A growing number of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stent implantation also have atrial fibrillation. This poses challenges for their optimal antithrombotic ...management because patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing PCI require oral anticoagulation for the prevention of cardiac thromboembolism and dual antiplatelet therapy for the prevention of coronary thrombotic complications. The combination of oral anticoagulation and dual antiplatelet therapy substantially increases the risk of bleeding. Over the last decade, a series of North American Consensus Statements on the Management of Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention have been reported. Since the last update in 2018, several pivotal clinical trials in the field have been published. This document provides a focused updated of the 2018 recommendations. The group recommends that in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing PCI, a non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant is the oral anticoagulation of choice. Dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and a P2Y
inhibitor should be given to all patients during the peri-PCI period (during inpatient stay, until time of discharge, up to 1 week after PCI, at the discretion of the treating physician), after which the default strategy is to stop aspirin and continue treatment with a P2Y
inhibitor, preferably clopidogrel, in combination with a non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (ie, double therapy). In patients at increased thrombotic risk who have an acceptable risk of bleeding, it is reasonable to continue aspirin (ie, triple therapy) for up to 1 month. Double therapy should be given for 6 to 12 months with the actual duration depending on the ischemic and bleeding risk profile of the patient, after which patients should discontinue antiplatelet therapy and receive oral anticoagulation alone.
The efficacy of ticagrelor in the long-term post-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated with fibrinolytic therapy remains uncertain.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ...efficacy of ticagrelor when compared with clopidogrel in STEMI patients treated with fibrinolytic therapy.
This international, multicenter, randomized, open-label with blinded endpoint adjudication trial enrolled 3,799 patients (age <75 years) with STEMI receiving fibrinolytic therapy. Patients were randomized to ticagrelor (180-mg loading dose, 90 mg twice daily thereafter) or clopidogrel (300- to 600-mg loading dose, 75 mg daily thereafter). The key outcomes were cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke, and the same composite outcome with the addition of severe recurrent ischemia, transient ischemic attack, or other arterial thrombotic events at 12 months.
The combined outcome of cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke occurred in 129 of 1,913 patients (6.7%) receiving ticagrelor and in 137 of 1,886 patients (7.3%) receiving clopidogrel (hazard ratio: 0.93; 95% confidence interval: 0.73 to 1.18; p = 0.53). The composite of cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, severe recurrent ischemia, transient ischemic attack, or other arterial thrombotic events occurred in 153 of 1,913 patients (8.0%) treated with ticagrelor and in 171 of 1,886 patients (9.1%) receiving clopidogrel (hazard ratio: 0.88; 95% confidence interval: 0.71 to 1.09; p = 0.25). The rates of major, fatal, and intracranial bleeding were similar between the ticagrelor and clopidogrel groups.
Among patients age <75 years with STEMI, administration of ticagrelor after fibrinolytic therapy did not significantly reduce the frequency of cardiovascular events when compared with clopidogrel. (Ticagrelor in Patients With ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction Treated With Pharmacological Thrombolysis TREAT; NCT02298088).
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
Background The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) required a reevaluation of cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in the RECORD trial. This provided an opportunity to assess the implications of event ...adjudication by 2 groups and quantify the differences as well as to use new FDA end point definitions in development. Methods Original data were used to systematically identify all potential deaths, myocardial infarctions (MIs), and strokes. Site investigators were approached for additional source documents and information about participants lost to follow-up. Suspected events were adjudicated using standard procedures, and the results were compared with the original trial outcomes. Results Follow-up for mortality was 25,833 person-years, including an additional 328 person-years identified during the reevaluation effort. A total of 184 CV or unknown-cause deaths (88 rosiglitazone, 96 metformin/sulfonylurea), 128 participants with an MI (68 rosiglitazone, 60 metformin/sulfonylurea), and 113 participants with a stroke (50 rosiglitazone, 63 metformin/sulfonylurea) were included. The hazard ratio (HR) for rosiglitazone versus metformin/sulfonylurea for the end point of CV (or unknown cause) death, MI, or stroke was 0.95 (95% CI 0.78-1.17) compared with 0.93 (95% CI 0.74-1.15) for the original RECORD results. Treatment comparisons for MI (HR 1.13, 95% CI 0.80-1.59) and mortality (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.68-1.08) were also the same compared with the original RECORD results. Sensitivity analyses were also consistent with the original RECORD results. Analyses using the FDA definitions showed similar results. Conclusions Only a modest number of additional person-years of follow-up were ascertained from this reevaluation of CV end points in RECORD. Observed HRs and CIs from these analyses using the original RECORD or new FDA end point definitions showed similar treatment effects of rosiglitazone compared with the original RECORD results.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
There are no randomized data evaluating the safety or efficacy of apixaban for stroke prevention in patients with end-stage kidney disease on hemodialysis and with atrial fibrillation (AF).
The ...RENAL-AF trial (Renal Hemodialysis Patients Allocated Apixaban Versus Warfarin in Atrial Fibrillation) was a prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded-outcome evaluation (PROBE) of apixaban versus warfarin in patients receiving hemodialysis with AF and a CHA
DS
-VASc score ≥2. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to 5 mg of apixaban twice daily (2.5 mg twice daily for patients ≥80 years of age, weight ≤60 kg, or both) or dose-adjusted warfarin. The primary outcome was time to major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. Secondary outcomes included stroke, mortality, and apixaban pharmacokinetics. Pharmacokinetic sampling was day 1, day 3, and month 1.
From January 2017 through January 2019, 154 patients were randomly assigned to apixaban (n=82) or warfarin (n=72). The trial stopped prematurely because of enrollment challenges. Time in therapeutic range (international normalized ratio, 2.0-3.0) for warfarin-treated patients was 44% (interquartile range, 23%-59%). The 1-year rates for major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding were 32% and 26% in apixaban and warfarin groups, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.20 95% CI, 0.63-2.30), whereas 1-year rates for stroke or systemic embolism were 3.0% and 3.3% in apixaban and warfarin groups, respectively. Death was the most common major event in the apixaban (21 patients 26%) and warfarin (13 patients 18%) arms. The pharmacokinetic substudy enrolled the target 50 patients. Median steady-state 12-hour area under the curve was 2475 ng/mL×h (10th to 90th percentiles, 1342-3285) for 5 mg of apixaban twice daily and 1269 ng/mL×h (10th to 90th percentiles, 615-1946) for 2.5 mg of apixaban twice daily. There was substantial overlap between minimum apixaban blood concentration, 12-hour area under the curve, and maximum apixaban blood concentration for patients with and without a major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding event.
There was inadequate power to draw any conclusion regarding rates of major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding comparing apixaban and warfarin in patients with AF and end-stage kidney disease on hemodialysis. Clinically relevant bleeding events were ≈10-fold more frequent than stroke or systemic embolism among this population on anticoagulation, highlighting the need for future randomized studies evaluating the risks versus benefits of anticoagulation among patients with AF and end-stage kidney disease on hemodialysis.
URL: https://www.
gov; Unique identifier: NCT02942407.
Both sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists reduce cardiovascular events among patients with type 2 diabetes. However, no cardiovascular ...outcome trial has evaluated the long-term effects of their combined use. The AMPLITUDE-O trial (Effect of Efpeglenatide on Cardiovascular Outcomes) reported that once-weekly injections of the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists efpeglenatide (versus placebo) reduced major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs); MACEs, coronary revascularization, or unstable angina hospitalization (expanded MACEs); a renal composite outcome; and MACEs or death in people with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular or renal disease. The trial uniquely stratified randomization by baseline or anticipated use of SGLT2 inhibitors and included the highest prevalence at baseline (N=618, 15.2%) of SGLT2 inhibitor use among glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist cardiovascular outcome trials to date. Its results were analyzed to estimate the combined effect of SGLT2 inhibitors and efpeglenatide on clinical outcomes.
Cardiovascular and renal outcomes were analyzed with Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for region, SGLT2 inhibitor randomization strata, and the SGLT2 inhibitor-by-treatment interaction. Continuous variables were analyzed with a mixed-effects models for repeated measures that also included an interaction term.
The effect (hazard ratio 95% CI) of efpeglenatide versus placebo in the absence and presence of baseline SGLT2 inhibitors on MACEs (0.74 0.58-0.94 and 0.70 0.37-1.30, respectively), expanded MACEs (0.77 0.62-0.96 and 0.87 0.51-1.48), renal composite (0.70 0.59-0.83 and 0.52 0.33-0.83), and MACEs or death (0.74 0.59-0.93 and 0.65 0.36-1.19) did not differ by baseline SGLT2 inhibitor use (
for all interactions >0.2). The reduction of blood pressure, body weight, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio by efpeglenatide also appeared to be independent of concurrent SGLT2 inhibitor use (all interaction
≥0.08). Last, adverse events did not differ by baseline SGLT2 inhibitor use.
The efficacy and safety of efpeglenatide appear to be independent of concurrent SGLT2 inhibitor use. These data support combined SGLT2 inhibitor and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist therapy in type 2 diabetes. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03496298.
Background The optimal antithrombotic therapy for patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention is a topic of debate. We aimed at defining the efficacy and safety of ...double antithrombotic therapy with single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) plus a non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) against triple antithrombotic therapy with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) added to a vitamin K antagonist (VKA), illustrating the pooled cumulative distribution of events, the ranking of different NOACs tested in NOAC+SAPT combination strategies, and the state of the current evidence in the field. Methods and Results Randomized controlled trials meeting the inclusion criteria were identified. The primary efficacy end point was the composite of trial-defined major adverse cardiac events. The primary safety end point was clinically significant bleeding. Secondary end points were the components of primary end points. Trial-level pairwise and Bayesian network meta-analyses, reconstructed Kaplan-Meier analyses, and trial sequential analysis were performed. Four randomized controlled trials (10 969 patients) were included. No differences were found in terms of major adverse cardiac events (hazard ratio HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.94-1.22), and the NOAC+SAPT strategy showed a lower rate of clinically significant bleeding compared with VKA + DAPT (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.39-0.80). These results were consistent in reconstructed Kaplan-Meier analyses. In the Bayesian network meta-analysis, different NOACs displayed diverse risk-benefit profiles. Trial sequential analyses suggest that the evidence for the similarity in major adverse cardiac events compared with VKA + DAPT and the bleeding risk reduction observed with NOAC+SAPT is likely to be conclusive. Conclusions NOAC+SAPT does not increase the risk of major adverse cardiac events and reduces the risk of bleeding compared with VKA + DAPT in AF patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Various NOACs may have different risk-benefit profiles in combination strategies. Registration URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/; Unique identifier: CRD42020151089.
Background The perceived risk of serious bleeding is an obstacle to the use of oral anticoagulation in East Asia. The efficacy and safety of apixaban in East Asian patients with atrial fibrillation ...are unknown. Methods ARISTOTLE included 18,201 patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation randomized to apixaban 5 mg twice daily or warfarin. The efficacy and safety of apixaban and warfarin among patients recruited from East Asia (n = 1,993) were compared with those recruited from outside East Asia (n = 16,208). Results Compared with warfarin, apixaban resulted in a consistent reduction in stroke or systemic embolism in East Asian (hazard ratio HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.50-1.10) and non–East Asian (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.66-0.99) patients (interaction P = .70). Consistent benefits of apixaban over warfarin were also seen for major bleeding in East Asian (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.35-0.80) and non–East Asian (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.62-0.83) patients (interaction P = .17). There was a greater reduction in major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding with apixaban compared with warfarin in East Asian (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.35-0.67) than in non–East Asian (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.63-0.79) patients (interaction P = .03). Numerically higher rates of intracranial bleeding were seen in East Asian patients with warfarin but not with apixaban. Conclusions Apixaban resulted in similar reductions in stroke or systemic embolism and major bleeding and greater reductions in major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding in patients from East Asia. Warfarin is associated with more intracranial bleeding, particularly in patients from East Asia.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
Background Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) combines minimally invasive left internal mammary artery to left anterior descending bypass with percutaneous coronary intervention of non-left ...anterior descending vessels. Its safety and effectiveness compared with conventional CABG have been under studied. Study Design Patients with multivessel disease and/or left main disease who underwent HCR at a US academic center between October 2003 and September 2013 were included. These patients were matched 1:3 to patients treated with CABG using a propensity-score matching algorithm. Conditional logistic regression and Cox regression analyses stratified on matched pairs were performed to evaluate the adjusted association between HCR and short- and long-term outcomes. Results The 30-day composite of death, MI, or stroke after HCR and CABG was 3.3% and 3.1% (odds ratio = 1.07; 95% CI, 0.52–2.21; p = 0.85) in the matched cohort of 1,224 patients (HCR, n =306; CABG, n = 918). Hybrid coronary revascularization was associated with lower rates of in-hospital major morbidity (8.5% vs 15.5%; p = 0.005), lower blood transfusion use (21.6% vs 46.6%; p < 0.001), lower chest tube drainage (690 mL; 25th to 75th percentile: 485 to 1,050 mL vs 920 mL, 25th to 75th percentile: 710 to 1,230 mL; p < 0.001), and shorter postoperative length of stay (<5-day stay: 52.6% vs 38.1%; p = 0.001). During a 3-year follow-up period, mortality was similar after HCR and CABG (8.8% vs 10.2%; hazard ratio = 0.91; 95% CI, 0.55–1.52; p = 0.72). Subgroup analyses in patients stratified by 2-vessel, 3-vessel, left main disease, and by Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk scores rendered similar results. Conclusions The use of HCR appeared to be safe, with faster recovery and similar outcomes when compared with conventional CABG. These findings were consistent irrespective of anatomic or predicted procedural risk.
BACKGROUND:Atrial fibrillation is associated with increased but variable risk of stroke. Our aim was to validate the recently developed biomarker-based ABC (age, biomarkers high-sensitivity troponin ...and N-terminal fragment B-type natriuretic peptide, and clinical history of prior stroke/transient ischemic attack)-stroke risk score and compare its performance with the CHA2DS2VASc and ATRIA (Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation) risk scores.
METHODS:The ABC-stroke score includes age, biomarkers (N-terminal fragment B-type natriuretic peptide and high-sensitivity cardiac troponin), and clinical history (prior stroke). This validation was based on 8356 patients, 16 137 person-years of follow-up, and 219 adjudicated stroke or systemic embolic events in anticoagulated patients with atrial fibrillation in the RE-LY study (Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy). Levels of N-terminal fragment B-type natriuretic peptide, high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT), and high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I (hs-cTnI) were determined in plasma samples obtained at study entry.
RESULTS:The ABC-stroke score was well calibrated with 0.76 stroke/systemic embolic events per 100 person-years in the predefined low (<1%/y) risk group, 1.48 in the medium (1%–2%/y) risk group, and 2.60 in the high (>2%/y) risk group for the ABC-stroke score with hs-cTnT. Hazard ratios for stroke/systemic embolic events were 1.95 for medium- versus low-risk groups, and 3.44 for high- versus low-risk groups. ABC-stroke score achieved C indices of 0.65 with both hs-cTnT and hs-cTnI, in comparison with 0.60 for CHA2DS2VASc (P=0.004 for hs-cTnT and P=0.022 hs-cTnI) and 0.61 for ATRIA scores (P=0.005 hs-cTnT and P=0.034 for hs-cTnI).
CONCLUSIONS:The biomarker-based ABC-stroke score was well calibrated and consistently performed better than both the CHA2DS2VASc and ATRIA stroke scores. The ABC score should be considered an improved decision support tool in the care of patients with atrial fibrillation.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:URLhttp://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifiersARISTOTLE, NCT00412984; RE-LY, NCT00262600.
BACKGROUND:Compared with the general population, patients with advanced chronic kidney disease have a >10-fold higher burden of atrial fibrillation. Limited data are available guiding the use of ...nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in this population.
METHODS:We compared the safety of apixaban with warfarin in 269 patients with atrial fibrillation and advanced chronic kidney disease (defined as creatinine clearance CrCl 25 to 30 mL/min) enrolled in the ARISTOTLE trial (Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation). Cox proportional models were used to estimate hazard ratios for major bleeding and major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. We characterized the pharmacokinetic profile of apixaban by assessing differences in exposure using nonlinear mixed effects models.
RESULTS:Among patients with CrCl 25 to 30 mL/min, apixaban caused less major bleeding (hazard ratio, 0.34 95% CI, 0.14–0.80) and major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (hazard ratio, 0.35 95% CI, 0.17–0.72) compared with warfarin. Patients with CrCl 25 to 30 mL/min randomized to apixaban demonstrated a trend toward lower rates of major bleeding when compared with those with CrCl >30 mL/min (P interaction=0.08) and major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (P interaction=0.05). Median daily steady-state areas under the curve for apixaban 5 mg twice daily were 5512 ng/(mL·h) and 3406 ng/(mL·h) for patients with CrCl 25 to 30 mL/min or >30 mL/min, respectively. For apixaban 2.5 mg twice daily, the median exposure was 2780 ng/(mL·h) for patients with CrCl 25 to 30 mL/min. The area under the curve values for patients with CrCl 25 to 30 mL/min fell within the ranges demonstrated for patients with CrCl >30 mL/min.
CONCLUSIONS:Among patients with atrial fibrillation and CrCl 25 to 30 mL/min, apixaban caused less bleeding than warfarin, with even greater reductions in bleeding than in patients with CrCl >30 mL/min. We observed substantial overlap in the range of exposure to apixaban 5 mg twice daily for patients with or without advanced chronic kidney disease, supporting conventional dosing in patients with CrCl 25 to 30 mL/min. Randomized, controlled studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of apixaban are urgently needed in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease, including those receiving dialysis.
REGISTRATION:URLhttps://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifierNCT00412984.
PDF
