In-Hospital Bleeding Outcomes of Myocardial Infarction in the Era of Warfarin and Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Atrial Fibrillation in the United States: A Report From the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry

Efficacy and safety of oral anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation and acute myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimal antithrombotic therapy strategies for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remain uncertain. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral anticoagulants (OAC) among patients with AF and AMI.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched from inception till 5 February 2025. The primary outcome was any stroke.

RESULTS

Eleven studies with 83 549 patients were included. OAC therapy was associated with lower risks of any stroke (odds ratio [OR]: 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.60-0.77; P < .001), ischemic stroke (OR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.57-0.73; P < .001), and all-cause mortality (OR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.74-0.89; P < .001). Additionally, OAC therapy was associated with a higher risk of any bleeding (OR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.06-1.46; P = .009), but not for major bleeding (OR: 1.28; 95% CI: 0.87-1.90; P = .21).

CONCLUSIONS

OAC therapy is effective for patients with AF and AMI, but should be administered cautiously in those at high bleeding risk.

When Apixaban and Rivaroxaban Interfere With Anti-Xa Assays: A Cohort Study

Background

The use of direct factor Xa inhibitors, such as apixaban and rivaroxaban, has improved medication adherence. However, in certain situations during hospital admission, patients on these medications may need to be transitioned to unfractionated heparin (UFH) infusions. This transition can skew results of anticoagulation monitoring, such as the anti-Xa assay, due to residual factor-Xa inhibitor activity.

Methods

We conducted this retrospective chart among admitted patients to St. Vincent's Medical Center in Bridgeport, CT between December 2020 till June 2022. Patients who were maintained on Apixaban or Rivaroxaban, factor-Xa inhibitors, and were transitioned to unfractionated intravenous drip were included. A baseline plasma anti-Xa level was noted. Assessment for thrombotic or bleeding events during hospitalization was performed.

Results

A total of 48 patients were included in this study. The majority of patients were bridged to UFH for NSTEMI (31%) or pre-procedure (23%). The mean baseline anti-Xa for all patients was 0.92 U/mL. Twelve patients (25%) and one patient (2%) of patients had bleeding and thrombotic events, respectively. Although the mean baseline anti-Xa level was higher for patients who had an adverse event compared to no event, the difference was non-statistically significant. Fifty seven percent of patients who had an adverse event had a supratherapeutic plasma anti-Xa baseline level. A gastrointestinal bleed was the most common type of bleeding event.

Conclusions

To prevent thrombotic or bleeding events, we suggest adopting a standard practice of obtaining a baseline anti-Xa level in patients with recent exposure to factor Xa inhibitors in order to guide the timing of UFH initiation, the dosing of heparin, and determine the need for alternative assays, such as the activated partial thromboplastin clotting time.

In-hospital Bleeding Outcomes of Oral Anticoagulant and Dual Antiplatelet Therapy During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: An Analysis From the Japanese Nationwide Registry

ABSTRACT

The type of periprocedural antithrombotic regimen that is the safest and most effective in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients on oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy has not been fully investigated. We aimed to retrospectively investigate the in-hospital bleeding outcomes of patients receiving OAC and antiplatelet therapies during PCI using Japanese nationwide multicenter registry data. A total of 26,938 patients who underwent PCI with OAC and antiplatelet therapies between 2016 and 2017 were included. We investigated in-hospital bleeding requiring blood transfusion, mortality, and stent thrombosis according to the antithrombotic regimens used at the time of PCI: OAC + single antiplatelet therapy (double therapy) and OAC + dual antiplatelet therapy (triple therapy). The antiplatelet agents included aspirin, clopidogrel, and prasugrel. The OAC agents included warfarin and direct OACs. Adjusting the dose of OAC or intermitting OAC before PCI was at each operator's discretion. In the study population [mean age (SD), 73.5 (9.5) years; women, 21.5%], the double therapy and triple therapy groups comprised 5546 (20.6%) and 21,392 (79.4%) patients, respectively. Bleeding requiring transfusion was not significantly different between the groups [adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 0.700; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.420-1.160; P = 0.165] (triple therapy as a reference). Mortality was not significantly different (aOR, 1.370; 95% CI, 0.790-2.360; P = 0.258). Stent thrombosis was significantly different between the groups (aOR, 3.310; 95% CI, 1.040-10.500; P = 0.042) (triple therapy as a reference). In conclusion, for patients on OAC therapy who underwent PCI, periprocedural triple therapy may be safe with respect to in-hospital bleeding risks. However, further investigations are warranted to establish the safety and efficacy of periprocedural triple therapy.

Characteristics, Management, and Outcomes of Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients with Cancer

Patients with cancer are at increased risk of cardiovascular disease, with a reported prevalence of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) ranging from 3% to 17%. The increased risk of ACS in these patients seems to be due to the complex interaction of shared cardiovascular risk factors, cancer type and stage, and chemotherapeutic and radiotherapy regimens. The management of ACS in patients with cancer is a clinical challenge, particularly due to cancer's unique pathophysiology, which makes it difficult to balance thrombotic and bleeding risks in this specific patient population. In addition, patients with cancer have largely been excluded from ACS trials. Hence, an evidence-based treatment for ACS in this group of patients is unknown and only a limited proportion of them is treated with antiplatelets or invasive revascularization, despite initial reports suggesting their beneficial prognostic effects in cancer patients. Finally, cancer patients experiencing ACS are also at higher risk of in-hospital and long-term mortality as compared to non-cancer patients. In this review, we will provide an overview on the available evidence of the relationship between ACS and cancer, in terms of clinical manifestations, possible underlying mechanisms, and therapeutic and prognostic implications.

In-Hospital Bleeding Outcomes of Myocardial Infarction in the Era of Warfarin and Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Atrial Fibrillation in the United States: A Report From the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry

Background

We sought to examine patient characteristics, peri‐infarction invasive and pharmacologic management, and in‐hospital major bleeding in myocardial infarction patients with atrial fibrillation or flutter, based on home anticoagulant use.

Methods and Results

We stratified patients by home anticoagulant: (1) no anticoagulant, (2) warfarin, and (3) direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) among ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non‐STEMI (NSTEMI) patients with atrial fibrillation or flutter treated at 761 US hospitals in the ACTION (Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network) Registry from January 2015 to December 2016. The primary outcome of our study was in‐hospital major bleeding. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the independent association between home anticoagulant and in‐hospital major bleeding. Among 6471 STEMI patients with atrial fibrillation or flutter, 15.7% were on warfarin and 13.0% on DOACs; among 19 954 NSTEMI patients, 22.8% were on warfarin and 15.4% on DOACs. In STEMI, door‐to‐balloon times were slightly higher in those on anticoagulant, with similar rates of angiography within 24 hours in the 3 groups. NSTEMI patients on anticoagulant were less likely to undergo angiography (49.3% no anticoagulant, 33.4% on warfarin, 36.4% on DOACs; P<0.01) or percutaneous coronary intervention within 24 hours (21.1% no anticoagulant, 14.3% on warfarin, 15.9% on DOACs; P<0.01). After multivariate adjustment, use of home warfarin (odds ratio: 1.00 [95% CI, 0.79–1.27] in STEMI and 1.13 [95% CI, 0.97–1.30] in NSTEMI) or DOAC (odds ratio: 0.93 [95% CI, 0.73–1.20] in STEMI and 0.97 [95% CI, 0.81–1.16] in NSTEMI) was not associated with increased in‐hospital major bleeding compared with no anticoagulant.

Conclusions

In routine clinical practice, home warfarin or DOAC therapy is not associated with an increased risk of in‐hospital bleeding compared with no anticoagulant.

Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Acute Coronary Syndrome

Acute coronary syndrome and atrial fibrillation are both common and can occur in the same patient. Combination therapy with dual antiplatelet therapy and oral anticoagulation increases risk of bleeding. Where the two conditions coexist, careful consideration is needed to determine the optimal antithrombotic treatment to reduce the risks of future ischaemic events associated with both conditions. Choices can be made in intraprocedural anticoagulation, type and dosing of oral anticoagulant, duration of combination therapy, and selection of P2Y12 inhibitor including genetic testing. This review article provides an overview of the available evidence to support clinicians in finding the delicate balance between antithrombotic efficacy and bleeding risk in patients with acute coronary syndrome and atrial fibrillation.

Prognostic impact of body mass index on in-hospital bleeding complications after ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remains a major cause of mortality despite early revascularization and optimal medical therapy. Tailoring individual management by considering patients’ specificities may help in improving post-STEMI survival.

AIM

To evaluate whether in-hospital bleeding complications may be involved in post STEMI prognosis among overweight patients.

METHODS

We prospectively included 2070 patients with a STEMI between January 2005 and December 2012 in the French observational cohort, “Registre d’Infarctus Maine-Anjou”. Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) in-hospital bleeding complications were recorded.

RESULTS

Of 705 patients (35.3%) were presented as being of normal weight, defined as a body mass index (BMI) < 25 kg/m², 877 (43.9%) had a BMI between 25 and 30 kg/m² and 416 (20.8%) had a BMI ≥ 30 kg/m². One-year cardiovascular mortality was lower for BMI ≥ 25 kg/m² (5.3% and 7.1%) patients than for normal weight patients (10.8%) (P = 0.001). We found an interaction between the effect of BARC 3 on mortality and BMI groups. While a BARC 3 was related to a higher 1-year mortality in general (HR: 2.58, 95%CI: 1.44-4.64, P ≤ 0.001), prognosis was even worse in normal weight patients (HR: 2.97, 95%CI: 1.61-5.5, P < 0.001) than for patients with a BMI ≥ 25 kg/m² (HR: 1.94, 95%CI: 1.02-3.69, P = 0.041).

CONCLUSION

Normal weight patients presented higher rates of in-hospital bleeding complications and lower survival after a STEMI. Excess mortality might be due to greater vulnerability to bleeding amongst normal weight patients.