Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Liver Disease

BackgroundAdvanced liver disease is known to increase the risk for bleeding and affects the hepatic clearance and metabolism of drugs. Subjects with active liver disease were excluded from pivotal clinical trials of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), so the evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of DOACs in patients with liver disease is lacking.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare DOACs with warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and liver disease.MethodsUsing the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, subjects with atrial fibrillation and active liver disease treated with oral anticoagulation were included (12,778 with warfarin and 24,575 with DOACs), and analyzed ischemic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, gastrointestinal bleeding, major bleeding, all-cause death, and the composite outcome. Propensity score weighting was used to balance covariates between the 2 groups.ResultsDOACs were associated with lower risks for ischemic stroke (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.548; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.485 to 0.618), intracranial hemorrhage (HR: 0.479; 95% CI 0.394 to 0.581), gastrointestinal bleeding (HR: 0.819; 95% CI: 0.619 to 0.949), major bleeding (HR: 0.650; 95% CI: 0.575 to 0.736), all-cause death (HR: 0.698; 95% CI: 0.636 to 0.765), and the composite outcome (HR: 0.610; 95% CI: 0.567 to 0.656) than warfarin. Among the total study population, 13% of patients (n = 4,942) were identified as having significant active liver disease. A consistent benefit was observed in patients with significant active liver disease (HR for the composite outcome: 0.691; 95% CI: 0.577 to 0.827).ConclusionsIn this large Asian population with atrial fibrillation and liver disease, DOACs showed better effectiveness and safety than warfarin, which was consistent in those with significant active liver disease.     

Oral Anticoagulation for Patients With Atrial Fibrillation on Long-Term Dialysis

BackgroundPatients on long-term dialysis are at increased risk of bleeding. Although oral anticoagulants (OACs) are recommended for atrial fibrillation (AF) to reduce the risk of stroke, randomized trials have excluded these populations. As such, the net clinical benefit of OACs among patients on dialysis is unknown.ObjectivesThis study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of OACs in patients with AF on long-term dialysis.MethodsMEDLINE and EMBASE were searched through June 10, 2019, for studies that investigated the efficacy and safety of different OAC strategies in patients with AF on long-term dialysis. The efficacy outcomes were ischemic stroke and/or systemic thromboembolism, all-cause mortality, and the safety outcome was major bleeding.ResultsThis study identified 16 eligible observational studies (N = 71,877) regarding patients on long-term dialysis who had AF. Only 2 of 16 studies investigated direct OACs. Outcomes for dabigatran and rivaroxaban were limited to major bleeding events. Compared with no anticoagulants, apixaban and warfarin were not associated with a significant decrease in stroke and/or systemic thromboembolism (apixaban 5 mg, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.30 to 1.17; apixaban 2.5 mg, HR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.93; warfarin, HR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.72 to 1.16). Apixaban 5 mg was associated with a significantly lower risk of mortality (vs. warfarin, HR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.93; vs. apixaban 2.5 mg, HR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.90; vs. no anticoagulant, HR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.41 to 0.90). Warfarin was associated with a significantly higher risk of major bleeding than apixaban 5 min/2.5 mg and no anticoagulant (vs. apixaban 5 mg, HR: 1.41; 95% CI: 1.07 to 1.88; vs. apixaban 2.5 mg, HR: 1.40; 95% CI: 1.07 to 1.82; vs. no anticoagulant, HR: 1.31; 95% CI: 1.15 to 1.50). Dabigatran and rivaroxaban were also associated with significantly higher risk of major bleeding than apixaban and no anticoagulant.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis showed that OACs were not associated with a reduced risk of thromboembolism in patients with AF on long-term dialysis. Warfarin, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban were associated with significantly higher bleeding risk compared with apixaban and no anticoagulant. The benefit-to-risk ratio of OACs in patients with AF on long-term dialysis warrants validation in randomized clinical trials.     

Left Atrial Appendage Closure Versus Direct Oral Anticoagulants in High-Risk Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

BackgroundPercutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is noninferior to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for preventing atrial fibrillation (AF)–related stroke. However, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have an improved safety profile over VKAs, and their effect on cardiovascular and neurological outcomes relative to LAAC is unknown.ObjectivesThis study sought to compare DOACs with LAAC in high-risk patients with AF.MethodsLeft Atrial Appendage Closure vs. Novel Anticoagulation Agents in Atrial Fibrillation (PRAGUE-17) was a multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial comparing LAAC with DOACs. Patients were eligible to be enrolled if they had nonvalvular AF; were indicated for oral anticoagulation (OAC); and had a history of bleeding requiring intervention or hospitalization, a history of a cardioembolic event while taking an OAC, and/or a CHA₂DS₂-VASc of ≥3 and HAS-BLED of >2. Patients were randomized to receive LAAC or DOAC. The primary composite outcome was stroke, transient ischemic attack, systemic embolism, cardiovascular death, major or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding, or procedure-/device-related complications. The primary analysis was by modified intention to treat.ResultsA high-risk patient cohort (CHA₂DS₂-VASc: 4.7 ± 1.5) was randomized to receive LAAC (n = 201) or DOAC (n = 201). LAAC was successful in 181 of 201 (90.0%) patients. In the DOAC group, apixaban was most frequently used (192 of 201; 95.5%). At a median 19.9 months of follow-up, the annual rates of the primary outcome were 10.99% with LAAC and 13.42% with DOAC (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR]: 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.53 to 1.31; p = 0.44; p = 0.004 for noninferiority). There were no differences between groups for the components of the composite endpoint: all-stroke/TIA (sHR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.40 to 2.51), clinically significant bleeding (sHR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.44 to 1.52), and cardiovascular death (sHR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.34 to 1.62). Major LAAC-related complications occurred in 9 (4.5%) patients.ConclusionsAmong patients at high risk for stroke and increased risk of bleeding, LAAC was noninferior to DOAC in preventing major AF-related cardiovascular, neurological, and bleeding events. (Left Atrial Appendage Closure vs. Novel Anticoagulation Agents in Atrial Fibrillation [PRAGUE-17]; NCT02426944)     

The Impact of CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED Scores on Clinical Outcomes in the Amplatzer Amulet Study

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of CHA₂DS₂-VASc and HAS-BLED scores on ischemic and bleeding events of patients enrolled in the Amplatzer Amulet Observational Study.BackgroundBaseline CHA₂DS₂-VASc and HAS-BLED scores have been validated in atrial fibrillation patients to guide about anticoagulation but not in patients treated by left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO).MethodsSubjects were stratified according to CHA₂DS₂-VASc and HAS-BLED scores. Clinical outcomes were collected through 2 years and adjudicated by an independent committee.ResultsSubjects were considered at low (n = 156), moderate (n = 715), and high (n = 215) risk for ischemic stroke, corresponding to CHA₂DS₂-VASc scores of <3, 3 to 5, and ≥6, respectively. The annual rates of ischemic stroke were 1.1%, 2.0%, and 3.5%, respectively. When compared with the predicted rate, LAAO reduced the risk of ischemic stroke by 56%, 69%, and 68%. Device-related thrombus occurred in 0.7%, 1.5%, and 3.0% of subjects at low, moderate, and high risk for ischemic stroke, respectively. The HAS-BLED score was ≤3 in 629 subjects and >3 in 456 subjects, respectively. Non-peri-procedural major bleeding was reduced by 11% and 9% compared with predicted rates in the low and high bleeding risk groups, respectively.ConclusionsLAAO with the Amplatzer Amulet reduced the risk of ischemic stroke compared with the predicted rate, with a greater magnitude among patients at high thromboembolic risk without increasing the bleeding risk. (Amplatzer™Amulet™ Post-Market Study [Amulet™PMS]; NCT02447081)     

Clinical Outcomes at 1 Year Following Transcatheter Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in the United States

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to report 1-year clinical outcomes following commercial transcatheter left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) in the United States.BackgroundThe National Cardiovascular Data Registry LAAO Registry was initiated to meet a condition of Medicare coverage and allow the assessment of clinical outcomes. The 1-year rates of thromboembolic events after transcatheter LAAO in such a large cohort of “real-world” patients have not been previously reported.MethodsPatients entered into the National Cardiovascular Data Registry LAAO Registry for a Watchman procedure between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2018, were included. The primary endpoint was ischemic stroke. Key secondary endpoints included the rate of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism, mortality, and major bleeding. Major bleeding was defined as any bleeding requiring hospitalization, and/or causing a decrease in hemoglobin level > 2g/dL, and/or requiring blood transfusion that was not hemorrhagic stroke. The Kaplan-Meier method was used for 1-year estimates of cumulative event rates.ResultsThe study population consisted of 36,681 patients. The mean age was 76.0 ± 8.1 years, the mean CHA₂DS₂-VASc score was 4.8 ± 1.5, and the mean HAS-BLED score was 3.0 ± 1.1. Prior stroke was present in 25.5%, clinically relevant bleeding in 69.5%, and intracranial bleeding in 11.9%. Median follow-up was 374 days (IQR: 212-425 days). The Kaplan-Meier–estimated 1-year rate of ischemic stroke was 1.53% (95% CI: 1.39%-1.69%), the rate of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism was 2.19% (95% CI: 2.01%-2.38%), and the rate of mortality was 8.52% (95% CI: 8.19%-8.87%). The 1-year estimated rate of major bleeding was 6.93% (95% CI: 6.65%-7.21%). Most bleeding events occurred between discharge and 45 days following the procedure.ConclusionsThis study characterizes important outcomes in a national cohort of patients undergoing transcatheter LAAO in the United States. Clinicians and patients can integrate these data in shared decision making when considering this therapy.     

Incidence,Characterization, and Clinical Impact of Device-Related Thrombus Following Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in the Prospective Global AMPLATZER Amulet Observational Study

ObjectivesThis study sought to report the incidence, characteristics, and clinical impact of device-related thrombus (DRT) following left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) with the AMPLATZER Amulet device (Abbott, Plymouth, Minnesota).BackgroundDRT is a potential serious complication of LAAO, but the incidence and clinical impact of DRTs in a real-world setting are not well characterized.MethodsA total of 1,088 patients were enrolled in a multicenter prospective study and followed for 1 year. All events were adjudicated by an independent committee, including the presence of DRT. Patients with DRT were reviewed for suboptimal device implantation and characterization of DRT formation. Multiple Cox regression was performed to identify predictors of DRT formation.ResultsDevice implantation was successful in 1,078 (99%) patients, with 1-year follow-up completed in 96.3% of patients. A total of 18 DRTs occurred in 17 patients (1.7%/year), as a second DRT developed following complete resolution of an initial DRT in 1 patient. The left upper pulmonary vein ridge was not covered by the Amulet disc in 82% of DRT patients, indicating suboptimal implantation, with most thrombus developing in the untrabeculated area of the LAA ostium between the pulmonary vein ridge and the upper edge of the disc. Three (18%) DRT patients had an ischemic stroke, all within 3 months of DRT diagnosis. Patients with a DRT were at a greater risk for ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack compared with non-DRT patients (hazard ratio: 5.27; 95% confidence interval: 1.58 to 17.55; p = 0.007). Larger LAA orifice width was a predictor of DRT formation (hazard ratio: 1.09; 95% confidence interval: 1.00 to 1.19; p = 0.04).ConclusionsFollowing LAAO with the AMPLATZER Amulet device, DRT was observed infrequently. Although the presence of DRT was associated with an increased rate of ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack as compared with patients without DRT, the large majority of DRT patients (82%) did not experience any ischemic neurologic events.     

TAVR Patients Requiring Anticoagulation: Direct Oral Anticoagulant or Vitamin K Antagonist?

ObjectivesUsing French transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) registries linked with the nationwide administrative databases, the study compared the rates of long-term mortality, bleeding, and ischemic events after TAVR in patients requiring oral anticoagulation with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) or vitamin K antagonists (VKAs).BackgroundThe choice of optimal drug for anticoagulation after TAVR remains debated.MethodsData from the France-TAVI and FRANCE-2 registries were linked to the French national health single-payer claims database, from 2010 to 2017. Propensity score matching was used to reduce treatment-selection bias. Two primary endpoints were death from any cause (efficacy) and major bleeding (safety).ResultsA total of 24,581 patients who underwent TAVR were included and 8,962 (36.4%) were treated with OAC. Among anticoagulated patients, 2,180 (24.3%) were on DOACs. After propensity matching, at 3 years, mortality (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.37; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.12-1.67; P < 0.005) and major bleeding including hemorrhagic stroke (HR: 1.64; 95% CI: 1.17-2.29; P < 0.005) were lower in patients on DOACs compared with those on VKAs. The rates of ischemic stroke (HR: 1.32; 95% CI: 0.81-2.15; P = 0.27) and acute coronary syndrome (HR: 1.17; 95% CI: 0.68-1.99; P = 0.57) did not differ among groups.ConclusionsIn these large multicenter French TAVR registries with an exhaustive clinical follow-up, the long-term mortality and major bleeding were lower with DOACs than VKAs at discharge. The present study supports preferential use of DOACs rather than VKAs in patients requiring oral anticoagulation therapy after TAVR.     

Peridevice Leak After Transcatheter Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: An Analysis of the Amulet IDE Trial

BackgroundPeridevice leak (PDL) is a limitation of left atrial appendage occlusion.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess the incidence of and outcomes associated with PDL in the Amulet IDE (AMPLATZER? Amulet? LAA Occluder Trial) randomized controlled trial.MethodsPatients with atrial fibrillation at increased stroke risk were randomly assigned to undergo either Amulet (dual occlusive mechanism) or Watchman 2.5 (single occlusive mechanism) device implantation. Transesophageal echocardiography was performed at 45 days and 12 months postprocedure. Clinically significant PDL was defined as ≥3 mm. The primary endpoint was ischemic stroke or systemic embolism, and the secondary endpoint was stroke, systemic embolism, or cardiovascular death. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate 18-month cumulative event rates landmarked at day 45 postprocedure.ResultsA total of 1,593 patients underwent successful left atrial appendage occlusion and had an evaluable transesophageal echocardiographic studies at 45 days. The dual–occlusive mechanism device provided superior closure (defined as leak <3 mm) compared with the single–occlusive mechanism device at 45 days (88.9% vs 74.1%; P < 0.01) and 12 months (90.5% vs. 78.3%; P < 0.01). Through 18 months, PDL was associated with a higher, but not statistically significant, risk for the primary endpoint (3.6% vs 1.8%; adjusted HR: 1.98; 95% CI: 0.93-4.19; P = 0.07) and a statistically significantly higher risk for the secondary endpoint (8.1% vs. 4.7%; adjusted HR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.02-2.69; P = 0.04).ConclusionsThe dual–occlusive mechanism device provided superior closure compared with the single–occlusive mechanism device at both 45 days and 1 year postprocedure. PDL ≥3 mm was associated with a significantly increased 18-month risk for the composite of stroke, systemic embolism, or cardiovascular death. Completeness of closure of the left atrial appendage has important implications for patient outcomes. (AMPLATZER? Amulet? LAA Occluder Trial [Amulet IDE]; NCT02879448)     

Impact of Pre-Existing and New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation on Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

ObjectivesThis study sought to evaluate impact of new-onset and pre-existing atrial fibrillation (AF) on transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) long-term outcomes compared with patients without AF.BackgroundPre-existing and new-onset AF in patients undergoing TAVR are associated with poor outcomes.MethodsThe study identified 72,660 patients ≥65 years of age who underwent nonapical TAVR between 2014 and 2016 using Medicare inpatient claims. History of AF was defined by diagnoses on claims during the 3 years preceding the TAVR, and new-onset AF was defined as occurrence of AF during the TAVR admission or within 30 days after TAVR in a patient without prior history of AF. Outcomes included all-cause mortality, and readmission for bleeding, stroke, and heart failure (HF).ResultsOverall, 40.7% had pre-existing AF (n = 29,563) and 6.8% experienced new-onset AF (n = 2,948) after TAVR. Mean age was 81.3, 82.4, and 83.8 years in patients with no AF, pre-existing, and new-onset AF, respectively. Pre-existing AF patients had the highest burden of comorbidities. After follow-up of 73,732 person-years, mortality was higher with new-onset AF compared with pre-existing and no AF (29.7, 22.6, and 12.8 per 100 person-years, respectively; p < 0.001). After adjusting for patient characteristics and hospital TAVR volume, new-onset AF remained associated with higher mortality compared with no AF (adjusted hazard ratio: 2.068, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.92 to 2.20; p < 0.01) and pre-existing AF (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.35; 95% CI: 1.26 to 1.45; p < 0.01). In competing risk analysis, new-onset AF was associated with higher risk of bleeding (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR]: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.48 to 1.86; p < 0.01), stroke (sHR: 1.92; 95% CI: 1.63 to 2.26; p < 0.01), and HF (sHR: 1.98; 95% CI: 1.81 to 2.16; p < 0.01) compared with pre-existing AF.ConclusionsIn patients undergoing TAVR, new-onset AF is associated with increased risk of mortality and bleeding, stroke, and HF hospitalizations compared with pre-existing AF or no AF.     

Patient-Level Analysis of Watchman Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Practice Versus Clinical Trials

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare outcomes among patients from the PROTECT-AF (WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage System for Embolic PROTECTion in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation) and PREVAIL (Evaluation of the WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage [LAA] Closure Device in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Versus Long Term Warfarin Therapy) left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) trials with matched patients from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry LAAO Registry using patient-level data.BackgroundPatients undergoing LAAO in clinical practice generally have more comorbidities than trial participants.MethodsPropensity-matched analyses, with up to 3 registry patients matched to each trial patient, were performed using Cox proportional hazards and Fine-Gray models.ResultsA total of 1,904 registry patients were matched to 667 trial LAAO patients; 1,010 registry patients were matched to 348 warfarin patients. Compared with registry patients, trial LAAO patients experienced more pericardial effusion requiring intervention (3.8% vs 0.6%, P < 0.001), periprocedural ischemic stroke (0.9% vs 0.2%, P = 0.005), and failed device implantation (7.5% vs 3.6%, P < 0.001). The 425-day risk of ischemic stroke in trial LAAO patients was higher than in registry patients (2.70% vs 1.21%; HR: 1.951; P = 0.03); warfarin patients had comparable rates of ischemic stroke compared with registry patients (1.15% vs 1.29%; HR: 0.728; P = 0.57). Hemorrhagic stroke risk was similar among trial LAAO and registry patients (P = 0.88). Hemorrhagic stroke risk was greater among warfarin patients versus registry patients (1.44% vs 0.20%; HR: 5.871, P = 0.03). Mortality was lower in trial LAAO patients than in registry patients (2.92% vs 6.23%; HR: 0.477; P = 0.004), a difference attributable to noncardiovascular deaths. Mortality was similar (P = 0.44) among trial warfarin (4.48%) and registry (5.86%) patients.ConclusionIn clinical practice, patients who meet trial criteria and undergo LAAO experience a lower risk of ischemic stroke, a similar risk of hemorrhagic stroke, and a higher risk of death after implant versus LAAO trial patients. (WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage System for Embolic PROTECTion in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation [PROTECT-AF], NCT00129545; Evaluation of the WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage [LAA] Closure Device in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Versus Long Term Warfarin Therapy [PREVAIL], NCT01182441)     

Aspirin for Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Events

BackgroundThe efficacy and safety of aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) remain debatable.ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to examine the clinical outcomes with aspirin for primary prevention of CVD after the recent publication of large trials adding >45,000 individuals to the published data.MethodsRandomized controlled trials comparing clinical outcomes with aspirin versus control for primary prevention with follow-up duration of ≥1 year were included. Efficacy outcomes included all-cause death, cardiovascular (CV) death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), and major adverse cardiovascular events. Safety outcomes included major bleeding, intracranial bleeding, fatal bleeding, and major gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. Random effects DerSimonian-Laird risk ratios (RRs) for outcomes were calculated.ResultsA total of 15 randomized controlled trials including 165,502 participants (aspirin n = 83,529, control n = 81,973) were available for analysis. Compared with control, aspirin was associated with similar all-cause death (RR: 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.93 to 1.01), CV death (RR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.00), and non-CV death (RR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.92 to 1.05), but a lower risk of nonfatal MI (RR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.72 to 0.94), TIA (RR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.71 to 0.89), and ischemic stroke (RR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.79 to 0.95). Aspirin was associated with a higher risk of major bleeding (RR: 1.5; 95% CI: 1.33 to 1.69), intracranial bleeding (RR: 1.32; 95% CI: 1.12 to 1.55), and major GI bleeding (RR: 1.52; 95% CI: 1.34 to 1.73), with similar rates of fatal bleeding (RR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.78 to 1.55) compared with the control subjects. Total cancer and cancer-related deaths were similar in both groups within the follow-up period of the study.ConclusionsAspirin for primary prevention reduces nonfatal ischemic events but significantly increases nonfatal bleeding events.     

Prevalence of Left Atrial Thrombus in Anticoagulated Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

BackgroundThe prevalence of left atrial (LA) thrombus in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) or atrial flutter (AFL) on guideline-directed anticoagulation is not well known, yet this may inform transesophageal echocardiogram (TEE) use before cardioversion or catheter ablation.ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to quantify LA thrombus prevalence among patients with AF/AFL on guideline-directed anticoagulation and to identify high-risk subgroups.MethodsEMBASE, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL were systematically searched from inception to July 2020 for studies reporting on LA thrombus prevalence among patients with AF/AFL undergoing TEE following at least 3 weeks of continuous therapeutic oral anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) or direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Meta-analysis was performed using random effects models.ResultsThirty-five studies describing 14,653 patients were identified. The mean-weighted LA thrombus prevalence was 2.73% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.95% to 3.80%). LA thrombus prevalence was similar for VKA- and DOAC-treated patients (2.80%; 95% CI: 1.86% to 4.21% vs. 3.12%; 95% CI: 1.92% to 5.03%; p = 0.674). Patients with nonparoxysmal AF/AFL had a 4-fold higher LA thrombus prevalence compared with paroxysmal patients (4.81%; 95% CI: 3.35% to 6.86% vs. 1.03%; 95% CI: 0.52% to 2.03%; p < 0.001). LA thrombus prevalence was higher among patients undergoing cardioversion versus ablation (5.55%; 95% CI: 3.15% to 9.58% vs. 1.65%; 95% CI: 1.07% to 2.53%; p < 0.001). Patients with CHA₂DS₂-VASc scores ≥3 had a higher LA thrombus prevalence compared with patients with scores ≤2 (6.31%; 95% CI: 3.72% to 10.49% vs. 1.06%; 95% CI: 0.45% to 2.49%; p < 0.001).ConclusionsLA thrombus prevalence is high in subgroups of anticoagulated patients with AF/AFL, who may benefit from routine pre-procedural TEE use before cardioversion or catheter ablation.     

Ticagrelor or Prasugrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome in Relation to Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of ticagrelor versus prasugrel for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) according to their estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFRs).BackgroundThe outcomes of ticagrelor versus prasugrel in patients with ACS according to eGFR have not been defined.MethodsPatients (n = 4,012) were categorized into 3 groups: low eGFR (<60 mL/min/1.73 m²), intermediate eGFR (≥60 and <90 mL/min/1.73 m²), and high eGFR (≥90 mL/min/1.73 m²). The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and stroke; the secondary safety endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium types 3 to 5 bleeding, both at 1 year.ResultsPatients with low eGFRs had a higher risk for the primary endpoint compared with patients with intermediate eGFRs (adjusted HR: 1.89; 95% CI: 1.46-2.46]) and those with high eGFRs (adjusted HR: 2.33; 95% CI: 1.57-3.46). A risk excess for low eGFR was also observed for bleeding (adjusted HR: 1.55 [95% CI: 1.12-2.13] vs intermediate eGFR; adjusted HR: 1.59 [95% CI: 1.01-2.50] vs high eGFR). However, eGFR did not affect the relative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel. In patients with low eGFR, the primary endpoint occurred in 20.5% with ticagrelor and in 14.7% with prasugrel (HR: 1.47; 95% CI: 1.04-2.08; P = 0.029); there was no significant difference in bleeding.ConclusionsThese results show that among patients with ACS, reduction of eGFR is associated with increased risk for ischemic and bleeding events but has no significant impact on the relative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel. (Prospective, Randomized Trial of Ticagrelor Versus Prasugrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome [ISAR-REACT 5]; NCT01944800)     

Association of Multiple Enrichment Criteria With Ischemic and Bleeding Risks Among COMPASS-Eligible Patients

BackgroundThe COMPASS (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) trial found clinical benefit of low-dose rivaroxaban plus aspirin, but at the expense of increased bleeding risk in patients with stable vascular disease.ObjectivesThis study evaluated the balance of ischemic and bleeding risks according to the presence of ≥1 enrichment criteria in “COMPASS-eligible” patients.MethodsKey COMPASS selection criteria were applied to identify a COMPASS-eligible population (n = 16,875) from the REACH (REduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health) Registry of stable atherothrombotic patients. Ischemic outcome was the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Bleeding outcome was serious bleeding (hemorrhagic stroke, hospitalization for bleeding, transfusion).ResultsPatients were categorized according to the enrichment criteria: age >65 years (81.5%), diabetes (41.0%), moderate renal failure (40.2%), peripheral artery disease (33.7%), current smoker (13.8%), heart failure (13.3%), ischemic stroke (11.1%), and asymptomatic carotid stenosis (8.7%). Each criterion was associated with a consistent increase in ischemic and bleeding events, but no individual subgroup derived a more favorable trade-off. Patients with multiple criteria had a dramatic increase in ischemic risk (7.0% [95% confidence interval (CI): 5.6% to 8.7%], 12.5% [95% CI: 11.1% to 14.1%], 16.6% [95% CI: 14.7% to 18.6%], and 21.8% [95% CI: 19.9% to 23.9%] with 1, 2, 3, and ≥4 enrichment criteria, respectively), but a more modest absolute increase in bleeding risk (1.5% [95% CI: 0.9% to 2.1%], 1.8% [95% CI: 1.3% to 2.2%], 2.0% [95% CI: 1.5% to 2.6%], 3.2% [95% CI: 2.6% to 3.9%]).ConclusionsIn a population of stable vascular patients at high risk of atherothrombotic events, the subset with multiple enrichment criteria had a greater absolute increase in ischemic than in bleeding risk and may be good candidates for low-dose rivaroxaban in addition to aspirin.     

New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

ObjectivesThe authors aimed to identify risk factors and outcomes associated with new-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).BackgroundNOAF is a common complication after TAVR, although estimates of the precise occurrence are variable. This study sought to quantify the occurrence of NOAF after TAVR and to explore the outcomes and predictors associated with this complication.MethodsWe searched Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane database from 2016 to 2020 for articles that reported NOAF after TAVR. We extracted data for studies published before 2016 from a previous systematic review. We pooled data using a random effects model.ResultsWe identified 179 studies with 241,712 total participants (55,271 participants with pre-existing atrial fibrillation (AF) were excluded) that reported NOAF from 2008 to 2020. The pooled occurrence of NOAF after TAVR was 9.9% (95% CI: 8.1%-12%). NOAF after TAVR was associated with a longer index hospitalization (mean difference = 2.66 days; 95% CI: 1.05-4.27), a higher risk of stroke in the first 30 days (risk ratio [RR]: 2.35; 95% CI: 2.12-2.61), 30-day mortality (RR: 1.76; 95% CI: 1.12-2.76), major or life-threatening bleeding (RR: 1.60; 95% CI: 1.39-1.84), and permanent pacemaker implantation (RR: 1.12; 95% CI: 1.05-1.18). Risk factors for the development of NOAF after TAVR included higher Society of Thoracic Surgeons score, transapical access, pulmonary hypertension, chronic kidney disease, peripheral vascular disease, and severe mitral regurgitation, suggesting that the risk for NOAF is highest in more comorbid TAVR patients.ConclusionsNOAF is common after TAVR. Whether AF after TAVR is a causal factor or a marker of sicker patients remains unclear.     

Comparative Safety of Transcatheter LAAO With the First-Generation Watchman and Next-Generation Watchman FLX Devices

BackgroundProcedural complications limit the clinical benefit of transcatheter left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO). Next-generation devices incorporate design modifications intended to improve procedural safety, but their clinical impact has not been described.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare in-hospital outcomes for the Watchman FLX with the predicate Watchman 2.5 device.MethodsThe National Cardiovascular Data Registry LAAO Registry was used to identify patients who received the Watchman FLX and an identical number of patients receiving the Watchman 2.5 at the same sites directly preceding the first Watchman FLX case at each site. The primary endpoint was in-hospital major adverse events (MAE), defined as a composite of death, cardiac arrest, stroke, transient ischemic attack, intracranial hemorrhage, systemic arterial embolism, major bleeding, major vascular complication, myocardial infarction, pericardial effusion requiring intervention (percutaneous or surgical), and device embolization. A secondary analysis was performed using 2:1 propensity score matching of patients receiving the Watchman 2.5 or Watchman FLX.ResultsThe study cohort consisted of 27,013 patients receiving each device. The rate of in-hospital MAE was significantly lower for the Watchman FLX compared with the Watchman 2.5 (1.35% vs 2.40%; adjusted OR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.50-0.65; P < 0.0001), driven largely by fewer pericardial effusions requiring intervention (0.42% vs 1.23%; adjusted OR: 0.34; 95% CI: 0.28-0.42; P < 0.0001). The Watchman FLX was also associated with significant lower rates of the individual endpoints of in-hospital mortality (0.12% vs 0.24%; P < 0.0001), major bleeding (1.08% vs 2.05%; P < 0.0001), cardiac arrest (0.13% vs 0.24%; P = 0.006), and device embolization (0.02% vs 0.06%; P = 0.028), while myocardial infarction, stroke, and major vascular complications did not differ between groups. Propensity score matching analysis demonstrated similar results, with lower rates of MAE with the Watchman FLX (1.34% vs 2.58%; OR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.46-0.58; P < 0.0001).ConclusionsTranscatheter LAAO with the Watchman FLX was associated with lower rates of in-hospital MAE compared with the predicate Watchman device, including mortality, pericardial effusion, major bleeding, cardiac arrest, and device embolization. This may favorably influence the balance of risks and benefits of transcatheter LAAO for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation.     

Direct Oral Anticoagulants vs Vitamin K Antagonists in Patients With Antiphospholipid Syndromes: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

BackgroundThe efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for patients with thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome remain controversial.ObjectivesThe authors performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that compared DOACs with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs).MethodsWe searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through April 9, 2022. The 2 main efficacy outcomes were a composite of arterial thrombotic events and venous thromboembolic events (VTEs). The main safety outcome was major bleeding. Random effects models with inverse variance were used.ResultsOur search retrieved 253 studies. Four open-label randomized controlled trials involving 472 patients were included (mean control-arm time-in-therapeutic-range 60%). All had proper random sequence generation and adequate allocation concealment. Overall, the use of DOACs compared with VKAs was associated with increased odds of subsequent arterial thrombotic events (OR: 5.43; 95% CI: 1.87-15.75; P < 0.001, I² = 0%), especially stroke, and the composite of arterial thrombotic events or VTE (OR: 4.46; 95% CI: 1.12-17.84; P = 0.03, I² = 0%). The odds of subsequent VTE (OR: 1.20; 95% CI: 0.31-4.55; P = 0.79, I² = 0%), or major bleeding (OR: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.42-2.47; P = 0.97; I² = 0%) were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Most findings were consistent within subgroups.ConclusionsPatients with thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome randomized to DOACs compared with VKAs appear to have increased risk for arterial thrombosis. No significant differences were observed between patients randomized to DOACs vs VKAs in the risk of subsequent VTE or major bleeding.     

Ticagrelor vs Prasugrel in a Contemporary Real-World Cohort Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

BackgroundPotent P2Y₁₂ agents such as ticagrelor and prasugrel are increasingly utilized across the clinical spectrum of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). There is a paucity of data supporting their use in a patient population inclusive of both acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) patients.ObjectivesThe authors compared the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor and prasugrel in a real-world contemporary PCI cohort.MethodsConsecutive patients undergoing PCI between 2014 and 2019 discharged on either prasugrel or ticagrelor were included from the prospectively collected institutional PCI registry. Primary endpoint was the composite of death and myocardial infarction (MI), with secondary outcomes including rates of bleeding, stroke, and target vessel revascularization at 1 year.ResultsOverall, 3,858 patients were included in the study (ticagrelor: n = 2,771; prasugrel: n = 1,087), and a majority (48.4%) underwent PCI in the context of CCS. Patients prescribed ticagrelor were more likely to be female, have a history of cerebrovascular disease, and have ACS presentation, while those receiving prasugrel were more likely to be White with a higher prevalence of prior revascularization. No difference in the risk of death or MI was noted across the groups (ticagrelor vs prasugrel: 3.3% vs 3.1%; HR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.54-1.43; P = 0.59). Rates of target vessel revascularization were significantly lower in the ticagrelor cohort (9.3% vs 14.0%; adjusted HR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.55-0.91; P = 0.007) with no differences in stroke or bleeding. The results were consistent in patients with CCS (HR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.46-1.54) and ACS (HR: 1.18; 95% CI: 0.46-1.54), without evidence of interaction (P = 0.37), and confirmed across multivariable adjustment and propensity score stratification analysis.ConclusionsIn this contemporary patient population undergoing PCI, prasugrel and ticagrelor were associated with similar 1-year efficacy and safety.