background Treatment with non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOAC) is the first option for primary prevention of ischaemic stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, there is still an evidence gap regarding efficacy and safety of NOAC in patients with AF and severe valvular heart disease undergoing valvular intervention. Purpose The aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of NOAC or no oral anticoagulant (OAC) treatment versus warfarin during the first 3 months after valvular intervention. Methods We used data from the National Quality Register SWEDEHEART and included all patients with AF discharged after surgical valvular intervention with bioprosthesis or valvuloplasty, or transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) between 2010 and 2016. Outcomes, including the composite of cardiovascular (CV) events (CV death, ischaemic stroke or systemic embolism), major bleeding, and relevant comorbidities and OAC treatment at discharge were collected from the National Patient Register, the Swedish Prescribed Drug Register, and the National Cause of Death Register. The association between exposure (warfarin, NOAC or no OAC) and occurrence of composite CV events and major bleeding was explored using a time-dependent adjusted Cox regression analysis. Results In total, 4730 patients with AF and valvular intervention were included. The cohort had a mean age of 75 years, 35.9% were women and mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 3.3 (Table 1). The proportion of patients treated with warfarin was higher in patients undergoing surgical valve intervention whereas NOAC was more commonly prescribed to patients treated with TAVI. Rates of composite CV events and major bleeding was similar between patients treated with NOAC versus warfarin. No OAC treatment versus warfarin was associated with higher rate of composite CV event, but with no difference with regard to major bleeding (Table 1). Conclusion A large proportion of patients with AF undergoing valvular intervention was not treated with OAC despite having a high CHA2DS2-VASc score. Also, patients on no OAC versus warfarin had a higher risk of i CV events in the early phase after valvular intervention. The efficacy and safety of NOAC was similar compared to warfarin during the first 3 months after intervention. Treatment with OAC in patients with AF, irrespective of NOAC or warfarin, was associated with improved clinical outcome early after valve intervention. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.

Safety of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulant Treatment in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease and Kidney Transplant Recipients

The use of novel oral anticoagulants in patients with impaired renal function or undergoing immunosuppressive therapy is limited due to the risk of drug-to-drug interactions and anticoagulation-related adverse events. This article aims to assess the current data on the safety of direct-acting oral anticoagulant-based therapy in the population of kidney transplant recipients and patients with impaired renal function. The most important factors affecting the safety of treatment are the incidence of bleeding events, thromboembolic events, deaths and drug-to-drug interactions. The available data were compared to the findings on warfarin-based anticoagulation. Findings on the use of novel oral anticoagulants in kidney transplant recipients are limited yet promising in terms of safety and efficacy of use. However, current recommendations state that the co-administration of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants with several immunosuppressive agents is contraindicated.

Persistence and adherence to non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation across five Western European countries

AimsTo assess persistence and adherence to non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in five Western European healthcare settings.Methods and resultsWe conducted a multi-country observational cohort study, including 559 445 AF patients initiating NOAC therapy from Stockholm (Sweden), Denmark, Scotland, Norway, and Germany between 2011 and 2018. Patients were followed from their first prescription until they switched to a vitamin K antagonist, emigrated, died, or the end of follow-up. We measured persistence and adherence over time and defined adequate adherence as medication possession rate ≥90% among persistent patients only.ResultsOverall, persistence declined to 82% after 1 year and to 63% after 5 years. When including restarters of NOAC treatment, 85% of the patients were treated with NOACs after 5 years. The proportion of patients with adequate adherence remained above 80% throughout follow-up. Persistence and adherence were similar between countries and was higher in patients starting treatment in later years. Both first year persistence and adherence were lower with dabigatran (persistence: 77%, adherence: 65%) compared with apixaban (86% and 75%) and rivaroxaban (83% and 75%) and were statistically lower after adjusting for patient characteristics. Adherence and persistence with dabigatran remained lower throughout follow-up.ConclusionPersistence and adherence were high among NOAC users in five Western European healthcare settings and increased in later years. Dabigatran use was associated with slightly lower persistence and adherence compared with apixaban and rivaroxaban.

Oral Anticoagulant Treatment in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Chronic Kidney Disease.

Over the past few decades, a series of innovative medicines have been developed in order to optimize anticoagulation therapy for atrial fibrillation (AF). As a result, a number of nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOAC) that directly target the enzymatic activity of factor II and factor Xa have been successfully licensed providing a more predictable effect and better safety profile compared to conventional anticoagulants (heparins and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs)). However, comparative efficacy and safety data is limited in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (i.e., CKD stage 4/5 and end stage renal disease) because patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 were actively excluded from landmark trials, thus representing a major clinical limitation for the currently available agents. However, the renal function of AF patients can be altered over time. On the other hand, patients with CKD have an increased risk of developing AF. This review article will provide an overview of current concepts and recent evidence guiding the clinical use of NOACs in patients with CKD requiring chronic anticoagulation, and the associated risks and benefits of treatment in this specific patient population.

Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation

Ischemic strokes related to atrial fibrillation are highly prevalent, presenting with severe neurologic syndromes and associated with high risk of recurrence. Although advances have been made in both primary and secondary stroke prevention for patients with atrial fibrillation, the long-term risks for stroke recurrence and bleeding complications from antithrombotic treatment remain substantial. We summarize the major advances in stroke prevention for patients with atrial fibrillation during the past 30 years and focus on novel diagnostic and treatment approaches currently under investigation in ongoing clinical trials. Non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants have been proven to be safer and equally effective compared with warfarin in stroke prevention for patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants are being investigated for the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation and rheumatic heart disease, for the treatment of patients with recent embolic stroke of undetermined source and indirect evidence of cardiac embolism, and in the prevention of vascular-mediated cognitive decline in patients with atrial fibrillation. Multiple clinical trials are assessing the optimal timing of non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant initiation after a recent ischemic stroke and the benefit:harm ratio of non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation and history of previous intracranial bleeding. Ongoing trials are addressing the usefulness of left atrial appendage occlusion in both primary and secondary stroke prevention for patients with atrial fibrillation, including those with high risk of bleeding. The additive value of prolonged cardiac monitoring for subclinical atrial fibrillation detection through smartphone applications or implantable cardiac devices, together with the optimal medical management of individuals with covert paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, is a topic of intensive research interest. Colchicine treatment and factor XIa inhibition constitute 2 novel pharmacologic approaches that might provide future treatment options in the secondary prevention of cardioembolic stroke attributable to atrial fibrillation.

Factors associated with non-prescription of oral anticoagulant treatment in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients with dementia: a CPRD-HES study.

Dementia is a common comorbidity in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and treatment guidelines recommend oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy for AF patients with dementia unless concordance cannot be ensured by the caregiver. Despite this, the literature reports a low prescribing of OAC treatment in these patients. This study investigated possible factors associated with non-prescribing of OAC treatment in dementia patients newly diagnosed with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) at age ≥ 65years between 2013 and 2017 using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink and Hospital Episodes Statistics databases. Of 1090 dementia patients newly diagnosed with NVAF, 693 (63.6%) patients did not have a prescription for an OAC in the year following their diagnosis. The likelihood of experiencing a thromboembolic event was high, with 97% of the population having a CHA2DS2-VASc score > 2; however, little difference in the presence of stroke risk factors was observed between the prescribed and non-prescribed groups. The presence of bleeding risk factors was high; only 28 (2.6%) of patients did not have a previous fall or a HAS-BLED bleeding risk factor. A history of falls [OR = 0.76, 95% confidence intervals (CIs) (0.58, 0.98)], previous major bleed [OR = 0.56, 95% CI (0.43, 0.73)] and care home residence [OR = 0.47, 95% CI (0.30, 0.74)] were associated with not having an OAC prescription. The results suggest that dementia patients with NVAF and certain risk bleeding risk factors are less likely to be prescribed an OAC. Further work is needed to establish possible relationships between bleeding risk factors and other potential drivers of OAC prescribing.

Adherence to oral anticoagulant treatment and risk factor assessment six months after DC-conversion of atrial fibrillation

Objective. We wanted to study the adherence of oral anticoagulant treatment in patients 6 months after elective DC-cardioversion and to observe possible increases in CHA2DS2-VASc scores and new adverse outcomes. Design. Consecutive patients admitted for elective DC-cardioversion at Haukeland University Hospital during the period from June 2017 to April 2018 were screened. Only patients who had a DC-cardioversion performed were included. Baseline information was collected from hospital records and follow up information was gathered through a structured phone interview and the prescription database. Results. Of the 125 patients screened, 38 were excluded as DC-cardioversion was not performed. The included patients were contacted 6 months later, out of whom 77 (84%) responded. Three patients had discontinued oral anticoagulation therapy, but only one patient had done so in violation of Guidelines. Two patients had continued oral anticoagulant treatment despite lack of indication. Of the responding patients 89% were compliant, estimated by a Proportion of Days Covered > 80%. Three patients experienced a thromboembolic event, despite being on anticoagulation. The mean CHA2DS2-VASc score increased from 3.0 ± 1.4 to 3.3 ± 1.5, (p < .001). Less than half maintained sinus rhythm, the remaining had either atrial fibrillation (n = 30, 40%) or were unsure of their current rhythm (n = 9, 12%). A third received new cardiac interventions during follow up. Conclusion. We found an excellent adherence to Guidelines recommended therapy amongst our patients. CHA2DS2-VASc scores increased significantly during the 6-month observation period. From this we conclude there is a need for structured follow up to assess new risk factors.

A retrospective cohort study of oral anticoagulant treatment in patients with acute coronary syndrome and atrial fibrillation

ObjectiveTo examine the real-world patterns of oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and atrial fibrillation (AF) in Southern China undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and...

A survey of opinion: When to start oral anticoagulants in patients with acute ischaemic stroke and atrial fibrillation?

There is uncertainty regarding the optimal timing for initiation of oral anticoagulant treatment in patients with recent ischaemic stroke and atrial fibrillation. We surveyed the current UK practice and assessed clinician's opinions of when to use oral anticoagulant in recent stroke patients with atrial fibrillation. An online survey was sent to stroke physicians within the United Kingdom via their national societies. One hundred and twenty-one clinicians responded to the survey. Ninety-five percent of responders agreed that there was uncertainty regarding timing of oral anticoagulant initiation after atrial fibrillation-related ischaemic stroke. Thirty-six percent of responders followed the '1-3-6-12' European Society of Cardiology guidelines recommendation. Uncertainty was greater in cases of moderate stroke than in cases of transient ischaemic attack (TIA), mild or severe stroke. Eighty-eight percent of responders would be willing to participate in a clinical trial of early versus later initiation of oral anticoagulant after stroke. Direct-acting oral anticoagulants were the preferred oral anticoagulant of choice. There is a lack of consensus amongst stroke physicians for when to initiate oral anticoagulant to prevent recurrence in stroke patients with atrial fibrillation. There is little uncertainty regarding TIA. A clinical trial assessing the use of early versus later initiation of direct-acting oral anticoagulant in patients with recent ischaemic stroke and atrial fibrillation would be beneficial.

Less dementia with oral anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation

The association between atrial fibrillation (AF) and dementia is well documented, but it is not clear if oral anticoagulant treatment offers protection. The aim of the study is therefore to compare the incidence of new dementia in patients with AF with and without oral anticoagulants, and to explore if there is a difference between novel anticoagulants and warfarin in this respect. Retrospective registry study of all patients with hospital diagnosis of AF and no previous diagnosis of dementia in Sweden between 2006 and 2014. Propensity score matching, falsification endpoints, and analyses according to intention to treat as well as on-treatment principles were used. The study included 444 106 patients and over 1.5 million years at risk. Patients on anticoagulant treatment at baseline was associated with 29% lower risk of dementia than patients without anticoagulant treatment [hazard ratio (HR) 0.71, 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) 0.68-0.74] and 48% lower risk analysed on treatment (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.50-055). Direct comparison between new oral anticoagulants and warfarin showed no difference (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.67-1.40). The risk of dementia is higher without oral anticoagulant treatment in patients with AF. This suggests that early initiation of anticoagulant treatment in patients with AF could be of value in order to preserve cognitive function.

Preliminary Results of Restarting Oral Anticoagulant Treatment In Patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation Following Intracranial Hemorrhage: A Population-Based Cohort Study

Preliminary Results of Restarting Oral Anticoagulant Treatment In Patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation Following Intracranial Hemorrhage: A Population-Based Cohort Study

Effects of policy interventions on the introduction of novel oral anticoagulants in Stockholm: an interrupted time series analysis.

The aim of the present study was to assess the effect of policy interventions - i.e. reimbursement decisions, guidelines and regional recommendations - on the prescribing of oral anticoagulant treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Interrupted time series analyses were carried out using monthly data on all patients with a recorded diagnosis of AF newly initiated (switchers and anticoagulant-naïve patients alike) on warfarin, dabigatran, rivaroxaban or apixaban in the Stockholm region from April 2011 until February 2016. A total of 34 165 initiations in 27 942 patients were included. The publication of the European Guidelines was associated with an increase in novel oral anticoagulant (NOAC) initiations of 12.5% [95% confidence interval (CI) 7.3, 17.7] after 5months. The choice between the different NOACs was mainly associated with changes in the regional recommendations, with apixaban initiations increasing by 19.5% (95% CI 16.3, 22.7) 5months after the drug was recommended as a first-line alternative to warfarin. Dabigatran received a second-line recommendation but initiations decreased by -9.5% (95% CI -12.6, -6.4), and initiations of rivaroxaban, which had no specific recommendation, decreased by -9.2% (95% CI -12.7, -5.7). A steady decrease in warfarin and increase in NOAC initiations was seen throughout the study period and from November 2015, AF patients were more likely to receive apixaban than any other anticoagulant, while less than 20% of the initiations were with warfarin. After reimbursement and inclusion in the European guidelines, the NOACs started gaining in popularity, while changes in regional recommendations were associated with the biggest change in prescribers' choice between the different NOACs.

Clinical events preceding switching and discontinuation of oral anticoagulant treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation.

AimsSwitching between oral anticoagulants and treatment discontinuation are common events related to therapy with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs). However, knowledge on the reasons leading to these treatment changes is scarce. The aim of this study was to identify clinical events preceding anticoagulant switching and NOAC discontinuation during oral anticoagulant therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation.Methods and resultsWe performed a nationwide register-based study including Danish atrial fibrillation patients initiating a NOAC between August 2011 and February 2016 (n = 50 623). We explored potential reasons leading to changes in anticoagulant treatment by identifying clinical events preceding switches from vitamin K antagonists (VKA) to NOAC, switches from NOAC to VKA, and discontinuations of NOACs. Among 23 531 anticoagulant users changing treatment, we identified 13 295 switches from VKA to NOAC, 5206 switches from NOAC to VKA, and 8995 discontinuations of NOACs. Approximately half of all treatment changes were preceded by a hospitalization. A relevant specific clinical event or procedure was identified prior to 18.3% of switches from VKA to NOAC, prior to 23.0% of switches from NOAC to VKA, and prior to 26.6% of discontinuations. Switches from VKA to NOAC were most often preceded by thromboembolic events (7.0%), whereas cardioversion was the most common specific event prior to a switch from NOAC to VKA (11.4%). Discontinuations were most often preceded by bleeding events (7.6%).ConclusionFor about one in five patients, treatment changes during anticoagulant therapy were preceded by a major clinical event. However, the majority of patients changed treatment for reasons not recorded in health registries.

Status of oral anticoagulant treatment in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation in Spain. REACT-AF study

Background and objectivesOral anticoagulant therapy is complex due to the need for control and the hemorrhagic risk the therapy entails. This study aims to determine the standard clinical practice in the treatment for preventing stroke in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) in Spain. Patients and methodThe Real Evidence of Anti Coagulation Treatment in AF is a European, multicenter, multinational, observational, retrospectively monitored cohort of patients with NVAF. This study included patients recruited in Spain with at least one visit during the period of inclusion (May 2010/April 2012). The study evaluated the following: (a) persistence of oral anticoagulant treatment (time to discontinuation); (b) persistence rate (% of patients in treatment) at 6, 12 and 24 months and at 5 years; (c) therapeutic compliance (medication possession ratio); (d) the correlation between the treatment followed and that recommended by the European Society of Cardiology; and the incidence of stroke and hemorrhagic events. ResultsThe patients treated with oral anticoagulants (n=7526) had a median time to discontinuation of treatment of 1.99 years and a persistence rate at 5 years of 26% (discontinuation ≥3 months). The compliance (mean MPR) was 0.54±0.36. The incidence of stroke was 0.3/100 person-years, and the incidence of hemorrhagic events was 2.4/100 person-years. Fifty-eight percent of the patients with NVAF (n=12,514) followed the recommendations of the European Society of Cardiology. ConclusionForty-two percent of the patients with NVAF did not follow the recommendations of the European Society of Cardiology. We detected low persistence and treatment compliance rates for oral anticoagulants.

Personalizing oral anticoagulant treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation

For decades, warfarin has remained the standard oral anticoagulation for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF). Three novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have been recently approved for stroke prevention in non-valvular AF: dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban. Better pharmacological and clinical profiles make these newcomers a preferable alternative over warfarin. Current AF guidelines do not endorse NOACs over warfarin, or one NOAC over another. Indeed, choice of the anticoagulation regimen should be personalized based on the relative efficacy and safety of different agents across subgroups stratified by thrombotic and bleeding risk, as well as on other clinical factors, including anticoagulation control on warfarin, drug interactions, compliance and need for coagulation monitoring. This review appraises i) the randomized evidence on approved NOACs versus warfarin in AF across subgroups stratified by risk factors of stroke and bleeding and by the anticoagulation level reached on warfarin; and ii) clinical factors impacting on the anticoagulation regimen selection.

Oral Anticoagulant Therapy in Patients Receiving Haemodialysis: Is It Time to Abandon It?

Oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy in haemodialysis patients causes a great deal of controversy. This is because a number of pro- and anticoagulant factors play an important role in end-stage renal failure due to the nature of the disease itself. In these conditions, the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of the OACs used change as well. In the case of the treatment of venous thromboembolism, the only remaining option is OAC treatment according to regimens used for the general population. Prevention of HD vascular access thrombosis with the use of OACs is not very effective and can be dangerous. However, OAC treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation in dialysis population may be associated with an increase in the incidence of stroke and mortality. Doubts should be dispelled by prospective, randomised studies; at the moment, there is no justification for routine use of OACs in the above-mentioned indications. In selected cases of OAC therapy in this group of patients, it is absolutely necessary to control and monitor the applied treatment thoroughly. Indications for the use of OACs in patients with end-stage renal disease, including haemodialysis patients, should be currently limited.