Vitamin K Antagonists In Atrial Fibrillation Patients Research Articles

Factor Xa Inhibitors Versus Vitamin K Antagonists in Atrial Fibrillation Patients with End-Stage Kidney Disease on Dialysis: A Meta-Analysis.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is prevalent among patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) undergoing dialysis, and both conditions are associated with a heightened risk of cardiovascular diseases. Anticoagulation is essential for preventing thromboembolic complications in these patients. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of factor Xa inhibitors compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for AF patients on dialysis. A comprehensive search of PubMed and Embase databases was conducted to identify relevant studies published up to June 2024. Eligible studies compared factor Xa inhibitors (rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban) with VKAs in AF patients on dialysis, with primary outcomes of stroke or systemic embolism(SSE) and major bleeding. A total of 7 studies (3 randomized controlled trials and 4 observational cohorts) were included. For the RCTs, the use of factor Xa inhibitors was associated with a reduced risk of SSE compared to VKAs (odds ratio [OR] = 0.37, 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.15-0.93). There was no significant difference in the risk of major bleeding events between the two groups (OR = 0.65, 95%CI:0.32-1.33). Observational cohort studies yielded similar results with a decreased risk of SSE (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.74, 95%CI:0.57-0.96) and no significant difference in major bleeding (HR = 0.87, 95%CI:0.62-1.22). No differences in treatment effect between apixaban and rivaroxaban were observed for efficacy (p-interaction = 0.44) and safety (p-interaction = 0.21) outcomes. Factor Xa inhibitors, particularly apixaban and rivaroxaban, were associated with a lower risk of SEE without an increase in major bleeding, which might be convenient alternatives to VKAs in managing AF in patients with ESKD on dialysis.

Post-TAVR patients with atrial fibrillation: are NOACs better than VKAs?-A meta-analysis.

This study aimed to compare the efficacy of novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) with traditional anticoagulants vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) post transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Studies comparing the usage of NOACs and VKAs in AF patients with oral anticoagulant indication post-TAVR were retrieved from PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, and Cochrane databases from their building-up to Jan. 2023. The literature was screened in line of inclusion and exclusion criteria. Risk ratio (RR) or odds ratio (OR),95% confidence interval (CI) and number needed to treat (NNT) were calculated for four main indexes that composite endpoints composed mainly of any clinically relevant risk events, stroke, major bleeding, and all-cause mortality. Subsequently, a meta-analysis was performed using the RevMan5.3 and Stata 16.0 software. In the aggregate of thirteen studies, contained 30388 post-TAVR patients with AF, were included in this meta-analysis. Our results indicated that there was no significant difference in stroke between the NOACs group and the VKAs group, and the NOACs group had a numerically but non-significantly higher number of composite endpoint events compared with the other group. Nevertheless, the incidence of major bleeding [11.29% vs. 13.89%, RR 0.82, 95%CI (0.77,0.88), P < 0.00001, I² = 69%, NNT = 38] and all-cause mortality [14.18% vs. 17.61%, RR 0.83, 95%CI (0.79,0.88), p < 0.00001, I² = 82%, NNT = 29] were significantly lower in the NOACs group than another group. Taken together, our data indicated that the usage of NOACs reduced the incidence of major bleeding and all-cause mortality compared to VKAs in post-TAVR patients with AF.

Novel oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonists in transcatheter aortic valve replacement treated patients-Patients' vulnerability still matters.

Key points Current meta‐analysis suggests that outcomes with novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) do not significantly differ compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), in particular, NOACs failed to demonstrate a better safety profile than VKAs in this clinical setting.Accordingly, the choice between NOACs and VKAs in AF patients after TAVR is left to clinical judgment.Future large‐scale clinical trials are warranted to establish a clinically superior anticoagulant regime in this clinical setting, based on risk profile and need for concomitant antiplatelet therapy.

Novel oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonists in patients with atrial fibrillation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

The efficacy and safety of novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) compared to the current guideline-recommended vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has not been well established. We pooled evidence from all available studies to assess the risks and benefits of this drug class. We queried electronic databases (MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane central) up until January 28th, 2022 for studies comparing NOACs to VKAs in AF patients undergoing TAVR. Results from studies were presented as risk ratios (RR) and pooled using a random-effects model. Subgroup analysis by study design and meta-regression analysis were performed to explore heterogeneity. A total of 12 studies (3 RCTs and 9 observational) containing 12,203 patients (mean age 81.2 years; 50.5% men) were identified and included in the analysis. Pooled analysis revealed no significant difference between NOACs and VKAs in terms of stroke or systemic embolism (RR: 0.78; p = 0.18), major bleeding (RR: 0.84; p = 0.32), intracranial hemorrhage (RR 0.61; p = 0.06), all-cause mortality (RR: 0.69; p = 0.07), and myocardial infarction (RR: 1.60; p = 0.24) at a mean length of follow-up of 15.1 months. RCTs and observational studies did not significantly differ across outcomes on subgroup analysis. Meta-regression analysis found heterogeneity in all-cause mortality to be significantly explained by percentage of males (coefficient: 0.049, p = 0.007), mean age (coefficient: 0.221, p < 0.001), and CHA2DS2-VASc score (coefficient: -1.657, p < 0.001). This meta-analysis suggests that outcomes with NOACs do not significantly differ compared to VKAs following TAVR in patients with AF.

Efficacy and Safety of NOACs Compared With VKAs for Patients With Atrial Fibrillation After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: A System Review and Meta-Analysis.

Novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are preferentially recommended in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) for stroke prevention over vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). However, the evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of NOACs versus VKAs after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in patients with AF is very rare. Pubmed, Embase, Web of science, and Cochrane Databases were searched for eligible studies published before May 19, 2022. A total of 11 studies were included in this meta-analysis involving 27 107 patients. Regarding primary outcomes, there were no differences between NOACs and VKAs in all-cause mortality (RR: 0.84, 95% CI: (0.69, 1.02)) and stroke (RR: 1.00, 95% CI: (0.85, 1.19)). With respect to secondary outcomes, NOACs were associated with reduced incidence of bleeding (RR: 0.77, 95% CI: (0.71, 0.83)) and intracranial bleeding (RR: 0.57, 95% CI: (0.39, 0.83)), whereas no significant differences were found in major or life-threatening bleeding (RR: 0.98, 95% CI: (0.82, 1.17)) and myocardial infarction (RR: 1.37, 95% CI: (0.83, 2.26)). Our meta-analysis revealed the safety and efficacy of NOACs may be superior to VKAs in AF patients undergoing TAVI.

Abstract 9845: Novel Oral Anticoagulants versus Vitamin K Antagonists in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: The efficacy and safety of novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) compared to the current guideline-recommended vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has not been well established. We pooled evidence from all available studies to assess the risks and benefits of this drug class. Methods: We queried electronic databases (MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane central) up until 15 th May 2021 for studies comparing NOACs to VKAs in AF patients undergoing TAVR. Results from studies were presented as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and pooled using a random-effects model. Subgroup analysis by study design and meta-regression analysis were performed to explore heterogeneity. Results: A total of 12 studies (4 RCTs and 8 retrospective observational) containing 13,815 patients (mean age 81.1 years; 50.1% men) were identified and included in the analysis. Pooled analysis revealed no significant difference between NOACs and VKAs in terms of stroke or systemic embolism (RR 0.83; p=0.34), major bleeding (RR 0.84; p=0.30), intracranial hemorrhage (RR 0.72; p=0.60), all-cause mortality (RR 0.71; p=0.15), and myocardial infarction (RR 1.34; p=0.32) at a mean length of follow-up of 15.1 months. RCTs and observational studies did not significantly differ across outcomes on subgroup analysis. Meta-regression analysis found heterogeneity in all-cause mortality to be significantly explained by percentage of males (coefficient: 0.049, p=0.007), mean age (coefficient: 0.221, p&lt;0.001), and CHA2DS2-VASc score (coefficient: -1.657, p&lt;0.001). Conclusions: This meta-analysis suggests that outcomes with NOACs do not significantly differ compared to VKAs following TAVR in patients with AF. Future RCTs may help provide a clearer answer.

Abstract 9866: Novel Oral Anticoagulants versus Vitamin K Antagonists in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Concomitant Valvular Heart Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Currently, vitamin-K antagonists (VKAs) are the anticoagulant of choice for treating atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with valvular heart disease (VHD). Novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) suggest better outcomes and could be a potential replacement for some patients. We aimed to conduct an updated systematic review and meta-analysis to resolve this matter. Methods: We queried MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane central up until May 29, 2021 for studies comparing NOACs to VKAs in AF patients with VHD. Results from studies were presented as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and pooled using a random-effects model. Subgroup analysis by study design was performed to explore heterogeneity. Results: A total of 10 studies (4 RCTs and 6 retrospective observational) containing 196,124 patients (mean age 75.3 years; 54.0% men) were identified and included in the analysis. All 10 studies excluded patients with artificial valves while all 4 RCTS excluded moderate-to-severe mitral stenosis. Pooled analysis revealed significant risk reduction by NOACS of stroke or systemic embolism (RR 0.58 [95% CI 0.46, 0.74]; p&lt;0.001, I 2 =91%), major bleeding (RR 0.60 [95% CI 0.43, 0.83]; p=0.002, I 2 =97%), intracranial hemorrhage (RR 0.40 [95% CI 0.28, 0.57]; p&lt;0.001, I 2 =78%), all-cause mortality (RR 0.67 [95% CI 0.47, 0.96]; p=0.03, I 2 =97%) , myocardial infarction (RR 0.65 [95% CI 0.51, 0.84]; p=0.001, I 2 =0%), and major adverse cardiovascular events (RR 0.89 [95% CI 0.80, 0.99]; p=0.03, I 2 =0%). A significant difference was found upon subgroup analysis between RCTs and observational studies for all-cause mortality (p-value for interaction=0.005) Conclusions: NOACs were found to significantly reduce risk of all studied outcomes in patients with AF and VHD. Future RCTs are required to further validate these results.

Abstract 9868: Novel Oral Anticoagulants versus Vitamin K Antagonists in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Bioprosthetic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) such as warfarin are traditionally prescribed in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and bioprosthetic valves (BPVs) to prevent thromboembolic events. However, various studies have proposed novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) as an effective and safer option to use. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare their relative efficacy and safety profiles. Methods: Pubmed, Cochrane Central, and Embase were searched up until May 15, 2021 for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies determining efficacy and safety of NOACs or VKAs in AF patients who had undergone BPV replacement. Outcomes of interest were: stroke or systemic embolism (SSE), major bleeding, all-cause mortality, and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). Subgroup analysis by study design (RCT and observational) was performed. Summary estimates were reported as random effects risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: A total of 12 studies (4 RCTs and 8 observational) with 6436 patients (mean age 72.1 years; 51.4% males) were included in the analysis. In comparison to VKAs, NOACs demonstrated a significant reduction in ICH (RR 0.41 [95% CI 0.25,0.67]; p=0.0003; I 2 = 0%) and major bleeding (RR 0.63 [95% CI 0.53,0.74]; p&lt;0.00001; I 2 = 0%) at a mean duration follow up of 23.8 months. However, no difference was observed in risk of SSE (RR 0.77 [95% CI 0.50,1.19]; p=0.23; I 2 = 53%) and all-cause mortality (RR 0.98 [95% CI 0.78,1.22]; p=0.84; I 2 = 15%). Observational studies and RCTs did not significantly differ across all outcomes in the subgroup analysis. Conclusions: This meta-analysis suggests that NOACs are effective at reducing risk of ICH and major bleeding in AF patients with BPVs in contrast to VKAs. Future large-scale RCTs can aid in corroborating the legitimacy of these results.

Non-vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants (NOACs) Versus Warfarin in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation Using P-gp and/or CYP450-Interacting Drugs: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are excreted by P-glycoprotein (P-gp) and some are metabolized by CYP450 enzymes such as CYP3A4. Although fewer drug interactions are present with NOACs, it is unclear whether NOACs should also be preferred over vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) using pharmacokinetically interacting drugs. Therefore, the benefit-risk profile of NOACs versus VKAs was investigated in AF patients treated with P-gp and/or CYP450-interacting drugs. Using PubMed and Embase, randomized controlled trials and observational studies on the effectiveness and safety of NOACs versus VKAs in AF patients using P-gp and/or CYP450-interacting drugs were included. A meta-analysis was performed, calculating relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) with the Mantel-Haenszel method. Twelve studies were included, investigating 10,793 NOAC and 10,096 VKA users treated with P-gp/CYP3A4 inhibitors, whereas no studies on P-gp and/or CYP450-inducing drugs were identified. Compared to VKAs, NOACs were associated with a borderline non-significantly lower stroke or systemic embolism (stroke/SE) risk (RR 0.85, 95%CI (0.72-1.01)), significantly lower intracranial bleeding (RR 0.47, 95%CI (0.34-0.65)) and all-cause mortality risks (RR 0.87, 95%CI (0.79-0.95), but significantly higher gastrointestinal bleeding risk (RR 1.74, 95%CI (1.06-2.86)). Among AF patients using amiodarone, NOACs were associated with significantly lower stroke/SE (RR 0.71, 95%CI (0.54-0.93)) and intracranial bleeding risks (RR 0.51, 95%CI (0.29-0.88)), but significantly higher gastrointestinal bleeding risk (RR 2.15, 95%CI (1.24-3.72)) than VKAs. The benefit-risk profile of NOACs compared to VKAs was preserved in AF patients using P-gp/CYP3A4 inhibitors, including amiodarone.

A Systematic Review of the Efficacy and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation Patients with Diabetes Using a Risk Index.

Diabetes mellitus (DM) represents an independent risk factor for chronic AF and is associated with unfavorable outcomes. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), with and without diabetes mellitus (DM), using a new risk index (RI) defined as: RI . In particular, an RI lower than 1 suggests a favorable treatment effect. We searched MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, EMBASE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The risk index (RI) was calculated in terms of efficacy (rate of stroke/systemic embolism (stroke SEE)/rate of patients with and without DM; rate of cardiovascular death/rate of patients with and without DM) and safety (rate of major bleeding/rate of patients with and without DM) outcomes. AF patients with DM (n = 22,057) and 49,596 without DM were considered from pivotal trials. DM doubles the risk index for stroke/SEE, major bleeding (MB), and cardiovascular (CV) death. The RI for stroke/SEE, MB, and CV death was comparable in patients treated with warfarin or DOACs. The lowest RI was in DM patients treated with Rivaroxaban (stroke/SEE, RI = 0.08; CV death, RI = 0.13). The RIs for bleeding were higher in DM patients treated with Dabigatran (RI110 = 0.32; RI150 = 0.40). Our study is the first to use RI to homogenize the efficacy and safety data reported in the DOACs pivotal studies against warfarin in patients with and without DM. Anticoagulation therapy is effective and safe in DM patients. DOACs appear to have a better efficacy and safety profile than warfarin. The use of DOACs is a reasonable alternative to vitamin-K antagonists in AF patients with DM. The RI can be a reasonable tool to help clinicians choose between DOACs or warfarin in the peculiar set of AF patients with DM.

Safety and efficacy of nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants during catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with a transitory increase in the risk of both thromboembolic and bleeding events. Evidence on the use of nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in patients undergoing AF ablation mostly comes from small observational studies, underpowered to detect differences in clinical outcomes between NOACs and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) treated patients. This updated meta-analysis aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of periprocedural anticoagulation with NOACs compared with VKAs in AF patients undergoing catheter ablation. We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane library, and web sources for randomized and observational studies comparing periprocedural treatment with NOACs and VKAs in patients undergoing AF ablation. The primary safety endpoint was major bleeding events, and the primary efficacy endpoint was thromboembolic events (a composite of systemic thromboembolism, transient ischemic attack, and stroke). A total of 29 studies with 12644 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, patients on NOACs had a significantly lower risk of major bleeding compared to VKAs either in observational studies (Peto OR 0.68; 95% CI: 0.48-0.95; P=0.022; I2 =20%) or in RCTs (Peto OR 0.30; 95% CI: 0.14-0.62; P=0.001; I2 =28%). Uninterrupted NOACs reduced the risk of major bleeding when compared to uninterrupted VKAs (Peto OR 0.66; 95% CI: 0.45-0.96; P=0.028; I2 =1%), similarly, interrupted NOACs lowered the risk of major bleeding compared to interrupted VKAs (Peto OR 0.29; 95% CI: 0.13-0.66; P=0.003; I2 =0%; Pinteraction =0.076). The rate of thromboembolic complications was very low and did not significantly differ between the study groups either in observational studies (Peto OR 0.91; 95% CI: 0.49-1.67; P=0.755; I2 =0%) or in RCTs (Peto OR 0.14; 95% CI: 0.01-1.30; P=0.083; I2 =0%). Use of NOACs compared to VKAs significantly reduced the risk of bleeding in patients with AF ablation. Similarly, the risk of bleeding was lower with uninterrupted NOACs than with uninterrupted VKAs, and with interrupted NOACs than with interrupted VKAs. The rate of thromboembolic complications was extremely low in both study groups without any differences.

Updated European Heart Rhythm Association Practical Guide on the use of non-vitamin K antagonist anticoagulants in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation.

The current manuscript is an update of the original Practical Guide, published in June 2013[Heidbuchel H, Verhamme P, Alings M, Antz M, Hacke W, Oldgren J, et al. European Heart Rhythm Association Practical Guide on the use of new oral anticoagulants in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Europace 2013;15:625-51; Heidbuchel H, Verhamme P, Alings M, Antz M, Hacke W, Oldgren J, et al. EHRA practical guide on the use of new oral anticoagulants in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation: executive summary. Eur Heart J 2013;34:2094-106]. Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are an alternative for vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) to prevent stroke in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF). Both physicians and patients have to learn how to use these drugs effectively and safely in clinical practice. Many unresolved questions on how to optimally use these drugs in specific clinical situations remain. The European Heart Rhythm Association set out to coordinate a unified way of informing physicians on the use of the different NOACs. A writing group defined what needs to be considered as 'non-valvular AF' and listed 15 topics of concrete clinical scenarios for which practical answers were formulated, based on available evidence. The 15 topics are (i) practical start-up and follow-up scheme for patients on NOACs; (ii) how to measure the anticoagulant effect of NOACs; (iii) drug-drug interactions and pharmacokinetics of NOACs; (iv) switching between anticoagulant regimens; (v) ensuring adherence of NOAC intake; (vi) how to deal with dosing errors; (vii) patients with chronic kidney disease; (viii) what to do if there is a (suspected) overdose without bleeding, or a clotting test is indicating a risk of bleeding?; (xi) management of bleeding complications; (x) patients undergoing a planned surgical intervention or ablation; (xi) patients undergoing an urgent surgical intervention; (xii) patients with AF and coronary artery disease; (xiii) cardioversion in a NOAC-treated patient; (xiv) patients presenting with acute stroke while on NOACs; and (xv) NOACs vs. VKAs in AF patients with a malignancy. Additional information and downloads of the text and anticoagulation cards in >16 languages can be found on an European Heart Rhythm Association web site (www.NOACforAF.eu).

Meta-analysis of risk of stroke and thrombo-embolism with rivaroxaban versus vitamin K antagonists in ablation and cardioversion of atrial fibrillation

BackgroundAnticoagulation in cardioversion and ablation of atrial fibrillation is imperative for reducing thrombo-embolic events. Ample information is available about the use of warfarin and vitamin K antagonists (VKA) but few trials examine safety and efficacy of rivaroxaban in these procedures. We aim to explore the hypothesis that rivaroxaban causes equal thrombo-embolic and bleeding events when used in atrial fibrillation patients undergoing ablation or cardioversion compared to VKA. MethodsWe searched the online databases as well as conference abstracts till December 2014 for studies comparing rivaroxaban with VKA in atrial fibrillation patients undergoing catheter ablation or cardioversion. We report events as Odds ratio using random effects model except when event rates were less than 1% we used Peto Odds Ratio. ResultsA total of 8872 atrial fibrillation patients in 15 studies undergoing either catheter ablation or cardioversion were included in this analysis. There were significantly lower stroke events with rivaroxaban compared with VKA (Peto Odds Ratio (POR) 0.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.11, 0.95]; P=0.04), and significantly less thrombo-embolic events with rivaroxaban compared with VKA (POR 0.46, 95% CI [0.21, 0.97]; P=0.04). Major and minor bleeding were equal with rivaroxaban versus VKA (Odds Ratio (OR) 0.92, 95% CI [0.62, 1.36]; P=0.68) and (OR 0.81,95% CI [0.58, 1.11]; P=0.19) respectively. ConclusionThe use of rivaroxaban in ablation and cardioversion of atrial fibrillation may be associated with decreased risk of stroke and thromboembolism with equal bleeding risk compared to VKA.

European Heart Rhythm Association Practical Guide on the use of new oral anticoagulants in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation

New oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are an alternative for vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) to prevent stroke in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF). Both physicians and patients will have to learn how to use these drugs effectively and safely in clinical practice. Many unresolved questions on how to optimally use these drugs in specific clinical situations remain. The European Heart Rhythm Association set out to coordinate a unified way of informing physicians on the use of the different NOACs. A writing group listed 15 topics of concrete clinical scenarios and formulated as practical answers as possible based on available evidence. The 15 topics are: (1) Practical start-up and follow-up scheme for patients on NOACs; (2) How to measure the anticoagulant effect of NOACs; (3) Drug-drug interactions and pharmacokinetics of NOACs; (4) Switching between anticoagulant regimens; (5) Ensuring compliance of NOAC intake; (6) How to deal with dosing errors; (7) Patients with chronic kidney disease; (8) What to do if there is a (suspected) overdose without bleeding, or a clotting test is indicating a risk of bleeding? (9) Management of bleeding complications; (10) Patients undergoing a planned surgical intervention or ablation; (11) Patients undergoing an urgent surgical intervention; (12) Patients with AF and coronary artery disease; (13) Cardioversion in a NOAC-treated patient; (14) Patients presenting with acute stroke while on NOACs; (15) NOACs vs. VKAs in AF patients with a malignancy. Since new information is becoming available at a rapid pace, an EHRA Web site with the latest updated information accompanies this text (www.NOACforAF.eu).

EHRA Practical Guide on the use of new oral anticoagulants in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation: executive summary†

New oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are an alternative for vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) to prevent stroke in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF). Both physicians and patients will have to learn how to use these drugs effectively and safely in specific clinical situations. This text is an executive summary of a practical guide that the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) has assembled to help physicians in the use of the different NOACs. The full text is being published in EP Europace. Practical answers have been formulated for 15 concrete clinical scenarios: (i) practical start-up and follow-up scheme for patients on NOACs; (ii) how to measure the anticoagulant effect of NOACs; (iii) drug-drug interactions and pharmacokinetics of NOACs; (iv) switching between anticoagulant regimens; (v) ensuring compliance of NOAC intake; (vi) how to deal with dosing errors; (vii) patients with chronic kidney disease; (viii) what to do if there is a (suspected) overdose without bleeding, or a clotting test is indicating a risk of bleeding?; (ix) management of bleeding complications; (x) patients undergoing a planned surgical intervention or ablation; (xi) patients undergoing an urgent surgical intervention; (xii) patients with AF and coronary artery disease; (xiii) cardioversion in a NOAC-treated patient; (xiv) patients presenting with acute stroke while on NOACs; (xv) NOACs vs. VKAs in AF patients with a malignancy. Since new information is becoming available at a rapid pace, an EHRA web site with the latest updated information accompanies the guide (www.NOACforAF.eu). It also contains links to the ESC AF Guidelines, a key message pocket booklet, print-ready files for a proposed universal NOAC anticoagulation card, and feedback possibilities.