Search

Background: Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and atrial fibrillation (AF) are at high risk of ischemic stroke. Evidence is lacking if patients with advanced CKD or on dialysis benefit from oral anticoagulants (OAC) as stroke prophylaxis. There is also no clear evidence on the safety and efficacy of prophylactic anticoagulants (PAC) in the prothrombotic state nephrotic syndrome (NS). Aims: To investigate effectiveness and risks of oral anticoagulants as stroke prophylaxis in chronic kidney disease with atrial fibrillation To examine the role of warfarin treatment quality as a predictor for ischemic stroke and bleeding in CKD To investigate benefits and risks with prophylactic anticoagulants in patients with nephrotic syndrome and elucidate risk factors for thrombosis and bleeding Methods: A cohort of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and CKD GFR category 3–5 (G3–G5) or on dialysis (G5D) was created by combining data from national health care- and quality registries between 2009-2018. Included registries were the Swedish Renal Registry, AuriculA, The Stroke Register and The Swedish National Patient Register. G3 was defined as GFR 30-59ml/min/1.73m2, G4: 15-29, G5: <15, G5D: on dialysis. Paper I compared patient time on warfarin with patient time on no OAC treatment using Cox regression. Paper II compared DOAC and warfarin using the same methods. Paper III investigated the effect of increasing warfarin treatment quality, measured as individual time in therapeutic range (iTTR). Primary outcomes in paper I-III were ischemic stroke and major bleeding. Paper IV, a retrospective medical records study included adults with NS between 2010-2019 in the county of Västernorrland, Sweden. Outcomes were venous thromboembolism (VTE), bleeding and death. Patients divided into PAC- and no PAC group were compared using Fisher’s exact test. Patient time was divided into serum/plasma (S/P)-albumin intervals and VTE- and bleeding rates were calculated. Re, Bakgrund: Kronisk njursjukdom, CKD, definieras som ihållande nedsatt njurfunktion, mätt som nedsatt filtrationshastighet i njurens små kärlnystan eller andra tecken på njurskada, såsom äggviteläckage i urinen. CKD kan orsakas av flera olika sjukdomar som till exempel diabetes, högt blodtryck eller inflammation i de små kärlnystanen (glomerulonefrit). CKD delas in i stadier där stadium 3 innebär moderat nedsatt njurfunktion, stadium 4 är allvarligt nedsatt njurfunktion och stadie 5 innebär att patienten så småningom behöver njurtransplanteras eller starta dialys (stadium 5D). CKD drabbar upp till 10% av befolkningen och bidrar till ökad risk för en rad följdsjukdomar inklusive hjärtrytmrubbningen förmaksflimmer. Av patienter med CKD stadium 4–5 har upp till 20-25% förmaksflimmer. När hjärtats förmak flimrar står blodet mer still och får chans att levra sig, bilda blodproppar. Detta kan leda till att små proppar lossnar, far i väg från hjärtat till hjärnan och orsakar stroke. Patienter med förmaksflimmer i den allmänna befolkningen behandlas ofta med blodförtunnande läkemedel, antikoagulantia, för att förhindra stroke. Traditionellt sett har man använt den blodförtunnande medlet warfarin. Det senaste decenniet har nya blodförtunnande läkemedel, DOAK, börjat dominera. Patienter med mer än moderat nedsatt njurfunktion har till största del uteslutits från stora randomiserade läkemedelsprövningar (RCTs) av antikoagulantia. Detta beror delvis på att CKD i sig medför ökad blödningsrisk. Därför är det oklart om patienter med allvarligt nedsatt njurfunktion och förmaksflimmer ska ha blodförtunnande, eller om den ökade blödningsrisken medför att antikoagulantia ska undvikas. Nefrotiskt syndrom är ett specialfall av njursjukdom som innebär ökad risk för venösa proppar. Traditionellt sett har dessa patienter behandlats med förebyggande blodförtunning, men det saknas studier på dess effekt och säkerhet. Syftet med våra studier var att undersöka nytta och risk med blodförtunning

Background: Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and atrial fibrillation (AF) are at high risk of ischemic stroke. Evidence is lacking if patients with advanced CKD or on dialysis benefit from oral anticoagulants (OAC) as stroke prophylaxis. There is also no clear evidence on the safety and efficacy of prophylactic anticoagulants (PAC) in the prothrombotic state nephrotic syndrome (NS). Aims: To investigate effectiveness and risks of oral anticoagulants as stroke prophylaxis in chronic kidney disease with atrial fibrillation To examine the role of warfarin treatment quality as a predictor for ischemic stroke and bleeding in CKD To investigate benefits and risks with prophylactic anticoagulants in patients with nephrotic syndrome and elucidate risk factors for thrombosis and bleeding Methods: A cohort of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and CKD GFR category 3–5 (G3–G5) or on dialysis (G5D) was created by combining data from national health care- and quality registries between 2009-2018. Included registries were the Swedish Renal Registry, AuriculA, The Stroke Register and The Swedish National Patient Register. G3 was defined as GFR 30-59ml/min/1.73m2, G4: 15-29, G5: <15, G5D: on dialysis. Paper I compared patient time on warfarin with patient time on no OAC treatment using Cox regression. Paper II compared DOAC and warfarin using the same methods. Paper III investigated the effect of increasing warfarin treatment quality, measured as individual time in therapeutic range (iTTR). Primary outcomes in paper I-III were ischemic stroke and major bleeding. Paper IV, a retrospective medical records study included adults with NS between 2010-2019 in the county of Västernorrland, Sweden. Outcomes were venous thromboembolism (VTE), bleeding and death. Patients divided into PAC- and no PAC group were compared using Fisher’s exact test. Patient time was divided into serum/plasma (S/P)-albumin intervals and VTE- and bleeding rates were calculated. Re, Bakgrund: Kronisk njursjukdom, CKD, definieras som ihållande nedsatt njurfunktion, mätt som nedsatt filtrationshastighet i njurens små kärlnystan eller andra tecken på njurskada, såsom äggviteläckage i urinen. CKD kan orsakas av flera olika sjukdomar som till exempel diabetes, högt blodtryck eller inflammation i de små kärlnystanen (glomerulonefrit). CKD delas in i stadier där stadium 3 innebär moderat nedsatt njurfunktion, stadium 4 är allvarligt nedsatt njurfunktion och stadie 5 innebär att patienten så småningom behöver njurtransplanteras eller starta dialys (stadium 5D). CKD drabbar upp till 10% av befolkningen och bidrar till ökad risk för en rad följdsjukdomar inklusive hjärtrytmrubbningen förmaksflimmer. Av patienter med CKD stadium 4–5 har upp till 20-25% förmaksflimmer. När hjärtats förmak flimrar står blodet mer still och får chans att levra sig, bilda blodproppar. Detta kan leda till att små proppar lossnar, far i väg från hjärtat till hjärnan och orsakar stroke. Patienter med förmaksflimmer i den allmänna befolkningen behandlas ofta med blodförtunnande läkemedel, antikoagulantia, för att förhindra stroke. Traditionellt sett har man använt den blodförtunnande medlet warfarin. Det senaste decenniet har nya blodförtunnande läkemedel, DOAK, börjat dominera. Patienter med mer än moderat nedsatt njurfunktion har till största del uteslutits från stora randomiserade läkemedelsprövningar (RCTs) av antikoagulantia. Detta beror delvis på att CKD i sig medför ökad blödningsrisk. Därför är det oklart om patienter med allvarligt nedsatt njurfunktion och förmaksflimmer ska ha blodförtunnande, eller om den ökade blödningsrisken medför att antikoagulantia ska undvikas. Nefrotiskt syndrom är ett specialfall av njursjukdom som innebär ökad risk för venösa proppar. Traditionellt sett har dessa patienter behandlats med förebyggande blodförtunning, men det saknas studier på dess effekt och säkerhet. Syftet med våra studier var att undersöka nytta och risk med blodförtunning

Background: Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and atrial fibrillation (AF) are at high risk of ischemic stroke. Evidence is lacking if patients with advanced CKD or on dialysis benefit from oral anticoagulants (OAC) as stroke prophylaxis. There is also no clear evidence on the safety and efficacy of prophylactic anticoagulants (PAC) in the prothrombotic state nephrotic syndrome (NS). Aims: To investigate effectiveness and risks of oral anticoagulants as stroke prophylaxis in chronic kidney disease with atrial fibrillation To examine the role of warfarin treatment quality as a predictor for ischemic stroke and bleeding in CKD To investigate benefits and risks with prophylactic anticoagulants in patients with nephrotic syndrome and elucidate risk factors for thrombosis and bleeding Methods: A cohort of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and CKD GFR category 3–5 (G3–G5) or on dialysis (G5D) was created by combining data from national health care- and quality registries between 2009-2018. Included registries were the Swedish Renal Registry, AuriculA, The Stroke Register and The Swedish National Patient Register. G3 was defined as GFR 30-59ml/min/1.73m2, G4: 15-29, G5: <15, G5D: on dialysis. Paper I compared patient time on warfarin with patient time on no OAC treatment using Cox regression. Paper II compared DOAC and warfarin using the same methods. Paper III investigated the effect of increasing warfarin treatment quality, measured as individual time in therapeutic range (iTTR). Primary outcomes in paper I-III were ischemic stroke and major bleeding. Paper IV, a retrospective medical records study included adults with NS between 2010-2019 in the county of Västernorrland, Sweden. Outcomes were venous thromboembolism (VTE), bleeding and death. Patients divided into PAC- and no PAC group were compared using Fisher’s exact test. Patient time was divided into serum/plasma (S/P)-albumin intervals and VTE- and bleeding rates were calculated. Re, Bakgrund: Kronisk njursjukdom, CKD, definieras som ihållande nedsatt njurfunktion, mätt som nedsatt filtrationshastighet i njurens små kärlnystan eller andra tecken på njurskada, såsom äggviteläckage i urinen. CKD kan orsakas av flera olika sjukdomar som till exempel diabetes, högt blodtryck eller inflammation i de små kärlnystanen (glomerulonefrit). CKD delas in i stadier där stadium 3 innebär moderat nedsatt njurfunktion, stadium 4 är allvarligt nedsatt njurfunktion och stadie 5 innebär att patienten så småningom behöver njurtransplanteras eller starta dialys (stadium 5D). CKD drabbar upp till 10% av befolkningen och bidrar till ökad risk för en rad följdsjukdomar inklusive hjärtrytmrubbningen förmaksflimmer. Av patienter med CKD stadium 4–5 har upp till 20-25% förmaksflimmer. När hjärtats förmak flimrar står blodet mer still och får chans att levra sig, bilda blodproppar. Detta kan leda till att små proppar lossnar, far i väg från hjärtat till hjärnan och orsakar stroke. Patienter med förmaksflimmer i den allmänna befolkningen behandlas ofta med blodförtunnande läkemedel, antikoagulantia, för att förhindra stroke. Traditionellt sett har man använt den blodförtunnande medlet warfarin. Det senaste decenniet har nya blodförtunnande läkemedel, DOAK, börjat dominera. Patienter med mer än moderat nedsatt njurfunktion har till största del uteslutits från stora randomiserade läkemedelsprövningar (RCTs) av antikoagulantia. Detta beror delvis på att CKD i sig medför ökad blödningsrisk. Därför är det oklart om patienter med allvarligt nedsatt njurfunktion och förmaksflimmer ska ha blodförtunnande, eller om den ökade blödningsrisken medför att antikoagulantia ska undvikas. Nefrotiskt syndrom är ett specialfall av njursjukdom som innebär ökad risk för venösa proppar. Traditionellt sett har dessa patienter behandlats med förebyggande blodförtunning, men det saknas studier på dess effekt och säkerhet. Syftet med våra studier var att undersöka nytta och risk med blodförtunning

Background: direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are an alternative to conventional antagonist of vitamin-K (AVK). However, immune suppressive drugs (ISDs) may interfere with DOACs pharmacokinetic. Aim of this study: evaluate safety and efficacy profile of DOACs compared to AVK in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) treated with ISDs. Methods: a multi-center study from 4 Italian University hospitals enrolling consecutive KTRs on DOACs or AVK was carried out. Sixty-six patients on DOACs were compared with fifty patients on AVK with similar clinical features. Serial evaluation of renal function and serum levels of ISDs during 18 months follow-up (FU) was performed. Results: Mean age of DOACs patients was 67±9 and mean eGFR was 58,3± 30,4mL/min/1.73m2. ISDs included tacrolimus (n=47, 71%), cyclosporin (n=13, 20%), everolimus (n=10, 7%) and sirolimus (n=4, 6%). After 14 days of DOACs therapy initiation there was a slight increase of serum levels of tacrolimus (+0.19±0.67 p=0.80) and cyclosporine (+0.12±0.25 p=0.94) not statistically significant. Levels of Tacrolimus and cyclosporin were stable at serial evaluation during 18-months follow-up. There were no thromboembolic events among patients treated with DOACs or AVK and no differences in term of major bleeding (6% vs 4% p=0.69), at long-term follow-up. There was no difference in term of eGFR decline from start therapy to 18 months FU between DOACs vs AVK therapy (-3.9±1 vs -3.8±2 p=0.82). Conclusion: DOACs have similar safety and efficacy than AVK among KTRs treated with ISDs. However, careful evaluation of potential drug interaction and ISDs serum levels is needed.

Background Severe trauma represents a major global public health burden and the management of post-traumatic bleeding continues to challenge healthcare systems around the world. Post-traumatic bleeding and associated traumatic coagulopathy remain leading causes of potentially preventable multiorgan failure and death if not diagnosed and managed in an appropriate and timely manner. This sixth edition of the European guideline on the management of major bleeding and coagulopathy following traumatic injury aims to advise clinicians who care for the bleeding trauma patient during the initial diagnostic and therapeutic phases of patient management. Methods The pan-European, multidisciplinary Task Force for Advanced Bleeding Care in Trauma included representatives from six European professional societies and convened to assess and update the previous version of this guideline using a structured, evidence-based consensus approach. Structured literature searches covered the period since the last edition of the guideline, but considered evidence cited previously. The format of this edition has been adjusted to reflect the trend towards concise guideline documents that cite only the highest-quality studies and most relevant literature rather than attempting to provide a comprehensive literature review to accompany each recommendation. Results This guideline comprises 39 clinical practice recommendations that follow an approximate temporal path for management of the bleeding trauma patient, with recommendations grouped behind key decision points. While approximately one-third of patients who have experienced severe trauma arrive in hospital in a coagulopathic state, a systematic diagnostic and therapeutic approach has been shown to reduce the number of preventable deaths attributable to traumatic injury. Conclusion A multidisciplinary approach and adherence to evidence-based guidelines are pillars of best practice in the management of, Background: Severe trauma represents a major global public health burden and the management of post-traumatic bleeding continues to challenge healthcare systems around the world. Post-traumatic bleeding and associated traumatic coagulopathy remain leading causes of potentially preventable multiorgan failure and death if not diagnosed and managed in an appropriate and timely manner. This sixth edition of the European guideline on the management of major bleeding and coagulopathy following traumatic injury aims to advise clinicians who care for the bleeding trauma patient during the initial diagnostic and therapeutic phases of patient management. Methods: The pan-European, multidisciplinary Task Force for Advanced Bleeding Care in Trauma included representatives from six European professional societies and convened to assess and update the previous version of this guideline using a structured, evidence-based consensus approach. Structured literature searches covered the period since the last edition of the guideline, but considered evidence cited previously. The format of this edition has been adjusted to reflect the trend towards concise guideline documents that cite only the highest-quality studies and most relevant literature rather than attempting to provide a comprehensive literature review to accompany each recommendation. Results: This guideline comprises 39 clinical practice recommendations that follow an approximate temporal path for management of the bleeding trauma patient, with recommendations grouped behind key decision points. While approximately one-third of patients who have experienced severe trauma arrive in hospital in a coagulopathic state, a systematic diagnostic and therapeutic approach has been shown to reduce the number of preventable deaths attributable to traumatic injury. Conclusion: A multidisciplinary approach and adherence to evidence-based guidelines are pillars of best practice in the management of severely injured trauma patients. F

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) and renal impairment share a bidirectional relationship with important pathophysiological interactions. We evaluated the impact of renal impairment in a contemporary cohort of patients with AF. METHODS: We utilised the ESC-EHRA EORP-AF Long-Term General Registry. Outcomes were analysed according to renal function by CKD-EPI equation. The primary endpoint was a composite of thromboembolism, major bleeding, acute coronary syndrome and all-cause death. Secondary endpoints were each of these separately including ischaemic stroke, haemorrhagic event, intracranial haemorrhage, cardiovascular death and hospital admission. RESULTS: A total of 9,306 patients were included. The distribution of patients with no, mild, moderate and severe renal impairment at baseline were 16.9%, 49.3%, 30.0% and 3.8%, respectively. AF patients with impaired renal function were older, more likely to be females, had worse cardiac imaging parameters and multiple comorbidities. Among patients with an indication for anticoagulation, prescription of these agents was reduced in those with severe renal impairment,p<0.001. Over 24 months, impaired renal function was associated with significantly greater incidence of the primary composite outcome and all secondary outcomes. Multivariable Cox regression analysis demonstrated an inverse relationship between eGFR and the primary outcome (HR 1.07[95% CI,1.01-1.14] per 10 mL/min/1.73m2 decrease), that was most notable in patients with eGFR <30mL/min/1.73m2 (HR 2.21[95% CI,1.23-3.99] compared to eGFR ≥90mL/min/1.73m2 ). CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of patients with AF suffer from concomitant renal impairment which impacts their overall management. Furthermore, renal impairment is an independent predictor of major adverse events including thromboembolism, major bleeding, acute coronary syndrome and all-cause death in patients with AF.

Background Observational data comparing warfarin with no treatment for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and severely reduced glomerular filtration rate (GFR) are conflicting and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are lacking. Most studies do not provide information on warfarin treatment quality, making them difficult to compare. Methods This national cohort study investigates the risk of ischaemic stroke and major bleeding during warfarin treatment compared with no oral anticoagulants in patients with NVAF, GFR category 3-5 (G3-G5) or on dialysis (G5D), with kidney transplant recipients excluded, between 2009 and 2018. Data extracted from high-quality Swedish national healthcare registries, including the Swedish Renal Registry, AuriculA-the Swedish national quality registry for atrial fibrillation and anticoagulation-and the Stroke Registry. Results At enrolment of 12 106 patients, 21.4% were G3, 43.5% were G4, 11.6% were G5 and 23.6% were G5D. The mean time in the therapeutic range was 70%. Warfarin compared with no treatment showed a lower risk for ischaemic stroke for G3 {hazard ratio [HR] 0.37 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18-0.76]}, G4 [0.53 (0.38-0.74)] and G5 [0.49 (0.30-0.79)] and an increased risk of major bleeding in G4 [HR 1.22 (1.02-1.46)], G5 [1.52 (1.15-2.01)] and G5D [1.23 (1.00-1.51)]. All-cause mortality was more than halved on warfarin compared with no treatment in all GFR categories. Conclusions Warfarin treatment is associated with a lower risk of ischaemic stroke for patients with NVAF and G3, G4 and G5D at the cost of a higher risk of major bleeding for G4-G5D. Existing observational data are conflicting, stressing the need for RCTs on warfarin compared with no treatment in G4-G5D. Awaiting RCTs, it seems reasonable to treat selected patients on dialysis and NVAF with warfarin.

Background: Observational data comparing warfarin with no treatment for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and severely reduced glomerular filtration rate (GFR) are conflicting and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are lacking. Most studies do not provide information on warfarin treatment quality, making them difficult to compare. Methods: This national cohort study investigates the risk of ischaemic stroke and major bleeding during warfarin treatment compared with no oral anticoagulants in patients with NVAF, GFR category 3-5 (G3-G5) or on dialysis (G5D), with kidney transplant recipients excluded, between 2009 and 2018. Data extracted from high-quality Swedish national healthcare registries, including the Swedish Renal Registry, AuriculA-the Swedish national quality registry for atrial fibrillation and anticoagulation- A nd the Stroke Registry. Results: At enrolment of 12 106 patients, 21.4% were G3, 43.5% were G4, 11.6% were G5 and 23.6% were G5D. The mean time in the therapeutic range was 70%. Warfarin compared with no treatment showed a lower risk for ischaemic stroke for G3 {hazard ratio [HR] 0.37 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18-0.76]}, G4 [0.53 (0.38-0.74)] and G5 [0.49 (0.30-0.79)] and an increased risk of major bleeding in G4 [HR 1.22 (1.02-1.46)], G5 [1.52 (1.15-2.01)] and G5D [1.23 (1.00-1.51)]. All-cause mortality was more than halved on warfarin compared with no treatment in all GFR categories. Conclusions: Warfarin treatment is associated with a lower risk of ischaemic stroke for patients with NVAF and G3, G4 and G5D at the cost of a higher risk of major bleeding for G4-G5D. Existing observational data are conflicting, stressing the need for RCTs on warfarin compared with no treatment in G4-G5D. Awaiting RCTs, it seems reasonable to treat selected patients on dialysis and NVAF with warfarin.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) and renal impairment share a bidirectional relationship with important pathophysiological interactions. We evaluated the impact of renal impairment in a contemporary cohort of patients with AF. METHODS: We utilised the ESC-EHRA EORP-AF Long-Term General Registry. Outcomes were analysed according to renal function by CKD-EPI equation. The primary endpoint was a composite of thromboembolism, major bleeding, acute coronary syndrome and all-cause death. Secondary endpoints were each of these separately including ischaemic stroke, haemorrhagic event, intracranial haemorrhage, cardiovascular death and hospital admission. RESULTS: A total of 9,306 patients were included. The distribution of patients with no, mild, moderate and severe renal impairment at baseline were 16.9%, 49.3%, 30.0% and 3.8%, respectively. AF patients with impaired renal function were older, more likely to be females, had worse cardiac imaging parameters and multiple comorbidities. Among patients with an indication for anticoagulation, prescription of these agents was reduced in those with severe renal impairment,p<0.001. Over 24 months, impaired renal function was associated with significantly greater incidence of the primary composite outcome and all secondary outcomes. Multivariable Cox regression analysis demonstrated an inverse relationship between eGFR and the primary outcome (HR 1.07[95% CI,1.01-1.14] per 10 mL/min/1.73m2 decrease), that was most notable in patients with eGFR <30mL/min/1.73m2 (HR 2.21[95% CI,1.23-3.99] compared to eGFR ≥90mL/min/1.73m2 ). CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of patients with AF suffer from concomitant renal impairment which impacts their overall management. Furthermore, renal impairment is an independent predictor of major adverse events including thromboembolism, major bleeding, acute coronary syndrome and all-cause death in patients with AF.

Background Observational data comparing warfarin with no treatment for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and severely reduced glomerular filtration rate (GFR) are conflicting and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are lacking. Most studies do not provide information on warfarin treatment quality, making them difficult to compare. Methods This national cohort study investigates the risk of ischaemic stroke and major bleeding during warfarin treatment compared with no oral anticoagulants in patients with NVAF, GFR category 3-5 (G3-G5) or on dialysis (G5D), with kidney transplant recipients excluded, between 2009 and 2018. Data extracted from high-quality Swedish national healthcare registries, including the Swedish Renal Registry, AuriculA-the Swedish national quality registry for atrial fibrillation and anticoagulation-and the Stroke Registry. Results At enrolment of 12 106 patients, 21.4% were G3, 43.5% were G4, 11.6% were G5 and 23.6% were G5D. The mean time in the therapeutic range was 70%. Warfarin compared with no treatment showed a lower risk for ischaemic stroke for G3 {hazard ratio [HR] 0.37 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18-0.76]}, G4 [0.53 (0.38-0.74)] and G5 [0.49 (0.30-0.79)] and an increased risk of major bleeding in G4 [HR 1.22 (1.02-1.46)], G5 [1.52 (1.15-2.01)] and G5D [1.23 (1.00-1.51)]. All-cause mortality was more than halved on warfarin compared with no treatment in all GFR categories. Conclusions Warfarin treatment is associated with a lower risk of ischaemic stroke for patients with NVAF and G3, G4 and G5D at the cost of a higher risk of major bleeding for G4-G5D. Existing observational data are conflicting, stressing the need for RCTs on warfarin compared with no treatment in G4-G5D. Awaiting RCTs, it seems reasonable to treat selected patients on dialysis and NVAF with warfarin.

Background Observational data comparing warfarin with no treatment for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and severely reduced glomerular filtration rate (GFR) are conflicting and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are lacking. Most studies do not provide information on warfarin treatment quality, making them difficult to compare. Methods This national cohort study investigates the risk of ischaemic stroke and major bleeding during warfarin treatment compared with no oral anticoagulants in patients with NVAF, GFR category 3-5 (G3-G5) or on dialysis (G5D), with kidney transplant recipients excluded, between 2009 and 2018. Data extracted from high-quality Swedish national healthcare registries, including the Swedish Renal Registry, AuriculA-the Swedish national quality registry for atrial fibrillation and anticoagulation-and the Stroke Registry. Results At enrolment of 12 106 patients, 21.4% were G3, 43.5% were G4, 11.6% were G5 and 23.6% were G5D. The mean time in the therapeutic range was 70%. Warfarin compared with no treatment showed a lower risk for ischaemic stroke for G3 {hazard ratio [HR] 0.37 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18-0.76]}, G4 [0.53 (0.38-0.74)] and G5 [0.49 (0.30-0.79)] and an increased risk of major bleeding in G4 [HR 1.22 (1.02-1.46)], G5 [1.52 (1.15-2.01)] and G5D [1.23 (1.00-1.51)]. All-cause mortality was more than halved on warfarin compared with no treatment in all GFR categories. Conclusions Warfarin treatment is associated with a lower risk of ischaemic stroke for patients with NVAF and G3, G4 and G5D at the cost of a higher risk of major bleeding for G4-G5D. Existing observational data are conflicting, stressing the need for RCTs on warfarin compared with no treatment in G4-G5D. Awaiting RCTs, it seems reasonable to treat selected patients on dialysis and NVAF with warfarin.

Background Observational data comparing warfarin with no treatment for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and severely reduced glomerular filtration rate (GFR) are conflicting and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are lacking. Most studies do not provide information on warfarin treatment quality, making them difficult to compare. Methods This national cohort study investigates the risk of ischaemic stroke and major bleeding during warfarin treatment compared with no oral anticoagulants in patients with NVAF, GFR category 3-5 (G3-G5) or on dialysis (G5D), with kidney transplant recipients excluded, between 2009 and 2018. Data extracted from high-quality Swedish national healthcare registries, including the Swedish Renal Registry, AuriculA-the Swedish national quality registry for atrial fibrillation and anticoagulation-and the Stroke Registry. Results At enrolment of 12 106 patients, 21.4% were G3, 43.5% were G4, 11.6% were G5 and 23.6% were G5D. The mean time in the therapeutic range was 70%. Warfarin compared with no treatment showed a lower risk for ischaemic stroke for G3 {hazard ratio [HR] 0.37 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18-0.76]}, G4 [0.53 (0.38-0.74)] and G5 [0.49 (0.30-0.79)] and an increased risk of major bleeding in G4 [HR 1.22 (1.02-1.46)], G5 [1.52 (1.15-2.01)] and G5D [1.23 (1.00-1.51)]. All-cause mortality was more than halved on warfarin compared with no treatment in all GFR categories. Conclusions Warfarin treatment is associated with a lower risk of ischaemic stroke for patients with NVAF and G3, G4 and G5D at the cost of a higher risk of major bleeding for G4-G5D. Existing observational data are conflicting, stressing the need for RCTs on warfarin compared with no treatment in G4-G5D. Awaiting RCTs, it seems reasonable to treat selected patients on dialysis and NVAF with warfarin.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) and renal impairment share a bidirectional relationship with important pathophysiological interactions. We evaluated the impact of renal impairment in a contemporary cohort of patients with AF. METHODS: We utilised the ESC-EHRA EORP-AF Long-Term General Registry. Outcomes were analysed according to renal function by CKD-EPI equation. The primary endpoint was a composite of thromboembolism, major bleeding, acute coronary syndrome and all-cause death. Secondary endpoints were each of these separately including ischaemic stroke, haemorrhagic event, intracranial haemorrhage, cardiovascular death and hospital admission. RESULTS: A total of 9,306 patients were included. The distribution of patients with no, mild, moderate and severe renal impairment at baseline were 16.9%, 49.3%, 30.0% and 3.8%, respectively. AF patients with impaired renal function were older, more likely to be females, had worse cardiac imaging parameters and multiple comorbidities. Among patients with an indication for anticoagulation, prescription of these agents was reduced in those with severe renal impairment,p<0.001. Over 24 months, impaired renal function was associated with significantly greater incidence of the primary composite outcome and all secondary outcomes. Multivariable Cox regression analysis demonstrated an inverse relationship between eGFR and the primary outcome (HR 1.07[95% CI,1.01-1.14] per 10 mL/min/1.73m2 decrease), that was most notable in patients with eGFR <30mL/min/1.73m2 (HR 2.21[95% CI,1.23-3.99] compared to eGFR ≥90mL/min/1.73m2 ). CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of patients with AF suffer from concomitant renal impairment which impacts their overall management. Furthermore, renal impairment is an independent predictor of major adverse events including thromboembolism, major bleeding, acute coronary syndrome and all-cause death in patients with AF.

Background: Observational data comparing warfarin with no treatment for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and severely reduced glomerular filtration rate (GFR) are conflicting and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are lacking. Most studies do not provide information on warfarin treatment quality, making them difficult to compare. Methods: This national cohort study investigates the risk of ischaemic stroke and major bleeding during warfarin treatment compared with no oral anticoagulants in patients with NVAF, GFR category 3-5 (G3-G5) or on dialysis (G5D), with kidney transplant recipients excluded, between 2009 and 2018. Data extracted from high-quality Swedish national healthcare registries, including the Swedish Renal Registry, AuriculA-the Swedish national quality registry for atrial fibrillation and anticoagulation- A nd the Stroke Registry. Results: At enrolment of 12 106 patients, 21.4% were G3, 43.5% were G4, 11.6% were G5 and 23.6% were G5D. The mean time in the therapeutic range was 70%. Warfarin compared with no treatment showed a lower risk for ischaemic stroke for G3 {hazard ratio [HR] 0.37 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18-0.76]}, G4 [0.53 (0.38-0.74)] and G5 [0.49 (0.30-0.79)] and an increased risk of major bleeding in G4 [HR 1.22 (1.02-1.46)], G5 [1.52 (1.15-2.01)] and G5D [1.23 (1.00-1.51)]. All-cause mortality was more than halved on warfarin compared with no treatment in all GFR categories. Conclusions: Warfarin treatment is associated with a lower risk of ischaemic stroke for patients with NVAF and G3, G4 and G5D at the cost of a higher risk of major bleeding for G4-G5D. Existing observational data are conflicting, stressing the need for RCTs on warfarin compared with no treatment in G4-G5D. Awaiting RCTs, it seems reasonable to treat selected patients on dialysis and NVAF with warfarin.

Background: Observational data comparing warfarin with no treatment for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and severely reduced glomerular filtration rate (GFR) are conflicting and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are lacking. Most studies do not provide information on warfarin treatment quality, making them difficult to compare. Methods: This national cohort study investigates the risk of ischaemic stroke and major bleeding during warfarin treatment compared with no oral anticoagulants in patients with NVAF, GFR category 3-5 (G3-G5) or on dialysis (G5D), with kidney transplant recipients excluded, between 2009 and 2018. Data extracted from high-quality Swedish national healthcare registries, including the Swedish Renal Registry, AuriculA-the Swedish national quality registry for atrial fibrillation and anticoagulation- A nd the Stroke Registry. Results: At enrolment of 12 106 patients, 21.4% were G3, 43.5% were G4, 11.6% were G5 and 23.6% were G5D. The mean time in the therapeutic range was 70%. Warfarin compared with no treatment showed a lower risk for ischaemic stroke for G3 {hazard ratio [HR] 0.37 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18-0.76]}, G4 [0.53 (0.38-0.74)] and G5 [0.49 (0.30-0.79)] and an increased risk of major bleeding in G4 [HR 1.22 (1.02-1.46)], G5 [1.52 (1.15-2.01)] and G5D [1.23 (1.00-1.51)]. All-cause mortality was more than halved on warfarin compared with no treatment in all GFR categories. Conclusions: Warfarin treatment is associated with a lower risk of ischaemic stroke for patients with NVAF and G3, G4 and G5D at the cost of a higher risk of major bleeding for G4-G5D. Existing observational data are conflicting, stressing the need for RCTs on warfarin compared with no treatment in G4-G5D. Awaiting RCTs, it seems reasonable to treat selected patients on dialysis and NVAF with warfarin.

Background: Observational data comparing warfarin with no treatment for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and severely reduced glomerular filtration rate (GFR) are conflicting and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are lacking. Most studies do not provide information on warfarin treatment quality, making them difficult to compare. Methods: This national cohort study investigates the risk of ischaemic stroke and major bleeding during warfarin treatment compared with no oral anticoagulants in patients with NVAF, GFR category 3-5 (G3-G5) or on dialysis (G5D), with kidney transplant recipients excluded, between 2009 and 2018. Data extracted from high-quality Swedish national healthcare registries, including the Swedish Renal Registry, AuriculA-the Swedish national quality registry for atrial fibrillation and anticoagulation- A nd the Stroke Registry. Results: At enrolment of 12 106 patients, 21.4% were G3, 43.5% were G4, 11.6% were G5 and 23.6% were G5D. The mean time in the therapeutic range was 70%. Warfarin compared with no treatment showed a lower risk for ischaemic stroke for G3 {hazard ratio [HR] 0.37 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18-0.76]}, G4 [0.53 (0.38-0.74)] and G5 [0.49 (0.30-0.79)] and an increased risk of major bleeding in G4 [HR 1.22 (1.02-1.46)], G5 [1.52 (1.15-2.01)] and G5D [1.23 (1.00-1.51)]. All-cause mortality was more than halved on warfarin compared with no treatment in all GFR categories. Conclusions: Warfarin treatment is associated with a lower risk of ischaemic stroke for patients with NVAF and G3, G4 and G5D at the cost of a higher risk of major bleeding for G4-G5D. Existing observational data are conflicting, stressing the need for RCTs on warfarin compared with no treatment in G4-G5D. Awaiting RCTs, it seems reasonable to treat selected patients on dialysis and NVAF with warfarin.

Background: Observational data comparing warfarin with no treatment for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and severely reduced glomerular filtration rate (GFR) are conflicting and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are lacking. Most studies do not provide information on warfarin treatment quality, making them difficult to compare. Methods: This national cohort study investigates the risk of ischaemic stroke and major bleeding during warfarin treatment compared with no oral anticoagulants in patients with NVAF, GFR category 3-5 (G3-G5) or on dialysis (G5D), with kidney transplant recipients excluded, between 2009 and 2018. Data extracted from high-quality Swedish national healthcare registries, including the Swedish Renal Registry, AuriculA-the Swedish national quality registry for atrial fibrillation and anticoagulation- A nd the Stroke Registry. Results: At enrolment of 12 106 patients, 21.4% were G3, 43.5% were G4, 11.6% were G5 and 23.6% were G5D. The mean time in the therapeutic range was 70%. Warfarin compared with no treatment showed a lower risk for ischaemic stroke for G3 {hazard ratio [HR] 0.37 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18-0.76]}, G4 [0.53 (0.38-0.74)] and G5 [0.49 (0.30-0.79)] and an increased risk of major bleeding in G4 [HR 1.22 (1.02-1.46)], G5 [1.52 (1.15-2.01)] and G5D [1.23 (1.00-1.51)]. All-cause mortality was more than halved on warfarin compared with no treatment in all GFR categories. Conclusions: Warfarin treatment is associated with a lower risk of ischaemic stroke for patients with NVAF and G3, G4 and G5D at the cost of a higher risk of major bleeding for G4-G5D. Existing observational data are conflicting, stressing the need for RCTs on warfarin compared with no treatment in G4-G5D. Awaiting RCTs, it seems reasonable to treat selected patients on dialysis and NVAF with warfarin.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) and renal impairment share a bidirectional relationship with important pathophysiological interactions. We evaluated the impact of renal impairment in a contemporary cohort of patients with AF. METHODS: We utilised the ESC-EHRA EORP-AF Long-Term General Registry. Outcomes were analysed according to renal function by CKD-EPI equation. The primary endpoint was a composite of thromboembolism, major bleeding, acute coronary syndrome and all-cause death. Secondary endpoints were each of these separately including ischaemic stroke, haemorrhagic event, intracranial haemorrhage, cardiovascular death and hospital admission. RESULTS: A total of 9,306 patients were included. The distribution of patients with no, mild, moderate and severe renal impairment at baseline were 16.9%, 49.3%, 30.0% and 3.8%, respectively. AF patients with impaired renal function were older, more likely to be females, had worse cardiac imaging parameters and multiple comorbidities. Among patients with an indication for anticoagulation, prescription of these agents was reduced in those with severe renal impairment,p<0.001. Over 24 months, impaired renal function was associated with significantly greater incidence of the primary composite outcome and all secondary outcomes. Multivariable Cox regression analysis demonstrated an inverse relationship between eGFR and the primary outcome (HR 1.07[95% CI,1.01-1.14] per 10 mL/min/1.73m2 decrease), that was most notable in patients with eGFR <30mL/min/1.73m2 (HR 2.21[95% CI,1.23-3.99] compared to eGFR ≥90mL/min/1.73m2 ). CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of patients with AF suffer from concomitant renal impairment which impacts their overall management. Furthermore, renal impairment is an independent predictor of major adverse events including thromboembolism, major bleeding, acute coronary syndrome and all-cause death in patients with AF.

Background Observational data comparing warfarin with no treatment for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and severely reduced glomerular filtration rate (GFR) are conflicting and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are lacking. Most studies do not provide information on warfarin treatment quality, making them difficult to compare. Methods This national cohort study investigates the risk of ischaemic stroke and major bleeding during warfarin treatment compared with no oral anticoagulants in patients with NVAF, GFR category 3-5 (G3-G5) or on dialysis (G5D), with kidney transplant recipients excluded, between 2009 and 2018. Data extracted from high-quality Swedish national healthcare registries, including the Swedish Renal Registry, AuriculA-the Swedish national quality registry for atrial fibrillation and anticoagulation-and the Stroke Registry. Results At enrolment of 12 106 patients, 21.4% were G3, 43.5% were G4, 11.6% were G5 and 23.6% were G5D. The mean time in the therapeutic range was 70%. Warfarin compared with no treatment showed a lower risk for ischaemic stroke for G3 {hazard ratio [HR] 0.37 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18-0.76]}, G4 [0.53 (0.38-0.74)] and G5 [0.49 (0.30-0.79)] and an increased risk of major bleeding in G4 [HR 1.22 (1.02-1.46)], G5 [1.52 (1.15-2.01)] and G5D [1.23 (1.00-1.51)]. All-cause mortality was more than halved on warfarin compared with no treatment in all GFR categories. Conclusions Warfarin treatment is associated with a lower risk of ischaemic stroke for patients with NVAF and G3, G4 and G5D at the cost of a higher risk of major bleeding for G4-G5D. Existing observational data are conflicting, stressing the need for RCTs on warfarin compared with no treatment in G4-G5D. Awaiting RCTs, it seems reasonable to treat selected patients on dialysis and NVAF with warfarin.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) and renal impairment share a bidirectional relationship with important pathophysiological interactions. We evaluated the impact of renal impairment in a contemporary cohort of patients with AF. METHODS: We utilised the ESC-EHRA EORP-AF Long-Term General Registry. Outcomes were analysed according to renal function by CKD-EPI equation. The primary endpoint was a composite of thromboembolism, major bleeding, acute coronary syndrome and all-cause death. Secondary endpoints were each of these separately including ischaemic stroke, haemorrhagic event, intracranial haemorrhage, cardiovascular death and hospital admission. RESULTS: A total of 9,306 patients were included. The distribution of patients with no, mild, moderate and severe renal impairment at baseline were 16.9%, 49.3%, 30.0% and 3.8%, respectively. AF patients with impaired renal function were older, more likely to be females, had worse cardiac imaging parameters and multiple comorbidities. Among patients with an indication for anticoagulation, prescription of these agents was reduced in those with severe renal impairment,p<0.001. Over 24 months, impaired renal function was associated with significantly greater incidence of the primary composite outcome and all secondary outcomes. Multivariable Cox regression analysis demonstrated an inverse relationship between eGFR and the primary outcome (HR 1.07[95% CI,1.01-1.14] per 10 mL/min/1.73m2 decrease), that was most notable in patients with eGFR <30mL/min/1.73m2 (HR 2.21[95% CI,1.23-3.99] compared to eGFR ≥90mL/min/1.73m2 ). CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of patients with AF suffer from concomitant renal impairment which impacts their overall management. Furthermore, renal impairment is an independent predictor of major adverse events including thromboembolism, major bleeding, acute coronary syndrome and all-cause death in patients with AF.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and renal impairment share a bidirectional relationship with important pathophysiological interactions. We evaluated the impact of renal impairment in a contemporary cohort of patients with AF. We utilised the ESC-EHRA EORP-AF Long-Term General Registry. Outcomes were analysed according to renal function by CKD-EPI equation. The primary endpoint was a composite of thromboembolism, major bleeding, acute coronary syndrome and all-cause death. Secondary endpoints were each of these separately including ischaemic stroke, haemorrhagic event, intracranial haemorrhage, cardiovascular death and hospital admission. A total of 9306 patients were included. The distribution of patients with no, mild, moderate and severe renal impairment at baseline were 16.9%, 49.3%, 30% and 3.8%, respectively. AF patients with impaired renal function were older, more likely to be females, had worse cardiac imaging parameters and multiple comorbidities. Among patients with an indication for anticoagulation, prescription of these agents was reduced in those with severe renal impairment, p < .001. Over 24 months, impaired renal function was associated with significantly greater incidence of the primary composite outcome and all secondary outcomes. Multivariable Cox regression analysis demonstrated an inverse relationship between eGFR and the primary outcome (HR 1.07 [95% CI, 1.01-1.14] per 10 ml/min/1.73 m decrease), that was most notable in patients with eGFR <30 ml/min/1.73 m (HR 2.21 [95% CI, 1.23-3.99] compared to eGFR ≥90 ml/min/1.73 m ). A significant proportion of patients with AF suffer from concomitant renal impairment which impacts their overall management. Furthermore, renal impairment is an independent predictor of major adverse events including thromboembolism, major bleeding, acute coronary syndrome and all-cause death in patients with AF.

Adults with congenital heart disease (ACHD) are a completely new and rapidly growing specialty comprising patients who require specialist knowledge regarding their care and treatment. Challenges involve diagnostics and treatment as studies are scarce and include small and heterogenous study populations.The first aim with this thesis was to evaluate the relationship between the systemic right ventricular function determined by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging, biomarkers, echocardiographic parameters, New York Heart Association class and performance on stress test.The second aim of this thesis was to evaluate anticoagulation treatment with vitamin K antagonists (VKA) in ACHD. This involved determining the quality of VKA therapy by evaluating time in therapeutic range (TTR) and variability of international normalised ratio of prothrombin time. Furthermore, studying the efficacy and safety of VKA and non-vitamin K oral antagonists (NOAC) in ACHD by evaluating the incidence of thromboembolism (TE), major bleeding and potential risk factors.Paper I A correlation was observed between the systemic ventricular function determined with CMR and echocardiographic ventricular global longitudinal strain in patients with systemic right ventricle.Paper II-III Anticoagulation with VKA was of high quality in ACHD in the South of Sweden. A low incidence of TE and major bleeding events was seen in ACHD patients with high quality VKA treatment. Younger age, female gender and cardiac failure were risk factors for poor anticoagulation and thus may be cause for cautiosness and when suitable, consideration of alternative non-VKA anticoagulants. History of TE was associated with complcations (TE and major bleeding).Paper IV In this retrospective study reports a single-center experience of NOAC use in ACHD patients we found no thromboembolic and one major bleeding events during a median duration of 17 months of therapy.In conclusion, right ventricular global longitudinal strain by ec

New oral anticoagulants (NOACs) is the preferred treatment in secondary prophylaxis of venous thromboembolic events (VTE). The aim of this study was to investigate possible risk factors associated with major bleeding in VTE-patients treated with NOACs. In this retrospective register-based study we screened the Swedish anticoagulation register Auricula (during 2012.01.01-2017.12.31) to find patients and used other national registers for outcomes. Primary endpoint was major bleeding defined as bleeding leading to hospital care. Multivariate Cox-regression analysis was used to reveal risk factors. 18 219 patients with NOAC due to VTE were included. 85.6% had their first VTE, mean age was 69.4 years and median follow-up time was 183 days. The most common NOAC was rivaroxaban (54.8%), followed by apixaban (42.0%), dabigatran (3.2%) and edoxaban (0.1%). The rate of major bleeding was 6.62 (95% CI 6.19-7.06) per 100 treatment years in all patients and 11.27 (CI 9.96-12.57) in patients above 80 years of age. Statistically independent risk factors associated with major bleeding were age (normalized HR 1.38, CI 1.27-1.50), earlier major bleeding (HR 1.58, Cl 1.09-2.30), COPD (HR 1.28, CI 1.04-1.60) and previous stroke (HR 1.28, Cl 1.03-1.58) or transient ischemic attack (TIA) (HR 1.33, Cl 1.01-1.76). Prior warfarin treatment was protective (HR 0.67, CI 0.58-0.78). This real world cohort shows a high bleeding rate especially among the elderly and in patients with previous major bleeding, COPD and previous stroke or TIA. This should be considered when deciding on treatment duration and NOAC dose in these patients.

ObjectiveTo establish the risk of major bleeding in direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) users (overall and by class) versus vitamin K antagonist (VKA) users, using health care databases from four European countries and six provinces in Canada.MethodsA retrospective cohort study was performed according to a similar protocol. First-users of VKAs or DOACs with a diagnosis of non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) were included. The main outcome of interest was major bleeding and secondary outcomes included gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding and intracranial haemorrhage (ICH). Incidence rates of events per 1000 person years were calculated. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were estimated using a Cox proportional hazard regression model. Exposure and confounders were measured and analysed in a time-dependant way. Risk estimates were pooled using a random effect model.Results421 523 patients were included. The risk of major bleeding for the group of DOACs compared to VKAs showed a pooled HR of 0.94 (95% CI: 0.87–1.02). Rivaroxaban showed a modestly increased risk (HR 1.11, 95% CI: 1.06–1.16). Apixaban and dabigatran showed a decreased risk of respectively HR 0.76 (95% CI: 0.69–0.84) and HR 0.85 (95% CI: 0.75–0.96).ConclusionsThis study confirms that the risk of major bleeding of DOACs compared to VKAs is not increased when combining all DOACs. However, we observed a modest higher risk of major bleeding for rivaroxaban, whereas for apixaban and dabigatran lower risks of major bleeding were observed compared to VKAs.

Aims The introduction of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) has broadened the treatment arsenal for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, but observational studies on the benefit-risk balance of DOACs compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) are needed. The aim of this study was to characterize the risk of major bleeding in DOAC users using longitudinal data collected from electronic health care databases from 4 different EU-countries analysed with a common study protocol. Methods A cohort study was conducted among new users (>= 18 years) of DOACs or VKAs with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation using data from the UK, Spain, Germany and Denmark. The incidence of major bleeding events (overall and by bleeding site) was compared between current use of DOACs and VKAs. Cox regression analysis was used to calculate hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI) and adjust for confounders. Results/Conclusion Overall, 251 719 patients were included across the 4 study cohorts (mean age similar to 75 years, % females between 41.3 and 54.3%), with overall hazard ratios of major bleeding risk for DOACsvsVKAs ranging between 0.84 (95% CI: 0.79-0.90) in Denmark and 1.13 (95% CI 1.02-1.25) in the UK. When stratifying according to the bleeding site, risk of gastrointestinal bleeding was increased by 48-67% in dabigatran users and 30-50% for rivaroxaban users compared to VKA users in all data sources except Denmark. Compared to VKAs, apixaban was not associated with an increased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding in all data sources and seemed to be associated with the lowest risk of major bleeding events compared to dabigatran and rivaroxaban.

New oral anticoagulants (NOACs) is the preferred treatment in secondary prophylaxis of venous thromboembolic events (VTE). The aim of this study was to investigate possible risk factors associated with major bleeding in VTE-patients treated with NOACs. In this retrospective register-based study we screened the Swedish anticoagulation register Auricula (during 2012.01.01-2017.12.31) to find patients and used other national registers for outcomes. Primary endpoint was major bleeding defined as bleeding leading to hospital care. Multivariate Cox-regression analysis was used to reveal risk factors. 18 219 patients with NOAC due to VTE were included. 85.6% had their first VTE, mean age was 69.4 years and median follow-up time was 183 days. The most common NOAC was rivaroxaban (54.8%), followed by apixaban (42.0%), dabigatran (3.2%) and edoxaban (0.1%). The rate of major bleeding was 6.62 (95% CI 6.19-7.06) per 100 treatment years in all patients and 11.27 (CI 9.96-12.57) in patients above 80 years of age. Statistically independent risk factors associated with major bleeding were age (normalized HR 1.38, CI 1.27-1.50), earlier major bleeding (HR 1.58, Cl 1.09-2.30), COPD (HR 1.28, CI 1.04-1.60) and previous stroke (HR 1.28, Cl 1.03-1.58) or transient ischemic attack (TIA) (HR 1.33, Cl 1.01-1.76). Prior warfarin treatment was protective (HR 0.67, CI 0.58-0.78). This real world cohort shows a high bleeding rate especially among the elderly and in patients with previous major bleeding, COPD and previous stroke or TIA. This should be considered when deciding on treatment duration and NOAC dose in these patients.

Aims The introduction of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) has broadened the treatment arsenal for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, but observational studies on the benefit-risk balance of DOACs compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) are needed. The aim of this study was to characterize the risk of major bleeding in DOAC users using longitudinal data collected from electronic health care databases from 4 different EU-countries analysed with a common study protocol. Methods A cohort study was conducted among new users (>= 18 years) of DOACs or VKAs with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation using data from the UK, Spain, Germany and Denmark. The incidence of major bleeding events (overall and by bleeding site) was compared between current use of DOACs and VKAs. Cox regression analysis was used to calculate hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI) and adjust for confounders. Results/Conclusion Overall, 251 719 patients were included across the 4 study cohorts (mean age similar to 75 years, % females between 41.3 and 54.3%), with overall hazard ratios of major bleeding risk for DOACsvsVKAs ranging between 0.84 (95% CI: 0.79-0.90) in Denmark and 1.13 (95% CI 1.02-1.25) in the UK. When stratifying according to the bleeding site, risk of gastrointestinal bleeding was increased by 48-67% in dabigatran users and 30-50% for rivaroxaban users compared to VKA users in all data sources except Denmark. Compared to VKAs, apixaban was not associated with an increased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding in all data sources and seemed to be associated with the lowest risk of major bleeding events compared to dabigatran and rivaroxaban.

New oral anticoagulants (NOACs) is the preferred treatment in secondary prophylaxis of venous thromboembolic events (VTE). The aim of this study was to investigate possible risk factors associated with major bleeding in VTE-patients treated with NOACs. In this retrospective register-based study we screened the Swedish anticoagulation register Auricula (during 2012.01.01-2017.12.31) to find patients and used other national registers for outcomes. Primary endpoint was major bleeding defined as bleeding leading to hospital care. Multivariate Cox-regression analysis was used to reveal risk factors. 18 219 patients with NOAC due to VTE were included. 85.6% had their first VTE, mean age was 69.4 years and median follow-up time was 183 days. The most common NOAC was rivaroxaban (54.8%), followed by apixaban (42.0%), dabigatran (3.2%) and edoxaban (0.1%). The rate of major bleeding was 6.62 (95% CI 6.19-7.06) per 100 treatment years in all patients and 11.27 (CI 9.96-12.57) in patients above 80 years of age. Statistically independent risk factors associated with major bleeding were age (normalized HR 1.38, CI 1.27-1.50), earlier major bleeding (HR 1.58, Cl 1.09-2.30), COPD (HR 1.28, CI 1.04-1.60) and previous stroke (HR 1.28, Cl 1.03-1.58) or transient ischemic attack (TIA) (HR 1.33, Cl 1.01-1.76). Prior warfarin treatment was protective (HR 0.67, CI 0.58-0.78). This real world cohort shows a high bleeding rate especially among the elderly and in patients with previous major bleeding, COPD and previous stroke or TIA. This should be considered when deciding on treatment duration and NOAC dose in these patients., First published online: 2 November 2020

New oral anticoagulants (NOACs) is the preferred treatment in secondary prophylaxis of venous thromboembolic events (VTE). The aim of this study was to investigate possible risk factors associated with major bleeding in VTE-patients treated with NOACs. In this retrospective register-based study we screened the Swedish anticoagulation register Auricula (during 2012.01.01-2017.12.31) to find patients and used other national registers for outcomes. Primary endpoint was major bleeding defined as bleeding leading to hospital care. Multivariate Cox-regression analysis was used to reveal risk factors. 18 219 patients with NOAC due to VTE were included. 85.6% had their first VTE, mean age was 69.4 years and median follow-up time was 183 days. The most common NOAC was rivaroxaban (54.8%), followed by apixaban (42.0%), dabigatran (3.2%) and edoxaban (0.1%). The rate of major bleeding was 6.62 (95% CI 6.19-7.06) per 100 treatment years in all patients and 11.27 (CI 9.96-12.57) in patients above 80 years of age. Statistically independent risk factors associated with major bleeding were age (normalized HR 1.38, CI 1.27-1.50), earlier major bleeding (HR 1.58, Cl 1.09-2.30), COPD (HR 1.28, CI 1.04-1.60) and previous stroke (HR 1.28, Cl 1.03-1.58) or transient ischemic attack (TIA) (HR 1.33, Cl 1.01-1.76). Prior warfarin treatment was protective (HR 0.67, CI 0.58-0.78). This real world cohort shows a high bleeding rate especially among the elderly and in patients with previous major bleeding, COPD and previous stroke or TIA. This should be considered when deciding on treatment duration and NOAC dose in these patients., First published online: 2 November 2020

New oral anticoagulants (NOACs) is the preferred treatment in secondary prophylaxis of venous thromboembolic events (VTE). The aim of this study was to investigate possible risk factors associated with major bleeding in VTE-patients treated with NOACs. In this retrospective register-based study we screened the Swedish anticoagulation register Auricula (during 2012.01.01-2017.12.31) to find patients and used other national registers for outcomes. Primary endpoint was major bleeding defined as bleeding leading to hospital care. Multivariate Cox-regression analysis was used to reveal risk factors. 18 219 patients with NOAC due to VTE were included. 85.6% had their first VTE, mean age was 69.4 years and median follow-up time was 183 days. The most common NOAC was rivaroxaban (54.8%), followed by apixaban (42.0%), dabigatran (3.2%) and edoxaban (0.1%). The rate of major bleeding was 6.62 (95% CI 6.19-7.06) per 100 treatment years in all patients and 11.27 (CI 9.96-12.57) in patients above 80 years of age. Statistically independent risk factors associated with major bleeding were age (normalized HR 1.38, CI 1.27-1.50), earlier major bleeding (HR 1.58, Cl 1.09-2.30), COPD (HR 1.28, CI 1.04-1.60) and previous stroke (HR 1.28, Cl 1.03-1.58) or transient ischemic attack (TIA) (HR 1.33, Cl 1.01-1.76). Prior warfarin treatment was protective (HR 0.67, CI 0.58-0.78). This real world cohort shows a high bleeding rate especially among the elderly and in patients with previous major bleeding, COPD and previous stroke or TIA. This should be considered when deciding on treatment duration and NOAC dose in these patients., First published online: 2 November 2020

New oral anticoagulants (NOACs) is the preferred treatment in secondary prophylaxis of venous thromboembolic events (VTE). The aim of this study was to investigate possible risk factors associated with major bleeding in VTE-patients treated with NOACs. In this retrospective register-based study we screened the Swedish anticoagulation register Auricula (during 2012.01.01-2017.12.31) to find patients and used other national registers for outcomes. Primary endpoint was major bleeding defined as bleeding leading to hospital care. Multivariate Cox-regression analysis was used to reveal risk factors. 18 219 patients with NOAC due to VTE were included. 85.6% had their first VTE, mean age was 69.4 years and median follow-up time was 183 days. The most common NOAC was rivaroxaban (54.8%), followed by apixaban (42.0%), dabigatran (3.2%) and edoxaban (0.1%). The rate of major bleeding was 6.62 (95% CI 6.19-7.06) per 100 treatment years in all patients and 11.27 (CI 9.96-12.57) in patients above 80 years of age. Statistically independent risk factors associated with major bleeding were age (normalized HR 1.38, CI 1.27-1.50), earlier major bleeding (HR 1.58, Cl 1.09-2.30), COPD (HR 1.28, CI 1.04-1.60) and previous stroke (HR 1.28, Cl 1.03-1.58) or transient ischemic attack (TIA) (HR 1.33, Cl 1.01-1.76). Prior warfarin treatment was protective (HR 0.67, CI 0.58-0.78). This real world cohort shows a high bleeding rate especially among the elderly and in patients with previous major bleeding, COPD and previous stroke or TIA. This should be considered when deciding on treatment duration and NOAC dose in these patients., First published online: 2 November 2020

New oral anticoagulants (NOACs) is the preferred treatment in secondary prophylaxis of venous thromboembolic events (VTE). The aim of this study was to investigate possible risk factors associated with major bleeding in VTE-patients treated with NOACs. In this retrospective register-based study we screened the Swedish anticoagulation register Auricula (during 2012.01.01-2017.12.31) to find patients and used other national registers for outcomes. Primary endpoint was major bleeding defined as bleeding leading to hospital care. Multivariate Cox-regression analysis was used to reveal risk factors. 18 219 patients with NOAC due to VTE were included. 85.6% had their first VTE, mean age was 69.4 years and median follow-up time was 183 days. The most common NOAC was rivaroxaban (54.8%), followed by apixaban (42.0%), dabigatran (3.2%) and edoxaban (0.1%). The rate of major bleeding was 6.62 (95% CI 6.19-7.06) per 100 treatment years in all patients and 11.27 (CI 9.96-12.57) in patients above 80 years of age. Statistically independent risk factors associated with major bleeding were age (normalized HR 1.38, CI 1.27-1.50), earlier major bleeding (HR 1.58, Cl 1.09-2.30), COPD (HR 1.28, CI 1.04-1.60) and previous stroke (HR 1.28, Cl 1.03-1.58) or transient ischemic attack (TIA) (HR 1.33, Cl 1.01-1.76). Prior warfarin treatment was protective (HR 0.67, CI 0.58-0.78). This real world cohort shows a high bleeding rate especially among the elderly and in patients with previous major bleeding, COPD and previous stroke or TIA. This should be considered when deciding on treatment duration and NOAC dose in these patients., First published online: 2 November 2020

ObjectiveTo establish the risk of major bleeding in direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) users (overall and by class) versus vitamin K antagonist (VKA) users, using health care databases from four European countries and six provinces in Canada.MethodsA retrospective cohort study was performed according to a similar protocol. First-users of VKAs or DOACs with a diagnosis of non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) were included. The main outcome of interest was major bleeding and secondary outcomes included gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding and intracranial haemorrhage (ICH). Incidence rates of events per 1000 person years were calculated. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were estimated using a Cox proportional hazard regression model. Exposure and confounders were measured and analysed in a time-dependant way. Risk estimates were pooled using a random effect model.Results421 523 patients were included. The risk of major bleeding for the group of DOACs compared to VKAs showed a pooled HR of 0.94 (95% CI: 0.87–1.02). Rivaroxaban showed a modestly increased risk (HR 1.11, 95% CI: 1.06–1.16). Apixaban and dabigatran showed a decreased risk of respectively HR 0.76 (95% CI: 0.69–0.84) and HR 0.85 (95% CI: 0.75–0.96).ConclusionsThis study confirms that the risk of major bleeding of DOACs compared to VKAs is not increased when combining all DOACs. However, we observed a modest higher risk of major bleeding for rivaroxaban, whereas for apixaban and dabigatran lower risks of major bleeding were observed compared to VKAs.

New oral anticoagulants (NOACs) is the preferred treatment in secondary prophylaxis of venous thromboembolic events (VTE). The aim of this study was to investigate possible risk factors associated with major bleeding in VTE-patients treated with NOACs. In this retrospective register-based study we screened the Swedish anticoagulation register Auricula (during 2012.01.01-2017.12.31) to find patients and used other national registers for outcomes. Primary endpoint was major bleeding defined as bleeding leading to hospital care. Multivariate Cox-regression analysis was used to reveal risk factors. 18 219 patients with NOAC due to VTE were included. 85.6% had their first VTE, mean age was 69.4 years and median follow-up time was 183 days. The most common NOAC was rivaroxaban (54.8%), followed by apixaban (42.0%), dabigatran (3.2%) and edoxaban (0.1%). The rate of major bleeding was 6.62 (95% CI 6.19-7.06) per 100 treatment years in all patients and 11.27 (CI 9.96-12.57) in patients above 80 years of age. Statistically independent risk factors associated with major bleeding were age (normalized HR 1.38, CI 1.27-1.50), earlier major bleeding (HR 1.58, Cl 1.09-2.30), COPD (HR 1.28, CI 1.04-1.60) and previous stroke (HR 1.28, Cl 1.03-1.58) or transient ischemic attack (TIA) (HR 1.33, Cl 1.01-1.76). Prior warfarin treatment was protective (HR 0.67, CI 0.58-0.78). This real world cohort shows a high bleeding rate especially among the elderly and in patients with previous major bleeding, COPD and previous stroke or TIA. This should be considered when deciding on treatment duration and NOAC dose in these patients.

New oral anticoagulants (NOACs) is the preferred treatment in secondary prophylaxis of venous thromboembolic events (VTE). The aim of this study was to investigate possible risk factors associated with major bleeding in VTE-patients treated with NOACs. In this retrospective register-based study we screened the Swedish anticoagulation register Auricula (during 2012.01.01-2017.12.31) to find patients and used other national registers for outcomes. Primary endpoint was major bleeding defined as bleeding leading to hospital care. Multivariate Cox-regression analysis was used to reveal risk factors. 18 219 patients with NOAC due to VTE were included. 85.6% had their first VTE, mean age was 69.4 years and median follow-up time was 183 days. The most common NOAC was rivaroxaban (54.8%), followed by apixaban (42.0%), dabigatran (3.2%) and edoxaban (0.1%). The rate of major bleeding was 6.62 (95% CI 6.19-7.06) per 100 treatment years in all patients and 11.27 (CI 9.96-12.57) in patients above 80 years of age. Statistically independent risk factors associated with major bleeding were age (normalized HR 1.38, CI 1.27-1.50), earlier major bleeding (HR 1.58, Cl 1.09-2.30), COPD (HR 1.28, CI 1.04-1.60) and previous stroke (HR 1.28, Cl 1.03-1.58) or transient ischemic attack (TIA) (HR 1.33, Cl 1.01-1.76). Prior warfarin treatment was protective (HR 0.67, CI 0.58-0.78). This real world cohort shows a high bleeding rate especially among the elderly and in patients with previous major bleeding, COPD and previous stroke or TIA. This should be considered when deciding on treatment duration and NOAC dose in these patients.

New oral anticoagulants (NOACs) is the preferred treatment in secondary prophylaxis of venous thromboembolic events (VTE). The aim of this study was to investigate possible risk factors associated with major bleeding in VTE-patients treated with NOACs. In this retrospective register-based study we screened the Swedish anticoagulation register Auricula (during 2012.01.01-2017.12.31) to find patients and used other national registers for outcomes. Primary endpoint was major bleeding defined as bleeding leading to hospital care. Multivariate Cox-regression analysis was used to reveal risk factors. 18 219 patients with NOAC due to VTE were included. 85.6% had their first VTE, mean age was 69.4 years and median follow-up time was 183 days. The most common NOAC was rivaroxaban (54.8%), followed by apixaban (42.0%), dabigatran (3.2%) and edoxaban (0.1%). The rate of major bleeding was 6.62 (95% CI 6.19-7.06) per 100 treatment years in all patients and 11.27 (CI 9.96-12.57) in patients above 80 years of age. Statistically independent risk factors associated with major bleeding were age (normalized HR 1.38, CI 1.27-1.50), earlier major bleeding (HR 1.58, Cl 1.09-2.30), COPD (HR 1.28, CI 1.04-1.60) and previous stroke (HR 1.28, Cl 1.03-1.58) or transient ischemic attack (TIA) (HR 1.33, Cl 1.01-1.76). Prior warfarin treatment was protective (HR 0.67, CI 0.58-0.78). This real world cohort shows a high bleeding rate especially among the elderly and in patients with previous major bleeding, COPD and previous stroke or TIA. This should be considered when deciding on treatment duration and NOAC dose in these patients.

AimsRelative bleeding risks of different antithrombotic agents in heart failure (HF) patients is an important consideration in treatment decision making, making detailed comparative analysis desirable. The aim of this study was to conduct a network meta-analysis to investigate the major bleeding risk for individual novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) vs. aspirin among patients with HF.Methods and resultsWe searched Pubmed, EMBASE, Cochrane Collaboration Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, and Clinicaltrials.gov from 1966 to November 2019 to identify relevant randomized clinical trials. Studies comparing individual NOACs vs. aspirin were analysed using direct study-level meta-analysis. Studies comparing aspirin to warfarin and NOACs to warfarin were then additionally added using network (direct and indirect) study-level meta-analysis. Primary endpoint was major bleeding. Final analysis included nine trials with 34 367 participants, including one direct comparison trial (apixaban vs. aspirin) and eight indirect comparison trials against the shared warfarin comparator (four aspirin trials and one trial each of apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and edoxaban). For apixaban, network meta-analysis combing direct and indirect comparison showed that major bleeding risk might not be different between apixaban and aspirin (odds ratio, 1.18 [95% confidence interval, 0.38 to 3.65]) in HF patients. In contrast, indirect-comparison meta-analysis showed dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and edoxaban compared with aspirin might be associated with a higher risk of major bleeding in HF patients.ConclusionsIn network meta-analysis, apixaban might be associated with a comparable risk of major bleeding compared with aspirin in patients with HF, while other NOACs might be associated with a higher risk. However, such results were not strongly convincing because of lack of direct comparison in an original trial and small sample size of trials and participants. A clinical trial direct

OBJECTIVES: To compare effectiveness of warfarin and antiplatelet exposure regarding both thrombotic and bleeding events, following surgical aortic valve replacement with a biological prosthesis(bioSAVR). METHODS: The study included all patients in Sweden undergoing a bioSAVR during 2008-2014 who were alive at discharge from the index hospital stay. Exposure was analysed and defined as postdischarge dispension of any antithrombotic pharmaceutical, updated at each following dispensions and categorised as single antiplatelet (SAPT), warfarin, warfarin combined with SAPT, dual antiplatelet (DAPT) or no antithrombotic treatment. Exposure to SAPT was used as comparator. Outcome events were all-cause mortality, ischaemic stroke, haemorrhagic stroke, any thromboembolism and major bleedings. We continuously updated adjustments for comorbidities with any indication for antithrombotic treatment by Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: We identified 9539 patients with bioSAVR (36.8% women) at median age of 73 years with a mean follow-up of 3.13 years. As compared with SAPT, warfarin alone was associated with a lower incidence of ischaemic stroke (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.70) and any thromboembolism (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.94) but with no difference in mortality (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.13). The incidence of haemorrhagic stroke (HR 1.94, 95% CI 1.07 to 3.51) and major bleeding (HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.30 to 2.15) was higher during warfarin exposure. As compared with SAPT, DAPT was not associated with any difference in ischaemic stroke or any thromboembolism. Risk-benefit analyses demonstrated that 2.7 (95% CI 1.0 to 11.9) of the ischaemic stroke cases could potentially be avoided per every haemorrhagic stroke caused by warfarin exposure instead of SAPT during the first year. CONCLUSION: In patients discharged after bioSAVR, warfarin exposure as compared with SAPT exposure was associated with lower long-term risk of ischaemic stroke and thromboembolic events, and with a higher incid

OBJECTIVES: To compare effectiveness of warfarin and antiplatelet exposure regarding both thrombotic and bleeding events, following surgical aortic valve replacement with a biological prosthesis(bioSAVR). METHODS: The study included all patients in Sweden undergoing a bioSAVR during 2008-2014 who were alive at discharge from the index hospital stay. Exposure was analysed and defined as postdischarge dispension of any antithrombotic pharmaceutical, updated at each following dispensions and categorised as single antiplatelet (SAPT), warfarin, warfarin combined with SAPT, dual antiplatelet (DAPT) or no antithrombotic treatment. Exposure to SAPT was used as comparator. Outcome events were all-cause mortality, ischaemic stroke, haemorrhagic stroke, any thromboembolism and major bleedings. We continuously updated adjustments for comorbidities with any indication for antithrombotic treatment by Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: We identified 9539 patients with bioSAVR (36.8% women) at median age of 73 years with a mean follow-up of 3.13 years. As compared with SAPT, warfarin alone was associated with a lower incidence of ischaemic stroke (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.70) and any thromboembolism (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.94) but with no difference in mortality (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.13). The incidence of haemorrhagic stroke (HR 1.94, 95% CI 1.07 to 3.51) and major bleeding (HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.30 to 2.15) was higher during warfarin exposure. As compared with SAPT, DAPT was not associated with any difference in ischaemic stroke or any thromboembolism. Risk-benefit analyses demonstrated that 2.7 (95% CI 1.0 to 11.9) of the ischaemic stroke cases could potentially be avoided per every haemorrhagic stroke caused by warfarin exposure instead of SAPT during the first year. CONCLUSION: In patients discharged after bioSAVR, warfarin exposure as compared with SAPT exposure was associated with lower long-term risk of ischaemic stroke and thromboembolic events, and with a higher incid

OBJECTIVES: To compare effectiveness of warfarin and antiplatelet exposure regarding both thrombotic and bleeding events, following surgical aortic valve replacement with a biological prosthesis(bioSAVR). METHODS: The study included all patients in Sweden undergoing a bioSAVR during 2008-2014 who were alive at discharge from the index hospital stay. Exposure was analysed and defined as postdischarge dispension of any antithrombotic pharmaceutical, updated at each following dispensions and categorised as single antiplatelet (SAPT), warfarin, warfarin combined with SAPT, dual antiplatelet (DAPT) or no antithrombotic treatment. Exposure to SAPT was used as comparator. Outcome events were all-cause mortality, ischaemic stroke, haemorrhagic stroke, any thromboembolism and major bleedings. We continuously updated adjustments for comorbidities with any indication for antithrombotic treatment by Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: We identified 9539 patients with bioSAVR (36.8% women) at median age of 73 years with a mean follow-up of 3.13 years. As compared with SAPT, warfarin alone was associated with a lower incidence of ischaemic stroke (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.70) and any thromboembolism (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.94) but with no difference in mortality (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.13). The incidence of haemorrhagic stroke (HR 1.94, 95% CI 1.07 to 3.51) and major bleeding (HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.30 to 2.15) was higher during warfarin exposure. As compared with SAPT, DAPT was not associated with any difference in ischaemic stroke or any thromboembolism. Risk-benefit analyses demonstrated that 2.7 (95% CI 1.0 to 11.9) of the ischaemic stroke cases could potentially be avoided per every haemorrhagic stroke caused by warfarin exposure instead of SAPT during the first year. CONCLUSION: In patients discharged after bioSAVR, warfarin exposure as compared with SAPT exposure was associated with lower long-term risk of ischaemic stroke and thromboembolic events, and with a higher incid

OBJECTIVES: To compare effectiveness of warfarin and antiplatelet exposure regarding both thrombotic and bleeding events, following surgical aortic valve replacement with a biological prosthesis(bioSAVR). METHODS: The study included all patients in Sweden undergoing a bioSAVR during 2008-2014 who were alive at discharge from the index hospital stay. Exposure was analysed and defined as postdischarge dispension of any antithrombotic pharmaceutical, updated at each following dispensions and categorised as single antiplatelet (SAPT), warfarin, warfarin combined with SAPT, dual antiplatelet (DAPT) or no antithrombotic treatment. Exposure to SAPT was used as comparator. Outcome events were all-cause mortality, ischaemic stroke, haemorrhagic stroke, any thromboembolism and major bleedings. We continuously updated adjustments for comorbidities with any indication for antithrombotic treatment by Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: We identified 9539 patients with bioSAVR (36.8% women) at median age of 73 years with a mean follow-up of 3.13 years. As compared with SAPT, warfarin alone was associated with a lower incidence of ischaemic stroke (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.70) and any thromboembolism (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.94) but with no difference in mortality (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.13). The incidence of haemorrhagic stroke (HR 1.94, 95% CI 1.07 to 3.51) and major bleeding (HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.30 to 2.15) was higher during warfarin exposure. As compared with SAPT, DAPT was not associated with any difference in ischaemic stroke or any thromboembolism. Risk-benefit analyses demonstrated that 2.7 (95% CI 1.0 to 11.9) of the ischaemic stroke cases could potentially be avoided per every haemorrhagic stroke caused by warfarin exposure instead of SAPT during the first year. CONCLUSION: In patients discharged after bioSAVR, warfarin exposure as compared with SAPT exposure was associated with lower long-term risk of ischaemic stroke and thromboembolic events, and with a higher incid

OBJECTIVES: To compare effectiveness of warfarin and antiplatelet exposure regarding both thrombotic and bleeding events, following surgical aortic valve replacement with a biological prosthesis(bioSAVR). METHODS: The study included all patients in Sweden undergoing a bioSAVR during 2008-2014 who were alive at discharge from the index hospital stay. Exposure was analysed and defined as postdischarge dispension of any antithrombotic pharmaceutical, updated at each following dispensions and categorised as single antiplatelet (SAPT), warfarin, warfarin combined with SAPT, dual antiplatelet (DAPT) or no antithrombotic treatment. Exposure to SAPT was used as comparator. Outcome events were all-cause mortality, ischaemic stroke, haemorrhagic stroke, any thromboembolism and major bleedings. We continuously updated adjustments for comorbidities with any indication for antithrombotic treatment by Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: We identified 9539 patients with bioSAVR (36.8% women) at median age of 73 years with a mean follow-up of 3.13 years. As compared with SAPT, warfarin alone was associated with a lower incidence of ischaemic stroke (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.70) and any thromboembolism (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.94) but with no difference in mortality (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.13). The incidence of haemorrhagic stroke (HR 1.94, 95% CI 1.07 to 3.51) and major bleeding (HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.30 to 2.15) was higher during warfarin exposure. As compared with SAPT, DAPT was not associated with any difference in ischaemic stroke or any thromboembolism. Risk-benefit analyses demonstrated that 2.7 (95% CI 1.0 to 11.9) of the ischaemic stroke cases could potentially be avoided per every haemorrhagic stroke caused by warfarin exposure instead of SAPT during the first year. CONCLUSION: In patients discharged after bioSAVR, warfarin exposure as compared with SAPT exposure was associated with lower long-term risk of ischaemic stroke and thromboembolic events, and with a higher incid

The efficacy of antiplatelet treatment with aspirin in the primary prevention of major cardiovascular events was questioned during 2018, following a new series of trials that we summarize here in a quick synoptic overview. The three studies involved are the ASPREE trial, the ASCEND study and the ARRIVE trial. These studies all have a double-blind randomized design, and 100 mg/day aspirin was administered with an intention-to-treat approach and against placebo. Age of the enrolled patients, prevalence of diabetes mellitus and geographical location of other studies are just some of the elements analyzed here, in addition to the different problems of cardiovascular events. The ASPREE study observed a marginal reduction of cardiovascular events with the use of aspirin, by approximately 5% with a confidence interval at risk of insignificancy. On the other hand, the increased risk of a hemorrhagic event appeared to be rather robust, resulting between 18% and 62%. The ASCEND study observed a reduction in cardiovascular events of around 12%, offset by an increase in the risk of major bleeding between 9% and 52%. The ARRIVE study did not detect any incidence of major cardiovascular events, while the risk of major bleeding appeared to even double. The evidences of the current literature push us to review a widespread conviction among professionals who fight the war against cardiovascular disease every day: the prescription of aspirin in the primary prevention can no longer happen systematically, and every single prescription need care between benefits and dangers connected to the treatment. (Cardionephrology), The efficacy of antiplatelet treatment with aspirin in the primary prevention of major cardiovascular events was questioned during 2018, following a new series of trials that we summarize here in a quick synoptic overview. The three studies involved are the ASPREE trial, the ASCEND study and the ARRIVE trial. These studies all have a double-blind randomized design, and 100 mg/day aspirin was administered with an intention-to-treat approach and against placebo. Age of the enrolled patients, prevalence of diabetes mellitus and geographical location of other studies are just some of the elements analyzed here, in addition to the different problems of cardiovascular events. The ASPREE study observed a marginal reduction of cardiovascular events with the use of aspirin, by approximately 5% with a confidence interval at risk of insignificancy. On the other hand, the increased risk of a hemorrhagic event appeared to be rather robust, resulting between 18% and 62%. The ASCEND study observed a reduction in cardiovascular events of around 12%, offset by an increase in the risk of major bleeding between 9% and 52%. The ARRIVE study did not detect any incidence of major cardiovascular events, while the risk of major bleeding appeared to even double. The evidences of the current literature push us to review a widespread conviction among professionals who fight the war against cardiovascular disease every day: the prescription of aspirin in the primary prevention can no longer happen systematically, and every single prescription need care between benefits and dangers connected to the treatment. (Cardionephrology)

Andexanet alfa is a recombinant modified factor Xa protein that has been developed to reverse factor Xa inhibitors. Since May 2018, the FDA has approved its utilization in patients treated with apixaban and rivaroxaban in case of life-threatening or uncontrolled bleeding. On 28 of February 2019, the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use adopted a positive opinion, recommending the granting of a conditional marketing authorization for andexanet alfa in Europe. Area covered: The authors provide an overview of andexanet alfa development and its pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties. The results of the clinical phase III trial ANNEXA as well as current limitations related to andexanet alfa are also discussed. Expert opinion: Although phase I and II studies have proven that andexanet alfa can be effective in reversing the effect of factor Xa inhibitors, its efficacy in major bleeding patients has only been shown for apixaban and rivaroxaban, without any comparator group. Well-designed studies comparing the efficacy and safety of andexanet alfa to other reversal strategies are required to confirm preliminary data. The benefit of andexanet alfa in specific settings needs to be investigated and its use in clinical practice needs to be facilitated by the implementation of international guidelines.

Background and objectives: The timing of blood administration in critically ill patients is first driven by patients' needs. This study aimed to define the epidemiology and significance of overnight transfusion in critically ill patients. Materials and methods: This is a post hoc analysis of a prospective multicentre observational study including 874 critically ill patients receiving red blood cells, platelets, fresh frozen plasma (FFP) or cryoprecipitate. Characteristics of patients receiving blood only during the day (8 am up until 8 pm) were compared to those receiving blood only overnight (8 pm up until 8 am). Characteristics of transfusion were compared, and factors independently associated with major bleeding were analysed. Results: The 287 patients transfused during the day only had similar severity and mortality to the 258 receiving blood products overnight only. Although bleeding-related admission diagnoses were similar, major bleeding was the indication for transfusion in 12% of patients transfused in daytime only versus 30% of patients transfused at night only (P < 0·001). Similar total amount of blood products were transfused at day and night (2856 versus 2927); however, patients were more likely to receive FFP and cryoprecipitate at night compared with daytime. Overnight transfusion was independently associated with increased odds of major bleeding (odds ratio, 3·16, 95% confidence interval, 2·00–5·01). Conclusion: Transfusion occurs evenly across day and night in ICU; nonetheless, there are differences in type of blood products administered that reflect differences in indication. Critically ill patients were more likely to receive blood for major bleeding at night irrespective of admission diagnosis.

Background: Oral anticoagulation is the mainstay of stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF), but must be balanced against the associated bleeding risk. Several risk scores have been proposed for prediction of bleeding events in patients with AF. Objectives: To compare the performance of contemporary clinical bleeding risk scores in 18113 patients with AF randomized to dabigatran 110 mg, 150 mg or warfarin in the RE-LY trial. Methods: HAS-BLED, ORBIT, ATRIA and HEMORR(2)HAGES bleeding risk scores were calculated based on clinical information at baseline. All major bleeding events were centrally adjudicated. Results: There were 1182 (6.5%) major bleeding events during a median follow-up of 2.0 years. For all the four schemes, high-risk subgroups had higher risk of major bleeding (all P<0.001). The ORBIT score showed the best discrimination with c-indices of 0.66, 0.66 and 0.62, respectively, for major, life-threatening and intracranial bleeding, which were significantly better than for the HAS-BLED score (difference in c-indices: 0.050, 0.053 and 0.048, respectively, all P<0.05). The ORBIT score also showed the best calibration compared with previous data. Significant treatment interactions between the bleeding scores and the risk of major bleeding with dabigatran 150 mg BD versus warfarin were found for the ORBIT (P=0.0019), ATRIA (P<0.001) and HEMORR(2)HAGES (P<0.001) scores. HAS-BLED score showed a nonsignificant trend for interaction (P=0.0607). Conclusions: Amongst the current clinical bleeding risk scores, the ORBIT score demonstrated the best discrimination and calibration. All the scores demonstrated, to a variable extent, an interaction with bleeding risk associated with dabigatran or warfarin.

BackgroundTherapeutic decisions in atrial fibrillation (AF) are often influenced by assessment of bleeding risk. However, existing bleeding risk scores have limitations.ObjectivesWe sought to develop and validate a novel bleeding risk score using routinely available clinical information to predict major bleeding in a large, community-based AF population.MethodsWe analysed data from Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF), a prospective registry that enrolled incident and prevalent AF patients at 176 US sites. Using Cox proportional hazards regression, we identified factors independently associated with major bleeding among patients taking oral anticoagulation (OAC) over a median follow-up of 2 years (interquartile range = 1.6-2.5). We also created a numerical bedside risk score that included the five most predictive risk factors weighted according to their strength of association with major bleeding. The predictive performance of the full model, the simple five-item score, and two existing risk scores (hypertension, abnormal renal/liver function, stroke, bleeding history or predisposition, labile INR, elderly, drugs/alcohol concomitantly, HAS-BLED, and anticoagulation and risk factors in atrial fibrillation, ATRIA) were then assessed in both the ORBIT-AF cohort and a separate clinical trial population, Rivaroxaban Once-daily oral direct factor Xa inhibition compared with vitamin K antagonism for prevention of stroke and embolism trial in atrial fibrillation (ROCKET-AF).ResultsAmong 7411 ORBIT-AF patients taking OAC, the rate of major bleeding was 4.0/100 person-years. The full continuous model (12 variables) and five-factor ORBIT risk score (older age [75+ years], reduced haemoglobin/haematocrit/history of anaemia, bleeding history, insufficient kidney function, and treatment with antiplatelet) both had good ability to identify those who bled vs. not (C-index 0.69 and 0.67, respectively). These scores both had similar discri

BackgroundTherapeutic decisions in atrial fibrillation (AF) are often influenced by assessment of bleeding risk. However, existing bleeding risk scores have limitations.ObjectivesWe sought to develop and validate a novel bleeding risk score using routinely available clinical information to predict major bleeding in a large, community-based AF population.MethodsWe analysed data from Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF), a prospective registry that enrolled incident and prevalent AF patients at 176 US sites. Using Cox proportional hazards regression, we identified factors independently associated with major bleeding among patients taking oral anticoagulation (OAC) over a median follow-up of 2 years (interquartile range = 1.6-2.5). We also created a numerical bedside risk score that included the five most predictive risk factors weighted according to their strength of association with major bleeding. The predictive performance of the full model, the simple five-item score, and two existing risk scores (hypertension, abnormal renal/liver function, stroke, bleeding history or predisposition, labile INR, elderly, drugs/alcohol concomitantly, HAS-BLED, and anticoagulation and risk factors in atrial fibrillation, ATRIA) were then assessed in both the ORBIT-AF cohort and a separate clinical trial population, Rivaroxaban Once-daily oral direct factor Xa inhibition compared with vitamin K antagonism for prevention of stroke and embolism trial in atrial fibrillation (ROCKET-AF).ResultsAmong 7411 ORBIT-AF patients taking OAC, the rate of major bleeding was 4.0/100 person-years. The full continuous model (12 variables) and five-factor ORBIT risk score (older age [75+ years], reduced haemoglobin/haematocrit/history of anaemia, bleeding history, insufficient kidney function, and treatment with antiplatelet) both had good ability to identify those who bled vs. not (C-index 0.69 and 0.67, respectively). These scores both had similar discri

Background: An accurate tool with good discrimination for bleeding would be useful to clinicians for improved management of all their patients. Bleeding risk models have been published but not externally validated in independent clinical datasets. We chose the NCDR PCI score to validate within a large, multi-site community dataset. The aim of the study was to determine the diagnostic utility of this bleeding risk score tool. Methods: This is a large-scale retrospective analysis utilizing American College of Cardiology data from a 37-hospital health system. The central repository of PCI procedures between 6-1-2009 and 6-30-2012 was utilized to validate the NCDR PCI bleeding risk score (BRS) among 4693 patients. The primary endpoint was major bleeding. Discriminant analysis calculating the receiver operating characteristic curve was performed. Results: There were 143 (3.0%) major bleeds. Mean bleeding risk score was 14.7 (range 3 – 42). Incidence of bleeding by risk category: low (0.5%), intermediate (1.7%), and high risk (7.6%). Patients given heparin had 113 (3.7%) major bleeds and those given bivalirudin had 30 (2.1%) major bleeds. Tool accuracy was poor to fair (AUC 0.78 heparin, 0.65 bivalirudin). Overall accuracy was 0.71 (CI: 0.66-0.76). Accuracy did not improve when confined to just the intermediate risk group (AUC 0.58; CI: 0.55-0.67). Conclusion: Bleeding risk tools have low predictive value. Adjustment for anticoagulation use resulted in poor discrimination because bivalirudin differentially biases outcomes toward no bleeding. The current state of bleeding risk tools provides little support for diagnostic utility in regards to major bleeding and therefore have limited clinical applicability.