Long-term antithrombotic treatment in intracranial hemorrhage survivors with atrial fibrillation

Prevention of Stroke in Intracerebral Haemorrhage Survivors with Atrial Fibrillation: Rationale and Design for PRESTIGE-AF Trial

Adequate secondary prevention in survivors of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) who also have atrial fibrillation (AF) is a long-standing clinical dilemma because these patients are at increased risk of recurrent ICH as well as of ischemic stroke. The efficacy and safety of oral anticoagulation, the standard preventive medication for ischemic stroke patients with AF, in ICH patients with AF are uncertain. PRESTIGE-AF is an international, phase 3b, multi-center, randomized, open, blinded end-point assessment (PROBE) clinical trial that compared the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) with no DOAC (either no antithrombotic treatment or any antiplatelet drug). Randomization occurred in a 1:1 ratio and stratification was based on ICH location and sex. The two co-primary binary endpoints included ischemic stroke and recurrent ICH which will be analyzed hierarchically according to the intention-to-treat principle. Secondary efficacy endpoints encompassed all-stroke and systemic embolism, all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, major adverse cardiac events, and net clinical benefit. Secondary safety endpoints included any major hemorrhage and intracranial hemorrhage. All outcome events were adjudicated by an independent committee. Results of PRESTIGE-AF are expected to support risk-adjusted secondary prevention in ICH survivors with AF and to inform clinical guideline recommendations.

Direct oral anticoagulants versus no anticoagulation for the prevention of stroke in survivors of intracerebral haemorrhage with atrial fibrillation (PRESTIGE-AF): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) reduce the rate of thromboembolism in patients with atrial fibrillation but the benefits and risks in survivors of intracerebral haemorrhage are uncertain. We aimed to determine whether DOACs reduce the risk of ischaemic stroke without substantially increasing the risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage.

METHODS

PRESTIGE-AF is a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial conducted at 75 hospitals in six European countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with spontaneous intracerebral haemorrhage, atrial fibrillation, an indication for anticoagulation, and a score of 4 or less on the modified Rankin Scale. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to a DOAC or no anticoagulation, stratified by intracerebral haemorrhage location and sex. Only the events adjudication committee was masked to treatment allocation. The coprimary endpoints were first ischaemic stroke and first recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage. Hierarchical testing for superiority and non-inferiority, respectively, was performed in the intention-to-treat population. The margin to establish non-inferiority regarding intracerebral haemorrhage was less than 1·735. The safety analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03996772, and is complete.

FINDINGS

Between May 31, 2019, and Nov 30, 2023, 319 participants were enrolled and 158 were randomly assigned to the DOAC group and 161 to the no anticoagulant group. Patients' median age was 79 years (IQR 73-83). 113 (35%) of 319 patients were female and 206 (65%) were male. Median follow-up was 1·4 years (IQR 0·7-2·3). First ischaemic stroke occurred less frequently in the DOAC group than in the no anticoagulant group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·05 [95% CI 0·01-0·36]; log-rank p<0·0001). The rate of all ischaemic stroke events was 0·83 (95% CI 0·14-2·57) per 100 patient-years in the DOAC group versus 8·60 (5·43-12·80) per 100 patient-years in the no anticoagulant group. For first recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage, the DOAC group did not meet the prespecified HR for the non-inferiority margin of less than 1·735 (HR 10·89 [90% CI 1·95-60·72]; p=0·96). The event rate of all intracerebral haemorrhage was 5·00 (95% CI 2·68-8·39) per 100 patient-years in the DOAC group versus 0·82 (0·14-2·53) per 100 patient years in the no anticoagulant group. Serious adverse events occurred in 70 (44%) of 158 patients in the DOAC group and 89 (55%) of 161 patients in the no anticoagulant group. 16 (10%) patients in the DOAC group and 21 (13%) patients in the no anticoagulant group died.

INTERPRETATION

DOACs effectively prevent ischaemic strokes in survivors of intracerebral haemorrhage with atrial fibrillation but a part of this benefit is offset by a substantially increased risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage. To optimise stroke prevention in these vulnerable patients, further evidence from ongoing trials and a meta-analysis of randomised data is needed, as well as the evaluation of safer medical or mechanical alternatives for selected patients.

FUNDING

European Commission.

Advances in the medical treatment and diagnosis of intracranial hemorrhage associated with oral anticoagulation

INTRODUCTION

With the increasing prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF), it entails expanding oral anticoagulants (OACs) use, carrying a higher risk of associated hemorrhagic events, including intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). Despite advances in OACs development with a better safety profile and reversal agent for these anticoagulants, there is still no consensus on the optimal management of patients with OACs-associated ICH.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, the authors have carried out an exhaustive search on the advances in recent years. The authors provide an update on the management of ICH in anticoagulated patients, as well as an update on the latest evidence on anticoagulation resumption, recent therapeutic strategies, and investigational drugs that could play a role in the future.

EXPERT OPINION

Following an ICH event in an anticoagulated patient, a comprehensive clinical evaluation is imperative. Anticoagulation should be promptly withdrawn and reversed. Once the patient is stabilized, a reintroduction of anticoagulation should be considered, typically within a timeframe of 4-8 weeks, if feasible. If re-anticoagulation is not possible, alternative options such as Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion are available.

Stroke

Stroke affects up to one in five people during their lifetime in some high-income countries, and up to almost one in two in low-income countries. Globally, it is the second leading cause of death. Clinically, the disease is characterised by sudden neurological deficits. Vascular aetiologies contribute to the most common causes of ischaemic stroke, including large artery disease, cardioembolism, and small vessel disease. Small vessel disease is also the most frequent cause of intracerebral haemorrhage, followed by macrovascular causes. For acute ischaemic stroke, multimodal CT or MRI reveal infarct core, ischaemic penumbra, and site of vascular occlusion. For intracerebral haemorrhage, neuroimaging identifies early radiological markers of haematoma expansion and probable underlying cause. For intravenous thrombolysis in ischaemic stroke, tenecteplase is now a safe and effective alternative to alteplase. In patients with strokes caused by large vessel occlusion, the indications for endovascular thrombectomy have been extended to include larger core infarcts and basilar artery occlusion, and the treatment time window has increased to up to 24 h from stroke onset. Regarding intracerebral haemorrhage, prompt delivery of bundled care consisting of immediate anticoagulation reversal, simultaneous blood pressure lowering, and prespecified stroke unit protocols can improve clinical outcomes. Guided by underlying stroke mechanisms, secondary prevention encompasses pharmacological, vascular, or endovascular interventions and lifestyle modifications.

GTE: a graph learning framework for prediction of T-cell receptors and epitopes binding specificity

The interaction between T-cell receptors (TCRs) and peptides (epitopes) presented by major histocompatibility complex molecules (MHC) is fundamental to the immune response. Accurate prediction of TCR-epitope interactions is crucial for advancing the understanding of various diseases and their prevention and treatment. Existing methods primarily rely on sequence-based approaches, overlooking the inherent topology structure of TCR-epitope interaction networks. In this study, we present $GTE$, a novel heterogeneous Graph neural network model based on inductive learning to capture the topological structure between TCRs and Epitopes. Furthermore, we address the challenge of constructing negative samples within the graph by proposing a dynamic edge update strategy, enhancing model learning with the nonbinding TCR-epitope pairs. Additionally, to overcome data imbalance, we adapt the Deep AUC Maximization strategy to the graph domain. Extensive experiments are conducted on four public datasets to demonstrate the superiority of exploring underlying topological structures in predicting TCR-epitope interactions, illustrating the benefits of delving into complex molecular networks. The implementation code and data are available at https://github.com/uta-smile/GTE.

Reversal and resumption of anticoagulants in patients with anticoagulant-associated intracerebral hemorrhage

The use of anticoagulants has become more frequent due to the progressive aging population and increased thromboembolic events. Consequently, the proportion of anticoagulant-associated intracerebral hemorrhage (AAICH) in stroke patients is gradually increasing. Compared with intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) patients without coagulopathy, patients with AAICH may have larger hematomas, worse prognoses, and higher mortality. Given the need for anticoagulant reversal and resumption, the management of AAICH differs from that of conventional medical or surgical treatments for ICH, and it is more specific. Understanding the pharmacology of anticoagulants and identifying agents that can reverse their effects in the early stages are crucial for treating life-threatening AAICH. When patients transition beyond the acute phase and their vital signs stabilize, it is important to consider resuming anticoagulants at the right time to prevent the occurrence of further thromboembolism. However, the timing and strategy for reversing and resuming anticoagulants are still in a dilemma. Herein, we summarize the important clinical studies, reviews, and related guidelines published in the past few years that focus on the reversal and resumption of anticoagulants in AAICH patients to help implement decisive diagnosis and treatment strategies in the clinical setting.

Between a rock and a hard place: resumption of oral anticoagulant therapy after intracranial hemorrhage

Intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) is the most feared and lethal complication of oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy. Resumption of OAC after ICH has long posed a challenge for clinicians, complicated by the expanding range of anticoagulant agents available in modern clinical practice, including direct OACs and, more recently, factor XI and XII inhibitors. A review of the current literature found support for resuming OAC in the majority of patients after ICH based on pooled retrospective data showing that resumption is associated with a lower risk of mortality and thromboembolism without a significantly increased risk of recurrent hemorrhage. The optimal time to resume OAC is less clear; however, the available evidence suggests that the composite risk of both recurrent hemorrhage and thromboembolism is likely minimized, somewhere between 4 and 6 weeks, after ICH in most patients. Specific considerations to guide the optimal resumption time in the individual patient include ICH location, mechanism, and anticoagulant class. Patients with mechanical heart valves and intracerebral malignancy represent high-risk groups who require more nuanced decision making. Here, we appraise the literature with the aim of providing a practical guide for clinicians while also discussing priorities for future investigation.

2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 12, 2022, to November 3, 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through November 2022, during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Atrial fibrillation is the most sustained common arrhythmia, and its incidence and prevalence are increasing in the United States and globally. Recommendations from the "2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" and the "2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic risk assessment, anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion, atrial fibrillation catheter or surgical ablation, and risk factor modification and atrial fibrillation prevention have been developed.

2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 12, 2022, to November 3, 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through November 2022, during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Atrial fibrillation is the most sustained common arrhythmia, and its incidence and prevalence are increasing in the United States and globally. Recommendations from the "2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" and the "2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic risk assessment, anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion, atrial fibrillation catheter or surgical ablation, and risk factor modification and atrial fibrillation prevention have been developed.

Effects of oral anticoagulation in people with atrial fibrillation after spontaneous intracranial haemorrhage (COCROACH): prospective, individual participant data meta-analysis of randomised trials

BACKGROUND

The safety and efficacy of oral anticoagulation for prevention of major adverse cardiovascular events in people with atrial fibrillation and spontaneous intracranial haemorrhage are uncertain. We planned to estimate the effects of starting versus avoiding oral anticoagulation in people with spontaneous intracranial haemorrhage and atrial fibrillation.

METHODS

In this prospective meta-analysis, we searched bibliographic databases and trial registries using the strategies of a Cochrane systematic review (CD012144) on June 23, 2023. We included clinical trials if they were registered, randomised, and included participants with spontaneous intracranial haemorrhage and atrial fibrillation who were assigned to either start long-term use of any oral anticoagulant agent or avoid oral anticoagulation (ie, placebo, open control, another antithrombotic agent, or another intervention for the prevention of major adverse cardiovascular events). We assessed eligible trials using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. We sought data for individual participants who had not opted out of data sharing from chief investigators of completed trials, pending completion of ongoing trials in 2028. The primary outcome was any stroke or cardiovascular death. We used individual participant data to construct a Cox regression model of the time to the first occurrence of outcome events during follow-up in the intention-to-treat dataset supplied by each trial, followed by meta-analysis using a fixed-effect inverse-variance model to generate a pooled estimate of the hazard ratio (HR) with 95% CI. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021246133.

FINDINGS

We identified four eligible trials; three were restricted to participants with atrial fibrillation and intracranial haemorrhage (SoSTART [NCT03153150], with 203 participants) or intracerebral haemorrhage (APACHE-AF [NCT02565693], with 101 participants, and NASPAF-ICH [NCT02998905], with 30 participants), and one included a subgroup of participants with previous intracranial haemorrhage (ELDERCARE-AF [NCT02801669], with 80 participants). After excluding two participants who opted out of data sharing, we included 412 participants (310 [75%] aged 75 years or older, 249 [60%] with CHA2DS2-VASc score ≤4, and 163 [40%] with CHA2DS2-VASc score >4). The intervention was a direct oral anticoagulant in 209 (99%) of 212 participants who were assigned to start oral anticoagulation, and the comparator was antiplatelet monotherapy in 67 (33%) of 200 participants assigned to avoid oral anticoagulation. The primary outcome of any stroke or cardiovascular death occurred in 29 (14%) of 212 participants who started oral anticoagulation versus 43 (22%) of 200 who avoided oral anticoagulation (pooled HR 0·68 [95% CI 0·42-1·10]; I2=0%). Oral anticoagulation reduced the risk of ischaemic major adverse cardiovascular events (nine [4%] of 212 vs 38 [19%] of 200; pooled HR 0·27 [95% CI 0·13-0·56]; I2=0%). There was no significant increase in haemorrhagic major adverse cardiovascular events (15 [7%] of 212 vs nine [5%] of 200; pooled HR 1·80 [95% CI 0·77-4·21]; I2=0%), death from any cause (38 [18%] of 212 vs 29 [15%] of 200; 1·29 [0·78-2·11]; I2=50%), or death or dependence after 1 year (78 [53%] of 147 vs 74 [51%] of 145; pooled odds ratio 1·12 [95% CI 0·70-1·79]; I2=0%).

INTERPRETATION

For people with atrial fibrillation and intracranial haemorrhage, oral anticoagulation had uncertain effects on the risk of any stroke or cardiovascular death (both overall and in subgroups), haemorrhagic major adverse cardiovascular events, and functional outcome. Oral anticoagulation reduced the risk of ischaemic major adverse cardiovascular events, which can inform clinical practice. These findings should encourage recruitment to, and completion of, ongoing trials.

FUNDING

British Heart Foundation.

Effectiveness and Safety of Non-Vitamin K Oral Anticoagulants versus Warfarin in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Previous Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Current evidence regarding the clinical outcomes of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and previous stroke is inconclusive, especially in patients with previous intracranial haemorrhage (ICrH). We aim to undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the effectiveness and safety of NOACs versus warfarin in AF patients with a history of stroke.

METHODS

We searched studies published up to December 10, 2022, on PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Studies on adults with AF and previous ischaemic stroke (IS) or IrCH receiving either NOACs or warfarin and capturing outcome events (thromboembolic events, ICrH, and all-cause mortality) were eligible for inclusion.

RESULTS

Six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (including 19,489 patients with previous IS) and fifteen observational studies (including 132,575 patients with previous IS and 13,068 patients with previous ICrH) were included. RCT data showed that compared with warfarin, NOACs were associated with a significant reduction in thromboembolic events (odds ratio [OR]: 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.75-0.96), ICrH (OR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.36-0.90), and all-cause mortality (OR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.80-0.98). In analysing observational studies, similar results were retrieved. Moreover, patients with previous ICrH had a lower OR on thromboembolic events than those with IS (OR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.46-0.95 vs. OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.70-0.93) in the comparison between NOACs and warfarin.

CONCLUSIONS

Observational data showed that in AF patients with previous stroke, NOACs showed better clinical performance compared to warfarin and the benefits of NOACs were more pronounced in patients with previous IrCH versus those with IS. RCT data also showed NOACs are superior to warfarin. However, current RCTs only included AF patients who survived an IS, and further large RCTs focused on patients with previous ICrH are warranted.

Anticoagulant in atrial fibrillation patients with prior intracranial haemorrhage: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The benefit of resuming anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with prior intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) and which anticoagulant to choose are controversial.

SUMMARY OF REVIEW

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library were searched from their inception until 13 February 2022. Thirteen eligible articles (17 600 participants) were collected, including 11 real-world studies (n=17 296) and 2 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (n=304). Compared with no anticoagulants, oral anticoagulation (OAC) was not associated with an increased risk of ICH recurrence (HR 0.85 (95% CI 0.57 to 1.25), p=0.41), but with a significantly increased risk of major bleeding (HR 1.66 (95% CI 1.20 to 2.30), p<0.01). Meanwhile, OAC was associated with a reduced risk of ischaemic stroke/systemic thromboembolism (IS/SE) (HR 0.54 (95% CI 0.42 to 0.70), p<0.01) and all-cause death (HR 0.38 (95% CI 0.28 to 0.52), p<0.01) compared with no anticoagulants. Furthermore, compared with warfarin, non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) were associated with a significant reduction of ICH recurrence (HR 0.64 (95% CI 0.49 to 0.85), p<0.01), while the risk of IS/SE and all-cause mortality were comparable between warfarin and NOACs.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with AF with prior ICH, OAC is associated with a significant reduction in IS/SE and all-cause mortality without increasing ICH recurrence, but may increase major bleeding risk. Compared with warfarin, NOACs had a better safety profile and comparable efficacy. Further larger RCTs are warranted to validate these findings.

Management of oral anticoagulant therapy after intracranial hemorrhage in patients with atrial fibrillation

Intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) is considered a potentially severe complication of oral anticoagulants (OACs) and antiplatelet therapy (APT). Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who survived ICH present both an increased ischemic and bleeding risk. Due to its lethality, initiating or reinitiating OACs in ICH survivors with AF is challenging. Since ICH recurrence may be life-threatening, patients who experience an ICH are often not treated with OACs, and thus remain at a higher risk of thromboembolic events. It is worthy of mention that subjects with a recent ICH and AF have been scarcely enrolled in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on ischemic stroke risk management in AF. Nevertheless, in observational studies, stroke incidence and mortality of patients with AF who survived ICH had been shown to be significantly reduced among those treated with OACs. However, the risk of hemorrhagic events, including recurrent ICH, was not necessarily increased, especially in patients with post-traumatic ICH. The optimal timing of anticoagulation initiation or restarting after an ICH in AF patients is also largely debated. Finally, the left atrial appendage occlusion option should be evaluated in AF patients with a very high risk of recurrent ICH. Overall, an interdisciplinary unit consisting of cardiologists, neurologists, neuroradiologists, neurosurgeons, patients, and their families should be involved in management decisions. According to available evidence, this review outlines the most appropriate anticoagulation strategies after an ICH that should be adopted to treat this neglected subset of patients.

Anticoagulation medication in nontraumatic intracranial hemorrhage survivors with atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

The relative effectiveness of anticoagulation agents in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who survive an intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) is unknown. This study was performed to examine the comparative effectiveness of different oral anticoagulation (OAC) on clinical outcomes in this group of patients.

METHODS

We performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing different OAC (direct oral anticoagulant [DOAC] and warfarin) for the treatment of patients with AF who sustained ICH. Outcomes included repeat ICH, thromboembolic events, and all-cause mortality. The values derived from the surface under the cumulative ranking curve were obtained to rank the treatment hierarchy.

RESULTS

We identified 12 studies (two RCTs and ten observational studies) involving 23,265 patients; 346 patients were treated with any OAC agents; 5,006 received DOAC; 5,271 received warfarin; 12,007 received antiplatelet or no therapy, and 635 did not received relevant therapy. Both DOAC and warfarin (RR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.45-0.74; RR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.69-0.98) were superior to antiplatelet or no therapy in preventing thromboembolic events. Moreover, DOAC also showed superiority in preventing thromboembolic events (RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.58-0.83), repeat ICH (RR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.40-0.67), and all-cause mortality (RR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.46-0.56) than warfarin.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests DOACs may be a reasonable alternative to anti-platelet therapy and warfarin for patients with AF who experienced ICH. However, given the available evidence is primarily observational, further validation by ongoing trials directly comparing these two classes of drugs are needed.

Antithrombotic treatment after stroke due to intracerebral haemorrhage

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the Cochrane Review last published in 2017. Survivors of stroke due to intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) are at risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Antithrombotic (antiplatelet or anticoagulant) treatments may lower the risk of ischaemic MACE after ICH, but they may increase the risk of bleeding.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the overall effectiveness and safety of antithrombotic drugs on MACE and its components for people with ICH.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (5 October 2021). We also searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL: the Cochrane Library 2021, Issue 10), MEDLINE Ovid (from 1948 to October 2021) and Embase Ovid (from 1980 to October 2021). The online registries of clinical trials searched were the US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register ClinicalTrials.gov (clinicaltrials.gov) and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (5 October 2021). We screened the reference lists of included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for additional, potentially relevant RCTs.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected RCTs in which participants with ICH of any age were allocated to a class of antithrombotic treatment as intervention or comparator.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

In accordance with standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane, two review authors assessed each selected RCT for its risk of bias and extracted data independently. The primary outcome was a composite of MACE, and secondary outcomes included death, individual components of the MACE composite, ICH growth, functional status and cognitive status. We estimated effects using the frequency of outcomes that occurred during the entire duration of follow-up and calculated a risk ratio (RR) for each RCT. We grouped RCTs separately for analysis according to 1) the class(es) of antithrombotic treatment used for the intervention and comparator, and 2) the duration of antithrombotic treatment use (short term versus long term). We pooled the intention-to-treat populations of RCTs using a fixed-effect model for meta-analysis, but used a random-effects model if RCTs differed substantially in their design or there was considerable heterogeneity (I2 ≥ 75%) in their results. We applied GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified seven new completed RCTs for this update, resulting in the inclusion of a total of nine RCTs based in secondary care, comprising 1491 participants (average age ranged from 61 to 79 years and the proportion of men ranged from 44% to 67%). The proportion of included RCTs at low risk of bias, by category was: random sequence generation (67%), allocation concealment (67%), performance (22%), detection (78%), attrition (89%), and reporting (78%). For starting versus avoiding short-term prophylactic dose anticoagulation after ICH, no RCT reported MACE. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of starting short-term prophylactic dose anticoagulation on death (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.70, P = 1.00; 3 RCTs; very low-certainty evidence), venous thromboembolism (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.37, P = 0.49; 4 RCTs; very low-certainty evidence), ICH (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.38, P = 0.11; 2 RCTs; very low-certainty evidence), and independent functional status (RR 2.03, 95% CI 0.78 to 5.25, P = 0.15; 1 RCT; very low-certainty evidence) over 90 days. For starting versus avoiding long-term therapeutic dose oral anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation after ICH, starting long-term therapeutic dose oral anticoagulation probably reduces MACE (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.94, P = 0.02; 3 RCTs; moderate-certainty evidence) and probably reduces all major occlusive vascular events (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.53, P = 0.0002; 3 RCTs; moderate-certainty evidence), but probably results in little to no difference in death (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.78, P = 0.86; 3 RCTs; moderate-certainty evidence), probably increases intracranial haemorrhage (RR 2.43, 95% CI 0.88 to 6.73, P = 0.09; 3 RCTs; moderate-certainty evidence), and may result in little to no difference in independent functional status (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.24, P = 0.87; 2 RCTs; low-certainty evidence) over one to three years. For starting versus avoiding long-term antiplatelet therapy after ICH, the evidence is uncertain about the effects of starting long-term antiplatelet therapy on MACE (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.22, P = 0.46; 1 RCT; moderate-certainty evidence), death (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.53, P = 0.66; 1 RCT; moderate-certainty evidence), all major occlusive vascular events (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.55, P = 0.90; 1 RCT; moderate-certainty evidence), ICH (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.03, P = 0.06; 1 RCT; moderate-certainty evidence) and independent functional status (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.18, P = 0.67; 1 RCT; moderate-certainty evidence) over a median follow-up of two years. For adults within 180 days of non-cardioembolic ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack and a clinical history of prior ICH, there was no evidence of an effect of long-term cilostazol compared to aspirin on MACE (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.74 to 2.40, P = 0.34; subgroup of 1 RCT; low-certainty evidence), death (RR 1.65, 95% CI 0.55 to 4.91, P = 0.37; subgroup of 1 RCT; low-certainty evidence), or ICH (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.35 to 4.69, P = 0.70; subgroup of 1 RCT; low-certainty evidence) over a median follow-up of 1.8 years; all major occlusive vascular events and functional status were not reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We did not identify beneficial or hazardous effects of short-term prophylactic dose parenteral anticoagulation and long-term oral antiplatelet therapy after ICH on important outcomes. Although there was a significant reduction in MACE and all major occlusive vascular events after long-term treatment with therapeutic dose oral anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation after ICH, the pooled estimates were imprecise, the certainty of evidence was only moderate, and effects on other important outcomes were uncertain. Large RCTs with a low risk of bias are required to resolve the ongoing dilemmas about antithrombotic treatment after ICH.

Memantine as a neuroprotective agent in ischemic stroke: Preclinical and clinical analysis

The primary mechanism for neuron death after an ischemic stroke is excitotoxic injury. Excessive depolarization leads to NMDA-mediated calcium entry to the neuron and, subsequently, cellular death. Therefore, the inhibition of the NMDA channel has been proposed as a neuroprotective measure in ischemic stroke. The high morbimortality associated with stroke warrants new therapies that can improve the functional prognosis of patients. Memantine is a non-competitive NMDA receptor antagonist which has gained attention as a potential drug for ischemic stroke. Here we analyze the available preclinical and clinical evidence concerning the use of memantine following an ischemic stroke. Preclinical evidence shows inhibition of the excitotoxic cascade, as well as improved outcomes in terms of motor and sensory function with the use of memantine. The available clinical trials of high-dose memantine in patients poststroke have found that it can improve patients' NIHSS and Barthel index and help patients with poststroke aphasia and intracranial hemorrhage. These results suggest that memantine has a clinically relevant neuroprotective effect; however, small sample sizes and other study shortcomings limit the impact of these findings. Even so, current studies show promising results that should serve as a basis to promote future research to conclusively determine if memantine does improve the outcomes of patients' post-ischemic stroke. We anticipate that future trials will fill current gaps in knowledge, and these latter results will broaden the therapeutic arsenal for clinicians looking to improve the prognosis of patients poststroke.

Cerebral small vessel disease and intracranial bleeding risk: Prognostic and practical significance

Balancing the risks of recurrent ischemia and antithrombotic-associated bleeding, particularly intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), is a key challenge in the secondary prevention of ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack. In hyperacute ischemic stroke, the use of acute reperfusion therapies is determined by the balance of anticipated benefit and the risk of ICH. Cerebral small vessel disease (CSVD) causes most spontaneous ICH. Here, we review the evidence linking neuroimaging markers of CSVD to antithrombotic and thrombolytic-associated ICH, with emphasis on cerebral microbleeds (CMB). We discuss their role in the prediction of ICH, and practical implications for clinical decision making. Although current observational data suggest CMB presence should not preclude antithrombotic therapy in patients with ischemic stroke or TIA, they are useful for improving ICH risk prediction with potential relevance for determining the optimal secondary prevention strategy, including the use of left atrial appendage occlusion. Following ICH, recommencing antiplatelets is probably safe in most patients, while the inconclusive results of recent randomized controlled trials of anticoagulant use makes recruitment to ongoing trials (including those testing left atrial appendage occlusion) in this area a high priority. Concern regarding CSVD and ICH risk after hyperacute stroke treatment appears to be unjustified in most patients, though some uncertainty remains regarding patients with very high CMB burden and other risk factors for ICH. We encourage careful phenotyping for underlying CSVD in future trials, with the potential to enhance precision medicine in stroke.

Risk of Cerebrovascular Events in Intracerebral Hemorrhage Survivors With Atrial Fibrillation: A Nationwide Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

In patients with intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) and prevalent atrial fibrillation (AF), the optimal stroke prevention strategy is unclear. We sought to estimate the risk of cerebrovascular events among ICH survivors with AF.

METHODS

We used the Danish Stroke Registry to identify patients with incident ICH and prevalent AF between 2003 and 2018. Key inclusion/exclusion criteria of the PRESTIGE-AF (Prevention of Stroke in Intracerebral hemorrhage Survivors With Atrial Fibrillation) trial were applied. Cumulative incidence of recurrent ICH, cerebrovascular ischemic event, and all-cause death were investigated after one year.

RESULTS

A total of 1885 patients (median age 80.0 years; 47.6% females) were included in the study. We observed 191 cerebrovascular events and 650 all-cause deaths, and more cerebrovascular ischemic events (N=63) than recurrent ICH events (N=40). Risks of recurrent ICH, cerebrovascular ischemic event, and all-cause death were 1.5%, 3.2%, and 30.3%, respectively, among patients not exposed to OAC during follow-up. The cumulative incidences were 2.8% for recurrent ICH, 3.2% for cerebrovascular ischemic events, and 22.0% for all-cause death among patients initiating/resuming OAC during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed a high risk of cerebrovascular ischemic events and a very high risk of all-cause death at one year after the incident ICH. The results of ongoing clinical trials are warranted to determine optimal stroke prevention treatment among ICH survivors with concomitant AF.

Meta-Analysis of Oral Anticoagulants and Adverse Outcomes in Atrial Fibrillation Patients After Intracranial Hemorrhage

Background

Intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) is excluded in most anticoagulation randomized clinical trials (RCTs), so oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy is still the conventional treatment for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) after ICH. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to determine the effectiveness and safety outcomes of OAC for these patients.

Methods

We systematically searched the PubMed and Embase databases up to March 2022 for RCTs and observational studies exploring the effect of OAC in patients with AF after ICH. The effectiveness outcomes included stroke or systemic embolism, ischemic stroke, and all-cause death, whereas the safety outcomes were major bleeding and recurrent ICH. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) from each study were pooled using a random-effects model.

Results

A total of 14 studies were included. The OAC therapy that was performed reduced the risks of stroke or systemic embolism (HR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.53-0.81), ischemic stroke (HR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.60-0.82), and all-cause death (HR = 0.43, 95% CI 0.27-0.70) but had a higher risk of major bleeding (HR = 1.50, 95% CI 0.94-2.40) and showed no difference in recurrent ICH (HR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.53-1.55) compared to the no OAC therapy. With the use of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) therapy, a lower risk of stroke or systemic embolism (HR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.70-0.98), all-cause death (HR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.53-0.84), and recurrent ICH (HR = 0.68, 95% CI 0.54-0.86) was observed against the use of vitamin K antagonists (VKA) therapy.

Conclusion

The OAC therapy (especially VKA) revealed superior effectiveness in patients with AF after ICH, and the superiority of NOAC was also found, but some related evidence was limited.

Effectiveness and Safety of Antithrombotic Medication in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Intracranial Hemorrhage: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND:

For patients with atrial fibrillation who survive an intracranial hemorrhage (ICrH), the decision to offer oral anticoagulation (OAC) is challenging and necessitates balancing risk of thromboembolic events with risk of recurrent ICrH.

METHODS:

This systematic review assesses the effectiveness and safety of OAC and/or antiplatelets in patients with atrial fibrillation with nontraumatic ICrH. Bibliographic databases CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL were searched. Articles on adults with atrial fibrillation with spontaneous ICrH (intracerebral, subdural, and subarachnoid), receiving antithrombotic therapy for stroke prevention were eligible for inclusion.

RESULTS:

Twenty articles (50 470 participants) included 2 randomized controlled trials (n=304)‚ 8 observational studies, 8 cohort studies, and 2 studies that meta-analyzed individual-level data from observational studies. OAC therapy was associated with a significant reduction in thromboembolic events (summary relative risk [sRR], 0.51 [95% CI, 0.30–0.86], heterogeneity I 2 =2%; P =0.39, n=5 studies) and all-cause mortality (sRR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.38–0.71], heterogeneity I 2 =0; P =0.44, n=3 studies). OAC therapy was not associated with an increased risk of recurrent ICrH (sRR, 1.44 [95% CI, 0.38–5.46], heterogeneity I 2 =70%, P =0.02, n=5 studies). Nonvitamin K antagonist OACs were more effective at reducing the risk of thromboembolic events (sRR, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.44–0.97], heterogeneity I 2 =72%, P =0.03, n=3 studies) and were associated with a lower risk of recurrent ICrH (sRR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.40–0.67], heterogeneity I 2 =0%, P =0.43, n=3 studies) than warfarin.

CONCLUSIONS:

In nontraumatic ICrH survivors with atrial fibrillation, OAC therapy is associated with a reduced risk of thromboembolic events and all-cause mortality without significantly increasing risk of recurrent ICrH. This finding is primarily based on observational data, and further larger randomized controlled trials are needed to corroborate or refute these findings.

Protecting the Brain, From the Heart: Safely Mitigating the Consequences of Thrombosis in Intracerebral Hemorrhage Survivors With Atrial Fibrillation

Optimal antithrombotic management after intracerebral hemorrhage remains one of the central unresolved issues for patients who survive, especially for those patients with atrial fibrillation. Given the observational nature of the studies regarding anticoagulation resumption after intracerebral hemorrhage, there is uncertainty regarding resumption of oral anticoagulation therapy and its timing. There is limited high-quality evidence to guide clinical practice, leading to significant practice variation and uncertainty for patients and providers. Here, we aim to provide the key elements to guide clinicians in their individual decision: whether or not to start or resume anticoagulation in patients with a history of intracerebral hemorrhage.

Antithrombotic dilemmas in stroke medicine: new data, unsolved challenges

Antithrombotic therapy is a key element of secondary prevention in patients who have had an ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack. However, its use in clinical practice is not always straightforward. This review provides an update on certain difficult scenarios in antithrombotic management, with a focus on recent clinical trials and large observational studies. We discuss the approach to patients with an indication for antithrombotic treatment who also have clinical or radiological evidence of previous intracranial bleeding, patients with indications for both anticoagulant and antiplatelet treatment, and patients in whom antithrombotic treatment fails to prevent stroke. We also review the timing of anticoagulation initiation after cardioembolic stroke, and the use of antithrombotics in patients with asymptomatic cerebrovascular disease. Despite a wealth of new evidence, numerous uncertainties remain and we highlight ongoing trials addressing these.

In Search of the Optimal Antithrombotic Regimen for Intracerebral Hemorrhage Survivors with Atrial Fibrillation

Spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) constitutes 10-15% of all strokes, and is a significant cause of mortality and morbidity. Survivors of ICH, especially those with atrial fibrillation (AF), are at risk for both recurrent hemorrhagic and ischemic cerebrovascular events. A conundrum in the field of vascular neurology, neurosurgery, and cardiology has been the decision to initiate or resume versus withhold anticoagulation in survivors of ICH with AF. To initiate anticoagulation would decrease the risk of ischemic stroke but may increase the risk of hemorrhage. To withhold anticoagulation maintains a lower risk of hemorrhage but does not decrease the risk of ischemic stroke. In this narrative review, we discuss the evidence for and against the use of antithrombotics in ICH survivors with AF, focusing on recently completed and ongoing clinical trials.

Thromboembolic Risk in Patients With Pneumonia and New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation Not Receiving Anticoagulation Therapy

IMPORTANCE

New-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) is commonly reported in patients with severe infections. However, the absolute risk of thromboembolic events without anticoagulation remains unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the thromboembolic risks associated with AF in patients with pneumonia, assess the risk of recurrent AF, and examine the association of initiation of anticoagulation therapy with new-onset AF.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This population-based cohort study used linked Danish nationwide registries. Participants included patients hospitalized with incident community-acquired pneumonia in Denmark from 1998 to 2018. Statistical analysis was performed from August 15, 2021, to March 12, 2022.

EXPOSURES

New-onset AF.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Thromboembolic events, recurrent AF, and all-cause death. Estimated risks were calculated for thromboembolism without anticoagulation therapy, new hospital or outpatient clinic contact with AF, initiation of anticoagulation therapy, and all-cause death at 1 and 3 years of follow-up. Death was treated as a competing risk, and inverse probability of censoring weights was used to account for patient censoring if they initiated anticoagulation therapy conditioned on AF.

RESULTS

Among 274 196 patients hospitalized for community-acquired pneumonia, 6553 patients (mean age [SD], 79.1 [11.0] years; 3405 women [52.0%]) developed new-onset AF. The 1-year risk of thromboembolism was 0.8% (95% CI, 0.8%-0.8%) in patients without AF vs 2.1% (95% CI, 1.8%-2.5%) in patients with new-onset AF without anticoagulation; this risk was 1.4% (95% CI, 1.0%-2.0%) among patients with AF with intermediate stroke risk and 2.8% (95% CI, 2.3%-3.4%) in patients with AF with high stroke risk. Three-year risks were 3.5% (95% CI, 2.8%-4.3%) among patients with intermediate stroke risk and 5.3% (95% CI, 4.4%-6.5%) among patients with high stroke risk. Among patients with new-onset AF, 32.9% (95% CI, 31.8%-34.1%) had a new hospital contact with AF, and 14.0% (95% CI, 13.2%-14.9%) initiated anticoagulation therapy during the 3 years after incident AF diagnosis. At 3 years, the all-cause mortality rate was 25.7% (95% CI, 25.6%-25.9%) in patients with pneumonia without AF vs 49.8% (95% CI, 48.6%-51.1%) in patients with new-onset AF.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This cohort study found that new-onset AF after community-acquired pneumonia was associated with an increased risk of thromboembolism, which may warrant anticoagulation therapy. Approximately one-third of patients had a new hospital or outpatient clinic contact for AF during the 3-year follow-up, suggesting that AF triggered by acute infections is not a transient, self-terminating condition that reverses with resolution of the infection.

Anticoagulation after stroke: persistent uncertainties

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) are the mainstay of anticoagulant therapy for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Persistent uncertainties remain in different areas, and this review discusses current dilemmas based on selected studies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Optimal timing of DOAC initiation after a recent ischaemic stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation is currently unknown and subject of ongoing randomized controlled trials. Ischaemic stroke despite anticoagulant therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation is frequent, constitutes heterogeneous causes (competing stroke cause, medication error and cardioembolism despite anticoagulation) and optimal treatment is currently unknown. Thorough etiological work-up is justified. Recent randomized controlled trials found no beneficial effect of DOAC therapy in unselected patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS). Currently ongoing trials targeting subgroup of ESUS patients with additional atrial cardiopathy will provide novel data. Cerebral mircobleeds combined in a novel risk score (MICON score) provide good predictive value to stratify the risk of intracranial haemorrhage in patients taking anticoagulants. Use of DOAC after intracerebral haemorrhage in patients with atrial fibrillation is subject of ongoing trials.

SUMMARY

There are still significant uncertainties in anticoagulant management in patients with stroke. Ongoing trials will soon provide novel data to improve management of these patients.

Apixaban versus no anticoagulation after anticoagulation-associated intracerebral haemorrhage in patients with atrial fibrillation in the Netherlands (APACHE-AF): a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

In patients with atrial fibrillation who survive an anticoagulation-associated intracerebral haemorrhage, a decision must be made as to whether restarting or permanently avoiding anticoagulation is the best long-term strategy to prevent recurrent stroke and other vascular events. In APACHE-AF, we aimed to estimate the rates of non-fatal stroke or vascular death in such patients when treated with apixaban compared with when anticoagulation was avoided, to inform the design of a larger trial.

METHODS

APACHE-AF was a prospective, randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial with masked endpoint assessment, done at 16 hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients who survived intracerebral haemorrhage while treated with anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation were eligible for inclusion 7-90 days after the haemorrhage. Participants also had a CHA₂DS₂-VASc score of at least 2 and a score on the modified Rankin scale (mRS) of 4 or less. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive oral apixaban (5 mg twice daily or a reduced dose of 2·5 mg twice daily) or to avoid anticoagulation (oral antiplatelet agents could be prescribed at the discretion of the treating physician) by a central computerised randomisation system, stratified by the intention to start or withhold antiplatelet therapy in participants randomised to avoiding anticoagulation, and minimised for age and intracerebral haemorrhage location. The primary outcome was a composite of non-fatal stroke or vascular death, whichever came first, during a minimum follow-up of 6 months, analysed using Cox proportional hazards modelling in the intention-to-treat population. APACHE-AF is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02565693) and the Netherlands Trial Register (NL4395), and the trial is closed to enrolment at all participating sites.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 15, 2015, and July 6, 2020, we recruited 101 patients (median age 78 years [IQR 73-83]; 55 [54%] were men and 46 [46%] were women; 100 [99%] were White and one [1%] was Black) a median of 46 days (IQR 21-74) after intracerebral haemorrhage. 50 were assigned to apixaban and 51 to avoid anticoagulation (of whom 26 [51%] started antiplatelet therapy). None were lost to follow-up. Over a median follow-up of 1·9 years (IQR 1·0-3·1; 222 person-years), non-fatal stroke or vascular death occurred in 13 (26%) participants allocated to apixaban (annual event rate 12·6% [95% CI 6·7-21·5]) and in 12 (24%) allocated to avoid anticoagulation (11·9% [95% CI 6·2-20·8]; adjusted hazard ratio 1·05 [95% CI 0·48-2·31]; p=0·90). Serious adverse events that were not outcome events occurred in 29 (58%) of 50 participants assigned to apixaban and 29 (57%) of 51 assigned to avoid anticoagulation.

INTERPRETATION

Patients with atrial fibrillation who had an intracerebral haemorrhage while taking anticoagulants have a high subsequent annual risk of non-fatal stroke or vascular death, whether allocated to apixaban or to avoid anticoagulation. Our data underline the need for randomised controlled trials large enough to allow identification of subgroups in whom restarting anticoagulation might be either beneficial or hazardous.

FUNDING

Dutch Heart Foundation (grant 2012T077).

Effects of oral anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation after spontaneous intracranial haemorrhage in the UK: a randomised, open-label, assessor-masked, pilot-phase, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Oral anticoagulation reduces the rate of systemic embolism for patients with atrial fibrillation by two-thirds, but its benefits for patients with previous intracranial haemorrhage are uncertain. In the Start or STop Anticoagulants Randomised Trial (SoSTART), we aimed to establish whether starting is non-inferior to avoiding oral anticoagulation for survivors of intracranial haemorrhage who have atrial fibrillation.

METHODS

SoSTART was a prospective, randomised, open-label, assessor-masked, parallel-group, pilot phase trial done at 67 hospitals in the UK. We recruited adults (aged ≥18 years) who had survived at least 24 h after symptomatic spontaneous intracranial haemorrhage, had atrial fibrillation, and had a CHA2DS2-VASc score of at least 2. Web-based computerised randomisation incorporating a minimisation algorithm allocated participants (1:1) to start or avoid long-term (≥1 year) full treatment dose open-label oral anticoagulation. The participants assigned to start oral anticoagulation received either a direct oral anticoagulant or vitamin K antagonist, and the group assigned to avoid oral anticoagulation received standard clinical practice (antiplatelet agent or no antithrombotic agent). The primary outcome was recurrent symptomatic spontaneous intracranial haemorrhage, and was adjudicated by an individual masked to treatment allocation. All outcomes were ascertained for at least 1 year after randomisation and assessed in the intention-to-treat population of all randomly assigned participants, using Cox proportional hazards regression adjusted for minimisation covariates. We planned a sample size of 190 participants (one-sided p=0·025, power 90%, allowing for non-adherence) based on a non-inferiority margin of 12% (or adjusted hazard ratio [HR] of 3·2). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03153150) and is complete.

FINDINGS

Between March 29, 2018, and Feb 27, 2020, consent was obtained at 61 sites for 218 participants, of whom 203 were randomly assigned at a median of 115 days (IQR 49-265) after intracranial haemorrhage onset. 101 were assigned to start and 102 to avoid oral anticoagulation. Participants were followed up for median of 1·2 years (IQR 0·97-1·95; completeness 97·2%). Starting oral anticoagulation was not non-inferior to avoiding oral anticoagulation: eight (8%) of 101 in the start group versus four (4%) of 102 in the avoid group had intracranial haemorrhage recurrences (adjusted HR 2·42 [95% CI 0·72-8·09]; p=0·152). Serious adverse events occurred in 17 (17%) participants in the start group and 15 (15%) in the avoid group. 22 (22%) patients in the start group and 11 (11%) patients in the avoid group died during the study.

INTERPRETATION

Whether starting oral anticoagulation was non-inferior to avoiding it for people with atrial fibrillation after intracranial haemorrhage was inconclusive, although rates of recurrent intracranial haemorrhage were lower than expected. In view of weak evidence from analyses of three composite secondary outcomes, the possibility that oral anticoagulation might be superior for preventing symptomatic major vascular events should be investigated in adequately powered randomised trials.

FUNDING

British Heart Foundation, Medical Research Council, Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland.

Stroke Prevention After Intracerebral Hemorrhage: Where Are We Now?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Patients after intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) are at high risk of both ischemic stroke and recurrent ICH, and stroke prevention after ICH is important to improve the long-term outcomes in this patient population. The objective of this article is to review the current guidelines on stroke prevention measures after ICH as well as the new findings and controversies for future guidance.

RECENT FINDINGS

Intensive blood pressure reduction might benefit ICH survivors significantly. Cholesterol levels and the risk of ICH have an inverse relationship, but statin therapy after ICH might be still beneficial. Anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation after ICH specifically with novel oral anticoagulants may be associated with better long-term outcomes. Left atrial appendage occlusion may be an alternative for stroke prevention in ICH survivors with atrial fibrillation for whom long-term anticoagulation therapy is contraindicated. While complete individualized risk assessment is imperative to prevent stroke after ICH, future research is required to address current controversies and knowledge gap in this topic.

Hemoptysis in Quadriplegia with Atrial Fibrillation Who Was Taking Edoxaban: a Case Report

The direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) would be the standard treatment for the prevention of stroke and thromboembolism in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients. The adverse effects of greatest concern are bleeding especially major bleeding. We present a case of a patient with a history of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and pacemaker, who developed severe anemia after massive hemoptysis while taking DOAC; however, he has continued taking DOAC. Through this case, we have summarized the current management of major bleeding associated with anticoagulation and discuss the optimal regimen for restarting of anticoagulation therapy.

[Interdisciplinary aspects of oral anticoagulation with NOACs in atrial fibrillation]

Stroke prophylaxis with non-vitamin K-dependent oral anticoagulants (NOAKs) in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (nvVHF) is now firmly established in routine clinical practice. The definition of nvVHF includes the absence of a mechanical heart valve and AF not associated with moderate- or high-grade mitral valve stenosis. The management of oral anticoagulation (OAC) requires a high degree of interdisciplinarity. Not least for this reason, uncertainties are repeatedly observed in practice, which can have far-reaching consequences for the individual patient. For this reason, a committee consisting of representatives from general medicine, geriatrics, cardiology, nephrology and neurology has gathered to identify aspects of practical relevance from the various disciplines and to jointly develop practical guidelines to improve therapy safety for patients in everyday life.

Anticoagulation resumption after intracranial hemorrhage in patients treated with VKA and DOACs

BACKGROUND

Intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) is associated with severe prognosis and recurrent risk. This impacts on the decision to resume anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation (AF) or venous thromboembolism (VTE) patients. Purpose of our study is to evaluate the incidence rate of recurrent ICH in patients with AF or VTE resuming anticoagulation after a first ICH episode.

METHODS

We report data of two cohorts of AF or VTE after a first ICH. The Vitamin K antagonist (VKA) cohort (166 patients) derives from CHIRONE Study, the direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) cohort (178 patients) derives from START2-Register RESULTS: The clinical characteristics of the two cohort are similar with the exception of more prevalence of history of previous stroke/TIA in DOAC patients with respect to VKA (p = 0.02) and serum creatinine levels>1.5 mg/dL in VKA patients with respect to DOAC(p = 0.0001). The index ICH was spontaneous in 66.4% and in 33.7% among DOAC and VKAs cohort respectively (p = 0.0001). During follow-up, 14 recurrent ICH were recorded; 9 (rate 2.5 × 100 patient-years) in VKA and 5 (rate 1.3 × 100 patient-years) in DOAC (Relative Risk 1.9; 95% CI 0.6-7.4; p = 0.2). The univariate logistic regression analysis showed that patients with recurrent ICH were more frequently males, hypertensive, with a history of previous Stroke/TIA and older than patients without recurrence. VKA patients showed a higher risk of recurrence with respect to DOAC patients (OR 1.9;95% CI 0.7-6.7).

CONCLUSIONS

A trend toward fewer ICH recurrences was detected among DOACs patients in comparison to the previously reported rate of patients on warfarin.

Effectiveness and Safety of Restarting Oral Anticoagulation in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation after an Intracranial Hemorrhage: Analysis of Medicare Part D Claims Data from 2010-2016

BACKGROUND

In patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who survive an anticoagulant-related intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), the benefits of restarting oral anticoagulation (OAC) remain unclear.

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we sought to determine the effectiveness and safety associated with resumption of OAC in atrial fibrillation patients who survive an ICH.

METHODS

Using 2010-2016 Medicare claims data, we identified patients with non-valvular AF who experienced an OAC-related ICH and survived at least 6 weeks after the ICH (n = 1502). The primary outcomes included the composite of ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA), thromboembolism (TE), a composite of ischemic stroke/TIA and TE, recurrent ICH, and all-cause mortality. We constructed Cox proportional hazard models to evaluate the association between post-ICH OAC resumption, which was measured in a time-dependent manner, and the risk of primary outcomes, while controlling for a comprehensive list of covariates.

RESULTS

Among patients who survived an ICH, 69% reinitiated OAC within 6 weeks of the event, and among those who resumed OAC, 83% restarted warfarin. There was no significant difference in the risk of ischemic stroke/TIA (hazard ratio [HR] 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-1.21), TE (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.55-1.32), and ischemic stroke/TIA/TE (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.61-1.07) between post-ICH OAC use and non-use. Post-ICH OAC use was associated with a lower risk of recurrent ICH (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.41-0.95) and all-cause mortality (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.37-0.62) compared with non-OAC use.

CONCLUSIONS

In AF patients who survived an ICH, restarting OAC was not associated with a greater risk of recurrent ICH. Evidence from randomized controlled studies is needed to further clarify the clinical benefit of restarting OAC in this high-risk population. Further evaluation of which individuals benefit from restarting OAC is also needed to provide more clinical guidance.

Re-initiation of anticoagulation after central nervous system hemorrhage during treatment with direct oral anticoagulants: a single hospital cohort study

BACKGROUND

Central nervous system (CNS) hemorrhage is a serious complication related to direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) therapy. Current recommendations about re-initiation of anticoagulation treatment are limited to expert opinions. For this purpose, we analyzed the data of all consecutive DOAC patients with CNS hemorrhage, in whom DOACs were reinitiated.

METHODS

Over a 6-year period (2012-2018), all consecutive patients with CNS hemorrhage (subdural, subarachnoid, intracerebral, spinal), while receiving DOACs, were included in this observational single-center cohort study. DOAC therapy was reinitiated only in patients with well-controlled arterial hypertension and diabetes, as well as exclusion of vascular malformations and cerebral amyloid angiopathy. The composite primary endpoint comprised of recurrent CNS hemorrhage, ischemic stroke, and mortality; secondary endpoints were separate aforementioned outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 54 patients included, 18 died within a month of CNS hemorrhage. The average observational time was 590 days. DOACs were reinitiated in 13/36 patients (36%); of these patients, three died: none due to ischemic stroke or recurrent CNS bleeding. In 23 patients, anticoagulation was not reinitiated; of these patients, 10 died: three from recurrent CNS hemorrhage, one due to ischemic stroke, and six from causes unrelated to stroke.

CONCLUSIONS

In carefully selected patients, re-initiation of DOAC therapy did not increase the rate of both endpoints. Recommendations for DOAC re-initiation, which include hypertension and diabetes control, as well as treated vascular malformations, and excluded cerebral amyloid angiopathy, appear to be valid in clinical practice.

STudy of Antithrombotic Treatment after IntraCerebral Haemorrhage: Protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background and aims

Many patients with prior intracerebral haemorrhage have indications for antithrombotic treatment with antiplatelet or anticoagulant drugs for prevention of ischaemic events, but it is uncertain whether such treatment is beneficial after intracerebral haemorrhage. STudy of Antithrombotic Treatment after IntraCerebral Haemorrhage will assess (i) the effects of long-term antithrombotic treatment on the risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage and occlusive vascular events after intracerebral haemorrhage and (ii) whether imaging findings, like cerebral microbleeds, modify these effects.

Methods

STudy of Antithrombotic Treatment after IntraCerebral Haemorrhage is a multicentre, randomised controlled, open trial of starting versus avoiding antithrombotic treatment after non-traumatic intracerebral haemorrhage, in patients with an indication for antithrombotic treatment. Participants with vascular disease as an indication for antiplatelet treatment are randomly allocated to antiplatelet treatment or no antithrombotic treatment. Participants with atrial fibrillation as an indication for anticoagulant treatment are randomly allocated to anticoagulant treatment or no anticoagulant treatment. Cerebral CT or MRI is performed before randomisation. Duration of follow-up is at least two years. The primary outcome is recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage. Secondary outcomes include occlusive vascular events and death. Assessment of clinical outcomes is performed blinded to treatment allocation. Target recruitment is 500 participants.

Trial status: Recruitment to STudy of Antithrombotic Treatment after IntraCerebral Haemorrhage is on-going. On 30 April 2020, 44 participants had been enrolled in 31 participating hospitals. An individual patient–data meta-analysis is planned with similar randomised trials.

Intracerebral haemorrhage, microbleeds and antithrombotic drugs

Antithrombotic therapy is a cornerstone for secondary prevention of ischaemic events, cerebral and extra-cerebral. A number of clinical questions remain unanswered concerning the impact of antithrombotic drugs on the risk of first-ever and recurrent macro or micro cerebral haemorrhages, raising the clinical dilemma on the risk/benefit balance of giving antiplatelets and anticoagulants in patients with potential high risk of brain bleeds. High field magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) blood-weighted sequences, including susceptibility weighted imaging (SWI), have expanded the spectrum of these clinical questions, because of their increasing sensitivity in detecting radiological markers of small vessel disease. This review will summarise the literature, focusing on four main clinical questions: how do cerebral microbleeds impact the risk of cerebrovascular events in healthy patients, in patients with previous ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack, and in patients with intracerebral haemorrhage? Is the risk/benefit balance of oral anticoagulants shifted by the presence of microbleeds in patients with atrial fibrillation after recent ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack? Should we restart antiplatelet drugs after symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage or not? Are oral anticoagulants allowed in patients with a history of atrial fibrillation and previous intracerebral haemorrhage?

Treatment strategies for patients with atrial fibrillation and anticoagulant-associated intracranial hemorrhage: an overview of the pharmacotherapy

INTRODUCTION

Oral anticoagulants (OAC) reduce stroke/systemic embolism and mortality risks in atrial fibrillation (AF). However, there is an inherent bleeding risk with OAC, where intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) is the most feared, disabling, and lethal complication of this therapy. Therefore, the optimal management of OAC-associated ICH is not well defined despite multiple suggested strategies.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, the authors describe the severity and risk factors for OAC-associated ICH and the associated implications for using DOACs in AF patients. We also provide an overview of the management of OAC-associated ICH and treatment reversal strategies, including specific and nonspecific reversal agents as well as a comprehensive summary of the evidence about the resumption of DOAC and the optimal timing.

EXPERT OPINION

In the setting of an ICH, supportive care/measures are needed, and reversal of anticoagulation with specific agents (including administration of vitamin K, prothrombin complex concentrates, idarucizumab and andexanet alfa) should be considered. Most patients will likely benefit from restarting anticoagulation after an ICH and permanently withdrawn of OAC is associated with worse clinical outcomes. Although the timing of OAC resumption is still under debate, reintroduction after 4-8 weeks of the bleeding event may be possible, after a multidisciplinary approach to decision-making.

Stroke

Stroke is a major cause of death and disability globally. Diagnosis depends on clinical features and brain imaging to differentiate between ischaemic stroke and intracerebral haemorrhage. Non-contrast CT can exclude haemorrhage, but the addition of CT perfusion imaging and angiography allows a positive diagnosis of ischaemic stroke versus mimics and can identify a large vessel occlusion target for endovascular thrombectomy. Management of ischaemic stroke has greatly advanced, with rapid reperfusion by use of intravenous thrombolysis and endovascular thrombectomy shown to reduce disability. These therapies can now be applied in selected patients who present late to medical care if there is imaging evidence of salvageable brain tissue. Both haemostatic agents and surgical interventions are investigational for intracerebral haemorrhage. Prevention of recurrent stroke requires an understanding of the mechanism of stroke to target interventions, such as carotid endarterectomy, anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation, and patent foramen ovale closure. However, interventions such as lowering blood pressure, smoking cessation, and lifestyle optimisation are common to all stroke subtypes.

Anticoagulation decisions in elderly patients with stroke

Primary and secondary prevention of stroke is often a challenge in elderly patients due to the increase in both thrombotic and hemorrhagic risks with age. In some cases, there is sufficient data in the elderly population to allow recommendations or anticoagulation decisions to be made, such as for the indication of anticoagulation to prevent stroke related to atrial fibrillation (AF) or the choice of oral anticoagulant therapy in this situation. In other situations, the less robust data leave some questions; this is the case for the delay to initiate an oral anticoagulant therapy after an AF-related ischemic stroke, for the management of antithrombotic treatment after a stroke of undetermined cause or after intracranial bleeding or in a high-risk bleeding situation associated with stroke in the elderly subject. These issues will be discussed in this paper.

Incidence and prognostic factors for recurrence of intracerebral hemorrhage in patients with and without atrial fibrillation: A cohort study

BACKGROUND

Intracerebral hemorrhage is a devastating vascular event. Clinical factors prognostic of recurrence facilitating individualized post-bleeding patient management are sparsely described. We aimed to describe incidence of recurrence of intracerebral hemorrhage and explore the prognostic value of 25 clinical characteristics in patients with and without atrial fibrillation.

METHODS

Cohort study of patients with incident intracerebral hemorrhage diagnosed from 2003 to 2016 identified using nationwide Danish administrative registries. Results reported as cumulative incidence of intracerebral recurrence accounting for competing risk of death. Univariate and multivariate prognostic factors for recurrence estimated using Cox regression (hazard ratios [HRs], 95% confidence intervals [CI]).

RESULTS

We identified 9255 patients with incident intracerebral hemorrhage (median age 73 years, 46.6% females, 16% with atrial fibrillation). Five-year risks of recurrence of intracerebral hemorrhage were approximately 10% in the study population, although slightly higher for patients without atrial fibrillation. Prognostic factors for recurrence were broadly similar for patients with and without atrial fibrillation. Age in categories <60 years (reference), age 60-70 years (HR 1.29, 95% CI 1.02-1.64), age 70-80 years (HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.26-2.00), age >80 years (HR 1.19, 95% CI 0.91-1.55), nursing home residency (HR 1.48, 95% CI 1.02-2.13), and Scandinavian Stroke Scale score ('mild' versus 'moderate' (HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.13-1.72) and 'severe' (HR 1.96, 95% CI 1.61-2.39)) were the strongest prognostic factors.

CONCLUSION

Risk of recurrence of intracerebral hemorrhage after five years was approximately 10%. Clinical characteristics associated with recurrence were few and broadly similar for patients with and without atrial fibrillation, with age and measure of incident bleeding severity, as reflected by Scandinavian Stroke Scale score, being the most important.

Cortical superficial siderosis progression in cerebral amyloid angiopathy: Prospective MRI study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the prevalence, predictors, and clinical relevance of cortical superficial siderosis (cSS) progression in cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA).

METHODS

Consecutive patients with symptomatic CAA meeting Boston criteria in a prospective cohort underwent baseline and follow-up MRI within 1 year. cSS progression was evaluated on an ordinal scale and categorized into mild (score 1-2 = cSS extension within an already present cSS focus or appearance of 1 new cSS focus) and severe progression (score 3-4 = appearance of ≥2 new cSS foci). Binominal and ordinal multivariable logistic regression were used to determine cSS progression predictors. We investigated future lobar intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) risk in survival analysis models.

RESULTS

We included 79 patients with CAA (mean age, 69.2 years), 56 (71%) with lobar ICH at baseline. cSS progression was detected in 23 (29%) patients: 15 (19%) patients had mild and 8 (10%) severe progression. In binominal multivariable logistic regression, ICH presence (odds ratio [OR], 7.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.75-53.52; p = 0.016) and baseline cSS (OR, 10.41; 95% CI, 2.84-52.83; p = 0.001) were independent predictors of cSS progression. In similar models, presence of disseminated (but not focal) cSS at baseline (OR, 5.58; 95% CI, 1.81-19.41; p = 0.004) was an independent predictor of cSS progression. Results were similar in ordinal multivariable logistic regression models. In multivariable Cox regression analysis, severe cSS progression was independently associated with increased future ICH risk (HR, 5.90; 95% CI, 1.30-26.68; p = 0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

cSS evolution on MRI is common in patients with symptomatic CAA and might be a potential biomarker for assessing disease severity and future ICH risk. External validation of these findings is warranted.

[Stroke and intracerebral hemorrhage under anticoagulation or platelet inhibition-when should treatment be restarted and how?]

Recurrent stroke is a frequent event and clinical trials that addressed the best secondary prevention are sparse. If patients take a thrombocyte aggregation inhibitor (TAI) before the recurrent stroke, clopidogrel can be chosen instead of aspirin or vice versa but evidence is lacking. A 3-week period of dual antiplatelet treatment might be a good alternative after acute reinfarction. The results of the recently published RESTART trial support resuming TAI treatment after a hemorrhagic stroke and showed that the intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) rate is not elevated in comparison with a study group without TAI. Patients with ICH associated with oral anticoagulation (OAC) and atrial fibrillation should be restarted on novel OACs, if there are no relevant contraindications and the risk of ischemia is high. The anticoagulation treatment of patients with cerebral amyloid angiopathy is still a clinical dilemma as there is a high risk of recurrent ICH. These patients might be candidates for left appendage closure.

[Left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation : Present evidence, ongoing studies, open questions]

About every fifth ischemic stroke is caused by atrial fibrillation. Oral anticoagulation is highly effective in secondary stroke prevention, but a relevant portion of patients with atrial fibrillation is not (permanently) anticoagulated for a variety of reasons. Based on present evidence, no general recommendation can be given for left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. However, left atrial appendage occlusion is a treatment option after severe anticoagulation-related bleeding, if the cause of bleeding is not treatable. Left atrial appendage occlusion is critical in patients with a relative contraindication for oral anticoagulation or lack of adherence to given medication. It seems to be important that further randomized studies confirm a benefit of left atrial appendage occlusion in selected patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. In addition, it is vital to clarify whether discontinuation of antiplatelets is feasible after catheter-based left atrial appendage occlusion, as antiplatelets are associated with a risk of bleeding. Within this review article, we discuss present evidence, gaps of knowledge and provide an overview on ongoing clinical studies. In addition, we summarize the design of the CLOSURE-AF study. This randomized multicenter study will start recruitment soon and is funded by the German Center for Cardiovascular Research e. V.

An Update on the Reversal of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants

Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) include thrombin inhibitor dabigatran and coagulation factor Xa inhibitors rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban, and betrixaban. NOACs have several benefits over warfarin, including faster time to the achieve effect, rapid onset of action, fewer documented food and drug interactions, lack of need for routine INR monitoring, and improved patient satisfaction. Local hemostatic measures, supportive care, and withholding the next NOAC dose are usually sufficient to achieve hemostasis among patients presenting with minor bleeding. The administration of reversal agents should be considered in patients on NOAC's with major bleeding manifestations (life-threatening bleeding, or major uncontrolled bleeding), or those who require rapid anticoagulant reversal for an emergent surgical procedure. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved two reversal agents for NOACs: idarucizumab for dabigatran and andexanet alfa for apixaban and rivaroxaban. The American College of Cardiology (ACC), American Heart Association (AHA), and Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) have released an updated guideline for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation that provides indications for the use of these reversal agents. In addition, the final results of the ANNEXA-4 study that evaluated the efficacy and safety of andexanet alfa were recently published. Several agents are in different phases of clinical trials, and among them, ciraparantag has shown promising results. However, their higher cost and limited availability remains a concern. Here, we provide a brief review of the available reversal agents for NOACs (nonspecific and specific), recent updates on reversal strategies, lab parameters (including point-of-care tests), NOAC resumption, and agents in development.

Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin in Atrial Fibrillation Patients With Intracerebral Hemorrhage

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Background and Purpose—

Recurrent bleeding associated with oral anticoagulants (OACs) causes a dilemma in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) sustaining an intracerebral hemorrhage. Treatment recommendations guiding clinical practice on optimal OAC agent selection in this population are lacking. This study aimed to investigate the comparative effectiveness and safety of non–vitamin K antagonist OAC (NOAC) versus warfarin in patients with AF sustaining an intracerebral hemorrhage.

Methods—

We conducted a nationwide observational cohort study including patients with AF sustaining an intracerebral hemorrhage and who subsequently claimed an OAC prescription. Contrasts of 1-year risks for ischemic stroke and intracerebral hemorrhage risks were obtained and evaluated by inverse probability treatment weighted absolute risk reduction and risk ratios.

Results—

Among 622 AF patients with intracerebral hemorrhage, 274 claimed a warfarin prescription and 348 a NOAC prescription. Mean age was 76 years (39% females); 72% had an index nonsevere event and 28% moderate to severe index event according to the Scandinavian Stroke Severity scale. The 1-year ischemic stroke risk was 7.85% for warfarin and 4.01% for NOACs, with a weighted absolute risk reduction of 3.78% (95% CI, −0.15% to 7.71%); the weighted risk ratio was 0.52 (0.27–1.00). For recurrent intracerebral hemorrhage, the risk was 7.00% for warfarin and 5.07% for NOACs. The absolute risk reduction was 1.93% (−2.02% to 5.87%), with an a weighted risk ratio of 0.72 (0.38–1.38).

Conclusions—

NOACs were associated with a nonsignificant lower risk of ischemic stroke and recurrent intracerebral hemorrhage compared with warfarin. The results add to current recommendations of selecting a NOAC agent for stroke prophylaxis treatment in patients with AF, including those with sustaining an intracerebral hemorrhage.

Non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in patients with stroke and atrial fibrillation

Patients with atrial fibrillation who had a previous transient ischemic attack or ischemic stroke had a significantly high risk of stroke recurrence and the introduction of oral anticoagulants should be mandatory. However, the long-term use of oral anticoagulants increases the risk of developing all types of intracranial hemorrhages. The advantages of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) compared to warfarin are that they have a significantly lower risk for hemorrhagic stroke. They are preferred in elderly patients, those with small vessel disease, or those with previous intracerebral hemorrhage. The time of NOACs introduction after an ischemic stroke depends on its severity and the rule "1-3-6-12" days should be applied. The reintroduction of NOACs in patients with atrial fibrillation and previous intracerebral hemorrhage depends on its etiology and should be after about 4-8 weeks if the cardioembolic risk is high and the risk for intracranial hemorrhage small.

Oral Anticoagulation in Asian Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and a History of Intracranial Hemorrhage

Background and Purpose- Warfarin is associated with a better net clinical benefit compared with no treatment in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) and history of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). There are limited data on nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in these patients, especially in the Asian population. We aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of NOACs to warfarin in a large-scale nationwide Asian population with AF and a history of ICH. Methods- Using the Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment database from January 2010 to April 2018, we identified patients with oral anticoagulant naïve nonvalvular AF with a prior spontaneous ICH. For the comparisons, warfarin and NOAC groups were balanced using propensity score weighting. Ischemic stroke, ICH, composite outcome (ischemic stroke+ICH), fatal ischemic stroke, fatal ICH, death from composite outcome, and all-cause death were evaluated as clinical outcomes. Results- Among 5712 patients with AF with prior ICH, 2434 were treated with warfarin and 3278 were treated with NOAC. Baseline characteristics were well-balanced after propensity score weighting (mean age 72.5 years and CHA₂DS₂-VASc score 4.0). Compared with warfarin, NOAC was associated with lower risks of ischemic stroke (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77 [95% CI, 0.61-0.97]), ICH (HR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.47-0.92]), and composite outcome (HR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.60-0.88]). NOAC was associated with lower risks of fatal stroke (HR, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.32-0.89]), death from composite outcome (HR, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.34-0.81]), and all-cause death (HR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.69-0.99]) than warfarin. NOAC showed nonsignificant trends toward to reduce fatal ICH compared with warfarin (HR, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.20-1.03]). Conclusions- NOAC was associated with a significant lower risk of ICH and ischemic stroke compared with warfarin. NOAC might be a more effective and safer treatment option for Asian patients with nonvalvular AF and a prior history of ICH.

Management of therapeutic anticoagulation in patients with intracerebral haemorrhage and mechanical heart valves

Aims

Evidence is lacking regarding acute anticoagulation management in patients after intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) with implanted mechanical heart valves (MHVs). Our objective was to investigate anticoagulation reversal and resumption strategies by evaluating incidences of haemorrhagic and thromboembolic complications, thereby defining an optimal time-window when to restart therapeutic anticoagulation (TA) in patients with MHV and ICH.

Methods and results

We pooled individual patient-data (n = 2504) from a nationwide multicentre cohort-study (RETRACE, conducted at 22 German centres) and eventually identified MHV-patients (n = 137) with anticoagulation-associated ICH for outcome analyses. The primary outcome consisted of major haemorrhagic complications analysed during hospital stay according to treatment exposure (restarted TA vs. no-TA). Secondary outcomes comprised thromboembolic complications, the composite outcome (haemorrhagic and thromboembolic complications), timing of TA, and mortality. Adjusted analyses involved propensity-score matching and multivariable cox-regressions to identify optimal timing of TA. In 66/137 (48%) of patients TA was restarted, being associated with increased haemorrhagic (TA = 17/66 (26%) vs. no-TA = 4/71 (6%); P < 0.01) and a trend to decreased thromboembolic complications (TA = 1/66 (2%) vs. no-TA = 7/71 (10%); P = 0.06). Controlling treatment crossovers provided an incidence rate-ratio [hazard ratio (HR) 10.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.67–35.70; P < 0.01] in disadvantage of TA for haemorrhagic complications. Analyses of TA-timing displayed significant harm until Day 13 after ICH (HR 7.06, 95% CI 2.33–21.37; P < 0.01). The hazard for the composite—balancing both complications, was increased for restarted TA until Day 6 (HR 2.51, 95% CI 1.10–5.70; P = 0.03).

Conclusion

Restarting TA within less than 2 weeks after ICH in patients with MHV was associated with increased haemorrhagic complications. Optimal weighing—between least risks for thromboembolic and haemorrhagic complications—provided an earliest starting point of TA at Day 6, reserved only for patients at high thromboembolic risk.