Safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation on concomitant treatment with dronedarone

R. Vio, P. China, E. Marras, A. Cutolo, R. Valle, G. Grassi, S. Saccà, A. Chinellato, S. Themistoclakis
{"title":"Safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation on concomitant treatment with dronedarone","authors":"R. Vio, P. China, E. Marras, A. Cutolo, R. Valle, G. Grassi, S. Saccà, A. Chinellato, S. Themistoclakis","doi":"10.1093/europace/euac053.291","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n Type of funding sources: None.\n \n \n \n The use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with bleedings. Interactions with dronedarone may increase this risk, but data on concomitant treatment of DOACs with dronedarone are limited.\n \n \n \n The primary endpoint was to compare the survival free from the composite endpoint of clinically relevant bleeding, thromboembolic event and all-cause death, between AF patients on treatment with dronedarone and different DOACs. The secondary endpoints were to compare the survival free from i) clinically relevant bleeding and ii) clinically relevant major bleeding.\n \n \n \n A retrospective study was conducted at our Local Health Unit, from January 1st 2016 to December 31st 2020. The population included AF patients with concomitant prescriptions of DOACs and dronedarone. Patients were divided into 4 groups (rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban, dabigatran). Clinically relevant major bleedings were defined as fatal bleeding or bleeding leading to transfusion of ≥2 units of blood. Clinically relevant non-major bleedings were defined as any sign of hemorrhage that does not fit the criteria for major bleeding but does lead to hospitalization or emergency room admission. Thromboembolic events were defined as ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), and systemic embolism.\n \n \n \n 165 patients were included: 46/165 (28%) on rivaroxaban, 66/165 (40%) on apixaban, 45/165 (27%) on edoxaban, and 8/165 (5%) on dabigatran (Fig.1). Over a median follow-up of 339 days, 14/165 (8%) met the primary composite endpoint: 8/165 (5%) had clinically relevant bleedings, of which 1/165 (0.6%) was a clinically relevant major bleeding (i.e., fatal spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage), 2/165 (1%) had TIAs, and 5/165 (3%) died. We found no difference in survival free from the primary composite endpoint and from clinically relevant bleeding between groups (p=0.19 and p=0.69, respectively) (Fig. 2A-B). However, survival free from clinically relevant major bleeding was significantly lower in dabigatran users (p=0.003) (Fig. 2C). At a secondary analysis, DOACs contraindicated by 2015 EHRA guide (dabigatran, edoxaban 60 mg), and not by 2018/2021 EHRA guides (rivaroxaban, dabigatran, edoxaban 60 mg), were associated with lower survival from either clinically relevant bleeding or clinically relevant major bleeding (p=0.03 and p<0.001, respectively).\n \n \n \n In our study on patients on concomitant treatment with DOACs and dronedarone, there was no difference in survival free from the primary composite endpoint and from clinically relevant bleeding between groups of coadministration. However, survival free from clinically relevant major bleeding was significantly lower in dabigatran users. DOACs contraindicated by 2015 EHRA guide (and not by the latest 2018/2021 EHRA guides) are associated with lower survival from either clinically relevant bleeding or clinically relevant major bleeding.\n","PeriodicalId":11720,"journal":{"name":"EP Europace","volume":"29 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EP Europace","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euac053.291","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Type of funding sources: None. The use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with bleedings. Interactions with dronedarone may increase this risk, but data on concomitant treatment of DOACs with dronedarone are limited. The primary endpoint was to compare the survival free from the composite endpoint of clinically relevant bleeding, thromboembolic event and all-cause death, between AF patients on treatment with dronedarone and different DOACs. The secondary endpoints were to compare the survival free from i) clinically relevant bleeding and ii) clinically relevant major bleeding. A retrospective study was conducted at our Local Health Unit, from January 1st 2016 to December 31st 2020. The population included AF patients with concomitant prescriptions of DOACs and dronedarone. Patients were divided into 4 groups (rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban, dabigatran). Clinically relevant major bleedings were defined as fatal bleeding or bleeding leading to transfusion of ≥2 units of blood. Clinically relevant non-major bleedings were defined as any sign of hemorrhage that does not fit the criteria for major bleeding but does lead to hospitalization or emergency room admission. Thromboembolic events were defined as ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), and systemic embolism. 165 patients were included: 46/165 (28%) on rivaroxaban, 66/165 (40%) on apixaban, 45/165 (27%) on edoxaban, and 8/165 (5%) on dabigatran (Fig.1). Over a median follow-up of 339 days, 14/165 (8%) met the primary composite endpoint: 8/165 (5%) had clinically relevant bleedings, of which 1/165 (0.6%) was a clinically relevant major bleeding (i.e., fatal spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage), 2/165 (1%) had TIAs, and 5/165 (3%) died. We found no difference in survival free from the primary composite endpoint and from clinically relevant bleeding between groups (p=0.19 and p=0.69, respectively) (Fig. 2A-B). However, survival free from clinically relevant major bleeding was significantly lower in dabigatran users (p=0.003) (Fig. 2C). At a secondary analysis, DOACs contraindicated by 2015 EHRA guide (dabigatran, edoxaban 60 mg), and not by 2018/2021 EHRA guides (rivaroxaban, dabigatran, edoxaban 60 mg), were associated with lower survival from either clinically relevant bleeding or clinically relevant major bleeding (p=0.03 and p<0.001, respectively). In our study on patients on concomitant treatment with DOACs and dronedarone, there was no difference in survival free from the primary composite endpoint and from clinically relevant bleeding between groups of coadministration. However, survival free from clinically relevant major bleeding was significantly lower in dabigatran users. DOACs contraindicated by 2015 EHRA guide (and not by the latest 2018/2021 EHRA guides) are associated with lower survival from either clinically relevant bleeding or clinically relevant major bleeding.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
直接口服抗凝剂治疗心房颤动患者与drone . arone联合治疗的安全性和有效性
资金来源类型:无。心房颤动(AF)患者使用直接口服抗凝剂(DOACs)与出血有关。与无人机的相互作用可能会增加这种风险,但无人机同时治疗doac的数据有限。主要终点是比较接受drone - edarone和不同DOACs治疗的房颤患者在无临床相关出血、血栓栓塞事件和全因死亡等复合终点的生存率。次要终点是比较i)临床相关出血和ii)临床相关大出血的无生存期。2016年1月1日至2020年12月31日在我们当地卫生单位进行了一项回顾性研究。人群包括伴有DOACs和drone - ronone处方的房颤患者。患者分为4组(利伐沙班、阿哌沙班、依多沙班、达比加群)。临床上相关大出血定义为致死性出血或导致输血≥2单位血的出血。临床上相关的非大出血被定义为任何不符合大出血标准但导致住院或急诊的出血迹象。血栓栓塞事件被定义为缺血性卒中、短暂性脑缺血发作(TIA)和全身性栓塞。165例患者入组:利伐沙班46/165(28%),阿哌沙班66/165(40%),依多沙班45/165(27%),达比加群8/165(5%)(图1)。在339天的中位随访中,14/165(8%)达到了主要综合终点:8/165(5%)有临床相关出血,其中1/165(0.6%)为临床相关大出血(即致死性自发性脑出血),2/165(1%)有tia, 5/165(3%)死亡。我们发现两组无主要复合终点和临床相关出血的生存率无差异(p=0.19和p=0.69)(图2A-B)。然而,达比加群使用者无临床相关大出血的生存率显著降低(p=0.003)(图2C)。在一项二级分析中,2015年EHRA指南(达比加群,依多沙班60 mg)和2018/2021年EHRA指南(利伐沙班,达比加群,依多沙班60 mg)的DOACs禁忌与临床相关出血或临床相关大出血的生存率较低相关(p=0.03和p<0.001)。在我们对DOACs和dronedarone同时治疗的患者的研究中,两组共给药在无主要复合终点和无临床相关出血的生存率方面没有差异。然而,达比加群使用者无临床相关大出血的生存率明显较低。2015年EHRA指南(而不是最新的2018/2021年EHRA指南)禁忌的DOACs与临床相关出血或临床相关大出血的生存率较低相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
High lead-related complication rate with MicroPort Vega active fixation pacing leads. Dual chamber versus single chamber pacemaker in patients in sinus rhythm with an atrioventricular block: a nationwide cohort study Ventricular Arrhythmias in Acute Heart Failure. A Clinical Consensus Statement of the Association for Acute CardioVascular Care Association (ACVC), the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) and the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC Enhancing Origin Prediction: Deep Learning Model for Diagnosing Premature Ventricular Contractions with Dual-Rhythm Analysis Focused on Cardiac Rotation A computational study on the influence of antegrade accessory pathway location on the 12-lead electrocardiogram in Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1