[Direct oral anticoagulants: In which indications? Which one to prescribe? For or against their use in frail patients and in atypical cases? Which monitoring and management haemorrhage complications?]

Direct Oral Anticoagulants versus Vitamin K Antagonists in Individuals Aged 80 Years and Older: An Overview in 2021

Two main types of oral anticoagulants are available in France: vitamin K antagonists (VKA) and, more recently, direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC). The benefit−risk profile appears to be favorable for DOAC, which is as effective as VKA but safer (fewer cases of severe and cerebral bleeding). In a study in 2017, we observed that older adults did not seem to receive the same modalities of oral anticoagulants as younger individuals for various reasons. To assess anticoagulation prescribing practices over time, we repeated this cross-sectional study by comparing very old individuals taking DOAC to those taking VKA. Ambulatory individuals aged 80 years and older were included. They were affiliated with the Mutualité Sociale Agricole of Burgundy and were refunded for a medical prescription of oral anticoagulation in March 2021. The demographic characteristics, registered chronic diseases (RCD), number and types of prescribed drugs, and mortality of the DOAC group and the VKA group were compared. A total of 4275 subjects were included in the study: 67.44% (2883) received DOAC and 32.56% (1392) received VKA. The two groups were similar in age. In the DOAC group, there were more women (54.98% vs. 46.98%) (p < 0.001), fewer RCD (91.47% vs. 93.68%) (p = 0.014), and lower rates of venous thromboembolism (2.53% vs. 6.75%) (p < 0.001), severe heart failure (56.50% vs. 68.03%) (p < 0.001), and severe kidney diseases (1.38% vs. 3.59%) (p < 0.001), but there were more subjects with Alzheimer’s disease (7.49% vs. 4.31%) (p = 0.001). Individuals in the DOAC group had fewer prescriptions of furosemide (48.53% vs. 55.75%) (p < 0.001) and fibrates (2.32% vs. 3.88%) (p = 0.044). They also had more prescriptions of proton pump inhibitors (43.95% vs. 39.44%) (p = 0.006) and antirheumatics (1.60% vs. 0.65%) (p = 0.009) than those in the VKA group. There was no difference in mortality. This study revealed that prescribing practices for DOAC have changed over time.

Direct Oral Anticoagulants versus Vitamin K Antagonists in Patients Aged 80 Years and Older

The effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) is non-inferior to vitamin K antagonists (VKA) to treat atrial fibrillation and venous thromboembolism (VTE). In this cross-sectional study, we compared older persons taking DOACs to those taking VKAs. We included ambulatory individuals ≥80 years, affiliated to Mutualité Sociale Agricole of Burgundy, who were refunded for a medical prescription in September 2017. The demographic conditions, registered chronic diseases (RCD), and number and types of prescribed drugs were compared in the DOAC group and VKA group. Of the 3190 included individuals, 1279 (40%) were prescribed DOACs and 1911 (60%) VKAs. Individuals taking VKAs were older than those taking DOACs (87.11 vs. 86.35 years). In the DOAC group, there were more women (51.92% vs. 48.25%) (p = 0.043), less RCD (89.60% vs. 92.73%) (p = 0.002), less VTE (1.80% vs. 6.59%), less severe heart failure (58.09% vs. 67.87%), less severe hypertension (18.22% vs. 23.60%), less severe kidney diseases (1.49% vs. 3.82%), and fewer drugs per prescription (6.15 vs. 6.66) (p < 0.01 for all). The DOAC group were also less likely to be taking angiotensin receptor blockers (10.79% vs. 13.97%), furosemide (40.81% vs. 49.66%) or digoxin (10.32% vs. 13.66%) than the VKA group (p = 0.009, p < 0.001, and p = 0.005). DOACs were less prescribed than VKAs. Individuals taking VKAs were older and had more severe comorbidities and more drugs per prescription than those taking DOACs.