Key result
Anticoagulation in cirrhosis and AF is linked to ~74% more hospital admissions.
Why the study?
Randomized trials demonstrating anticoagulation benefits in AF excluded patients with significant liver disease, leaving guidelines to extrapolate recommendations.
Does anticoagulation strategy affect safety events (death, transfusion, hospital/ICU admissions) in patients with atrial fibrillation and cirrhosis?
Cohort
Does anticoagulation strategy affect safety events (death, transfusion, hospital/ICU admissions) in patients with atrial fibrillation and cirrhosis?
Effect estimate: OR 1.74
p-value: p=<0.001
In patients with AF and cirrhosis, anticoagulation is associated with increased hospital and ICU admissions but not increased mortality or transfusion requirements.
May increase admissions in cirrhosis with AF; leaves open net benefit versus stroke prevention in randomized trials.
Aims In patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and stroke risk factors, randomized trials have demonstrated that anticoagulation decreases the risk of ischemic stroke. However, all trials to date have excluded patients with significant liver disease, leaving guidelines to extrapolate recommendations. We aim to evaluate the impact of anticoagulation on safety events in patients with AF and cirrhosis. Methods and Results In this retrospective cohort study, we obtained de-identified health record data to extract anticoagulation strategy, comorbidities, prescriptions, lab values, and procedures for a cohort of patients with cirrhosis who develop AF. After selecting a propensity matched population to match patients with various anticoagulation strategies, we tracked data on outcomes for death, transfusion requirements, hospital and ICU admissions. After propensity score weighting and multivariable adjustment, anticoagulation strategy was associated with increased hospital admission count (OR = 1.74 per admission, P < .001), binary risk of hospital admission (OR = 1.54, P = .010) and risk of ICU admission (OR = 1.41, P = .047). We detected no significant differences in mortality, transfusion of blood products, or average length of stay. Direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) prescriptions were associated with increased binary risk of hospital admission compared to warfarin prescriptions. In a third comparison, DOAC strategy alone was associated with increased hospital admission count (OR = 1.41 per admission, P < .001) and binary risk of hospital admission (OR = 1.52, P = .038) compared to no anticoagulation strategy. Conclusion Anticoagulation strategy in patients with cirrhosis and AF was associated with increased rate of hospital admission and ICU admission but not associated with increased risk of mortality or transfusion requirement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Song et al. (2024) conducted a cohort in Atrial fibrillation and cirrhosis. Anticoagulation vs. No anticoagulation was evaluated on Hospital admission count (OR 1.74, p=<0.001). Anticoagulation in patients with cirrhosis and AF was associated with an increased hospital admission count (OR 1.74, P<0.001) and ICU admission risk, but not mortality or transfusion requirements.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: