Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants and heart failure

Multidisciplinary Approach in Atrial Fibrillation: As Good as Gold

Atrial fibrillation (AF) represents the most common sustained arrhythmia necessitating dual focus: acute complication management and sustained longitudinal oversight to modulate disease progression and ensure comprehensive patient care over time. AF is a multifaceted disorder; due to such a great number of potential exacerbating conditions, a multidisciplinary team (MDT) should manage AF patients by cooperating with a cardiologist. Effective management of AF patients necessitates the implementation of a well-coordinated and tailored care pathway aimed at delivering optimized treatment through collaboration among various healthcare professionals. Management of AF should be carefully evaluated and mutually agreed upon in consultation with healthcare providers. It is crucial to recognize that treatment may evolve due to the emergence of new risk factors, symptoms, disease progression, and advancements in treatment modalities. In the context of multidisciplinary AF teams, a coordinated approach involves assembling a diverse team tailored to meet individual patients' unique needs based on local services' availability.

Impact of heart failure on the clinical profile and outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation treated with rivaroxaban. Data from the EMIR study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of the presence of heart failure (HF) on the clinical profile and outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) anticoagulated with rivaroxaban.

METHODS

Observational and non-interventional study that included AF adults recruited from 79 Spanish centers, anticoagulated with rivaroxaban ≥ 6 months before inclusion. Data were analyzed according to baseline HF status.

RESULTS

Out of 1,433 patients, 326 (22.7%) had HF at baseline. Compared to patients without HF, HF patients were older (75.3 ± 9.9 vs. 73.8 ± 9.6 years; p = 0.01), had more diabetes (36.5% vs. 24.3%; p < 0.01), coronary artery disease (28.2% vs. 12.9%; p < 0.01), renal insufficiency (31.7% vs. 22.6%; p = 0.01), higher CHA2DS2-VASc (4.5 ± 1.6 vs. 3.2 ± 1.4; p < 0.01) and HAS-BLED (1.8 ± 1.1 vs. 1.5 ± 1.0; p < 0.01). After a median follow-up of 2.5 years, among HF patients, annual rates of stroke/systemic embolism/transient ischemic attack, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (non-fatal myocardial infarction, revascularization and cardiovascular death), cardiovascular death, and major bleeding were 1.2%, 3.0%, 2.0%, and 1.4%, respectively. Compared to those patients without HF, HF patients had greater annual rates of MACE (3.0% vs. 0.5%; p < 0.01) and cardiovascular death (2.0% vs. 0.2%; p < 0.01), without significant differences regarding other outcomes, including thromboembolic or bleeding events. Previous HF was an independent predictor of MACE (odds ratio 3.4; 95% confidence interval 1.6-7.3; p = 0.002) but not for thromboembolic events or major bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

Among AF patients anticoagulated with rivaroxaban, HF patients had a worse clinical profile and a higher MACE risk and cardiovascular mortality. HF was independently associated with the development of MACE, but not with thromboembolic events or major bleeding.

The management of atrial fibrillation in heart failure: an expert panel consensus

Heart failure (HF) and atrial fibrillation (AF) often coexist, being closely interrelated as the one increases the prevalence and incidence and worsens the prognosis of the other. Their frequent coexistence raises several challenges, including under-diagnosis of HF with preserved ejection fraction in AF and of AF in HF, characterization and diagnosis of atrial cardiomyopathy, target and impact of rate control therapy on outcomes, optimal rhythm control strategy in the era of catheter ablation, HF-related thromboembolic risk and management of anticoagulation in patients with comorbidities, such as chronic kidney disease or transient renal function worsening, coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes, valvular or structural heart disease interventions and cancer. In the present document, derived by an expert panel meeting, we sought to focus on the above challenging issues, outlining the existing evidence and identifying gaps in knowledge that need to be addressed.

Intravascular cells and circulating microparticles induce procoagulant activity via phosphatidylserine exposure in heart failure

Relatively little information is known about the definitive role of phosphatidylserine (PS) in the hypercoagulability of heart failure (HF). Our objectives were to assess the levels of PS exposure on microparticles (MPs) and blood cells (BCs) in each group of HF patients and to evaluate their procoagulant activity (PCA). HF patients in each NYHA functional class II-IV (II n = 30, III n = 30, IV n = 30) and healthy controls (n = 25) were enrolled in the present study. PS exposure on MPs, BCs was analyzed with flow cytometry. MPs were classified based on their cellular origin: platelets (CD41a⁺), neutrophils (CD66b⁺), endothelial cells (CD31⁺CD41a^-), erythrocytes (CD235a⁺), monocytes (CD14⁺), T lymphocytes (CD3⁺), and B lymphocytes (CD19⁺). PCA was evaluated by clotting time, extrinsic/intrinsic FXa and prothrombinase production assays, as well as fibrin formation assays. Inhibition assays of PCA of PS⁺ BCs and MPs were performed by lactadherin. There was no significant difference in MP cellular origin between healthy and HF subjects. However, the total number of PS⁺ MPs was significantly increased in HF patients compared with healthy controls. In addition, circulating PS⁺ BCs cooperated with PS⁺ MPs to markedly shorten coagulation time and dramatically increase FXa/thrombin generation and fibrin formation in each HF group. Moreover, blockade of exposed PS on BCs and MPs with lactadherin inhibited PCA by approximately 80%. Our results lead us to believe that exposing PS on the injured BCs and MPs played a pivotal role in the hypercoagulability state in HF patients.

Heart Failure and Stroke

PURPOSE

Ischemic stroke significantly contributes to morbidity and mortality in heart failure (HF). The risk of stroke increases significantly, with coexisting atrial fibrillation (AF). An aggravating factor could be asymptomatic paroxysms of AF (so-called silent AF), and therefore, the risk stratification in these patients remains difficult. This review provides an overview of stroke risk in HF, its risk stratification, and stroke prevention in these patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Stroke risk stratification in HF patients remains an important issue. Recently, the CHA₂DS₂-VASc score, originally developed to predict stroke risk in AF patients, had been reported to be a predictive for strokes in HF patients regardless of AF being present. Furthermore, there are several independent risk factors (e.g., hypertension, diabetes mellitus, prior stroke) described. Based on the current evidence, HF should be considered as an independent risk factor for stroke. The CHA₂DS₂-VASc score might be useful to predict stroke risk in HF patients with or without AF in clinical routine. However, there is only a recommendation for the oral anticoagulation use in patients with concomitant HF and AF, while in patients with HF and no AF, individualized risk stratification is preferred. Current guidelines recommend to prefer non-vitamin Kantagonist anticoagulants over warfarin.

Anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation with heart failure

Heart failure (HF) and atrial fibrillation (AF) frequently coexist, and they can beget one another due to similar factors and shared pathophysiology. These pathophysiologic changes promote the episodes of AF, while they in turn predispose to the exacerbation of HF. In this review, we will discuss pathophysiological mechanisms shared by AF and HF. Patients with concomitant HF and AF are at a particularly high risk of thromboembolism, which contribute to even worse symptoms and poorer prognosis. Vitamin K antagonists (VKA) (warfarin) were the traditional medication in AF patients for the prevention of stroke, whereas the advance of novel non-VKA oral anticoagulants (NOACs) (dabigatran, apixaban, rivaroxaban, and edoxaban) is challenging these standard prescriptions. NOACs' potential advantages over warfarin, including fixed dosing regimens, wide therapeutic window, and more sustained anticoagulant response, promote clinicians to consider these novel agents in the first place. However, some data suggested patients with AF and HF may receive different therapeutic response than those with AF alone in anticoagulant treatment. Accordingly, we aim to assess the potential role of oral anticoagulants, especially NOACs, in the management of patients with concomitant AF and HF.

Heart Failure as a Risk Factor for Stroke

Heart failure (HF) is one of the major causes of death worldwide. Despite the high incidence of stroke in patients with HF, there has been a controversy as to whether HF itself is a risk factor for stroke. Recently, there is a great deal of evidence that HF itself increases the risk of stroke. In previous studies, the benefit of warfarin for stroke prevention in patients with HF was offset by the risk of bleeding. In the era of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants with low bleeding profiles, we can expect a more effective stroke prevention in patients with HF by selective anticoagulation. The purpose of this review is to describe the relationship between stroke and HF, which could be an unconventional risk factor and a potential intervention target for stroke prevention.