Search

Aims: This study aimed to determine the robustness, reproducibility and representativeness of the landmark Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (AF) (ARISTOTLE) and Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in AF (ROCKET AF) randomised trials through replication in an observational AF patient registry., Methods and Results: Patients from the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD (GARFIELD)-AF registry treated with apixaban, rivaroxaban or vitamin K antagonist (VKA) were assessed for eligibility for the ARISTOTLE and ROCKET AF trials. HRs of apixaban and rivaroxaban versus comparator for stroke/systemic embolism, major bleeding and all-cause mortality within 2 years follow-up were calculated using propensity score overlap-weighted Cox models. Among GARFIELD-AF patients on apixaban, 2570/3615 (71%) would have been eligible for ARISTOTLE. Among patients using rivaroxaban, 2005/4914 (41%) would have been eligible for ROCKET AF. Eligibility rates were steady over time, with minor differences across medical specialties. Real-world AF patients selected according to trial criteria had lower cardiovascular burden than the original trial participants, especially compared with ROCKET AF. HRs (95% CI) for apixaban versus VKA among ARISTOTLE-eligible users were 0.57 (0.34 to 0.94) for stroke/systemic embolism, 0.76 (0.48 to 1.20) for major bleeding and 0.89 (0.70 to 1.12) for all-cause mortality. Among ROCKET AF-eligible rivaroxaban users, HRs for rivaroxaban versus VKA were 0.90 (0.57 to 1.43), 0.92 (0.59 to 1.43) and 0.86 (0.69 to 1.08), respectively. All safety and efficacy estimates were similar to those in the original trials., Conclusion: Real-world representativeness of the selection criteria was greater for ARISTOTLE than ROCKET AF. The pivotal randomised trials of apixaban and rivaroxaban versus warfarin can be successfully emulated in real-world AF patients by applying trial-specific selection criteria and appropriate methodology for non-randomised treatment allocation., Trial Registration Number: NCT01090362., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JC reports institutional grants and personal fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer/BMS and Daiichi Sankyo. KP has consultancies with Johnson & Johnson, Element Science, Artivion and Novartis. FV received grants from Bayer Healthcare and personal fees from Bayer Healthcare, BMS/Pfizer, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Boehringer-Ingelheim. J-PB received a personal fee from Thrombosis Research Institute, during the conduct of the study. FM is a former employee of Bayer AG. FC reports speaker fees from Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma, Bayer, Pfizer and Daiichi-Sankyo Europe and a modest research grant from Daiichi-Sankyo Europe. HG received honoraria from Bayer Australia, Eli Lilly Australia, Pfizer Australia and BMS Australia. AKK received personal fees and grants from Bayer AG, Sanofi S.A. and Anthos Therapeutics. JCLH, SV, REH and ACPB report no conflicts of interest., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2025. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: The extent to which differences in results from Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (ARISTOTLE) and Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial (ROCKET) atrial fibrillation (AF)-the landmark trials for the approval of apixaban and rivaroxaban, respectively, for non-valvular AF-were influenced by differences in their protocols is debated. The potential influence of selection criteria on trial results was assessed by emulating these trials in data from the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the Field (GARFIELD)-AF registry., Methods: Vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and non-vitamin K oral antagonist (NOAC) users from GARFIELD-AF were selected according to eligibility for the original ARISTOTLE or ROCKET AF trials. A propensity score overlap weighted Cox model was used to emulate trial randomisation between treatment groups. Adjusted HRs for stroke or systemic embolism (SE) within 2 years of enrolment were calculated for each NOAC versus VKA., Results: Among patients on apixaban, rivaroxaban and VKA, 2570, 3560 and 8005 were eligible for ARISTOTLE, respectively, and 1612, 2005 and 4368, respectively, for ROCKET AF. When selecting for ARISTOTLE criteria, apixaban users had significantly lower stroke/SE risk versus VKA (HR 0.57; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.94) while no reduction was observed with rivaroxaban (HR 0.98; 95% CI 0.68 to 1.40). When selecting for ROCKET AF criteria, safety and efficacy versus VKA were similar across the NOACs., Conclusion: Apixaban and rivaroxaban showed similar results versus VKA in high-risk patients selected according to ROCKET AF criteria, whereas differences emerged when selecting for the more inclusive ARISTOTLE criteria. Our results highlight the importance of trial selection criteria in interpreting trial results and underline the problems faced in comparing treatments across rather than within clinical trials., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JC reports institutional grants and personal fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer/BMS and Daiichi Sankyo and personal fees from Portola. KP has consultancies with Johnson & Johnson, Element Science, Artivion and Novartis. AO received a research grant from Pfizer and is Steering Committee Member and National Coordinator of the ENGAGE-AF (TIMI 48) study. BFJ received speaker honoraria from Boehringer, Sanofi, Aspen, Pfizer, Takeda and Astra Zeneca Jitendra Pal Singh Sawhney reports professional/advisory fees outside the submitted work from Pfizer, Astra Zeneca, Novartis, Sanofi, Torrent and Lupin. TWL has received research support from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim and Pfizer. HG received honoraria from Bayer Australia, Eli Lilly Australia, Pfizer Australia and BMS Australia Shinya Goto was a recipient of quality personal fees from Jansen and Antos, and Phillips, fees from the American Heart Association as an Associate Editor for Circulation, and Steering Committee fees from Duke University. SH received personal fees from Bayer, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Pfizer, Sanofi. KAAF reports grants and personal fees from Bayer/Janssen and Astra Zeneca. PJ has served as a consultant or on an advisory board for Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Novartis. FV has received grants from Bayer Healthcare, and personal fees from Bayer Healthcare, BMS/Pfizer, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Boehringer-Ingelheim. AKK received personal fees and grants from Bayer AG, Sanofi S.A. and Anthos Therapeutics. JCLH, SV and REH report no conflicts of interest., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Current European Stroke Organisation (ESO) guidelines recommend >48 h of continuous electrocardiographic monitoring for atrial fibrillation (AF) in all patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) with undetermined origin. We assessed the yield of the guideline-recommended monitoring for AF, as well as of extending monitoring up to 14 days., Patients and Methods: We included consecutive patients with stroke/TIA without AF in an academic hospital in The Netherlands. We reported AF incidence and number needed to screen (NNS) in the overall sample after 48 h and 14 days of Holter monitoring., Results: Among 379 patients with median age 63 years (IQR 55-73), 58% male, Holter monitoring detected 10 cases of incident AF during a median of 13 (IQR 12-14) days of monitoring. Seven AF cases were detected within the first 48 hours (incidence 1.85%, 95% CI 0.74-3.81; NNS 54), and three additional AF cases were recorded among the 362 patients with >48 h of monitoring and without AF ⩽ 48 h (incidence 0.83%, 95% CI: 0.17-2.42; NNS 121). All AF cases were detected within the first 7 days of monitoring. Our sample was subject to sampling bias favoring inclusion of participants with low AF risk., Discussion: Strengths of this work were the broad inclusion criteria as recommended by ESO guidelines, and high Holter adherence among participants. The analysis was limited by inclusion of lower-risk cases and a relatively small sample size., Conclusion: In low-risk patients with recent stroke or TIA, ESO guideline-recommended screening for AF resulted in a low AF yield, with limited additional value of monitoring up to 14 days. Our results underline the need for a personalized approach in determining a patient's optimum duration for post-stroke non-invasive ambulatory monitoring., Competing Interests: The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: JCLH has received a grant from Stichting Stoffels-Hornstra and consultancy fees from Thrombosis Research Institute (outside the submitted work); WAML reports no disclosures relevant to the manuscript; JMC reported receiving grants from Dutch Heart Foundation and from Boehringer Ingelheim (outside the submitted work); REH reported receiving grants from the Dutch Research Council (outside the submitted work); JRdG has been supported by research grants from Abbott, AtriCure, Boston Scientific, Bayer, Daiichi Sankyo, Johnson & Johnson, and Medtronic Servier and has received consultancy fees from AtriCure, Bayer, Daiichi Sankyo, Johnson & Johnson, and Medtronic (outside the submitted work); HCPMvW served on the editorial board of the European Journal of General Practice, 2012-2021., (© European Stroke Organisation 2022.)

Direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOAC's) have surpassed vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) as the preferred anticoagulant therapy in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism. In most patients, the benefits of anticoagulant therapy, i.e. prevention of thromboembolism including stroke risk outweigh the risks of bleeding complications. However, in older and frail patients, uptake of DOAC's is limited by concerns of bleeding. Recent developments, with therapeutics that specifically target factor XI, carry a promise to be a game changer. Activated factor XI is thought to contribute to clot progression and thrombosis, but has only a minor effect on clot consolidation during hemostasis. In this paper we will discuss the latest findings of clinical studies on factor XI inhibitors and speculate on future perspectives, including the proposal to use consistent terminology for this emerging class of DOAC's.

Background and Purpose: Hypertension is common in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and carries an additional risk for complications, most notably stroke and bleeding. We assessed the history of hypertension, level of blood pressure control, and an interaction with the choice of oral anticoagulants on clinical outcomes., Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that randomised patients to novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) or vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) and reported outcomes stratified by presence of hypertension. Collected outcomes were: ischaemic stroke or systemic embolism (SE), haemorrhagic stroke, intracranial haemorrhage and major bleeding. Log adjusted hazard ratios (HR) and corresponding standard error were calculated, and HRs were compared using Mantel-Haenszel random effects. Quality of the evidence was assessed with Cochrane risk of bias tool., Results: Five high-quality studies were eligible, including 71.527 participants who received NOACs (apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, rivaroxaban) or VKAs, with median follow-up of 1.8-2.8 years. Compared with patients without hypertension, those with hypertension had higher adjusted risk for ischaemic stroke/SE (HR: 1.25, 95%-CI:1.09, 1.43) and haemorrhagic stroke (HR:1.98, 1.24-3.16). On a continuous scale, the risk of ischaemic stroke/SE increased 6-7% per 10 mmHg increase in systolic blood pressure. No interactions were found between the efficacy or safety of NOACs versus VKAs in the presence or absence of hypertension. In both groups, the use of NOACs led to a lower risk of ischaemic stroke/SE, haemorrhagic stroke and intracranial haemorrhage compared with patients that used VKAs., Conclusions: Adequate blood pressure management is vital to optimally reduce the risk of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation. The benefits of NOACs over VKAs, also apply to patients with elevated blood pressure.

Background: Advancing age is the primary selection criterion for community screening for atrial fibrillation (AF), with selection often restricted to those aged ≥65 years. If multivariable models were shown to have considerable additional value over age alone in predicting AF risk among younger individuals, AF screening could be expanded to patients with lower age, but with high AF risk as per a validated risk model., Methods: We validated risk models CHARGE-AF (Cohorts for Heart and Aging Research in Genomic Epidemiology model for AF) and FHS-AF (Framingham Heart Study model for AF), and risk scores CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc and CHA 2 DS 2 -VA, and presented their predictive abilities for 5-year and 10-year AF risk versus that of age alone in a young Dutch population cohort (PREVEND) free from AF at baseline. We assessed discrimination by the C-statistic and calibration by the calibration plot and stratified Kaplan-Meier plot using survey-weighted Cox models., Results: During 5-year and 10-year follow-up there were n=98 (2.46/1000 person-years) and n=249 (3.29/1000 person-years) new AF cases, respectively, among 8265 participants with mean age 49±13 years. CHARGE-AF and FHS-AF both showed good discrimination for 5-year and 10-year AF (C-statistic range 0.83-0.86) with accurate calibration for 5-year AF, but overestimation of 10-year AF risk in highest-risk individuals. CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc and CHA 2 DS 2 -VA relatively underperformed. Age alone showed similar discrimination to that of CHARGE-AF and FHS-AF both in the overall, young PREVEND cohort and in subgroups for lower age and lower stroke risk., Conclusion: Multivariable models accurately discriminate for 5-year and 10-year AF risk among young European community-dwelling individuals. However, their additional discriminatory value over age alone was limited. Selection strategies for primary AF screening using multivariable models should not be expanded to younger individuals., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Aims: To validate a multivariable risk prediction model (Cohorts for Heart and Aging Research in Genomic Epidemiology model for atrial fibrillation (CHARGE-AF)) for 5-year risk of atrial fibrillation (AF) in routinely collected primary care data and to assess CHARGE-AF's potential for automated, low-cost selection of patients at high risk for AF based on routine primary care data., Methods: We included patients aged ≥40 years, free of AF and with complete CHARGE-AF variables at baseline, 1 January 2014, in a representative, nationwide routine primary care database in the Netherlands (Nivel-PCD). We validated CHARGE-AF for 5-year observed AF incidence using the C-statistic for discrimination, and calibration plot and stratified Kaplan-Meier plot for calibration. We compared CHARGE-AF with other predictors and assessed implications of using different CHARGE-AF cut-offs to select high-risk patients., Results: Among 111 475 patients free of AF and with complete CHARGE-AF variables at baseline (17.2% of all patients aged ≥40 years and free of AF), mean age was 65.5 years, and 53% were female. Complete CHARGE-AF cases were older and had higher AF incidence and cardiovascular comorbidity rate than incomplete cases. There were 5264 (4.7%) new AF cases during 5-year follow-up among complete cases. CHARGE-AF's C-statistic for new AF was 0.74 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.74). The calibration plot showed slight risk underestimation in low-risk deciles and overestimation of absolute AF risk in those with highest predicted risk. The Kaplan-Meier plot with categories <2.5%, 2.5%-5% and >5% predicted 5-year risk was highly accurate. CHARGE-AF outperformed CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc (Cardiac failure or dysfunction, Hypertension, Age >=75 [Doubled], Diabetes, Stroke [Doubled]-Vascular disease, Age 65-74, and Sex category [Female]) and age alone as predictors for AF. Dichotomisation at cut-offs of 2.5%, 5% and 10% baseline CHARGE-AF risk all showed merits for patient selection in AF screening efforts., Conclusion: In patients with complete baseline CHARGE-AF data through routine Dutch primary care, CHARGE-AF accurately assessed AF risk among older primary care patients, outperformed both CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc and age alone as predictors for AF and showed potential for automated, low-cost patient selection in AF screening., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Importance: Antithrombotic treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) presents a balancing act with regard to bleeding and ischemic risks., Objectives: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of 4 antithrombotic regimens by conducting an up-to-date network meta-analysis and to identify the optimal treatment for patients with AF undergoing PCI., Data Sources: Online computerized database (MEDLINE)., Study Selection: Five randomized studies were included (N = 11 542; WOEST, PIONEER AF-PCI, RE-DUAL PCI, AUGUSTUS, ENTRUST-AF PCI)., Data Extraction and Synthesis: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used in this network meta-analysis, in which bayesian random-effects models were applied. The data were analyzed from September 9 to 29, 2019., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary safety outcome was thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) major bleeding and the primary efficacy outcome was trial-defined major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE)., Results: The total number of participants included in the study was 11 532. The mean age of the participants ranged from 70 to 72 years, 69% to 83% were male, 20% to 26% were female, and the participants were predominantly white (>90%). Compared with vitamin K antagonists (VKA) plus dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) (reference), the odds ratios (ORs) (95% credible intervals) for TIMI major bleeding were 0.57 (0.31-1.00) for VKA plus P2Y12 inhibitor, 0.69 (0.40-1.16) for non-VKA oral anticoagulant (NOAC) plus DAPT, and 0.52 (0.35-0.79) for NOAC plus P2Y12 inhibitor. For MACE, using VKA plus DAPT as reference, the ORs (95% credible intervals) were 0.97 (0.64-1.42) for VKA plus P2Y12 inhibitor, 0.95 (0.64-1.39) for NOAC plus DAPT, and 1.03 (0.77-1.38) for NOAC plus P2Y12 inhibitor., Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that an antithrombotic regimen of VKA plus DAPT should generally be avoided, because regimens in which aspirin is discontinued may lead to lower bleeding risk and no difference in antithrombotic effectiveness. The use of a NOAC plus a P2Y12 inhibitor without aspirin may be the most favorable treatment option and the preferred antithrombotic regimen for most patients with AF undergoing PCI.

Aims: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common arrhythmia associated with an increased stroke risk. The use of multivariable prediction models could result in more efficient primary AF screening by selecting at-risk individuals. We aimed to determine which model may be best suitable for increasing efficiency of future primary AF screening efforts., Methods and Results: We performed a systematic review on multivariable models derived, validated, and/or augmented for AF prediction in community cohorts using Pubmed, Embase, and CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) through 1 August 2019. We performed meta-analysis of model discrimination with the summary C-statistic as the primary expression of associations using a random effects model. In case of high heterogeneity, we calculated a 95% prediction interval. We used the CHARMS (Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies) checklist for risk of bias assessment. We included 27 studies with a total of 2 978 659 unique participants among 20 cohorts with mean age ranging from 42 to 76 years. We identified 21 risk models used for incident AF risk in community cohorts. Three models showed significant summary discrimination despite high heterogeneity: CHARGE-AF (Cohorts for Heart and Aging Research in Genomic Epidemiology) [summary C-statistic 0.71; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.66-0.76], FHS-AF (Framingham Heart Study risk score for AF) (summary C-statistic 0.70; 95% CI 0.64-0.76), and CHA2DS2-VASc (summary C-statistic 0.69; 95% CI 0.64-0.74). Of these, CHARGE-AF and FHS-AF had originally been derived for AF incidence prediction. Only CHARGE-AF, which comprises easily obtainable measurements and medical history elements, showed significant summary discrimination among cohorts that had applied a uniform (5-year) risk prediction window., Conclusion: CHARGE-AF appeared most suitable for primary screening purposes in terms of performance and applicability in older community cohorts of predominantly European descent., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2020. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives: To externally validate the accuracy of the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF) model against existing risk scores for stroke and major bleeding risk in patients with non-valvular AF in a population-based cohort., Design: Retrospective cohort study., Setting: Danish nationwide registries., Participants: 90 693 patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular AF were included between 2010 and 2016, with follow-up censored at 1 year., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: External validation was performed using discrimination and calibration plots. C-statistics were compared with CHA 2 DS 2 VASc score for ischaemic stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and HAS-BLED score for major bleeding/haemorrhagic stroke outcomes., Results: Of the 90 693 included, 51 180 patients received oral anticoagulants (OAC). Overall median age (Q1, Q3) were 75 (66-83) years and 48 486 (53.5%) were male. At 1-year follow-up, a total of 2094 (2.3%) strokes/SE, 2642 (2.9%) major bleedings and 10 915 (12.0%) deaths occurred. The GARFIELD-AF model was well calibrated with the predicted risk for stroke/SE and major bleeding. The discriminatory value of GARFIELD-AF risk model was superior to CHA 2 DS 2 VASc for predicting stroke in the overall cohort (C-index: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.70 to 0.72 vs C-index: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.66 to 0.68, p<0.001) as well as in low-risk patients (C-index: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.59 to 0.69 vs C-index: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.53 to 0.61, p=0.007). The GARFIELD-AF model was comparable to HAS-BLED in predicting the risk of major bleeding in patients on OAC therapy (C-index: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.63 to 0.66 vs C-index: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.63 to 0.65, p=0.60)., Conclusion: In a nationwide Danish cohort with non-valvular AF, the GARFIELD-AF model adequately predicted the risk of ischaemic stroke/SE and major bleeding. Our external validation confirms that the GARFIELD-AF model was superior to CHA 2 DS 2 VASc in predicting stroke/SE and comparable with HAS-BLED for predicting major bleeding., Competing Interests: Competing interests: KF has received research grants Bayer/Janssen and AstraZeneca and Consulting/Fees Bayer, Sanofi/Regeneron and Verseon. FV has received honoraria for consulting and presentations from Bayer HealthCare, Boehringer Ibgelheimy, BMSPfizer and Daiichi-Sankyo. GHG has ownership of stocks in Novo Nordisk Pharmaceuticals and reports research grants from Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim and Bayer. CTP declares grants for studies from Bayer. Other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Purpose: To study whether polypharmacy or drug-drug interactions have differential effect on safety and efficacy in patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) versus warfarin., Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that randomized patients with atrial fibrillation to DOACs or warfarin stratified by the number of concomitant drugs. Outcomes included stroke or systemic embolism (SE), all-cause mortality, major bleeding, and intracranial hemorrhage. Risk ratios (RR) were calculated and Mantel-Haenszel random effects were applied., Results: Two high-quality studies were eligible, including 32,465 participants who received apixaban, rivaroxaban, or warfarin, with a median follow-up of 1.9 years. Of participants, 29% used < 5 drugs, 55% used 5-9 drugs, and 16% used ≥ 10 drugs. Drugs interacting with DOACs (P-glycoprotein/CYP3A4) were used by 6460 (20%) of patients. Patients with higher number of drugs (0-4 vs 5-9 vs ≥ 10) had higher rates of mortality (5.8%, 7.9%, 10.0%) and major bleeding (3.4%, 4.8%, 7.7%). Comparative efficacy or safety of DOACs versus warfarin was not affected by polypharmacy status or P-glycoprotein/CYP3A4 inhibitor use. However, the presence of polypharmacy (p = 0.001) or glycoprotein/CYP3A4-modulating drugs (p = 0.03) was correlated with increased risk of major bleeding when compared with warfarin. Overall, DOAC use was associated with a lower risk of stroke/SE (RR, 0.84; 95%CI, 0.74-0.94), all-cause mortality (RR, 0.91; 95%CI, 0.84-0.98), and intracranial hemorrhage (RR, 0.51; 95%CI, 0.38-0.70) compared with warfarin., Conclusions: DOACs were more effective than warfarin, and at least as safe. Polypharmacy was associated with adverse outcomes and attenuated the advantage in risk of major bleeding among rivaroxaban users, particularly in the presence of P-glycoprotein/CYP3A4-modulating drugs.

Background: Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) represents a minimally invasive revascularization strategy in which the durability of the internal mammary artery to left anterior descending artery graft is combined with percutaneous coronary intervention to treat remaining lesions. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare clinical outcomes after HCR with conventional coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery., Methods: A comprehensive EMBASE and PUBMED search was performed for comparative studies evaluating in-hospital and 1-year death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and repeat revascularization., Results: Six observational studies (1 case control, 5 propensity adjusted) comprising 1,190 patients were included; 366 (30.8%) patients underwent HCR (185 staged and 181 concurrent), and 824 (69.2%) were treated with CABG (786 off-pump, 38 on-pump). Drug-eluting stents were used in 328 (89.6%) patients undergoing HCR. Hybrid coronary revascularization was associated with lower in-hospital need for blood transfusions, shorter length of stay, and faster return to work. No significant differences were found for the composite of death, MI, stroke, or repeat revascularization during hospitalization (odds ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.25-1.58, P = .33) and at 1-year follow-up (odds ratio 0.49, 95% CI 0.20-1.24, P = .13). Comparisons of individual components showed no difference in all-cause mortality, MI, or stroke, but higher repeat revascularization among patients treated with HCR., Conclusions: Hybrid coronary revascularization is associated with lower morbidity and similar in-hospital and 1-year major adverse cerebrovascular or cardiac events rates, but greater requirement for repeat revascularization compared with CABG. Further exploration of this strategy with adequately powered randomized trials is warranted., (Copyright © 2014 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The use of apixaban instead of vitamin K antagonists (VKA) as well as dropping aspirin results in less bleeding and comparable ischemic events in patients with atrial fibrillation and acute coronary syndrome and/or percutaneous coronary intervention treated with a P2Y12 inhibitor.Objectives: The authors assessed the safety and efficacy of antithrombotic regimens according to HAS-BLED and CHA2DS2-VASc scores in AUGUSTUS (The Open-Label, 2 × 2 Factorial, Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Safety of Apixaban vs. Vitamin K Antagonist and Aspirin vs. Placebo in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Acute Coronary Syndrome and/or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention).Methods: In AUGUSTUS, 4,614 patients were randomized in a 2-by-2 factorial design to open-label apixaban or VKA and blinded aspirin or placebo. The primary endpoint was major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding over 6 months of follow-up. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess treatment effects by baseline HAS-BLED (≤2 vs ≥3) and CHA2DS2-VASc (≤2 vs ≥3) scores.Results: Of 4,386 (95.1%) patients with calculable scores, 66.8% had HAS-BLED ≥3 and 81.7% had CHA2DS2-VASc ≥3. Bleeding rates were lower with apixaban than VKA irrespective of baseline risk (HR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.41-0.78 [HAS-BLED ≤2]; HR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.59-0.88 [HAS-BLED ≥3]; interaction P = 0.23). Aspirin increased bleeding irrespective of baseline risk (HR: 1.86; 95% CI: 1.36-2.56 [HAS-BLED ≤2]; HR: 1.81; 95% CI: 1.47-2.23 [HAS-BLED ≥3]; interaction P = 0.88). Apixaban resulted in a lower risk of death or hospitalization than VKA without a significant interaction with baseline stroke risk (HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.67-1.25 [CHA2DS2-VASc ≤2]; HR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.73-0.94 [CHA2DS2-VASc ≥3]; interaction P = 0.53).Conclusions: Our findings support the use of apixaban and a P2Y12 inhibitor without aspirin for most patients with atrial fibrillation and acute coronary syndrome and/or percutaneous coronary intervention, irrespective of a patient's baseline bleeding and stroke risk (NCT02415400). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common arrhythmia associated with an increased stroke risk. The use of multivariable prediction models could result in more efficient primary AF screening by selecting at-risk individuals. We aimed to determine which model may be best suitable for increasing efficiency of future primary AF screening efforts.Methods and Results: We performed a systematic review on multivariable models derived, validated, and/or augmented for AF prediction in community cohorts using Pubmed, Embase, and CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) through 1 August 2019. We performed meta-analysis of model discrimination with the summary C-statistic as the primary expression of associations using a random effects model. In case of high heterogeneity, we calculated a 95% prediction interval. We used the CHARMS (Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies) checklist for risk of bias assessment. We included 27 studies with a total of 2 978 659 unique participants among 20 cohorts with mean age ranging from 42 to 76 years. We identified 21 risk models used for incident AF risk in community cohorts. Three models showed significant summary discrimination despite high heterogeneity: CHARGE-AF (Cohorts for Heart and Aging Research in Genomic Epidemiology) [summary C-statistic 0.71; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.66-0.76], FHS-AF (Framingham Heart Study risk score for AF) (summary C-statistic 0.70; 95% CI 0.64-0.76), and CHA2DS2-VASc (summary C-statistic 0.69; 95% CI 0.64-0.74). Of these, CHARGE-AF and FHS-AF had originally been derived for AF incidence prediction. Only CHARGE-AF, which comprises easily obtainable measurements and medical history elements, showed significant summary discrimination among cohorts that had applied a uniform (5-year) risk prediction window.Conclusion: CHARGE-AF appeared most suitable for primary screening purposes in terms of performance and applicability in older community cohorts of predominantly European descent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on a study which compares the effectiveness of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with multivessel coronary disease for long-term mortality and morbidity. The study employed data from bibliographical databases such as MEDLINE and Exerpta Medica. The study concludes that CABG is more effective than PCI in controlling long-term mortality and morbidity.

Background: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly used in perioperative pain management of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery. However, the association of periprocedural use of NSAIDs and clinical outcomes after coronary artery bypass graft is understudied.Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis using pooled data from 2 multicenter randomized controlled trials (PREVENT IV [n = 3014] and MEND-CABG II [n = 3023]). Rates of death, death or myocardial infarction, and death, myocardial infarction, or stroke in the 30 days following coronary artery bypass graft surgery were compared in patients using or not using perioperative NSAIDs. Inverse probability of treatment weighting and Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to adjust for confounding.Results: A total of 5887 patients were studied. Median age was 65 years, 78% were male, and 91% were White. NSAIDs were used in 2368 (40.2%) patients. The majority of patients (1822 [30.9%]) received NSAIDs after coronary artery bypass graft surgery; 289 (4.9%) used them prior to and after the surgery; and 257 (4.4) received NSAIDs prior to the surgery only. Adjusted 30-day outcomes were similar in patients receiving and not receiving NSAIDs (death: hazard ratio [HR] 1.18; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48-2.92; death or myocardial infarction: HR 0.87; 95% CI, 0.42-1.79; death, myocardial infarction, or stroke: HR 0.87; 95% CI, 0.46-1.65).Conclusion: In this pooled data analysis, perioperative NSAID use was common among patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery and was not associated with an increased short-term risk for major adverse clinical outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]