Arrhythmias/Electrophysiology
Phase 2b RCT: Abelacimab Significantly Reduces Bleeding Events Compared with Rivaroxaban in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation
27 Jan, 2025 | 11:00h | UTCBackground: Atrial fibrillation (AF) elevates stroke risk roughly fivefold, necessitating anticoagulation therapy to reduce embolic events. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have replaced vitamin K antagonists as the preferred agents, given their comparable efficacy and lower risk of intracranial hemorrhage. However, significant bleeding—especially gastrointestinal bleeding—still occurs with DOACs, prompting ongoing efforts to develop safer anticoagulants. Abelacimab, a fully human monoclonal antibody targeting factor XI (and its active form, XIa), is hypothesized to “uncouple” thrombosis from hemostasis, potentially lowering bleeding risk. Early data in knee arthroplasty prevention suggested reduced venous thromboembolism (VTE) without increased bleeding. This trial (AZALEA–TIMI 71) aimed to compare the bleeding rates of monthly subcutaneous abelacimab with once-daily rivaroxaban in patients with AF and moderate-to-high stroke risk.
Objective: To evaluate whether subcutaneous abelacimab at two doses (150 mg or 90 mg monthly) leads to fewer major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding events than rivaroxaban (20 mg or 15 mg daily) in patients with AF.
Methods: In this phase 2b, parallel-group, partially blind, randomized trial, 1287 adults with AF (CHA2_2DS2_2-VASc ≥3–4 and moderate/high stroke risk) were assigned 1:1:1 to abelacimab 150 mg, abelacimab 90 mg, or open-label rivaroxaban. Treatment continued for a median of 2.1 years. The primary endpoint was major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding, adjudicated by a blinded events committee. Levels of free factor XI were measured to gauge abelacimab’s pharmacodynamics. The trial was halted early based on a recommendation from the independent data monitoring committee due to unexpectedly large reductions in bleeding with abelacimab.
Results: Median age was 74 years, and 44% of participants were female. In the final analysis of the complete dataset, major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding occurred at rates of 3.2 and 2.6 events per 100 person-years for abelacimab 150 mg and 90 mg, respectively, versus 8.4 per 100 person-years for rivaroxaban. Corresponding hazard ratios were 0.38 (95% CI, 0.24–0.60) for the 150-mg dose and 0.31 (95% CI, 0.19–0.51) for the 90-mg dose (P<0.001 for both comparisons). The incidence of major gastrointestinal bleeding was notably lower with abelacimab (0.5% in both arms) compared with rivaroxaban (4.2%). Although not powered for stroke prevention, ischemic stroke rates were numerically higher with abelacimab, underscoring the need for larger efficacy trials.
Conclusions: Monthly abelacimab led to substantial and sustained reduction of free factor XI and demonstrated significantly lower bleeding rates than rivaroxaban in patients with AF. While these findings suggest a potentially safer profile for abelacimab, definitive conclusions about stroke prevention require phase 3 studies.
Implications for Practice: Should abelacimab maintain efficacy in preventing thromboembolism in forthcoming trials, it may offer an alternative to existing DOACs, particularly for patients at elevated bleeding risk (e.g., gastrointestinal). However, clinicians must consider real-world factors such as possible high drug cost, insurance coverage, and the logistics of monthly subcutaneous injections. Abelacimab is investigational and not yet approved; its role will depend on phase 3 efficacy and cost-effectiveness outcomes.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include randomized design, relatively long follow-up (median 2.1 years), and direct comparison to an established DOAC. The major limitation is that the trial was not sufficiently powered to evaluate stroke or systemic embolism. Moreover, the open-label design between abelacimab and rivaroxaban could introduce bias, partly mitigated by blinded dose assignments for abelacimab and blinded endpoint adjudication. The predominantly White population may limit generalizability.
Future Research: Ongoing phase 3 studies (e.g., LILAC–TIMI 76) will clarify abelacimab’s efficacy and safety in larger cohorts, particularly regarding stroke prevention. Comparative cost analyses, real-world adherence, and exploration of subcutaneous administration logistics will be crucial in determining abelacimab’s long-term clinical value. Additional investigations into factor XIa inhibitors (e.g., small molecules, antisense oligonucleotides) may further expand this therapeutic class.
Reference:
- Ruff CT, Patel SM, Giugliano RP, Morrow DA, Hug B, Kuder JF, et al. “Abelacimab versus Rivaroxaban in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation.” New England Journal of Medicine. 2025;392:361–371. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2406674
- Angiolillo DJ, Capodanno D. “Uncoupling Thrombosis and Hemostasis by Inhibiting Factor XI.” New England Journal of Medicine. 2025;392:400–403. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMe2414209
- Mandrola JM. “Factor XI Inhibitors May Not Be Dead.” This Week in Cardiology Podcast. January 24, 2025. https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/1002184#vp_3
Review: Management of Atrial Fibrillation
18 Dec, 2024 | 14:22h | UTCIntroduction: This summary of a comprehensive review on atrial fibrillation (AF) focuses on an increasingly prevalent arrhythmia affecting more than 10 million adults in the United States. AF significantly elevates the risks of stroke, heart failure (HF), cognitive decline, and mortality. This guideline-based overview examines the pathophysiology, detection, prevention, and treatment strategies for AF, emphasizing risk factor modification, appropriate anticoagulation, and early rhythm control interventions to improve clinical outcomes and quality of life.
Key Recommendations:
- Risk Factor and Lifestyle Modification: Implement weight reduction, regular exercise, optimal blood pressure control, smoking cessation, and reduced alcohol intake at all AF stages to prevent new-onset AF, reduce recurrences, and mitigate complications.
- Screening and Diagnosis: Consider AF screening in high-risk patients using wearable devices or implantable loop recorders. Confirm suspected AF with electrocardiography and extended rhythm monitoring in those with cryptogenic stroke.
- Stroke Prevention: Assess stroke risk using CHA2DS2-VASc. For patients with annual stroke risk ≥2%, initiate oral anticoagulation (preferably direct oral anticoagulants over warfarin) to lower stroke risk by up to 80%. Avoid aspirin monotherapy for AF-related stroke prevention due to inferior efficacy.
- Early Rhythm Control: Begin rhythm control within one year of AF diagnosis, particularly in symptomatic patients or those with HF and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Early use of antiarrhythmic drugs or catheter ablation can improve symptoms, cardiac function, and reduce hospitalizations.
- Catheter Ablation: Utilize ablation as a first-line therapy in symptomatic paroxysmal AF to maintain sinus rhythm and prevent progression. In patients with AF and HFrEF, ablation enhances quality of life, improves left ventricular function, and lowers mortality and HF hospitalization rates.
- Rate Control Strategies: For patients who are not candidates for rhythm control, use beta-blockers or nondihydropyridine calcium channel blockers to achieve satisfactory ventricular rate control. Consider atrioventricular nodal ablation plus pacemaker implantation if pharmacologic therapy is inadequate.
- Staging and Long-Term Management: Recognize four AF stages (at risk, pre-AF, clinically apparent AF, and permanent AF) to tailor management. After ablation, continue anticoagulation for at least three months, then reassess stroke risk before considering discontinuation.
- Addressing Inequities: Improve access to guideline-directed AF therapies, including ablation and specialized care, and address social determinants of health that influence disparities in diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes.
Conclusion: Guideline-directed AF management, encompassing comprehensive risk factor modification, appropriate anticoagulation, and timely rhythm control strategies, can reduce stroke incidence, improve HF outcomes, and prolong life. Catheter ablation is a key intervention for appropriate patients, especially those with symptomatic paroxysmal AF or HFrEF, while striving for equitable and evidence-based care across diverse populations remains a critical priority.
News Release: Anticoagulation Does Not Prevent Cognitive Decline in Younger Low-Risk AFib Patients
20 Nov, 2024 | 20:17h | UTCIntroduction: A recent large-scale trial has found that anticoagulation therapy does not reduce the risk of cognitive decline, stroke, or transient ischemic attack (TIA) in adults under 65 years old with atrial fibrillation (AFib) who have no additional stroke risk factors. AFib is the most common type of irregular heart rhythm and is known to increase the risk of stroke, especially in older individuals or those with comorbidities. This study aimed to determine if blood thinners could offer neurocognitive and cerebrovascular protection in younger, low-risk AFib patients.
Highlights: The Blinded Randomized Trial of Anticoagulation to Prevent Ischemic Stroke and Neurocognitive Impairment in Atrial Fibrillation (BRAIN-AF) enrolled over 1,200 participants with an average age of 53 years, none of whom had standard indications for anticoagulation therapy. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either rivaroxaban (15 mg daily) or a placebo and were followed for an average of 3.7 years.
Key findings from the trial include:
- No Significant Difference in Primary Outcomes: There was no significant difference between the rivaroxaban and placebo groups in the combined outcome of cognitive decline (a decrease of two or more points on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment), stroke, or TIA. The annual rates were 7% for rivaroxaban and 6.4% for placebo.
- High Rate of Cognitive Decline: Approximately 1 in 5 participants experienced cognitive decline, accounting for 91% of the primary outcome events. Despite this high rate, anticoagulation did not mitigate the risk.
- Low Incidence of Stroke: The incidence of stroke was low in this population, at less than 1 in 100 participants per year.
- Early Termination of the Trial: The study was terminated early due to futility, as continuing was unlikely to demonstrate a benefit from anticoagulation in preventing cognitive decline or stroke in this group.
- Safety Profile: Major bleeding events were rare and did not differ significantly between the rivaroxaban and placebo groups.
These results confirm that younger AFib patients without additional stroke risk factors have a low incidence of stroke and that anticoagulation does not reduce the risk of cognitive decline or cerebrovascular events in this population.
Conclusion: The BRAIN-AF trial supports current clinical guidelines that do not recommend anticoagulation therapy for AFib patients under 65 years old without other stroke risk factors. The findings suggest that anticoagulation is not effective in preventing cognitive decline or stroke in this low-risk group. Clinicians should continue to focus on standard recommendations for maintaining cognitive health, such as promoting a healthy lifestyle, engaging in brain-stimulating activities, and encouraging regular physical activity, rather than prescribing anticoagulation therapy for neurocognitive protection in these patients.
Source: This study was conducted by researchers at the Montreal Heart Institute and Université de Montréal and was presented at the American Heart Association’s Scientific Sessions 2024.
- American Heart Association News Release: https://newsroom.heart.org/news/blood-thinners-didnt-reduce-cognitive-decline-in-adults-65-and-younger-with-afib
Additional commentaries:
- TCTMD: https://www.tctmd.com/news/rivaroxaban-doesnt-cut-cognitive-decline-stroke-or-tia-younger-af-patients
- American College of Cardiology: https://www.acc.org/latest-in-cardiology/clinical-trials/2024/11/15/15/17/brain-af
RCT: Left Atrial Appendage Closure May Reduce Bleeding Without Increasing Stroke Risk After AF Ablation
20 Nov, 2024 | 16:28h | UTCBackground: Catheter ablation is an effective treatment for symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF), but patients at high risk for stroke require ongoing oral anticoagulation (OAC) due to the potential for asymptomatic AF recurrence. Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is a mechanical alternative to OAC, but its efficacy and safety post-AF ablation are not well established.
Objective: To compare the safety and efficacy of LAAC versus continued OAC in patients with AF undergoing catheter ablation.
Methods: In this international, randomized trial, 1,600 patients with AF and elevated CHA₂DS₂-VASc scores (≥2 in men, ≥3 in women) who underwent or were scheduled for catheter ablation were assigned to either LAAC (n=803) or OAC (n=797). The primary safety endpoint was non–procedure-related major bleeding or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding through 36 months. The primary efficacy endpoint was a composite of death from any cause, stroke, or systemic embolism at 36 months. The secondary endpoint was major bleeding, including procedure-related bleeding.
Results: At 36 months, bleeding events occurred in 8.5% of the LAAC group versus 18.1% of the OAC group (P<0.001 for superiority). The primary efficacy endpoint occurred in 5.3% of the LAAC group and 5.8% of the OAC group (P<0.001 for noninferiority). Major bleeding, including procedure-related bleeding, occurred in 3.9% of the LAAC group and 5.0% of the OAC group (P<0.001 for noninferiority). Device-related complications occurred in 23 patients, and incomplete device closure was noted in up to 20% of patients.
Conclusions: Among patients undergoing AF ablation, LAAC reduced the risk of bleeding compared to OAC without increasing the risk of death, stroke, or systemic embolism over 36 months.
Implications for Practice: LAAC may be considered as an alternative to long-term OAC in patients undergoing AF ablation who are at moderate to high risk of stroke. However, clinicians should exercise caution due to potential device-related complications, such as incomplete closure and peri-device leaks, which may increase stroke risk. The decision to use LAAC should involve a thorough discussion with the patient about the benefits and risks.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include the randomized design and large sample size. Limitations involve the exclusion of procedure-related bleeding from the primary safety endpoint, potentially underestimating the true bleeding risk of LAAC. The inclusion of all-cause mortality in the primary efficacy endpoint may dilute the ability to detect differences in stroke risk. Additionally, missing data and a significant rate of incomplete device closure raise concerns about the generalizability and safety of LAAC.
Future Research: Further large-scale, randomized trials are needed to address these limitations, especially to assess stroke risk adequately and the impact of procedural complications. Studies should also evaluate long-term outcomes and the cost-effectiveness of LAAC compared to OAC in diverse patient populations.
References:
- Wazni OM, Saliba WI, Nair DG, et al. Left Atrial Appendage Closure after Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation. New England Journal of Medicine. Published November 16, 2024. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2408308
- Mandrola J. Electrophysiology is on the brink of a possible disaster. November 19, 2024. Available at: https://johnmandrola.substack.com/p/electrophysiology-is-on-the-brink
RCT: Linear Ablation Plus Ethanol infusion of the vein of Marshall Enhances Rhythm Outcomes in Persistent AF
20 Nov, 2024 | 15:48h | UTCBackground: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is the cornerstone of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) but has modest efficacy in persistent AF. Previous randomized trials have not demonstrated additional benefit from adding linear ablation to PVI, possibly due to challenges in achieving durable lesions. Ethanol infusion of the vein of Marshall (EIVOM) may facilitate linear ablation, especially at the mitral isthmus, potentially improving outcomes.
Objective: To determine whether adding linear ablation combined with EIVOM to PVI improves maintenance of sinus rhythm compared with PVI alone in patients with persistent AF.
Methods: PROMPT-AF was an investigator-initiated, multicenter, open-label randomized trial involving 12 hospitals in China. The study included 498 patients aged 18–80 years with persistent AF lasting >3 months undergoing first-time ablation. Participants were randomized to either PVI alone or PVI plus EIVOM and linear ablation targeting the left atrial roof, mitral isthmus, and cavotricuspid isthmus. Primary outcomes included freedom from atrial arrhythmias lasting >30 seconds without antiarrhythmic drugs over 12 months. Patients were monitored weekly with wearable ECG patches and periodic Holter monitoring.
Results: Among 495 patients analyzed (mean age, 61.1 years; 72.9% male), the intervention group demonstrated significantly higher freedom from atrial arrhythmias without antiarrhythmic drugs (70.7% vs 61.5%; HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.54–0.99; P = .045). Secondary outcomes showed no significant differences in quality of life or arrhythmia recurrence with antiarrhythmic drugs. Linear ablation increased procedural time (188.0 vs 140.8 minutes, P < .001) and fluoroscopy exposure. Serious adverse events were comparable between groups, though pericarditis or pericardial effusion occurred in 7 intervention patients versus none in the control.
Conclusions: Adding linear ablation and EIVOM to PVI significantly improves freedom from atrial arrhythmias in patients with persistent AF compared with PVI alone.
Implications for Practice: The combination of linear ablation and EIVOM addresses limitations of PVI alone by enhancing lesion durability and targeting challenging areas such as the mitral isthmus. However, the increased procedural complexity and longer operative times highlight the need for skilled operators. Adoption should be balanced against risks and resource demands.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include the randomized, multicenter design and high procedural adherence. Limitations involve the open-label design and potential underestimation of arrhythmia recurrence due to intermittent rhythm monitoring rather than continuous monitoring. The increased procedural time and fluoroscopy exposure are concerns, and the findings may not be generalizable to all persistent AF patients, especially those with episodes lasting less than 3 months.
Future Research: Further studies are needed to optimize ablation strategies, assess long-term outcomes, and evaluate the safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of incorporating EIVOM and linear ablation in diverse patient populations.
RCT: Catheter Ablation Superior to Antiarrhythmic Drugs in Ischemic Cardiomyopathy with Ventricular Tachycardia
20 Nov, 2024 | 14:32h | UTCBackground: Patients with ventricular tachycardia and ischemic cardiomyopathy face high risks of adverse outcomes, including death and recurrent arrhythmias. While catheter ablation is commonly used when antiarrhythmic drugs fail to suppress ventricular tachycardia, its effectiveness as a first-line therapy compared to antiarrhythmic drugs remains uncertain.
Objective: To compare the efficacy of catheter ablation versus antiarrhythmic drug therapy as a first-line treatment in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and ventricular tachycardia who have an implantable cardioverter–defibrillator (ICD).
Methods: In this multicenter, randomized controlled trial (VANISH2), 416 patients with previous myocardial infarction, clinically significant ventricular tachycardia, and an ICD were randomly assigned to receive catheter ablation within 14 days or antiarrhythmic drug therapy with sotalol or amiodarone based on prespecified criteria. The primary endpoint was a composite of death from any cause during follow-up or, more than 14 days after randomization, ventricular tachycardia storm, appropriate ICD shock, or sustained ventricular tachycardia treated by medical intervention.
Results: Over a median follow-up of 4.3 years, the primary endpoint occurred in 50.7% of patients in the catheter ablation group and 60.6% in the drug therapy group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58–0.97; P=0.03). Adverse events within 30 days post-ablation included death in 1.0% and nonfatal events in 11.3% of patients. In the drug therapy group, adverse events attributed to antiarrhythmic drugs included death from pulmonary toxicity in 0.5% and nonfatal events in 21.6% of patients.
Conclusions: Catheter ablation as an initial therapy significantly reduced the risk of the composite primary endpoint compared to antiarrhythmic drug therapy in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and ventricular tachycardia.
Implications for Practice: These findings support considering catheter ablation as a first-line treatment option for patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and ventricular tachycardia, potentially leading to improved clinical outcomes over initial antiarrhythmic drug therapy.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include the randomized, multicenter design and long-term follow-up. Limitations involve the inability to assess effects on individual components of the primary endpoint, such as mortality. Operator experience with catheter ablation may affect outcomes, potentially influencing the generalizability of the results.
Future Research: Further studies are needed to evaluate the long-term benefits and risks of catheter ablation, particularly with advancements in ablation technology. Research into new antiarrhythmic drugs and alternative ICD programming strategies may also provide additional insights.
Cohort Study: Late Ventricular Arrhythmias After Primary PCI for STEMI Are Rare but Increase Mortality
5 Nov, 2024 | 15:24h | UTCBackground: Ventricular tachycardia (VT) and ventricular fibrillation (VF) are critical complications following ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). While early VT/VF typically occurs before or shortly after reperfusion, contemporary data on the incidence of late VT/VF post-primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are limited. Understanding the risk of late VT/VF is essential for optimizing in-hospital monitoring and discharge timing.
Objective: To assess the risk of late VT and VF after primary PCI in patients with STEMI, identify associated factors, and evaluate their impact on in-hospital mortality.
Methods: This cohort study analyzed data from 174,126 adults with STEMI treated with primary PCI between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2018, using the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Chest Pain–MI Registry. Late VT/VF was defined as events occurring one or more days after PCI. Multivariable logistic regression was employed to identify factors associated with late VT/VF and its association with in-hospital mortality.
Results: Among the patients, 8.9% experienced VT or VF after primary PCI. Late VT/VF occurred in 2.4% of patients overall and 1.7% of those with uncomplicated STEMI. Late VT/VF associated with cardiac arrest was rare, occurring in 0.4% of all patients and 0.1% of patients with uncomplicated STEMI. Decreased left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was the most significant factor associated with late VT/VF with cardiac arrest (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] for every 5-unit decrease ≤40%: 1.67; 95% CI, 1.54–1.85). Late VT/VF was linked to increased odds of in-hospital mortality (AOR, 6.40; 95% CI, 5.63–7.29).
Conclusions: Late VT/VF after primary PCI for STEMI is infrequent, particularly in patients with uncomplicated presentations. However, when late VT/VF occurs, it is associated with a significantly higher risk of in-hospital mortality.
Implications for Practice: While vigilant monitoring remains crucial, patients with uncomplicated STEMI may be candidates for earlier discharge through shared decision-making. Identifying high-risk patients for late VT/VF can enable tailored monitoring strategies to improve outcomes.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include a large, contemporary cohort and detailed data on in-hospital VT/VF events. Limitations involve the observational design, potential unmeasured confounders, and the inability to differentiate between VT and VF due to registry definitions.
Future Research: Further studies are warranted to develop precise risk prediction models for late VT/VF and to explore effective out-of-hospital monitoring strategies post-STEMI.
RCT: Early DOACs Safe and Non-Inferior to Delayed Initiation Post-Stroke with Atrial Fibrillation
28 Oct, 2024 | 17:52h | UTCBackground: Atrial fibrillation increases ischaemic stroke risk, and patients are prone to recurrence. Prompt anticoagulation post-stroke is critical, but optimal timing is unclear due to bleeding concerns. Guidelines often delay DOAC initiation without strong evidence.
Objective: To determine if early DOAC initiation (≤4 days) is non-inferior to delayed initiation (7–14 days) in preventing recurrent ischaemic events without increasing intracranial haemorrhage risk in patients with acute ischaemic stroke and atrial fibrillation.
Methods: In this multicentre, open-label, blinded-endpoint, phase 4 randomised controlled trial at 100 UK hospitals, 3,621 adults with atrial fibrillation and acute ischaemic stroke were randomised to early or delayed DOAC initiation. Eligibility required physician uncertainty about timing. Participants and clinicians were unmasked; outcomes were adjudicated by a masked committee. The primary outcome was a composite of recurrent ischaemic stroke, symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage, unclassifiable stroke, or systemic embolism within 90 days.
Results: Among 3,621 patients (mean age 78.5; 45% female), the primary outcome occurred in 59 patients (3.3%) in both early and delayed groups (adjusted risk difference 0.0%, 95% CI –1.1 to 1.2%). Upper confidence limit below the 2% non-inferiority margin (p=0.0003) confirmed non-inferiority. Symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage rates were similar (0.6% early vs 0.7% delayed; p=0.78). No significant differences in mortality or heterogeneity across subgroups.
Conclusions: Early DOAC initiation within 4 days is non-inferior to delayed initiation in preventing recurrent events without increasing intracranial haemorrhage risk. Findings challenge guidelines advising delayed anticoagulation and support early initiation regardless of stroke severity.
Implications for Practice: Clinicians should consider starting DOACs within 4 days post-stroke in atrial fibrillation patients. Early initiation is safe and effective, potentially improving outcomes and suggesting guidelines may need revision.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include large sample size and masked outcome adjudication. Limitations include exclusion of patients with very severe strokes and low event rates, potentially limiting detection of rare adverse events.
Future Research: Further studies should explore optimal DOAC timing within 4 days and assess safety in patients with severe strokes or extensive haemorrhagic transformation.
Cohort Study: Ondansetron Initiation Linked to Increased 10-Day Sudden Cardiac Death Risk in Hemodialysis Patients
20 Oct, 2024 | 14:05h | UTCBackground: Individuals undergoing maintenance hemodialysis have a markedly elevated risk of sudden cardiac death, attributed to structural heart disease, electrolyte imbalances, and polypharmacy. Ondansetron, a commonly used antiemetic known to prolong the QT interval, has been associated with fatal arrhythmias when administered intravenously in the general population. However, its cardiac safety profile in the hemodialysis population remains unclear.
Objective: To assess whether initiation of oral ondansetron, compared to antiemetics with lesser QT-prolonging potential, is associated with a higher 10-day risk of sudden cardiac death among patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis.
Methods: This new-user, active-comparator cohort study analyzed data from the United States Renal Data System between 2012 and 2019. A total of 119,254 patients receiving in-center hemodialysis who initiated either oral ondansetron or comparator antiemetics (promethazine, metoclopramide, or prochlorperazine) were included. Inverse probability of treatment-weighted survival models estimated adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and risk differences (aRD), using an intention-to-treat approach with non-sudden cardiac death as a competing event.
Results: Among the patients, 64,978 (55%) initiated ondansetron, while 54,276 (45%) initiated comparator antiemetics. Ondansetron initiation was associated with a higher 10-day risk of sudden cardiac death compared to comparator drugs (aHR 1.44; 95% CI, 1.08–1.93; aRD 0.06%; 95% CI, 0.01%–0.11%). The number needed to harm was 1,688. Secondary analyses of additional cardiac outcomes, including ventricular arrhythmias and cardiovascular mortality, yielded consistent findings.
Conclusions: Initiation of oral ondansetron is associated with an increased short-term risk of sudden cardiac death among patients on maintenance hemodialysis compared to initiation of antiemetics with lesser QT-prolonging potential.
Implications for Practice: Clinicians should exercise caution when prescribing ondansetron to hemodialysis patients and consider alternative antiemetics with lower QT-prolonging risks. If ondansetron is necessary, monitoring for cardiac arrhythmias and performing electrocardiograms may be advisable to mitigate potential risks.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include a large, nationally representative cohort and an active-comparator design that minimizes confounding. Limitations involve potential residual confounding inherent in observational studies, possible misclassification of outcomes, and inability to assess dose-response relationships due to power constraints.
Future Research: Further studies are warranted to confirm these findings, elucidate the underlying mechanisms of increased cardiac risk, and evaluate the safety of ondansetron across different dosages and patient subgroups within the hemodialysis population.
Review: Management of Atrial Fibrillation in Older Adults
12 Oct, 2024 | 19:52h | UTCIntroduction: Atrial fibrillation (AF) predominantly affects adults over 65 years old and often coexists with multiple chronic conditions, polypharmacy, and geriatric syndromes such as frailty. Despite this, most randomized controlled trials and guidelines do not tailor recommendations specifically for older adults with these complexities. This review addresses the gap by synthesizing evidence and applying aging science principles to AF management, aiming to provide a framework that prioritizes patients’ goals across the spectrum of older adults—from fit individuals to those who are frail or at the end of life.
Key Recommendations:
- Individualized Care Approach: Clinicians should tailor AF management by considering patients’ comorbidities, frailty, and personal health goals. Tools like the Clinical Frailty Scale and comprehensive geriatric assessment can aid in assessing fitness and frailty.
- Screening for AF: Systematic population-level screening for AF in older adults has not conclusively shown a reduction in stroke incidence. Decisions regarding screening should be individualized, weighing the potential benefits and burdens.
- Lifestyle Interventions: For functional older adults, lifestyle modifications such as weight loss, moderate physical activity, blood pressure control, and alcohol avoidance are recommended to prevent and manage AF.
- Symptom Management: Use validated patient-reported outcome measures to assess and manage AF symptoms effectively, aligning treatment with patients’ experiences and quality of life goals.
- Rate and Rhythm Control:
- Fit Older Adults: Early rhythm control is preferred, with catheter ablation showing superiority over anti-arrhythmic drugs in maintaining sinus rhythm and improving quality of life.
- Multimorbid/Frail Older Adults: Treatment should be individualized, balancing the risks and benefits of anti-arrhythmic drugs versus catheter ablation.
- Heart Failure Coexistence: Catheter ablation is recommended over medical therapy for patients with AF and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.
- Anticoagulation Therapy:
- General Recommendation: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are preferred over warfarin due to similar efficacy and lower bleeding risk.
- Multimorbid/Frail Older Adults: Apixaban is favored for its lower bleeding risk. Decisions should consider life expectancy and patient preferences.
- End-of-Life Care: De-escalation of anticoagulation may be appropriate when risks outweigh benefits or when it aligns with the patient’s comfort-focused goals.
- Left Atrial Appendage Closure (LAAC):
- Indications: LAAC is considered for patients with contraindications to long-term anticoagulation.
- Considerations: Procedural risks should be weighed against potential benefits, especially in frail older adults.
Conclusion: Implementing an individualized, goal-directed approach to AF management in older adults can enhance patient care by aligning treatments with patients’ health priorities and improving clinical outcomes. Recognizing the heterogeneity among older adults with AF, clinicians should adopt strategies that consider fitness, frailty, comorbidities, and patient preferences to optimize care across the aging spectrum.
Meta-Analysis: Oral Anticoagulant Monotherapy Reduced Bleeding Without Increasing Ischemic Events in AF and Stable CAD
9 Oct, 2024 | 11:13h | UTCBackground: Atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) often require both oral anticoagulants (OACs) for stroke prevention and antiplatelet therapy for CAD management. However, dual antithrombotic therapy (DAT) increases bleeding risk. The optimal antithrombotic regimen in this population remains unclear.
Objective: To evaluate whether OAC monotherapy reduces major bleeding without increasing ischemic events compared to DAT in patients with AF and stable CAD.
Methods: This meta-analysis followed PRISMA guidelines, pooling data from three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 3,945 patients with AF and stable CAD. The trials included used various OACs (rivaroxaban, edoxaban, or warfarin/DOAC) and compared them with DAT. The primary outcomes were all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and major bleeding. Secondary outcomes included stroke (ischemic and hemorrhagic) and myocardial infarction (MI).
Results: OAC monotherapy significantly reduced the risk of major bleeding compared to DAT (3.4% vs 5.8%; RR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.32–0.95; p=0.03). There were no significant differences between groups in all-cause death (4.2% vs 5.4%; RR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.49–1.48; p=0.57), cardiovascular death (2.4% vs 3.0%; RR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.50–1.41; p=0.50), any stroke event (2.2% vs 3.1%; RR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.46–1.18; p=0.21), or myocardial infarction (RR: 1.57; 95% CI: 0.79–3.12; p=0.20).
Conclusions: In patients with AF and stable CAD, OAC monotherapy significantly reduces major bleeding risk compared to DAT without increasing the risk of ischemic events or mortality.
Implications for Practice: OAC monotherapy may be a preferable antithrombotic strategy in patients with AF and stable CAD, balancing effective thromboembolic protection with a lower bleeding risk. Clinicians should consider OAC monotherapy to simplify antithrombotic regimens and reduce bleeding complications, especially beyond one year after coronary events or interventions.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include the inclusion of recent large-scale RCTs and the focus on a clinically relevant patient population. Limitations involve reliance on study-level data, limited number of trials, and potential heterogeneity among included studies. The duration of DAT was not consistently available, and individual patient data meta-analysis may provide more detailed insights.
Future Research: Additional large-scale RCTs and individual patient data meta-analyses are needed to confirm these findings and to determine the optimal duration and type of antithrombotic therapy in patients with AF and stable CAD.
Summary: Perioperative Management of Patients Taking Direct Oral Anticoagulants
19 Sep, 2024 | 21:12h | UTCDirect oral anticoagulants (DOACs)—including apixaban, rivaroxaban, edoxaban, and dabigatran—are increasingly used for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation and for treating venous thromboembolism. Effective perioperative management of DOACs is essential to minimize bleeding and thromboembolic risks during surgical and nonsurgical procedures. Below are practical recommendations focused on the perioperative management of patients taking DOACs, based on a recent JAMA review article.
Elective Surgical or Nonsurgical Procedures
Classify Bleeding Risk of Procedures:
- Minimal Risk:
- Minor dental procedures (e.g., cleaning, extractions)
- Minor dermatologic procedures (e.g., skin lesion removal)
- Cataract surgery
- Low to Moderate Risk:
- Endoscopic procedures without high-risk interventions
- Cholecystectomy
- Inguinal hernia repair
- High Risk:
- Major surgery (e.g., cancer surgery, joint replacement)
- Procedures involving neuraxial anesthesia
- Endoscopic procedures with high-risk interventions (e.g., large polyp removal)
DOAC Management Strategies:
- Minimal Bleeding Risk Procedures:
- Option 1: Continue DOACs without interruption.
- Option 2: For added safety, withhold the morning dose on the day of the procedure (especially for twice-daily DOACs like apixaban and dabigatran).
- Low to Moderate Bleeding Risk Procedures:
- Preoperative:
- Discontinue DOACs 1 day before the procedure.
- This allows approximately 2 half-lives for drug clearance.
- Postoperative:
- Resume DOACs 1 day after the procedure, ensuring adequate hemostasis.
- Preoperative:
- High Bleeding Risk Procedures:
- Preoperative:
- Discontinue DOACs 2 days before the procedure.
- This allows approximately 4-5 half-lives for drug clearance.
- Postoperative:
- Resume DOACs 2-3 days after the procedure, based on bleeding risk and hemostasis.
- Preoperative:
Evidence Supporting These Strategies:
- The PAUSE study demonstrated that standardized interruption protocols without heparin bridging result in low rates of:
- Thromboembolism: 0.2%–0.4%
- Major Bleeding: 1%–2%
Postoperative DOAC Resumption:
- Assess surgical-site hemostasis before resuming DOACs.
- Delay resumption if there is ongoing bleeding or concerns about hemostasis.
- For high bleeding risk procedures, consider a longer delay (2–3 days).
Perioperative Heparin Bridging:
- Not recommended for patients on DOACs.
- Bridging increases bleeding risk without reducing thromboembolism.
- DOACs have rapid offset and onset, making bridging unnecessary.
Special Considerations
Patients with Impaired Renal Function:
- For CrCl 30–50 mL/min:
- Dabigatran: Extend preoperative discontinuation by an additional day.
- For CrCl <30 mL/min:
- Dabigatran is contraindicated.
- For other DOACs, consider extending discontinuation to 3–4 days before surgery.
Patients Undergoing Neuraxial Anesthesia:
- Discontinue DOACs for 3 days (apixaban, edoxaban, rivaroxaban) or 4 days (dabigatran) before the procedure.
- Minimizes risk of spinal or epidural hematoma.
Dental Procedures:
- Generally safe to continue DOACs.
- For added safety:
- Omit or delay the dose on the day of the procedure.
- Employ local hemostatic measures (e.g., tranexamic acid mouthwash).
Endoscopic Procedures:
- Low-risk procedures (e.g., diagnostic endoscopy without biopsy):
- Follow standard DOAC interruption for low to moderate bleeding risk.
- High-risk procedures (e.g., polypectomy of large polyps):
- Extend DOAC discontinuation by an additional day pre- and post-procedure.
Patients Unable to Resume Oral Medications Postoperatively:
- Use prophylactic low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) until oral intake is possible.
- Avoid therapeutic-dose LMWH due to bleeding risk.
Emergent, Urgent, or Semiurgent Procedures
Risks:
- Higher bleeding risk: Up to 23%
- Thromboembolism risk: Up to 11%
Management Strategies:
- Assess Time Since Last DOAC Dose:
- If within 48 hours, consider that significant anticoagulant effect may persist.
- Laboratory Testing (if available):
- DOAC Level Testing:
- ≥50 ng/mL: Consider using reversal agents.
- <50 ng/mL: May proceed without reversal agents.
- DOAC Level Testing:
- Use of Reversal Agents:
- For Dabigatran:
- Idarucizumab (5 g IV)
- For Factor Xa Inhibitors (apixaban, rivaroxaban, edoxaban):
- Andexanet alfa (dosing based on last dose timing and amount)
- Prothrombin Complex Concentrates (PCCs): If andexanet alfa is unavailable or contraindicated.
- For Dabigatran:
- Proceeding Without Testing:
- If testing is unavailable and last DOAC dose was within 48 hours, consider reversal agents.
- If >48 hours since last dose, may proceed without reversal.
Considerations:
- Reversal agents are expensive and may carry thrombotic risks.
- Use should be judicious, weighing risks and benefits.
- Consult hematology or thrombosis experts when possible.
Key Takeaways
- Elective Procedures:
- Utilize standardized protocols based on procedural bleeding risk.
- Routine preoperative DOAC level testing is unnecessary.
- Avoid heparin bridging.
- Emergent/Urgent Procedures:
- Reversal agents may be appropriate when significant DOAC levels are present.
- Decision to use reversal agents should consider bleeding risk, time since last dose, and availability of DOAC level testing.
- Patient Communication:
- Ensure patients understand the plan for DOAC interruption and resumption.
- Provide clear instructions regarding timing and dosing.
- Interdisciplinary Coordination:
- Collaborate with surgical teams, anesthesiologists, and pharmacists.
- Use electronic medical records and clinical decision support tools to enhance communication.
Conclusion
By applying standardized perioperative management protocols, clinicians can effectively balance the risks of bleeding and thromboembolism in patients taking DOACs who require surgical or nonsurgical procedures. These strategies simplify decision-making, avoid unnecessary interventions like heparin bridging, and promote patient safety.
Meta-analysis: Perioperative Colchicine Reduced Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation After CABG
18 Sep, 2024 | 13:33h | UTCBackground: Coronary artery disease (CAD) remains a leading cause of mortality worldwide. Inflammation is a key factor in the development and progression of CAD, and anti-inflammatory therapies have shown potential in improving cardiovascular outcomes. Colchicine, traditionally used to treat gout, has demonstrated efficacy in reducing cardiovascular events in patients with chronic CAD. Previous individual studies have suggested that perioperative colchicine may decrease the incidence of postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), but a comprehensive analysis is needed to confirm these findings.
Objective: To evaluate the effect of perioperative colchicine administration on the incidence of POAF in patients undergoing isolated CABG surgery through a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
Methods: A systematic search was conducted across MEDLINE, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library to identify RCTs comparing perioperative colchicine administration with standard care in patients undergoing CABG. Inclusion criteria encompassed studies involving isolated CABG patients randomized to receive colchicine or standard care without colchicine. The primary outcome was the incidence of POAF during short-term follow-up.
Results: Five RCTs published between 2014 and 2022 met the inclusion criteria, including a total of 839 patients undergoing isolated CABG. Perioperative colchicine administration was associated with a significant reduction in POAF rates compared to standard care (relative risk [RR], 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40–0.73; p < 0.01). Other outcomes, such as graft patency, myocardial infarction, or long-term mortality, were not uniformly reported and, therefore, not analyzed.
Conclusions: Perioperative administration of colchicine is associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of POAF in patients undergoing CABG surgery.
Implications for Practice: Colchicine may be considered as a prophylactic strategy to reduce POAF in patients undergoing CABG, potentially improving both short- and long-term outcomes. Given the association of POAF with increased perioperative morbidity and long-term adverse events, implementing colchicine could have substantial clinical benefits in this high-risk population.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths of this meta-analysis include the exclusive inclusion of randomized controlled trials and the use of rigorous statistical methods, including sensitivity analysis, which confirmed the robustness of the results. Limitations involve the small number of studies (five RCTs), potential variability in colchicine dosing regimens, and the lack of data on other clinically relevant outcomes.
Future Research: Large-scale, multicenter RCTs are warranted to further assess the effects of colchicine on other important outcomes in CABG patients, such as graft patency, myocardial infarction rates, and long-term mortality. Future studies should also evaluate the risk-benefit profile of colchicine in this patient population to establish its full role in clinical practice.
Reference: Kirov H., Caldonazo T., Runkel A., et al. (2024). Colchicine in Patients with Coronary Disease Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery – A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. The American Journal of Cardiology. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2024.09.003
RCT: Pulmonary Vein Isolation Reduces Atrial Fibrillation Burden and Improves Quality of Life vs. Sham Procedure
7 Sep, 2024 | 17:24h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This double-blind, randomized clinical trial (SHAM-PVI) compared pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) via cryoablation to a sham procedure in 126 patients with symptomatic paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). The study, conducted in two UK tertiary centers, enrolled patients between January 2020 and March 2024. Major exclusions included long-standing persistent AF, prior left atrial ablation, and ejection fraction below 35%. Patients were monitored using implantable loop recorders.
Main Findings: At 6 months, the PVI group demonstrated a significant reduction in AF burden (60.31%) compared to the sham group (35.0%), with a geometric mean difference of 0.25 (95% CI, 0.15-0.42; P < .001). Quality-of-life scores also improved more in the PVI group, with an 18.39-point difference (95% CI, 11.48-25.30). Symptom improvement was also marked, with a reduction in the Mayo AF-Specific Symptom Inventory frequency score of −6.36 points (95% CI, −8.46 to −4.26).
Implications for Practice: PVI significantly reduces AF burden and improves both symptoms and quality of life in patients with symptomatic AF, compared to a sham procedure. These findings support the efficacy of PVI beyond a placebo effect, making it a compelling option for managing AF in patients not responsive to antiarrhythmic drugs.
Reference: Dulai, R., Sulke, N., Freemantle, N., Lambiase, P. D., Farwell, D., Srinivasan, N. T., et al. (2024). Pulmonary vein isolation vs sham intervention in symptomatic atrial fibrillation: The SHAM-PVI randomized clinical trial. JAMA. http://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2024.17921
Link: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2823283
RCT: Edoxaban Monotherapy Reduces Bleeding Events in Atrial Fibrillation with Stable CAD Compared to Dual Therapy
7 Sep, 2024 | 13:03h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This multicenter, open-label, adjudicator-masked randomized trial enrolled 1,040 patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and stable coronary artery disease (CAD) across 18 sites in South Korea. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either edoxaban monotherapy (n=524) or dual antithrombotic therapy (edoxaban plus a single antiplatelet agent; n=516). The mean age was 72.1 years, with a mean CHA2DS2-VASc score of 4.3, reflecting a moderate to high stroke risk.
Main Findings: At 12 months, the primary composite outcome occurred in fewer patients in the edoxaban monotherapy group (6.8%) than in the dual therapy group (16.2%) (HR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.30–0.65; P<0.001). The reduction was largely driven by a significantly lower incidence of major bleeding or clinically relevant non-major bleeding (4.7% vs. 14.2%; HR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.22–0.53). In contrast, the incidence of major ischemic events was similar between the two groups.
Implications for Practice: Edoxaban monotherapy provides a safer antithrombotic option for patients with AF and stable CAD by significantly reducing bleeding without increasing ischemic events compared to dual therapy. These findings suggest that monotherapy could be a preferable long-term treatment strategy in this population.
RCT: AF Screening Does Not Reduce Stroke Hospitalizations in Elderly Patients
6 Sep, 2024 | 22:18h | UTCStudy Design and Population: The GUARD-AF trial was a prospective, randomized controlled trial conducted across 149 primary care sites in the U.S. It enrolled 11,905 participants aged 70 and older, with a median age of 75 years, 56.6% of whom were female. Participants were randomized 1:1 to either screening for atrial fibrillation (AF) using a 14-day continuous electrocardiographic patch monitor or usual care. The primary outcome was all-cause stroke hospitalization, with bleeding as a key safety outcome.
Main Findings: After a median follow-up of 15.3 months, AF diagnosis was higher in the screening group (5%) compared to the usual care group (3.3%), and anticoagulation initiation was also more frequent (4.2% vs. 2.8%). However, the risk of stroke hospitalization was not significantly different between the screening and usual care groups (0.7% vs. 0.6%; HR: 1.10, 95% CI: 0.69-1.75). Similarly, there was no significant difference in bleeding risk (1.0% vs. 1.1%; HR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.60-1.26).
Implications for Practice: The findings suggest that screening for AF using continuous electrocardiographic monitoring in elderly patients does not reduce stroke hospitalizations despite an increased detection of AF. Given the low event rates and premature termination of enrollment due to COVID-19, further studies are needed to confirm these results and explore alternative strategies for stroke prevention in this population.
2024 ESC Guidelines for the Management of Atrial Fibrillation – Eur Heart J
31 Aug, 2024 | 19:34h | UTCIntroduction: The 2024 guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation (AF) were developed by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) in collaboration with the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) and other specialized associations. These guidelines aim to provide evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis, treatment, and management of AF, with a focus on improving patient outcomes through a multidisciplinary approach.
Key Points:
1 – Patient-Centered Care and Education:
– Education directed at patients, caregivers, and healthcare professionals is essential for optimizing shared decision-making. This approach ensures that treatment options are discussed openly, considering both the benefits and risks.
2 – Comorbidity and Risk Factor Management:
– Diuretics are recommended for patients with AF, heart failure (HF), and congestion to alleviate symptoms and improve AF management.
– Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2 inhibitors) are recommended for patients with AF and HF, regardless of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), to reduce the risk of hospitalization and cardiovascular death.
3 – Stroke Prevention and Anticoagulation:
– Oral anticoagulation is recommended for all patients with clinical AF and elevated thromboembolic risk, particularly those with a CHA2DS2-VA score of 2 or more.
– Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are preferred over vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in eligible patients undergoing cardioversion.
4 – Rate and Rhythm Control:
– Beta-blockers, diltiazem, verapamil, or digoxin are recommended as first-choice drugs for heart rate control in patients with AF and LVEF >40%.
– Catheter ablation is recommended as a first-line treatment option in patients with paroxysmal AF to reduce symptoms and prevent AF progression.
Conclusion: The 2024 ESC guidelines emphasize a patient-centered, multidisciplinary approach to AF management, with a strong focus on the early identification and management of comorbidities and risk factors. The guidelines also advocate for the use of DOACs in stroke prevention and recommend specific strategies for rate and rhythm control to enhance patient outcomes.
Subgroup Analysis Insights: Apixaban vs. aspirin in subclinical atrial fibrillation based on CHA2DS2-VASc score – J Am Coll Cardiol
27 May, 2024 | 20:21h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This study is a subgroup analysis of the ARTESiA trial, which compared the efficacy and safety of apixaban versus aspirin in preventing stroke and systemic embolism (SE) in patients with subclinical atrial fibrillation (SCAF). The analysis focused on 4,012 patients categorized by their baseline CHA2DS2-VASc scores: <4 (39.4%), 4 (33.6%), and >4 (27.0%).
Main Findings: For patients with a CHA2DS2-VASc score >4, apixaban significantly reduced the stroke/SE rate to 0.98%/year compared to 2.25%/year with aspirin, preventing 1.28 strokes/SE per 100 patient-years while causing 0.68 major bleeds. In patients with scores <4, the stroke/SE prevention was minimal (0.12 strokes/SE per 100 patient-years) with a similar rate of major bleeds. Patients with a score of 4 had intermediate results, with a moderate reduction in stroke/SE (0.32 per 100 patient-years) and a comparable risk of major bleeding.
Implications for Practice: The study suggests that for patients with SCAF and a CHA2DS2-VASc score >4, the benefits of apixaban in preventing stroke/SE outweigh the risks of major bleeding. For those with scores <4, aspirin might be a safer option. Patients with a score of 4 fall into an intermediate category, where individual patient preferences should guide the treatment decision.
Reference (link to abstract – $ for full-text):
Cohort Study: Higher serious bleeding rates linked to diltiazem in elderly atrial fibrillation patients on anticoagulation
26 Apr, 2024 | 12:35h | UTCStudy Design and Population:
This retrospective cohort study analyzed data from 204,155 Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older diagnosed with atrial fibrillation. The study focused on new users of the anticoagulants apixaban or rivaroxaban who commenced treatment with either diltiazem or metoprolol between January 2012 and November 2020, with follow-up extending up to 365 days.
Main Findings:
Patients treated with diltiazem exhibited a significantly increased risk of serious bleeding, including bleeding-related hospitalization and death, compared to those treated with metoprolol. The hazard ratio (HR) for serious bleeding events was 1.21, with a rate difference (RD) of 10.6 per 1000 person-years. Notably, the risk escalated with diltiazem doses exceeding 120 mg/day, indicating a dose-response relationship. Secondary outcomes, such as ischemic stroke or systemic embolism, did not show significant differences between the treatment groups.
Implications for Practice:
The findings suggest that in older adults with atrial fibrillation treated with apixaban or rivaroxaban, diltiazem increases the risk of serious bleeding, especially at higher doses. These results underscore the importance of cautious medication management and might influence clinical decisions regarding the choice of ventricular rate control in this population.
Reference (link to abstract – $ for full-text):
Nested Case-Control Study: Increased risk of major bleeding in atrial fibrillation patients with concomitant SSRI and oral anticoagulant use
23 Mar, 2024 | 20:48h | UTCStudy Design and Population
This nested case-control study investigated the association between the concomitant use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and oral anticoagulants (OACs) on the risk of major bleeding among patients with atrial fibrillation. Conducted within the UK’s Clinical Practice Research Datalink, the study included 42,190 cases of major bleeding matched to 1,156,641 controls based on age, sex, cohort entry date, and follow-up duration. Patients initiating OACs between January 2, 1998, and March 29, 2021, were included, with risk-set sampling utilized for control selection.
Main Findings
The study found that concomitant use of SSRIs and OACs was associated with a 33% increased risk of major bleeding compared to OAC use alone, with the highest risk observed within the first 30 days of concurrent use. The increased risk was consistent across different ages, sexes, and patient histories, including those with chronic kidney disease or previous bleeding events. Notably, the elevated risk of bleeding extended up to 6 months of concomitant use but did not vary significantly with the potency of SSRIs or the type of OAC used (direct OACs or vitamin K antagonists).
Implications for Practice
These findings underscore the need for healthcare professionals to closely monitor patients with atrial fibrillation who are prescribed SSRIs in addition to OACs, particularly during the initial months of treatment. This study highlights the importance of managing bleeding risk factors and suggests reconsidering the necessity and duration of concomitant SSRI and OAC use. Future research should focus on strategies to mitigate this bleeding risk and explore alternative treatments for managing depression in patients requiring anticoagulation.
Reference
Observational Study: Association of antiarrhythmic drug use with increased risk of pacemaker implantation and syncope in new-onset atrial fibrillation patients
23 Mar, 2024 | 20:08h | UTCStudy Design and Population
This observational study utilized data from the Korean National Health Insurance Service to evaluate the impact of antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) on the risk of pacemaker implantation or syncope in patients diagnosed with new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) between 2013 and 2019. A total of 770,977 new-onset AF cases were identified, with 142,141 patients prescribed AADs within one year of diagnosis. The study compared the risk of these outcomes between AAD users and nonusers.
Main Findings
The study found that the use of AADs was associated with a significantly increased risk of pacemaker implantation or syncope, with adjusted risks being 3.5 times higher for either outcome, 2.0 times higher for syncope alone, and 5.0 times higher for pacemaker implantation. These associations were consistent across various patient subgroups, and propensity score-matched analysis supported these findings. Notably, women were found to be more susceptible to the adverse effects of AADs than men.
Implications for Practice
The findings suggest a need for careful evaluation of the risks associated with AAD use in patients with new-onset AF, particularly regarding the potential for pacemaker implantation or syncope. These results highlight the importance of individualized patient assessment before prescribing AADs to mitigate these risks effectively. Further research is needed to explore the mechanisms behind these associations and to develop strategies to minimize adverse outcomes in this patient population.
Reference
Meta-Analysis: No mortality benefit of early vs. delayed/selective coronary angiography in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest without ST-elevation
21 Mar, 2024 | 11:40h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This article presents a systematic review and meta-analysis of five randomized controlled trials comparing early/immediate versus delayed/selective coronary angiography (CAG) in 1512 patients who experienced out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) without ST-segment elevation. The population had a mean age of 67 years, with 26% female and 23% having a prior myocardial infarction. Follow-up duration was at least 30 days across included studies.
Main Findings: The analysis revealed no significant difference in the odds of all-cause death between early/immediate and delayed/selective CAG strategies (Odds Ratio [OR] 1.12, 95% CI 0.91–1.38). Similar results were found for the composite outcome of all-cause death or neurological deficit (OR 1.10, 95% CI 0.89–1.36). Subgroup analysis showed no significant effect modification based on age, initial cardiac rhythm, history of coronary artery disease, the presumed ischemic cause of arrest, or time to return of spontaneous circulation. Interestingly, a trend toward increased odds of death was observed in women receiving early CAG compared to men, although this finding approached but did not reach statistical significance.
Implications for Practice: The findings suggest that for OHCA patients without ST-segment elevation, an early/immediate CAG strategy does not confer a mortality benefit over a delayed/selective approach across major subgroups. Notably, the potential for increased mortality risk in women with early CAG warrants further investigation. Clinicians should consider these results when deciding on the timing of CAG in this patient population, keeping in mind the overall lack of mortality benefit and the nuanced differences among subgroups.
Reference: Fardin Hamidi et al. (2023). Early versus delayed coronary angiography in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and no ST-segment elevation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Clinical Research in Cardiology, 113(561–569). Access the study here: [Link]
RCT: Propafenone leads to quicker sinus rhythm restoration than amiodarone in supraventricular arrhythmias related to septic shock
1 Oct, 2023 | 15:19h | UTCStudy Design & Population: The research was a two-center, prospective, controlled parallel-group, double-blind trial involving 209 septic shock patients who had new-onset supraventricular arrhythmia and a left ventricular ejection fraction above 35%. Patients were randomized to receive either intravenous propafenone (70 mg bolus followed by 400–840 mg/24 h) or amiodarone (300 mg bolus followed by 600–1800 mg/24 h).
Main Findings: The primary outcomes focused on the proportion of patients in sinus rhythm 24 hours post-infusion, time to the first sinus rhythm restoration, and arrhythmia recurrence rates. No significant difference was observed in 24-hour sinus rhythm rates between the propafenone (72.8%) and amiodarone (67.3%) groups (p=0.4). Time to the first rhythm restoration was significantly shorter for the propafenone group (median 3.7 hours) compared to the amiodarone group (median 7.3 hours, p=0.02). Recurrence of arrhythmia was notably lower in the propafenone group (52%) than in the amiodarone group (76%, p<0.001). In the subgroup of patients with a dilated left atrium, amiodarone appeared to be more effective.
Implications & Limitations: The study suggests that while propafenone doesn’t offer better rhythm control at 24 hours compared to amiodarone, it does provide faster cardioversion and fewer arrhythmia recurrences, especially in patients with a non-dilated left atrium. No significant differences were observed in clinical outcomes, such as ICU or long-term mortality, between propafenone and amiodarone in the trial. Limitations include potential underpowering of the study and the inability to fully account for the impact of multiple covariates involved in the complex therapy of septic shock.
Commentary on Twitter:
Propafenone💉70 mg bolus+ 400-840 mg/24h vs amiodarone💉300 mg + by 600-1800 mg/24h for SVA in septic shock, RCT
🫀propafenone not better for rhythm control at 24h but excellent hemodynamic safety profile, cardioverting faster & fewer recurrences#FOAMCc
🔓https://t.co/GVuoxPD7Hy pic.twitter.com/rRlj00x71p— Intensive Care Medicine (@yourICM) September 13, 2023
RCT – 2ry analysis | Omega-3 supplementation linked to increased AF risk in post-MI patients
3 Aug, 2023 | 13:45h | UTCRelated:
M-A: Omega-3 fatty acids supplementation is associated with increased risk of atrial fibrillation.
Commentary from the author on Twitter (thread – click for more)
RCT data consistently show that Omega-3 suppl increase AF risk https://t.co/LQVHfPNtKL
In this substudy of the #OMEMI trial we add novel data from thumb-ECG screening and serum EPA/DHA, supporting a causal relation between omega-3 (EPA) and AF!https://t.co/B9VoDNQpZi
🧵 1/4 pic.twitter.com/GFYGfVaNMq
— Peder L. Myhre MD, PhD (@pmyhre) July 28, 2023
RCT | High-power radiofrequency improves AF ablation results vs. standard-power, but may increase asymptomatic cerebral emboli
26 Jul, 2023 | 13:16h | UTCA Randomized Trial of High vs Standard Power Radiofrequency Ablation for Pulmonary Vein Isolation: SHORT-AF – JACC: Clinical Electrophysiology (link to abstract – $ for full-text)