Use of Direct-Acting Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Chronic Liver Disease

Efficacy and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Compared to Vitamin K Antagonists for Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Liver Cirrhosis: An Update Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background

This meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients with concomitant atrial fibrillation (AF) and liver cirrhosis (LC).

Methods

PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases were searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs comparing DOACs and VKAs in patients with AF and LC. Analyses were performed in R software. A random-effects model was employed to calculate the pooled hazard ratio (HR).

Results

Eleven studies encompassing 19,617 patients were included, with 9379 receiving DOACs and 10,238 receiving VKAs. DOACs were associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of major bleeding (HR 0.70; 95% CI: 0.61-0.81; P < 0.001; I2 = 0%), all-cause mortality (HR 0.87; 95% CI: 0.78-0.98; P = 0.022; I2 = 41%), and gastrointestinal bleeding (HR 0.75; 95% CI: 0.67-0.84; P < 0.001; I2 = 4%). No significant difference was observed for thromboembolic events (HR 0.86; 95% CI: 0.69-1.06; P = 0.153; I2 = 0%).

Conclusion

DOACs may be a feasible option for patients with AF and LC, demonstrating similar effectiveness to VKAs while exhibiting a better safety profile. These findings await validation by prospective studies.

Safety of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with liver cirrhosis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Atrial fibrillation is the most prevalent cardiac arrhythmia, and catheter ablation (CA) has emerged as a viable treatment option for selected patients. However, its safety profile in liver cirrhosis (LC) populations remains underexplored.

METHODS

This was an observational analysis of the National Inpatient Sample Database 2016-2020; we analyzed adult encounters undergoing CA for atrial fibrillation who had a concomitant diagnosis of LC. Using propensity scores, encounters were divided into two cohorts based on the presence or absence of LC and matched in a 1:1 fashion using LC as the dependent variable. In-hospital mortality and postprocedure total complications were compared using regression models.

RESULTS

93 830 procedures were identified for non-LC patients and 960 involving LC patients; after propensity score matching, each cohort included 910 hospitalizations. The mean age in the LC-matched cohort was 66.5 ± 9.1 years. In-hospital mortality did not differ between the groups (aOR = 1.01; 95% CI [0.06-16.1]; p = .99). However, the LC cohort exhibited higher odds of total complications (aOR = 1.98; 95% CI [1.42-2.75]; p < .001). Length of stay (LOS) was comparable, but total costs were higher in the LC cohort: LOS was 2 days (95% CI [1-3]) in the LC group versus 3 days (95% CI [1-4]) (p < .11) and LC: $202,000 (95% CI [$142 000-$261 000]) versus non-LC: $189 000, (95% CI [$153 000-$222 000]) (p < .0001).

CONCLUSION

In this national analysis of patients undergoing CA for AF, those with LC had similar in-hospital mortality, postprocedure complications, and LOS compared to noncirrhotic patients. Furthermore, longitudinal studies are needed to assess the safety profile of CA in this subpopulation.

Risk of Adverse Events in Anticoagulated Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease

BACKGROUND

The clinical impact of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is still controversial.

AIM

To evaluate the 1-year risk of all-cause death, thromboembolic events, and bleeding in patients with AF-NAFLD.

METHODS

Retrospective study with a health research network (TriNetX). Patients with AF on oral anticoagulation (OAC) were categorized according to the presence of NAFLD into 2 groups. The primary outcomes were the 1-year risks of (1) a composite cardiovascular outcome (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, cardiac arrest, and pulmonary embolism) and (2) a composite hemorrhagic outcome (intracranial hemorrhage and gastrointestinal bleeding). Cox regression analysis before and after propensity score matching was used to estimate hazard ratio (HR) and 95% 95% CI,. Sensitivity analyses investigated the risk associated with cirrhosis, thrombocytopenia, and type of OAC (warfarin vs non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs).

RESULTS

We identified 22 636 patients with AF-NAFLD (69 ± 12 years, 46.7% females) and 391 014 patients with AF and without liver disease (72 ± 12 years, 42.7% females). NAFLD was associated with a higher risk of composite cardiovascular (HR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.47-1.61) and hemorrhagic (HR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.42-1.72) outcomes. This was consistent also for all the single outcomes. Cirrhotic and thrombocytopenic patients with AF-NAFLD showed the highest risks. Compared to patients with AF-NAFLD on NOACs, those on warfarin were associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular and hemorrhagic outcomes.

CONCLUSION

In patients with AF, NAFLD is associated with a higher 1-year risk of adverse events, with the risk of adverse events progressively increasing from noncirrhotic to cirrhotic and from nonthrombocytopenic to thrombocytopenic patients. NOACs were associated with a better effectiveness and safety profile compared to warfarin.

Effects of dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban on fibrin network permeability, thrombin generation, and fibrinolysis

INTRODUCTION

There are important pharmacological differences between direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) and a deeper knowledge of how they influence different aspects of hemostasis in patients on treatment is desirable.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Blood samples from patients on dabigatran (n = 23), rivaroxaban (n = 26), or apixaban (n = 20) were analyzed with a fibrin network permeability assay, a turbidimetric clotting and lysis assay, the calibrated automated thrombogram (CAT), plasma levels of thrombin-antithrombin complex (TAT) and D-dimer, as well as DOAC concentrations, PT-INR and aPTT. As a comparison, we also analyzed samples from 27 patients on treatment with warfarin.

RESULTS

Patients on dabigatran had a more permeable fibrin network, longer lag time (CAT and turbidimetric assay), and lower levels of D-dimer in plasma, compared with patients on rivaroxaban- and apixaban treatment, and a more permeable fibrin network than patients on warfarin. Clot lysis time was slightly longer in patients on dabigatran than in patients on rivaroxaban. Warfarin patients formed a more permeable fibrin network than patients on apixaban, had longer lag time than patients on rivaroxaban (CAT assay), and lower peak thrombin and ETP compared to patients on treatment with both FXa-inhibitors.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this study indicate dabigatran treatment is a more potent anticoagulant than apixaban and rivaroxaban. However, as these results are not supported by clinical data, they are probably more related to the assays used and highlight the difficulty of measuring and comparing the effect of anticoagulants.

Recommendations for the safe use of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with cirrhosis based on a systematic review of pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic and safety data

PURPOSE

The popularity of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) is increasing among patients with cirrhosis. Cirrhosis has a major impact on the pharmacokinetics of drugs, potentially increasing adverse events. Safe use of drugs in cirrhosis requires a diligent risk-benefit analysis. The aim of this study is to develop practice recommendations for safe use of DOACs in cirrhosis based on a systematic review of pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic and safety data.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search to identify studies on pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and safety of DOACs in cirrhosis. Data were collected and presented in summary tables by severity of cirrhosis using the Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) classification. A multidisciplinary expert panel evaluated the results and classified the DOACs according to safety.

RESULTS

Fifty four studies were included. All DOACs were classified as 'no additional risks known' for CTP A. For CTP B, apixaban, dabigatran and edoxaban were classified as 'no additional risks known'. Apixaban and edoxaban showed fewer adverse events in patients with cirrhosis, while dabigatran may be less impacted by severity of cirrhosis based on its pharmacokinetic profile. Rivaroxaban was classified as 'unsafe' in CTP B and C based on significant pharmacokinetic alterations. Due to lack of data, apixaban, dabigatran and edoxaban were classified as 'unknown' for CTP C.

CONCLUSION

DOACs can be used in patients with CTP A cirrhosis, and apixaban, dabigatran and edoxaban can also be used in CTP B. It is recommended to avoid rivaroxaban in CTP B and C. There is insufficient evidence to support safe use of other DOACs in CTP C cirrhosis.